Frederick Meekins is an independent theologian and social critic. He holds a BS from the University of Maryland in Political Science/History and a MA in Apologetics & Christian Philosophy from Trinity Theological Seminary. Frederick holds a Doctor of Practical Theology through the Master's Graduate School Of Divinity in Evansville, Indiana. Dr. Meekins is pursuing a Ph.D. in Apologetics through Newburgh Theological Seminary.

Tuesday, December 23

Pastor Invokes Independence Day To Undermine Human Liberty & Legal Protections

An Independence Day sermon posted at SermonAudio.com is titled “We Have No Rights”.

The pastor hypothesizes this is because Christ is our master.

The presupposition is correct but the conclusion the pastor deduces from that principle is at best only partially correct if at all.

It must be point out that, because Christ is our master, no man or government can ever be in the ultimate meaning of that concept.

Pulpit expositors must be exceedingly cautious when making claims such as the thesis around which the sermon under consideration is based.

For what if there is some kind of calamity and ISIS-like insurgents establish something akin to Sharia law somewhere in the United States?

If this doctrinal pronouncement is taken to its logical conclusion, when these savages threaten to kill you and rape your wife, as a Christian brainwashed by such urine deficient sermonizing would you just stand there and do nothing with the glazed over smile of an Oral Roberts back up singer plastered across your face?

And what about in a case not so extreme and out of the realm of the possibility in the dark days in which we live?

For if we really have no rights and are to endure everything that is as what Christ deems us worthy of enduring, on what grounds do you defend yourself or family members against a pastor with “wandering hands”?

Or by enunciating this very concern, have I stumbled upon the reason why this particular theory of jurisprudence is shockingly pervasive among certain extremist elements?

By Frederick Meekins

Southern Baptist Liberal Gets His Rearend Up On His Shoulders Over Christmas Music

Click On The headline

Regarding the extremeists that post anti-Christmas sermons on SermonAudio.com. Given that the site allows pastors that support the celebration of Christmas to upload content to the site, aren't those opposed to Christmas that remain on the site violating the very Scriptural injunction about separation that they invoke as justification for heaping condemnation upon those that celebrate Christmas? Or have I once again brought up one of those questions no one is supposed to ask?

Cuban Catholics Outraged Over Pope Coddling Castro Dictatorship

Click On The Headline

In a sermon titled “The Church: A Called Out Separate Assembly”, Pastor Jason Cooley suggested that people that start screaming and crying when you attempt to take away their Baal bush (presumably he means a Christmas tree) because such people are not acclimated to strong doctrinal preaching. Might the same thing be said regarding this minister as well? For does he not tend to toss a tantrum when a fellow believer might come to a different conclusion regarding such secondary matters?

In a prayer, a pastor insinuated that it is wrong to read the Bible in search of a blessing. That attitude might be wrong if one is doing so to obtain a material blessing. But why bother reading the text if not to get something --- either spiritual or intellectual --- out of such a mental exercise?

Sunday, December 21

How Authoritative Are A Pastor's Sermons Over You?

Ligonier Ministries has posted a meme disturbed that a majority do not believe their pastor's sermons to be authoritative over their lives.

It is God's Word that is authoritative over your life.

The pastor is simply one voice among many to assist in coming to an understanding of that particular text.

The minister's expositions are only authoritative or binding in those areas where the Scriptures speak definitively.

The pastor should be respected and listened to while in the pulpit if you decide to remain in the congregation where he is preaching in terms of refraining from audible disturbances being enunciated upon hearing something over which you have disagreement.

However, in regards to those issues where they can be a variety of opinion among Christians of similar piety and doctrinal propriety, you are the one that has the final say as to what goes on in your own home and life beyond the church meeting house.

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, December 17

Creches and Crucifixes

Click On The Headline

Why Study Prophecy?

Click On The Headline

Mourning Outburst Not Necessarily A Repudiation Of Faith

In a sermon, a congregation was encouraged to have a faith fixed like the astronomical phenomena described in Matthew 2 commonly referred to as the Christmas star.

As a counterexample, the illustration was provided of a pastor that, upon hearing of the unexpected tragic death of family members questioned, why and where was God.

However, apart from an admonition not to let one's faith waiver like that of this grief-stricken minister, those listening in the congregation weren't provided with much homiletical resolution otherwise as the sermon was hastily brought to a conclusion.

Did this pastor in the illustration renounce his belief in God altogether, as that would have been wrong.

Or, was he upset with God for a season yet still retaining his underlying faith and love of God?

After all, who among us has not been profoundly upset with a family member while still continuing to love them deeply?

Is God so wrapped up in Himself that He does not realize this?

On what grounds does a minister require an expectation that the Bible does not seem to impose?

For example, Job did not curse God.

However, at one point he did verbalize his frustrations with the divinely allowed unfolding of events that this suffering servant did not comprehend.

There are Psalms of lamentation that seem to indicate that David experienced a similar frame of mind where, despite being profoundly troubled, he still retained his deep faith.

In the Book of Ecclesiastes, his son Solomon would counsel that there is a time for mourning.

And one of the most profound Biblical references of all is also the shortest.

The passage succinctly conveys “Jesus wept.”

So if God's own Son did not make it through life without the intense emotional disturbance that is often required to bring a man to public tears, is it really proper to demand an emotional response bordering on a cognitive dissonance more concerned with how a response will be perceived rather than with what the traumatized person is actually experiencing?

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, December 11

If Those Leaving Are Excrement, What Does That Make The Pastor Forcing Them Out?

Pastor Perry Noble suggests that, if the church is analogous to a human body, those leaving a congregation must be the excrement.

But wouldn't that make the one squeezing them out (often the pastor) the anus?

That part of the anatomy remains attached as a permanent fixture and remains caked with lingering stench and filth no matter how well intentioned its regular cleaning.

Unless one is on the payroll or holds some kind of position of responsibility in a particular congregation, there is nothing in Scripture saying you have to articulate any specific reason why you might decide to leave and go elsewhere.

Southern Baptists Declare Jihad Against Bloggers

Click On The Headline

Pastor Insinuates Those Leaving His Congregation Are Pieces Of Sh-t

Click On The Headline

Southern Baptist Leadership Urges Churches To Emulate Mafia Protection Rackets

What those hearing this ought to do is either leave that church altogether or, if they don't itemize their contributions for tax purposes, not give the remainder of their 2014 offering until sometime in 2015 just for the Sheol of it.

Click On The Headline

Kirk Cameron No More Self-Obsessed Than Other Hollywood Luminaries

Regarding Kirk Cameron's Christmas movie, a critic wrote, “He's made a movie to say, 'Stop complaining about something I like.'. 'Saving Christmas' is a self-indulgent mess that ignores legitimate concerns in favor of saying, 'Don't spoil my party'...it gives us a swarmy lecturer justifying his proclivities and ignoring complaints.”

In other words, the production follows in the classic Hollywood tradition trail-blazed by the likes of Ellen Degeneres who stretched her talents as a thespian by coming out on her sitcom as a lesbian (which most could already tell she was by simply looking at her) and this seasons acclaimed comedy “Black-ish” that is so obsessed with race that the producers gave it a title that would result in riots (these days quite literally) if nearly the same program aired with an ethnically corresponding ensemble titled “White-ish”.

Wednesday, December 10

Was It Sin Not To Know Jesus Was In The Nativity At That Time If Only A Few Were Told?

In a sermon on the humility of the First Advent, a pastor observed that the only ones in the world that commemorated the birth of Christ other than His earthly parents were outcast shepherds and Persian Zoroastrian astrologers.

However, should a sermon be formulated in such a way to rhetorically insinuate that everyone else had done something profoundly wrong if God concealed this event from all but a few?

Why are certain hardline Evangelicals this insistent about finding sin in nearly everything?

Isn't the point of these accounts that, in announcing the birth of the Messiah to people as disparate as agricultural laborers and imperial advisors, the Gospel message is for everyone?

It might sound exceedingly pious, but you can't accuse a population of being too preoccupied with their own affairs in terms of complying the Roman census to be concerned about a young woman about to give birth to the most important baby in all history, as this pastor explicates in his homily, if the population is not told exactly who this blessed virgin happens to be?

They didn't exactly have Twitter or post Amber Alerts in those days.

by Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, December 9

What Is Orthodox Christianity?

Popes Dueling Over Sanctity Of Marriage

Click On The Headline

Do Jealous Theologians Bask In The Failure Of Christian Artists?

On social media, Lutheran apologist Chris Rosebrough felt the need to point out that Kirk Cameron's “Saving Christmas” is the worst rated movie in the history of Internet Movie Database.

And what is the point?

Is the truth of an artistic or didactic work to be determined by critics out to advance their own philosophical or religious agendas?

Applying Rosebrough's reasoning to other institutional venues, should a church not be judged by its willingness to stand up for the Gospel but rather by the size of the crowd drawn in Sunday morning?

There was no doubt a time when the influential of Europe condescendingly looked down their noses at the pastor and theologian Rev. Rosebrough identifies with in terms of denominational affiliation.

Should the bold Reformer have quietly taken his seat as well, leaving the issues of his day to be addressed and resolved by more celebrated thinkers and prestigious minds?

There seems to be little way of winning those of Chris Rosebrough's perspective.

He is correct in much of his analysis that a spirit of entertainment has penetrated the operational procedures of how many churches function.

But Cameron is not necessarily plying his craft solely in a the formalized ecclesiastical setting in which Lutherans of Rosebrough's variety insist the form and order of service cannot veer from its highly ordered and regulated nature.

Kirk Cameron will likely never be an historical figure on par with Martin Luther ushering humanity into whole new epochs of understanding where the very relationships between the individual, church, and God are reevaluated in light of reconsidered Scriptural evidence.

However, shouldn't these Christian leaders that bemoan the lack of a Christian influence throughout the arts be a bit more supportive when a fellow believer attempts to burst the epistemological shackles that were often put in place by fellow ministers imposing a misdirected brand of piety to begin with?

By Frederick Meekins

Should Organ Harvesters Be Required To Wait Until Victim Is Deceased Before They Scavenge?

