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.

Wednesday, May 27

Ministries Begin To Weigh In On Duggar Scandal

In a SermonAudio homily, a pastor condemned interest in the Duggar scandal as a form of gossip and tale bearing.

But if the information conveyed is true, is it gossip?

Some might respond that, because this information impacts only the Duggars, no one else but the involved parties need to know about it.

But if assorted religious propagandists uplifted the Duggars as some kind of ideal to emulate in terms of breeding out of control and for ways to curtail the freedoms of their children, shouldn't it be exposed where these figures fall short in adhering to the most simple and obvious Christian standards?

If it is considered gossip to report when this family falls short, shouldn't celebrating their hyperlegalistic proclivities also be considered a form of gossip when these are invoked for the purposes of manipulating one's audience into believing that their own walk with God is inferior when they prefer not to rely upon so many externalities in their own spirituality and religious devotion?

In reflection upon the Duggar scandal, a pastor on SermnAudio remarked how worldlings are gleeful when Christians fall into sin.

But don't we believers tend to do the same thing in regards to the adherents of assorted false belief systems?

Who among us didn't latch onto the Roman Catholic abuse scandal as proof to the shortcomings of that variety of Christianity?

So now shouldn't similar outrages be taken as proof that things might not be as perfect in hardline Evangelicalism as the missionary prayercard photos would lead us to believe?

In reflecting upon the Duggar scandal, a pastor criticized the number of homseschooling families that position themselves almost as teaching ministries as they share their practices and techniques with others but without the formal ecclesiastical authority of eldership.

The peculiarities of certain homeschool families are secondary in regards to that comment.

What this minister is saying is that you should not be allowed to publish a book or speak at a conference convened beyond the direct oversight of a church body without the permission of your pastor, deacon board, or consistory.