Click On The Headline

Monday, December 8

Will Hardiners Crucify Rick Warren Over Call For Measured Alliance With Roman Catholics?

Click On The Headline

Is Ebola An Antediluvian Bioweapon?

Click On The Headline

Santa Not The Only One Throwing His Weight Around At Christmas

The greatest joy some derive from the Christmas season stems from badgering or threatening others on what to do.

At the end of each broadcast, Bill O'Reily concludes with what the correspondent considers common sense advice.

On the 12/1/14 episode, he suggested that viewers not wish their non-Christian friends a “Merry Christmas” but instead a more non-sectarian platitude.

If such people are to remain so prickly despite knowing your particular preferences in terms of religious and holiday matters that they can't humor you, are such people really your friends?

It's not like the greeting is enunciated as some kind of religious identity test the way that ISIS conducts impromptu Koranic quizzes for the purposes of singling victims out for execution.

What's so wrong with wishing non-Christians a “Merry Christmas”?

Do those belonging to another faith think they'd fair better off should Jesus had never come?

Secular scholars always make a fuss how much tolerance and leeway Rome gave to populations subjugated willingly.

But that world power was particularly brutal to those that did not, particularly those insistent that their loyalty to God outweighed any that might be owed to earthly authorities.

A pastor opposed to Christmas insisted that Christians ought not to have anything to do with the day because of the widespread carnality that often takes place at that time despite many of the participants feeling holier overall because of the religious meaning attached to the festival.

But isn't that more the fault of the individual that decides to celebrate the occasion in that manner?

The pastor continued that he also opposed Christmas because the holiday does not deliver the joy and happiness that it promises.

But isn't the same true regarding nearly everything else in life?

Applying these same reasons, wouldn't it also follow that organized religion, and especially services conducted on weekends, should be avoided as well?

For do not many that attend these also think that by doing so that they have kindled special favor with God for having done so and, though few will admit it, they really did not have as good of a time as they claim they did in order to retain good standing with the group?

By Frederick Meekins

Will Pope Francis Bless Gay Marriage?

Click On The Headline

Hatemonger Honored At Funeral Of DC Luminary

Louis Farrakhan spoke prominently at the memorial service of Marion Barry.

Just days before, this Afrosupremacist demagogue delivered a tirade insinuating threats of racial violence and terrorism.

This is a testament to the extent to which DC political elites despise White people.

Mind you, these are some of the same people that would in other circumstances insist that Paula Deen should be financially ruined for what was said in the privacy of her own home following a traumatic experience and that the name of the Washington Redskins must be changed to comply with politically correct sensitivities.

Thursday, December 4

Homicidal Policing More The Outgrowth Of Contemporary Liberalism

Liberals create a situation where the selling of unlicensed cigarettes is an offense worthy of fatal police intervention and the statists applaud the continual expansion of government power.

These related perspectives then apparently blame certain varieties of conservatism when it is caught on tape how the totalist state actually plays itself out on the streets and in people's lives.

Obama can't chicken excrement his way out of this one.

Obese cigarette vendors are exactly the ones that have no place in the President's version of utopia.

One shouldn't resist arrest.

However, these bureaucrats are often clearly intoxicated on their own sense of self importance these days.

You are about accused of causing a disturbance at the DMV if you raise your voice for the purposes of being heard over the background roar of this anteroom of Ghenna to get your point across to the witless functionaries attempting not to apply the procedures as they are actually written and who can barely speak audible English.

by Frederick Meekins

Extraterrestrials & Religion

Click On The Headline

Lunatic Pastor Calls For Mass Execution Of Gays By Christmas

Click On The Headline

Archbishop Of The Celtic Cross Foundation Of Ministry Heckled Midservice

Click On The Headline

Wednesday, December 3

Profounder Debate Flies Under The Radar In Santa Fighter Jet Escort Fiasco

NORAD was criticized last year for its annual Santa-tracking public outreach.

One might think such a concern expressed would be about military resources diverted to what essentially amounts to frivolous entertainment or the result of upon additional reflection realizing that, if the military industrial complex is willing to go along with such a low-grade deception, what other things might the American people be being told less than the truth about.

However, a leftwing front group known as the Campaign For A Commercial Free Childhood denounced the violence and militarism promoted on a NORAD Santa-themed website depicting Old St. Nick's sleigh piloted by eight tiny reindeer being escorted by two fighter jets.

This response is wrong on a number of levels.

First is the name of the racket raising the ruckus.

Why should a Commercial Free Childhood be construed as a positive thing?

In many respects, commercialism and commercializing has been beneficial for all parties involved . Such transactions should not be looked at as necessarily bad.

Through commercialism, the manufacturer is able to produce a product that is needed or (in the case of most Christmas presents) desired in exchange for profit. Parents, in turn, are able to bring a degree of happiness and joy into the lives of their children on Christmas morning.

Granted, there are times that commercial transactions can get out of hand and begin to encroach upon or crowd out other considerations. But does that mean we abolish the free market or capitalist system as a result?

Such a question must be raised especially in light of the alternatives. It is interesting how radical activists aren't quite as eager to denounce the shortcomings of economic systems other than unbridled commerce.

Does an outfit like the Campaign For A Commercial Free Childhood honestly think it could exist in a milieu other than the technologically advanced West?

If the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood prefers a statist command economy where resource allocation is not made by an incomprehensible number of uncoerced choices but rather by a panel of credentialed experts thinking that they know more about the wants and needs of the individuals that make up the masses that such technocrats claim to be acting on behalf of, they need to realize that troublemakers such as themselves questioning the underlying assumptions of the regime in such an outright manner are either not allocated their ration for failing to comply with the objectives of the COMMUNITY or outright eliminated for undermining the authority of the hegemon.

The other alternative to both the advanced commercialist or command economy models would be one based more on simple barter or self sufficiency. To those that have never been forced to live in such a world, that particular way of life might seem idealized or even romantic.

However, such an existence is hardly the picture postcard it is easy to construe it to be from a distance. In such a setting, many of the luxuries and even many of the now easily-obtainable necessities that we enjoy would not be available or so scarce that access to them would be restricted to all but those with a level of wealth and power far beyond that of the ordinary.

Often, the sensitive can be troubled by the emphasis upon the material or physical that seems to characterize societies and civilizations that have advanced to at least an industrial level. It is only within a context where the basic biological needs of a high percentage of the population are met in an expedient or efficient manner that a sufficient number are allowed the luxury to reflect upon whether or not childhood (a period of life which itself wasn't given much consideration before the expansion of the mass society activists in these kinds of groups have made it their mission to denigrate and undermine) has become overly commercialized.

In a simple barter or self-sufficiency economy, the crank employed by the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood, in the best circumstances, wouldn't have the time necessary to contemplate abstractions such as militarism. Nearly all of one's attention and working hours would be devoted to cultivating and crafting on one's own the bare necessities of life if these are even available.

More than likely, those drawn to these kinds of non-profit associations that don't really do anything useful (or little of anything beyond pining for a world that would result in widespread destitution and ruination if it existed anywhere other than in the imaginations of the deluded) wouldn't survive for very long.

If the beatniks at the Campaign for a Commercial Free Childhood are clueless regarding the operation of a viable economy, they are downright dangerous when it comes to defense policy.

The specific complaint of the organization was that the animated sequence of Santa escorted by fighter jets promotes violence and militarism. Mind you, it wasn't like Santa was blown to smithereens for violating North American airspace.

Even more disturbing and unsettling was the extent to which the military went to placate the peaceniks in regards to this outreach effort.

The NORAD spokesman answering the press inquiry went out of his way to point out that the jet fighters depicted in the video weren't only unarmed but that they were Canadian rather than American. Nothing shouts surrender monkey this side of France louder than an unarmed Canadian.

A nation's future is determined in part by the values it instills in its youth regarding certain essential social institutions such as family, work, and the military. In terrorist nations of the Middle East, a Mickey Mouse knock-off indoctrinates toddlers regarding the need to exterminate Jews and Christians while extolling the glories of dieing a mangled death on behalf of the tribal deity. We, on the other hand, become unhinged now should a child merely see the image of an armed airplane.

By Frederick Meekins

Rob Bell Pimps For Revelation's Harlot

Click On The Headline

Will Pope Francis Celebrate Homosexual Penetration Of The Roman Catholic Church?

Click On The Headline

Monday, December 1

Theistic Evolutionists Undermine Belief In Adam & Eve

Click On The Headline

Head & Heart Knowledge Not Easily Divisibile

In a prayer, an admonishing petition exhorted that the hearers would not accumulate Biblical facts but rather be spoken to by the Holy Spirit.

Isn't it just as important to pray that a stark dichotomy not be drawn between these states of cognitive awareness?

Within a set of hermeneutical parameters where the Scriptures are ultimately the only trustworthy venue through which God speaks to mankind, without a collection of Biblical facts and observations deduced from revelation, how else will the believer hear from God?

Saturday, November 29

Combative Ministries Dreaming Of A Disputatious Christmas

An old adage warns that, the more you do for people, the more they you know what all over you.

Actor turned evangelist Kirk Cameron may be becoming personally acquainted with that classic truism.

Merging these divergent vocations, Cameron has produced a documentary examining the Christian origins or at least basis of Christmas.

Surprisingly, some of the harshest criticisms are not coming from the militant secularists or even outright atheists but rather from Cameron's fellow believers.

Cameron is coming under condemnation for including in his film a segment on Santa Claus being inspired by Bishop Nicholas of Myra.

It is from this figure that the legend of St. Nicholas is derived.

But instead of commending Cameron for highlighting little known facts of church history, according to ChristianNews.net, Mike Gerndon of Proclaiming the Gospel Ministries is peeved that Cameron kept his presentation on an ecumenical level and did not go all Jack Chick in exposing the jolly red elf's Roman Catholicism.

The evangelist is quoted as saying in an article posted 11/12/14. “The fact that the Roman Catholic Church made Nicholas a saint should be a red flag to anyone who knows only God can convert sinners to saints by the sovereign work of His Spirit.”

Does it really matter if Nicholas was Roman Catholic or not?

It's not like there were many other churches to pick from in his time if one wanted to express one's religious faith in terms of an orthodox Biblical theology.

However, for Gerndon, even getting his rear this high up on his shoulders is not enough.

His joy this time of year seems to be derived apparently by attempting to ruin every one else's holiday season.

Gerndon continued, “Born again Christians should not be joining Roman Catholics in any spiritual...activity. Paul called on us to remain separate from the unbeliever. When people say 'Merry Christmas'....They are mixing the holy name of Christ with a pagan holiday and a blasphemous representation of Christ on an altar.”

Like many other conceptual formulations, Christmas is imbued with the meaning that we put into it.

By saying “Thursday” or “Saturday”, are fundamental Evangelicals rendering homage to the pagan deities for which those particular days are named?

Scripture urges to call upon the name of the Lord and be saved.

At no time is salvation dependent upon how vehemently one opposes those historic points and personalities where this particular understanding of the faith intersects with another with which it is at times at distinctive variance.

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, November 23

Should Churches Be Subsidized For Preaching Politically Correct Propaganda?

In compliance with the state mandate to curb storm water run off, the Prince George's County Department of the Environment is considering a proposal that would waive the unpopular impervious surface property tax assessment for their properties if churches agree to preach environmentally friendly sermons or engage in other forms of mental conditioning.

What's the big deal, some will ask.

After all, does the Bible not teach us to be good stewards of God's creation?

God's word also instructs the believer to be on guard against wolves in sheep's clothing.

If governments grant tax code favors to religious organizations for ideological compliance in regards to one issue, what is to prevent them from doing so in regards to more controversial matters?

In the name tolerance and diversity, what if governments granted tax and regulatory relief to congregations supporting gay marriage?

What if a government wanted to promote pluralism and inclusion by lavishing all manner of benefits upon a church that agreed not to lift the name of Jesus above all names but instead only reference a nondescript generic God or no God at all but rather just the Ultimate Concern as formulated by Paul Tillich?

How about putting the shoe on the other foot for a moment?

What if to bolster declining birthrates a government lavished tax favors upon churches promising to preach prolife messages?

It is said that the power to tax is the power to destroy.

Advocates insist that that the program is strictly voluntary.

However, government programs that start off voluntary can easily end up becoming mandatory.

Anybody remember the assurances of if you like your healthcare plan you can keep your healthcare plan?

From one perspective, the program is completely voluntary with no government shocktroops raiding churches failing to put in the environmental upgrades or enunciating church dogma in such a way to win the approval of the state (at least not yet anyway).

Yet from another perspective, aren't churches that refuse to have their very thoughts policed in this manner punished by having to pay the tax?

Courts have forbidden graduation prayers for being less of a mental intrusion.

By Frederick Meekins

Pastor Badgers Congregation To Boycott C.S. Lewis

In a series of sermons against C.S. Lewis posted at SermonAudio.com, Pastor Jason Cooley creates the impression that it is wrong to read that particular author's works because of areas in which the famed scholar's theology was deficient by the standard of Biblical orthodoxy.

So why is it not wrong for the pastor to have either read these works or to have familiarized himself with this material?

At one point in the sermon, Pastor Cooley shouts like a lunatic asking if anyone in the congregation still wants to read the disputed books or watch movies inspired by these particular texts.

And what if someone responded back “YES!”

In this series of sermons, Pastor Cooley insisted that the title alone of “The Lion, The Witch & The Wardrobe” ought to be enough to get the believing Christian to avoid the book.

So if witches are evil, what is wrong with casting one in the role of the villain?

Maybe that role should instead, as in the case of many of Stephen King's works of speculative literature, be reserved for ultralegalistic ministers attempting to assert too much control over their congregations and parishioners.

From the sermons, it becomes increasingly apparent that, while Pastor Cooley has a commendable grasp of these areas where caution regarding Lewis would be prudent, the minister does not have much appreciation for the techniques of the literary arts.

This is particularly evident in regards to the scenes Cooley analyzes of Lucy's encounter with the fawn Mr.Tumnus.

For example, Rev. Cooley insists that, since fawns are noted in mythology for their seductive powers, that what Lewis is advocating are indecent carnal relations between underage minors and demoniac spirit beings.

Instead, the greater truth Lewis could be attempting to convey might be for the need to be cautious of that which we might initially find appealing if we consider the literary motif associated with the fawn and how the narrative plays itself out with Mr. Tumnus wanting to capitalize on his initial encounter with Lucy by handing her over to the White Witch.

Sometimes these unsettling realities that we are reluctant to face can be easier to grapple with or stick in the brain in the form of an engaging story rather than be constantly hollered at alone.

However, apparently Pastor Cooley is not much of a proponent of the old adage about a spoonful of sugar getting the medicine to go down.

In his tirades against C.S. Lewis, Pastor Cooley remarked that science fiction is nothing but witchcraft.

As justification for such a claim, Pastor Cooley posits that witchcraft consists of any power that does not come from God.

Once again, what Pastor Cooley possesses in terms of a desire to preserve sound doctrine he sadly lacks in literary understanding.

Admittedly, magic is often an intrinsic component of many forms of fantasy.

However, though science fiction can contain certain mystical elements such as the Force in Star Wars, over all, the genre attempts to provide a technological basis for the impressive wonders described in these works of imagination.

As such, though science fiction can be utilized to promote questionable philosophies, science fiction is morally neutral like most other forms of technology.

As such, does Pastor Cooley condemn the use of electricity or the internal combustion engine?

For though these are based upon natural forces set into motion by God's sustaining power, as in the case of literary speculation in conjecture like science fiction, these are the result of the human mind reflecting upon a fact or a concept and extrapolating from these to configure them in such a way as to result in an until then unrealized application or insight.

Interestingly, developers of these technologies expressed affinities towards ideas and affiliations perhaps even more questionable than those to which C.S. Lewis was drawn.

Henry Ford disseminated “The Protocols Of The Elders Of Zion” to promote his particular brand of anti-Semiticism.

Thomas Edison wasn't just at one time a member of Theosophical Society; his research into electricity was intermingled with speculation regarding spiritualist phenomena and communication.

Therefore, does that mean that to remain consistent with Pastor Cooley's call for a radical degree of separation, that Pastor Cooley must repent of his electronic ministries and instead must in faith rely only on those methods utilized by the Apostles in the early days of the Church?

By Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, November 18

Cosmologist Plots Theocide

Click On The Headline

Are Pastafarian Accessories Protected Religious Apparel?

Click On The Headline

Episcopals Forge Alliance With Islamists To Destroy America

Of the Muslim prayers allowed in the structure on 11/11/14, the National Cathedral posted on its Facebook page that the service was open only to attendees and interfaith guests.

So apparently the National Cathedral doesn't have a problem with religious exclusion when doing so promotes that institution's anti-Christian and anti-American agendas.

Would a radical Christian sect that opposed homosexuality be allowed to promote their particular theological viewpoint within that particular edifice with the vestry's blessing, especially if the sponsors or participants advocated the use of violence or extend moral approval to those utilizing such to achieve their socioreligious objectives?

Then why is this privilege being extended to Muslims having participated in such outrages?

Monday, November 17

Are Stores Open Thanksgiving Deserving Of Wide Scale Divine Retribution?

Granted, retailers opening on Thanksgiving might not have been the most family-friendly or magnanimous gesture in relation to their employees. However, the response on the part of certain theologians and critics might have gone a bit overboard.

In particular, one such condemnation intoned that from this alteration in commercial operational policy that America is an evil nation worthy of God's judgment.

So because Walmart was either open on Thanksgiving or opened their doors later that evening, nuclear destruction and annihilation or something comparable should rain down across the nation. That is, of course, what is usually meant by the euphemism of “God's judgment”.

To justify this hardline response to opening stores on Thanksgiving beyond simply frowning upon the decision to actively wanting to see lives ruined because of it, Biblical prohibitions regarding the Sabbath are often invoked.

The intentions might possess a nobility in that these sentiments attempt to construe all of reality through the light of God's word and theology derived from it. However, in terms of religious jurisprudence, the position falls a bit short in terms of serving as a platform upon which one can stand to look righteous in calling for blatant ruination and upheaval.

God no doubt delights when His children offer up gratitude for what He has provided and is angered when this appreciation is not evident. However, it does not follow that one cannot express gratitude in a scheduled ritualized manner prior to engaging in orderly commerce later that same day.

One might even claim that God does not really care one way or another to a great degree about the statutory observance of Thanksgiving Day. It may come as a surprise, but there is nothing found within the pages of the canon of Scripture demanding the observance be commemorated a particular Thursday in November.

It must also be asked to what extent do those enforcing Thanksgiving Day under the Mosaic regulations upholding the Sabbath want these punishments and prohibitions enforced? From Exodus 20:9-11, it is learned that the Sabbath is the seventh day of the week. Jehovah is quite explicit about this.

In our system of chronometric tabulation, Saturday is the Sabbath. What the vast majority of Christians celebrate each Sunday (especially in the morning) is technically not the Sabbath but rather the Lord's Day to commemorate the bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

These have been conflated in the minds of many, especially those under the sway of a strict legalism. However, these days are not the same.

So are those demanding compulsory observance of the Sabbath willing to turn themselves over for execution should they find themselves violating the extensive prohibitions regulating the day? For according to Exodus 31:14, that is the stipulated punishment for those failing to observe the Sabbath of the seventh day if such a regulation still applies beyond Deuteronomical Israel.

When those attending compulsory Sabbath observations return home, do they intend to walk rather than operate a vehicle? For that is the extent to which the most observant Orthodox Jews adhere to the exactness of that divine decree. Senator Joseph Lieberman would not even place his own subway fair card into the electronic ticket-taker.

Furthermore, do those deliberating to make such a chore of relaxation intend to only eat leftovers from the night before or unheated prepackaged foods? Because if the true believing Christian must abide by every Biblical decree in excruciating detail for fear of befalling God's indignation, the preparation of consumables is forbidden as well.

Those more interested in ruining everyone else's celebration rather than simply maximizing their own will respond that simply pointing out what is said plainly in certain passages of Scripture downplayed as a result of those advocating them not wanting a greater majority of Christians to grapple with what is being said actually obscures the greater truth of the principle that is being conveyed. Fair enough.

If not for the principles conveyed by God to the Hebrew forefathers of the need for rest and reflection, mankind might have never comprehended the need for a work environment beneficial for all sides of the economic transaction. Before this revelation, for the most part laborers were little more than fodder to be worked until they dropped and quickly discarded.

However, are those insisting up a slavish adherence to the letter of the law really getting that point across when their homiletical formulations cause the listeners to stop and wonder if what really gets the motors of these scriptural exegetes running is rather body counts, the destruction of property, and overall social upheaval. For are not these in some form or another what is meant by the phrase “God's judgment”?

In these times of widespread debauchery and systematic subversion of Western culture, one usually tries to distance oneself from feminist critiques and condemnation of traditional religion. However, if one desires to be an honest observer of the human condition, one is forced to admit that only a man sitting back with his feet propped up would construe Thanksgiving Day as a Sabbath free from labor.

On the classic sitcom “Home Improvement” starring Tim Allen, one of the wittiest lines ever uttered on the series was verbalized when his sidekick Al Borlin quipped that dinner does not make itself. The remark was very similar to an observation made by my own mother.

If a man fails to realize that Thanksgiving is not some magical occasion where one of the most delicious dinners of the year just sprouts fully formed on the table in a manner akin to manna from Heaven, it is most likely that a woman in either the form of a wife, mother or even unwed concubine has spent much of the day laboring away in preparation.

Interestingly, those often complaining the loudest about the growing irreverence with which the day is treated are not absent from the kitchen because they are given over to the higher spiritual pursuits such as prayer, Bible study, or theological contemplation. Instead, they are plopped in an easy chair or on the sofa watching the most typical of entertainments. And I am not talking about the Westminster Kennel Club but rather NFL football.

The conspicuously religious claim that they are opposed to retailers being opened on Thanksgiving because their delicate consciences are disturbed by something so crass and base as mere commerce being transacted on such a solemn occasion. Then why do they have their peepers glued to the boob tube?

It is quite instructive that this contempt for free market exchange is limited to when it is engaged in by the laboring and servile classes. For the last time I checked, it is doubtful that the players, assorted team personnel, or the media conglomerates were putting on a complimentary exhibition game.

No doubt, millions upon millions of dollars exchange hands to orchestrate whatever number of games take place on this particular day. I am not really aware of the exact number. I usually watch the dog show while eating canned pasta just so I can say I had spaghetti for Thanksgiving.

So why are those deciding to go shopping on Thanksgiving more worthy of having death and misery inflicted upon them more so than those instead either attending the football game or even watching the event on television? Confronted so boldly about what it is that they are advocating, those previously enunciating a desire to see God's wrath dispensed over something as commonplace as going to the mall might attempt to linguistically backpedal by claiming that, in their call for judgment, they did not mean to wish misery or death upon those participating in a disputed activity or behavior.

I've pretty much been in or around Christian circles my entire life even if I don't feel welcomed within them entirely. The phrase “God's judgment” rarely has connotation other than that of sorrow and lamentation unless in rare instances where one is referencing the rewards that will be bestowed upon the believer for the good deeds they did honoring to Christ.

Furthermore, in the vast majority of instances, it's not like those participating one way or the other were prevented from enjoying the primary festivities of the Thanksgiving celebration or were not duly compensated in some manner.

For example, though likely not a universal beneficence bestowed on all employees, most laboring to make the sales happen were probably paid some kind of overtime. If not, such personnel were probably not compelled to work beyond their normal allotment of hours for that particular week. As such, they were payed with their scheduled adjusted to be off at another time.

Of even less moral concern ought to be the ones deciding to participate in these sales events on the consumer side of the transaction. For example, many of these sales were designated to commence well after the customary dinner hour.

As such, by that point in the evening, most would have already cogitated upon whatever thoughts of gratitude would have otherwise fired within their respective synapses. Most are in a turkey-induced catatonia, bloated and passing intestinal gas as they glare in a stupor into the television.

Interestingly, if we are raising the opposition to the opening of retailers on Thanksgiving to the level of Biblical law worthy of incurring divine retribution for violating, it must be pointed out that the commencement of these sales technically aren't even occurring on Thanksgiving. In the context of Hebrew culture and religious jurisprudence, the rendering of the day is not determined from midnight to midnight as occurs in the contemporary system. The day is instead rendered from sundown to sundown.

If one wants to be a stickler to Biblical detail, it must be noted that many of these Thanksgiving sales often commence well after dark. Therefore, under Sabbath prohibitions, it is no more immoral to shop from the disputed 8 to 11:59 PM than it would be during the 8 to 11:59 AM period Black Friday morning.

Those wanting to impose the Old Testament as binding civil legislation insist such must be done because God is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow. So if Americans deserve nuclear annihilation, plague, or whatever manifestation of the Apocalypse tickles your particular eschatological fancy for simply going to the store on Thanksgiving, should our nation also be destroyed for altering the method of rendering the days in compliance with the interpretative principle just enunciated?

It can indeed be upsetting to see what one perceives as our culture moving away from Godly foundations. However, enunciating a desire to see lives ruined and destroyed for such is probably a greater violation of explicit Biblical imperatives (such as the careful invocation of judgment) than the modification of a practice that (though commendable and worthy of continuation) is more of an interpretive application of the divine imperatives to begin with.

By Frederick Meekins

Religious Leftists Attempt To Turn Thanksgiving Into Socialistic Guilt Trip

Click On The Headline

Apostate Clerics Bestow Blessing Upon Racailist Mob Violence

Click On The Headline

Islamist Desecrating National Cathedral A Terrorist Sympathizer

Click ON The Headline

Thursday, November 13

How Much History Is One Obligated To Study?

Because God in Christ worked out the plan of salvation in a particular moment of time, I don’t see how it follows that the true Christian is obligated to have a lifelong love of history to the point where you read the discipline regularly.

Isn’t that akin to saying that if you don’t possess a physician’s or nurse’s level of knowledge of anatomy that you don’t appreciate the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit?

Everybody’s got different things they are interested in.

It is commendable to have a knowledge of church history.

But I don't see the point of laying on a guilt trip on those that really aren't into the topic as an avocation or hobby.

Should the bookworms not that great at math beyond balancing a checkbook be condemned for not being skilled in what is often described as the language in which God wrote the universe into existence?

It is commendable to have an understanding and appreciation for church history.

However, if one becomes to absorbed in the discipline, isn't there a danger of keeping stoked to too intense a degree ancient disputes of long ago?

Just how worked up should the believer still be over the Defenestration of Prague?

by Frederick Meekins

Legalistic Fanatics Condemn Kirk Cameron For Defending Santa Claus

Click On The Headline

Wednesday, November 12

Church History Sermon Fails To Consider Profound Lesson

In a sermon on the importance of church history, it was argued that the church rather than the biological family was the primary social and psychological relationship in the life of the believer.

That might provide a degree of comfort if one's biological family is urging one to engage in blatantly anti-Biblical behavior.

However, such a grandiose sentiment itself needs to be circumscribed by carefully delineated boundaries.

You will always have a higher priority to those through whom you came into the world.

There is something downright shameful regarding some of these missionaries that will willingly die on behalf of the Pygmies in the African bush but hardly give a second thought to their aging parents here in America.

In classical Christian thought, this is the idea of subsidiarity, that your most profound obligations are to those closest to you.

Secondly, by insisting that a more profound loyalty is owed to one's church family than one's biological family can expose the gullible to a shocking litany of potential abuse on the part of church leaders.

For Jim Jones will live in infamy for conditioning numerous followers to place obedience to church structure over the well being of spouses and children, with the coercion and manipulation he subjected them to in the isolation of the jungle ending with hundreds dead.

It is a shame that a sermon purporting to admonish the need for the Christian to heed the lessons of history failed to take into account one of the twentieth century's most profound.

By Frederick Meekins

Rowan Williams Would Allow Teachers To Parade Around Classroom In Full Heathen Regalia

Click On The Headline

Mormon Church Admits Founder Was A Sex Pervert

Click On The Headline

Increasing Number Admit To Despising Compulsory Handshaking Rituals

Click On The Headline

National Cathedral Surrendered To Islamists

Yes, these are Islamists.

If just interested in quietly practicing their Islamic faith, they'd simply find somewhere else to prayer.

Will women be allowed to participate?

The National Cathedral has embraced the libertine sexual agenda so wholeheartedly that the bells were rung following a Supreme Court ruling on gay marriage like a war had ended or a new monarch crowned.

How many mosques or Islamic centers are open to distinctively Christian prayers?

Click On The Headline

A Biography Of Martin Luther

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, November 11

Colorado Educators Prefer Students Discuss Legalized Pot Than Theology

Click On The Headline

Ebola: The Blood Serpent & The Horsemen Of The Apocalypse

Check Out News Podcasts at Blog Talk Radio with Hagmann and Hagmann Report on BlogTalkRadio

For Thinking It's So Evil, Preachers Can Certainly Rattle On About Harry Potter's Specifics

In a discussion of the Harry Potter novels that was broadcast interestingly enough as part of the program that just days before heralded Larry The Cable Guy as a philosophical humorist on par with Will Rogers, the host lamented that 50% of all children in America have read at least one of the novels in that particular series and how said it was that many of the children claim to be Christian.

But what if a youngster, particularly as they move into the adolescent and teenage years, is able to discern spiritual truth from deception for themselves?

If that aptitude is irrelevant to the discussion, what about these ministers and teachers that go beyond the message that witchcraft is to be avoided but can themselves go into exacting detail regarding the plot twists of the Harry Potter saga that it is obvious that they have either read the books or seen the movies?

That is akin to simply not warning of the dangers of pornography but being able to critique how convincingly particular actors in that debauched genre are able to pull off roles as pizza delivery lads or coeds needing the dormitory plumbing snaked.

Should they be called upon to repent as well?

What gives this occupational class an exemption to research this material first hand but not the remainder of us?

If we are to be forbidden from investigating these things on our own, how do we know that the line they are pedaling us is really true?

By Frederick Meekins

Monday, November 10

The Dreadful Legacy Of Mark Twain

Click On The Headline

Mark Twain's Battle Against God

Click On The Headline

Researchers Hope To Respark Interest In Da Vinci Code Hooey

Click On The Headline

Scandal Erupts That Consumation Of Duggar Wedding Insufficiently Prayed Over

Click On The Headline

Will The Jesuits Brainwash The Gullible Into Surrendering To Extraterrestrial Invasion?

Click On The Headline

Are Certain Evangelicals As Obsessed Over Sexual Identity As Radical Gay Activists?

Controversy has erupted over a Notre Dame University conference titled “Gay In Christ: Dimensions In Fidelity”.

The purpose of the meeting was to reflect upon and address those that embrace Catholic teaching on marriage and the family but also experience homosexual temptation.

But instead of encouraging those that are struggling to live the right way despite the desires of their flesh, some have instead decided to criticize the goal of reconciling these combating inclinations.

Ryan Dobson, the slovenly tattooed beatnik son of James Dobson of Focus On The Family, is quoted in a ChristianNews.net article as saying, “Sexuality is not an identity; sexuality comes from one's identity. My identity does not come from my intimate relationship with my wife; my identity comes directly from my relationship...with God.”

Those words can be a powerful encouragement for those struggling against this variety of sin --- both homo and heterosexual.

However, haven't those affiliated with Focus On The Family over the years such as James Dobson and Albert Mohler carved out for themselves lucrative niche ministries guilt tripping those not married by the age of 25?

In essence, these ministers and scholars have come dangerously close to reducing individuals to little more than their sexual identities.

In these circles, it is not simply enough to teach that heterosexual marriage is the only relationship in which the manifestation of carnal affections is not a profound sin.

On his broadcasts and audio recordings, Mohler has suggested that churches should actually interrogate and verbally harass young adult singles as to why they have not yet married.

Our identity is indeed grounded in Christ and not over what elicits a stirring in the loins.

As such, perhaps it is about time for churches to leave alone those that have not fallen into open sin in this area of their lives and lend sensitive support rather than condemnation to those that have requested assistance in battling these particularly vexing temptations.

By Frederick Meekins

Audio: Church's Opposition To Holidays Borders On The Cultic

Because God in Christ worked out the plan of salvation in a particular moment of time, I don’t see how it follows that the true Christian is obligated to have a lifelong love of history to the point where you read the discipline regularly. Isn’t that akin to say that if you don’t possess a physician’s or nurse’s level of anatomy that you don’t appreciate the body as the temple of the Holy Spirit? Everybody’s got different things they are interested in.

Wednesday, November 5

Christan Bale Damns Moses As Barbaric

Click On The Headline

Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now

Disciples Of Christ Congregation Spices Up Hymn Sing With Free Booze

Click On The Headline

Has The Pope Abandoned Christianity In Favor Of A Platonic Mormonism?

In addressing the Pontifical Academy Of Sciences, Pope Francis pontificated, “When we read about Creation in Genesis, we run the risk of imagining God was a magician, with a magic wand able to do everything. But that is not so.”

If this wasn't bad enough, Pope Francis further elaborated, “God is not a divine being or a magician, but the Creator who brought everything to life.”

In other words, Pope Francis is not so much a Christian but rather a Platonist.

Christianity holds that God brought forth the world from nothingness.

John 1:3 reads, “All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.”

Colossians 1:16-17 stipulates in concurrence, “For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth...And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.”

Platonism, on the other hand, believes in accord with the assumptions hinted at in the Pope's statement that matter exists eternally and independent from God.

God merely reshaped to the best of His ability that which was already there.

Pope Francis is to be commended for his attempt to preserve the metaphysical freedom of human beings in playing a role in determining their eternal destiny.

But in positing the cosmology that he does, what guarantee are we provided that the system won't go spiraling out of control or that the promises made by God are even trustworthy?

For example, if God did not bring matter nor the laws governing physical substance into existence and is Himself subject to these limitations as inviolable standards rather than by His own volition, why ought we to believe that He is able to cause a virgin to conceive a son, and for that son to rise from the dead after dying upon a cross so that we might have the forgiveness of sins and beatific eternal life?

For are not these greater contraventions of how the universe operates than to bring the cosmos into existence within the span of six literal days?

In Luke 5 in the account where Jesus heals the paralytic lowered through the roof, Christ inquires in verse 23, “Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Rise up and walk?”

Thus, if the laws of nature cannot be suspended as the Divinity sees fit, on what grounds ought we to believe that He really has paid our debts in full?

On old adage asks is the Pope Catholic.

Maybe so, but these days it seems that, in terms of his foundational presuppositons, he might be trending Mormon but hopefully with a much less active sex life. By Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, November 4

Understanding The New Testament

Click On The Headline

Should We Abandon Or Reform American Protestantism?

Click On The Headline

Church's Opposition To Holidays Borders On The Cultic

In the equivalent of the self-denunciation that occurs in a variety of cults and Vietcong prisoner of war camps, the congregation of Grace Fellowship Church in Davenport, Iowa celebrate assorted holidays by not only being harangued by their pastor as to what wretched Christians they are if they are caught participating in these festivities but they are also expected to confess to one another just how much they despise these occasions as evidenced by a number of sermons posted at SermonAudio.com..

In an anti-Halloween sermon, the pastor remarked that any parents that have taught their children about Santa Claus are guilty of having lied. He then remarked how delighted he was of his son for having responded to an inquiry that Santa Claus was a wicked elf from the north. So the moral of that story must be that falsehoods are acceptable then they advance the family theological agendas and pecularitiies.

In a sermon condemning Halloween and nearly all other holidays, the pastor suggested that if you enjoy the accouterments of a particular celebration, you can partake of it at another time of year. As an example, he suggested saving your marshmallow peeps until May or June.

But if you are required to live your life in such a controlled and contrived manner, aren't you still living still beholden to that particular holiday? And more importantly, isn't such an individual still seeking the approval of man rather than God?

In an anti-Halloween sermon, the pastor made the argument that Trick Or Treating was wrong because the custom encourages children to dress up as something they are not and to hoard something that “appeals to the flesh” (that being candy). So in the case of this preacher, it would not be a sin for him to dress as a donkey because he's certainly a dumb you know what.

In a sermon on Halloween, it was claimed that the customs of Halloween are designed to take children away from God at an early age. Couldn't something similar be said about legalistic churches and Christian schools pushing children away from God with too many nitpicky and asinine rules?

The pastor devoted a portion of his assorted tirades exposing that Frosty the Snowman was based on a lie. Who over the age of six believes he is real? Even the History Channel hasn't stooped that low yet. By singing about Frosty, you are no more worshiping Frosty than you would be worshiping Calijah The Wooden Indian or worshiping The Gambler by singing those classic songs.

Particularly unsettling and disturbing were the verbal confessions members of the congregation were expected to engage in order to receive approval and affirmation from the pastors and elders.

One gentleman confided how much he had wanted to celebrate Christmas the previous year but instead submitted himself to the eldership of the church. Buddy, the elders might have say as to whether or not the church building is decorated for Christmas. However, they don't have any say whatsoever as to what you do in your home.

In being prodded further by the leadership as to why he no longer celebrated Christmas, this individual responded because the authority in his life had instructed him as such. At no time did he clarify whether or not by that he meant the Holy Spirit or rather merely those holding position at church. If you are going to relent to pastoral control over your life to such an extent, please for the sake of your family, decide for yourself now if you are going to let the pastor sleep with your wife and molest your kids when he comes asking or drink the sour Kool Aid when he orders it.

Another seeking approval during this protocultic ritual admitted in her confession to tossing out a Fischer Price Nativity set because of the adoration her granddaughter exhibited towards the Baby Jesus figurine. The grandmother reflected, and rightfully so to a certain extent, that often we prefer the adorable Baby Jesus that is not a depiction of the Christ of wrath and judgment.

But shouldn't we be cautious about tossing out the messianic baby with the baptismal water? Isn't there a profound and beautiful truth in God in Christ condescending to our level by becoming one of us?

There are indeed both gentle and wrathful sides to God. And in the spirit of the Book of Ecclesiastes, there is a time and purpose to contemplate each of these under Heaven.

Would it be better to deny this obviously spiritually sensitive and receptive child the tender side of Jesus and instead replace Him only with the hard-edged disciplinarian Jesus that the most thoroughgoing Fundamentalists seem to have a preference for? About the only thing the child is going to retain of this entire encounter is that granny tossed out such a beloved toy or decoration. Her family will no doubt sit around twiddling their thumbs years down the road baffled as to why the child is no longer close to God.

A pastor opposed to the celebration of Christmas remarked that no one that has considered the material he has made available regarding the subject and prayed seriously about the topic has told him that despite these that they will continue celebrating the holiday. The statement was made to promulgate the impression that there is little chance for the true believer to come to any conclusion other than that of this particular pastor.

However, there are at least two other alternatives.

Firstly, the individual believer could have been convicted by the Holy Spirit that there is something more profoundly wrong in that particular congregation than the celebrating of Christmas. Concluding such, they retreat hastily from that particular assembly and flee to another house of worship.

Secondly, they might have considered what the pastor had to say, came to a different conclusion, and felt their was no need to inform the pastor of the decision. Especially in light of those matters where the individual is granted some measure of personalized conviction, it is not really the preacher's business what goes on in your home. If this brand of theology and ecclesiology makes such a fuss over Roman Catholic confession, they can't really then invoke some kind of expectation that you are obligated to blab about everything you do.

In these churches where the congregations don't celebrate Christmas, is it out of a desire to please God or have they been so brainwashed by the pastor that they are afraid of ticking him off?

A pastor can repent of celebrating Christmas as much as he likes. However, it is really not his place to homiletically manipulate and coerce you into doing so.

By Frederick Meekins

Christianity & The New Liberalism

Click On The Headline

Now, on his commercial where he says that he and Gloria Copeland are married forever, does Kenneth Copeland speak rhetorically about this life or has he adopted the Mormon teaching on marriage. Might as well. Sounds like his old pal Pope Francis is adopting a more Mormon understanding of Creation.

(Audio) Has The Pope Abandoned Christianity In Favor Of A Platonic Mormonism?

Wednesday, October 29

Presbyterian Minister Downplays Physiological Aspects Of Mental Illness

In an anti-Halloween sermon that dealt in part with demonic manifestations, Presbyterian Pastor Steven Dilday insisted that the cure to potential possession was the same irrespective of whether the particular case was real or more psychological in nature.

That is because it is ultimately Christ that delivers the victory.

And does that include maladies that were once considered demonic in origin such as epilepsy or schizophrenia?

It might be the role of the minister to provide prayer in the resolution of these afflictions as well.

But if the cause of the illness lies in the realm of the biologically physiological, does not Christ also work through a physician for the alleviation of that variety of suffering?

By Frederick Meekins

Are Christian Broadcasters Losing Resolve To Stand Against Transgenderism?

In coverage of an incident where parents were not informed that a deranged sex fiend identifying itself as a female was allowed to change in the presence of minors actually configured as such genetically, the hosts of Standing Up For The Truth went out of their way to point out that it would be inappropriate to judge the student.

Comments crossing over the line into profanity would not be publicly acceptable.

But isn't there a place for good old fashioned judgment and shame?

This student wasn't caught in his own home crossdressing.

If this behavior is not to be subject to appropriate condemnation, is it really all that wrong to begin with?

How do we know that the lad in question really identifies as a woman or simply had an overwhelming compulsion to view a lush, emerging bosom?

If a boy wiggled his way into the girls changing area for that reason would Christian broadcasters be fumbling all over themselves verbally in regards to a school system that applauded such deviancy?

Yet isn't that lewdness less morally depraved than someone so obsessed with the body of the opposite gender that they are willing to have themselves mutilated in pursuit of such lust?

By Frederick Meekins

The Christian Origins Of Halloween

Click On The Headline

The Lutheran Reformation & Education

Click On The Headline

Hell Underlies Heaven's Initial Appeal

A blog posted at Patheos,com titled “What Christianity Without Hell Looks Like” claims that a more authentic expression of this particular world faith would be possible without the concept of a potentially punitive destination in the Afterlife being held over the heads of humanity.

The author writes, “In short, a Christianity without hell would be a fearless, trusting, loving, divinely inspired source of good in the world.”

Maybe so.

But it must asked, what then is the point?

For if either we all get to Heaven or Heaven is as nonexistent as this mythologized Hell, why bother going out of one's way to consider the claims of the Gospel message or to abide by the basic rigors of Biblical revelation?

As much as these progressives brainwashed to oppose the notion of enlightened are loathe to admit it, there are few motivators greater than an aversion to pain and suffering.

by Frederick Meekins

Monday, October 27

In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor showed the congregation a picture of himself in a costume as a child. If Halloween is so wicked, isn’t that the equivalent of a repentant adult film star showing a clip of one of her pornos?

Ministers Condemning Trick-Or-Treat Excuse Their Own Halloween Participation

In a tirade against Halloween, it was assured that, while the autumnal celebration is not referenced directly, the Bible does speak about the works of the devil.

So does that include pastors that can't keep their hands off the teen girls (and shockingly even the teen boys these days) in the congregation?

Since a shockingly high number of these incidents now occur in the ranks of Independent Baptist Churches now that this profound evil has burned its way through the Roman Catholicism, to avoid the appearance of evil and to be separate from these unclean things, does that mean the Christian ought to avoid independent fundamental Baptist churches for the sake of their testimonies as well?

In their annual tirades against Halloween, often aging ministers excuse their past participation in this celebration by insisting that the confectionary collection ritual did not mean back then what it does today.

To justify not only their abstention from the holiday but calling into question the profession of faith of any Christian caught participating as well, often ghastly atrocities that may or may not have actually taken place are elaborated as the sources from which these customs are alleged to have originated.

So unless there has been some kind of chronometric discombobulation where the time stream has become unhinged, even if these ministers are on the declining side of fifty in the their onward perambulation towards the century mark, these pulpiteers are still younger than the evils that they are referencing.

To get around the question that pops into the mind of the discerning of why it was acceptable for the Christian youth of fifty or sixty years ago to Trick Or Treat but a transgression bordering on the unpardonable for the youth of today to participate in the same form of merriment, the geezers at Southwest Radio Ministries concocted a novel but logically questionable justification..
Back when they were wee tots, America was a Judeo-Christian nation.

However, going door to door to collect candy (even if the local preacher doesn't place his hands where he has no business and will land him on an offender registry) will mentally warp the youth of today in these philosophically confused times.

It is still never satisfactorily explained how carving a pumpkin or cavorting about in an amusing but tasteful costume will cause one to apostatize from the faith later down the road.

It seems ministers and clergy that admit to having done one thing still not sounding very repentant about it while demanding another of those under their teaching would be the greater threat of tempting people away from the faith.

It has been suggested that, instead of handing out candy for Halloween, that the Christian should give out Gospel tracts.

But if Halloween in general and Trick Or Treat in particular are so inherently evil, applying this kind of logic to another setting, would placing a gospel tract into an exotic dancer's thong rather than dollar bills justify attendance at a strip club?

By Frederick Meekins

Saturday, October 25

Shouldn't Christians Be More Outraged At Scripture Twisting Than Trick Or Treating?

In an anti-Halloween sermon, a pastor quoted I Thessalonians 5:7, which reads, “For they that sleep sleep in the night; and they that be drunken are drunken in the night.”

In the exegesis that followed, the minister expounded that it was nearly a sin to do anything at night other than sleep as if to do so were some kind of mark of evil.

But what if you are a nocturnal type that is more alert at night?

Or what if, no matter what you do, you tend not to sleep the whole night through?

But is the text really so much about the condemnation of any activity at night other than slumber?

Earlier in the passage, the text emphasizes that the Day of the Lord is at hand.

The verses that follow remind the believer that we do not belong to darkness.

There is not much argument that significant carousing takes place while many of the more industrious and diligent are at home resting up for work the next day.

However, from the passage, one could just as legitimately conclude that both sleep and drunkenness are more metaphors for a lack of discernment and awareness.

The drunken could be viewed as those so overwhelmed by the despair of the world that the turn to overwhelming distraction.

The asleep are those that just don't give a tinker's you know what.

From such a comparison, a case could be made that the drunken might be better off because at least they are troubled by some kind of nagging sense that something is not right in the world.

If a pastor is going to position themselves as being so spiritual as to take a hardline position against Halloween, shouldn't they at least be as cautious as to consider the verse of scripture immediately prior to the one they intend to bash over the heads of those that do not agree with their interpretation of certain secondary matters?

I Thessalonians 5:6 counsels, “Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.”

This portion of the epistle under consideration is similar in motif to Christ's parable of the virgins in Matthew 25 that let their lamps go out waiting for the groom to arrive at the marriage feast.

If the passage is to be utilized to condemn Halloween on the grounds that it prompts people to participate in nocturnal activities other than slumber, shouldn't the next sermon in the series aim its condemnation at the mattress or pillow industry for abetting recuperative unconsciousness?

For in the passage, sleep is not portrayed all that positively either.

By Frederick Meekins

Sunday, October 19

Pastor Baffled Why Christians Reluctant To Embrace Death At The Hands Of ISIS Or Ebola

A pastor mused during a sermon that he wondered why so many Christians were reluctant to die.

It was then remarked you can either die at the hands of ISIS or from Ebola, so you might as well have a positive attitude about it.

Do those making such statements in a religious frenzy actually stop to consider how it is to perish as a result of such necrotic modalities?

Regarding the concern Christians often express regarding death.

Why are we at fault regarding the survival instinct God has imbued into nearly every form of life?

Furthermore, if Scripture says that those that hate God love death, wouldn't it therefore follow that as the most correct religion that Christians would be the most averse to this disputed metabolic state?

By Frederick Meekins

Friday, October 17

Could The President's UN Remarks Undermine Religious Liberty

In an address before the United Nations, President Obama proclaimed to the planetary assembly, “No children --- anywhere --- should be educated to hate people.”

The President went on to clarify, “There should be no tolerance of so-called clerics who call upon people to harm innocents.”

The President suggested that this could be accomplished in part by composing a “new compact...to eradicate the corruption of young minds by violent ideology” and by “contesting the space that terrorists occupy --- including the Internet and social media.”

Such proposed policies sounds like a prudent course of action to take against those out to destroy the American way of life.

But in deciphering the double talk that spews from the mouths of political elites like phlegm during flu season, the discerning grow concerned as to whether or not such rhetorical pronouncements will only be used against the jhadist menace.

Given the President's fundamental ideological orientation as a socialistic secularist, what safeguards are to be put in place that these strategies won't be used against Americans of a conservative Evangelical or Roman Catholic persuasion?

For example, when the average American hears Obama insist that no child anywhere should be taught to hate other people, images of toddlers and preschoolers being indoctrinated by a giant plushy mouse as to the glories of not only killing Christians and Jews but of their own suicide martyrdoms.

However, in the eyes of the crowd that Obama runs with, propagating hate can consist of little more than publicly reading those passages of Scripture critical of homosexuality or peacefully insisting that professing belief in Christ is the only path to eternal salvation.

In fact, columnist Mark Steyn was dragged before a Canadian human rights tribunal for remarks not too much more rhetorically forceful than those made by Obama on the floor of the United Nations by simply exposing what jihadists had themselves articulated.

Obama suggested that different faiths should come together to speak out against this violent worldview.

It depends upon what the President means by that.

Fine and dandy if he means a respect for human decency being enunciated individually from behind each pulpit in a wide variety of houses of worship.

However, if the President is suggesting that widely diverging faiths are obligated to open their pulpits to one another free of doctrinal criticism as to where these guests measure up and fall theologically short, the government will have taken a step one too many to the point where its agencies will likely become the next great threat to our own liberties and well being once the identifiable terrorist menace has been identified and appropriately dispatched.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, October 16

Naive Lutheran Would Welcome Homiletical Interrogation

Speaking in regards to the subpoena of the sermons of a number of Houston pastors opposing a “gender equality” statute, Dr. Scott Murray of that city's Luther Memorial Church remarked on an episode of Isssues Etc. that he would welcome such an opportunity to have his homilitetical output scrutinized by the state.

He ruminated that it might be the only time that these magistrates might be exposed to a nonlegalistic version of Christianity.

But is it really the proper function of civil authorities to deploy its policing powers to penalize doctrinal expression that has not veered beyond the boundaries of verbalization into the territory of physical or financial abuse?

Wednesday, October 15

Pastor's Advice Could Result In Prolonged Abuse

In a sermon comparing those that express anything but positive comments to the Ebola virus, a pastor suggested that we ought to concentrate solely on the good in our marriages, families, and churches.

But in the world in which we live, shouldn't that instruction be conditioned to apply only to minor everyday slights?

For example, should a wife say, “My husband only backhands me once in a while, but he certainly buys me pretty things.”

Should the husband say, “I might have caught her in the backyard next door squirming around in the neighbor's lap, but I should just be satisfied because she's the only woman that would consider marrying me.”

And what about church?

Should it be said, “Well, pastor might skim off the collection plate when he thinks no one is looking and, sure, he cops a feel of the teen girls occasionally, but boy can he preach a sermon condemning nearly every last aspect of the contemporary world and how we ought to avoid contact with any church that doesn't embrace our doctrinal peculiarities in their unaltered totality.”

by Frederick Meekins

Devout Catholics Stand Erect Against Homosexual Penetration

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, October 14

Reflections Upon Ebola

Thomas Friedan of the Centers For Disease Control remarked regarding the Texas nurse that contracted Ebola in the course of treating a patient with the plague that protocols were obviously violated.

In other words, it is her own expletive fault.

So does the government's medical establishment enunciate the same flippant dismissiveness regarding those that contract sexually transmitted diseases?

Eventually, Friedan did apologize for his remarks.

But if a public health functionary would still need to be punished for verbalizing such sentiments in reference to certain celebrated lifestyles, then why not in this particular instance where a dedicated individual was attempting to assist the suffering and afflicted rather than satisfying some carnal desire?

It was pointed out on Hannity that 900,000 Africans could perish in the Ebola epidemic.

This will undoubtedly rank among the great disasters of the 21st century.

The bubonic plague was one of the events demarcating the close of the Middle Ages and the commencement of the Modern Era?

Likewise, are we witnessing the close of this epoch even apart from any eschatological considerations. How much of the present order will be left standing this time next year?

by Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, October 8

Religious Leftists Agitate Politically

According to the 10/15/2014 issue of the Christian Century, a coalition of religious leftists is launching a campaign to encourage voter registration in low income and immigrant communities.

In other words, populations likely to elect candidates more likely to promise the largest handout payments.

This mobilization effort plans to organize under the banner of Let My People Vote.

Mind you, these are likely the very same agitators insisting that the pro-life, pro-family, and pro-American policy preferences of Religious Right organizations such as Moral Majority and the Christian Coalition cheapen the cause of the Gospel.

The Roman Catholic Church will probably lavish praise and honor for heroism all over the missionary priest that died from Ebola. So is the institution going to do anything for the nursing assistant that contracted Ebola from the priest?

Broadcaster Hints Ebola Plague Could Be Retribution For Violating Mosaic Dietary Guidelines

On the 8/5/2014 broadcast of Viewpoint, Chuck Crismier examined the threat posed by the Ebola virus.

In his analysis, he pointed out that the virus can be spread through the fruit bat, which a number of Africans consume as part of their native cuisine.

Crismier interjected that such a practice is not Biblical.

If the apologist is insisting that Old Testament dietary regulations are binding upon New Testament non-Jewish believers, he is not correct.

In Matthew 15:11, Christ Himself counsels that an individual is not defiled by what goes into one's mouth but rather by what comes out of the elocutionary orifice.

This New Testament alteration of the Old Testament law seems to be sustained by a number of other passages.

In I Timothy 4:4, the Apostle Paul asserts that ALL foods (not just the list of Mosaic kosher foods) can be enjoyed with thanksgiving.

To clarify that God was the God of both the Jews and the Gentiles, in Acts 10 Peter was instructed to eat from a selection of foods that up until that point that he had been conditioned to avoid as unclean.

God would not have compelled Peter to do something that was still a violation of God's law.

It's not like Peter was told to marry a man or to offer worship up towards a false god.

It is a correct observation that very few Americans would want to eat a bat.

However, is Chuck Crismier going to insist that he has never eaten or since repented of partaking of crab, shrimp, or lobster which are also forbidden under Old Testament dietary guidelines since these creatures are essentially underwater coach roaches?

Likewise, if Chuck Crismier believes this strongly about strict adherence to the Mosaic law in its entirety, does he intend to broadcast an episode of his Viewpoint news and cultural analysis program condemning the Duck Dynasty clan for the consumption of yet another food clearly forbidden in the pages of Old Testament revelation?

And what about the fast food industry such as Burger King and McDonald's?

A common complaint among certain factions of the more doctrinally enthusiastic is that contemporary Evangelicals are insufficiently Hebraic in their approach to the interpretation and application of Scripture.

So if Africans are to be condemned for consuming bats which might be one of the very few food items available to such impoverished populations, does one have to be consistent and declare an all out crusade against the All American cheeseburger?

By Frederick Meekins

Pope Threatens Income Redistribution In The Name Of Humane Immigration Policy

Click On The Headline

Sunday, October 5

Is The Southern Baptist Missions President More Interested In Your Stuff Than Your Soul?

There is no pleasing some theologians unless you word to the most exacting detail everything the way that they would.

A Facebook meme attributed to Southern Baptist International Missions Board president David Platt is quoted as saying the following: “Accept him? Do we really think Jesus needs our acceptance? Don't we need Him? Jesus is no longer one to be accepted or invited in but one who is infinitely worthy of our immediate and total surrender.”

Is there really a reason to get one's backside up on one's shoulders over a pastor or evangelist that phrases the soteriological appeal in terms of accepting Christ as Lord and Savior?

Granted, as part of the infinite triune Godhead, Jesus can hobble along quite fine without us no matter how much Pastor Platt believes world missions might collapse without his particular brand of religious over-enthusiasm.

What it simply means when someone accepts Jesus as Lord and Savior is that the person assents to the truth and validity of the claims and conditions made in the Gospels.

What is interesting is Rev. Platt's phraseology of immediate and total surrender.

Traditionally, that is what occurs when the sincere individual comes to a saving knowledge of Christ, meaning one makes a concerted effort with the help of the Holy Spirit to resist those more sinful desires.

However, what Platt may mean by that, given the perspective taken in a number of his books such as “Radical” and his sermons available on sites such as Youtube, is a bit different.

To Platt, it is not so much that your life and possessions are Christ's to determine directly how these are to be used to His glory but rather that is to be determined by your betters up the ecclesiastical food chain.

According to sermons from the likes of Rev. Platt, in taking up your cross, it is not sufficient to endure a particular struggle or trial that has come into your life but rather that you are to think of yourself as on the way to execution in terms that you are supposed to be wracked with profound guilt for a standard of living above that of the subsistence level.

However, religious superstars such as David Platt are to enjoy a semi-luxurious lifestyle flying across the country and around the globe having accolades and wads of cash tossed in their direction over how wonderful they are for being outraged that you have what you have.

Christ Himself says in Revelation 3:20, “Behold, I stand at the door and knock; if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”

The text does not say that Jesus will beat down the door.

Customarily, when someone knocks at the door, it is your right to either open the door to invite them into your dwelling or to decline their request along with whatever it is they might be happening to bring you.

But then again, we are in the age where apparently the theological celebrities know more than Christ ever did.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, October 2

Pastor Apparently Selective In What Pagan Practices He Condemns

In a sermon titled “The Satanic Deception Of Halloween” posted at SerrmonAudio.com, Pastor James Cooley details the history of how black cats came to be connected with this autumnal celebration as the spirit familiars of witches and as a result of an alleged Druidic belief that cats were the reincarnated souls of evil people.

To this, the podcaster interviewing Pastor Cooley remarked that he knew there was a reason why he did not like cats.

Pastor Cooley concurred with an “Amen.”

But who is it that created cats?

Surely it was not Satan.

Was it not the God that we are supposed to be so dedicated to that we can't even participate in a festival that does not possess any meaning for most other than dressing up in a silly costume to collect candy from door to door?

Cats are not inherently evil.

That is merely the connotation they have been imbued with from a cultural and literary standpoint derived from subjective existential or psychological sources.

In other words, from nothing more than what someone happened to think or feel regarding them.

Should something be abandoned because a number construe a conceptual or ontological category to be evil rather than it actually being so?

So does this include Fundamentalist Baptist Churches?

For years, that form of ecclesiology's most ardent adherents rightly condemned the pedophile scandals that wracked the Roman Catholic Church.

However, it turns out that nearly the same perversion had gripped a number of hardline Independent Fundamentalist ministries.

Therefore, isn't it logical to contend that there have been more innocent people hurt in a spirit of appalling wanton sin perpetrated by those that should have known better than were ever hurt by cats exhibiting a similar degree of deliberate malice?

So does that mean we should refrain from attendance at these particular houses of worship to avoid offending the weaker brother?

Often, the conspicuously pious will homiletically insist that Halloween ought to be avoided altogether not so much to refrain from actual wrongdoing but to avoid the appearance of such and out of the necessity to separate from unclean things as counseled by Scripture.

As such, shouldn't we also consider the source of this sentiment against cats if the propriety or impropriety of a thing is to be determined not so much by how it is practiced today but rather by ideas affiliated with it at the time a custom came into existence?

By the pastor's own admission, this particular prejudice is supposedly Druid in origin.

Thus, if we are to severe all connections with Halloween for being pagan in origin, why not this unfounded contempt for felines as well?

By Frederick Meekins

Albert Mohler Praises Islamist Call To Reduce Women To The Status Of Breeding Cows

Click On The Headline

Abortion Tourism A Growing Tennessee Industry

Click On The Headline

Tuesday, September 30

Will Reprobates Subvert The Synod On The Family?

Click On The Headline

German Perverts Insist Incest Prohibitions Undermine Sexual Self Determination

Click On The Headline

Episcopal Loom Worships The Creation Rather Than The Creator

Click On The Headline

Episcopal Panties In A Wad Over What To Call Female Clergy

Click On The Headline

2014 Benjamin Netanyahu UN Address

Apostate Insists The Bible No More Binding Than Star Wars Or Lord Of The Rings

Click On The Headline

When St. Francis Saved The Church

Is Cardinal Dolan Edging Closer To Embracing Moral Degeneracy?

Click On The Headline

The Coming Police State

Click On The Headline

Saturday, September 27

Does Enslavement Uplift Spirits?

Islamic propagandists are insisting that women that wear hijabs have a higher body image.

If a woman wants to wear such an outfit, that might be her business.

However, isn't the more pressing issue at hand the women being forced to wear these getups in areas where the particular form of extremeism such garments exemplify is on the rise?

Is one to conclude that the jihadists that hacked off the breasts of Christian women were instead simply trying to liberate these women from body dysmorphic disorder?

Regarding adherents of this creed that parade about in full heathen regalia to the extent that even their faces are concealed.

What assurances does an instructor in an academic setting have that it's the same student that shows up everyday adorned in such a potentially deceptive manner.

What if a member of the Ku Klux Klan showed up making their daily rounds in public in complete costume?

Tolerancemongers will insist what the Klansman is doing is intended to excite a spirit of fear and express hatred.

But so is the Mohammedan.

For such ensembles are not donned so much out of sincere religious devotion but out of contempt for our liberties that allow such imbeciles to cavort about without opposition or even question.

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, September 24

Apparently Only Certain Deaths Worthy Of Nazarene Reflection

A Maryland Nazarene Church has posted on its Facebook page photos of candles lit for those mourning Michael Brown and in support of the work to end racism.

It might be one thing to light a candle on behalf of his memory as a human being.

However, if he had not met his parting from this world in a manner that could be exploited to further assorted politically correct agendas, would this church have lit a candle for him?

Given that his church is located in the Washington/Baltimore corridor with its own disturbingly high rate of homicide, does this church post photos of candles lit on behalf of other murder victims explicitly by name?

Tagged on to the name of Michael Brown is mention of “our work to end racism”.

There is really no proof that the Michael Brown incident had anything to do with racism.

The foremost examples of racism involved surrounding this issue were of those that rampaged in the streets of Ferguson.

Does this Nazarene church intend to post candles lit beseeching divine protection for the shopkeeper brutalized by Michael Brown in the last hour of his life and the owners of the property pillaged by his supporters?

Or has the Church of the Nazarene been so given over to the social gospel embraced by much of the Emergent Church to the extent that the leadership of this particular congregation contends that property owners get whatever they deserve at the hands of the allegedly disadvantaged?

By Frederick Meekins

What Does The Church Teach About The Devil?

Click On The Headline

Do Militant Secularists Intend To Purge All Mentions Of Christianity From The Literary Record?

Click On The Headline

Does Harry Potter's Influence Surpass Christ?

Click On The Headline

So I guess according to those embracing the brand of eschatological sensationalism that seems to have taken over WorldNetDaily these past couple of years we are suppose to now, what, watch the Apocalypse commence starting today?

From Baptist To Lutheran Pastor

Click On The Headline

Monday, September 22

Why Aren’t You Entitled To Know The Background Character Of A Potential Mate?

A pastor remarked that, in a dating relationship, it is not your business if the person is a virgin.

However, if a relationship begins to progress beyond the stages of merely going out casually, especially if the person claims to never have been married before, aren't you entitled to know more about this aspect of an individual's character?

Why shouldn't someone that has lived a morally chaste life be able to decide for themselves based on all of the available information if they are willing to settle for soiled goods? Jesus does indeed forgive.

However, His record really isn't all that impressive in preventing the spread of the AIDS virus or other related diseases.

Are we to also avoid questions about other important issues such as previous marital status or doctrinal preferences in ascertaining the suitability of a potential mate?

According to this logic, one is suppose to accept being saddled in a relationship with a Baptist that has been a total whore rather than a Catholic or a Holy Roller that has kept their pants on and their legs together. Interesting how a sense of forgiveness or whatever one wants to call it should be so blind and stupid regarding one particular sin but if one decides to marry someone that is honest about a divorce about the only thing you will be allowed to do in some of these hardline churches is to empty your wallet into the collection plate.

by Frederick Meekins

Ezekiel Emanuel Want You Dead By The Time You're 75

Click On The Headline

Corrie Ten Boom Dismissed As Hatemonger

Click On The Headline

A pastor mentioned that, during Puritan times, if someone in the congregation nodded off during the sermon, the somnolent could be whacked by a roving usher. The pastor joked that perhaps we should return to our heritage. If one is to hold to the sola scruiptura of rigorous Protestantism, in what passage is such a use of force called for? How about pastors introducing or suggesting ideas nowhere called for in the pages of the Bible being beaten with a rod?

Where does it say if you are committing a sin when Jesus returns that you will be punished for that throughout all of eternity if you otherwise embrace Christ as Lord and Savior? And why is that moment any different than at the moment of a traditional death? What if you see a car barreling towards you and the moment before you die you shout “HOLY SH-T”? Even Paul admitted that he did that which he did not want to do.

A pastor remarked that there is no greater service than Christian service. The pastor than limited Christian service to those instances where one directly shared the Gospel. But given that we are not solely spiritual beings, shouldn't service intending to meet these other needs if those are the specific fields one has been called to address as one's vocation also be considered Christian service? Do you really want a Christian fireman to be exegeting the Scriptures to you when he should be putting out your house fire? Wasn't one of Protestantism's initial goals to correct this kind of errant perspective that had crept into medieval Christianity?

Saturday, September 20

Would Graham Have Preferred To Meander Down The Canterbury Trail?

A Harvard University Press biography of Billy Graham claims that, if the world's most famous Baptist had his life to live over again, he would consider becoming an evangelical Anglican.

Such a spiritual and ecclesiastical path would have a number of things to commend it.

Foremostly, to be baptized into such a church, one would not necessarily have to be dunked underwater.

Anglicans also accept sprinkling and pouring as appropriate modalities of this primary Christian rite.

To Baptists, it is immersion or nothing at all.

Though identifying as Protestant and distinct from Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism is not so hostile to the other form of Western Christianity so as to forsake that which it is still capable of teaching the believer despite the shortcomings that have taken root in that particular theological expression over the centuries.

Some Baptists, on the other hand, are energized by little more than just how much they can stick it in the eye of the Church of Rome.

by Frederick Meekins

Thursday, September 18

After The Fall Of The Romans: The Mysterious Dark Ages

Does The Apocalypse Catalog The Atrocities Of Out Of Control Superweapons?

Click ON The Headline

United Nations Endorses Islamist Invasion Of America

Click On The Headline

Do Sodomite Heresiarchs Intend To Destroy Evangelicalism?

Click On The Headline

Do Godless Schools Need Armored Vehicles & Grenade Launchers To Keep Unruly Students Under Control?

Click On The Headline

The Worldview Of Horror

Click On The Headline

The Elements Of Sermonizing

Click On The Headline

Phil Robertson of Duck Dynasty has enunciated more than his dislike of homosexuals. He has also made known his disapproval of fat kids, city dwellers, men that like cats, and females not married by the age of 15. In one episode, his wife insinuated that it is inappropriate for unmarried couples to hold hands. Wonder if they will make similarly doctrinaire statements regarding their granddaughter shaking her backside in a skimpy outfit on national TV. Or, as “Christian leaders”, do they get the customary exemption from the standards we non-celebrities are expected to adhere to.

Tuesday, September 16

Southern Baptist Missions President Applauds Family Neglect In God's Name

In a sermon titled “The Gospel Demands Sacrifice” posted at YouTube, President of the Southern Baptist International Missions Board Daniel Platt emphasized the Gospel requirement that our love for Christ should surpass even what we have for family.

As an example, Pastor Platt praised John Bunyan who was tossed into prison for refusing to stop preaching when ordered to by Anglican authorities despite the hardship endured by his family in general and his blind child in particular.

The Christian should not deny Christ.

However, Bunyan was initially imprisoned for preaching without a license.

Whether we agree with that or not is a secondary matter.

Often in a fallen world, the situations are so bad that the individual is forced to prioritize from a list of less than ideal options.

From the Wikipedia entry on John Bunyan, one gets the impression authorities were not initially inclined to imprison Bunyan until he blurted out that he'd be out preaching again the next day.

That causes one to ponder was it necessarily Christ that Bunyan was infatuated with or the adrenaline rush one can get from a good fight.

I Timothy 5:8 admonishes that those that do not take care of their own family are worse than an infidel.

The same ones praising John Bunyan for in their minds putting Christ in a proper place above the needs of his family would turn around and heap condemnation upon others for not taking care of the Bunyan urchins.

However, shouldn't taking care of the spiritual and physical needs of these children have been the foremost life's mission of the Bunyan parents?

Why couldn't have Bunyan been as an upstanding Christian example ministering to the needs of his ailing child and instead return to spreading the Gospel to others behind the back of authorities at a later time?

Jesus did indeed counsel that the believer's love of family should look like hate in comparison to that for Him.

However, the most profound expression of devotion to Christ may be in loving our family members in those times we feel like loving them the least or get distracted by a cause we deem much more exciting than the mundane duties of this world.

By Frederick Meekins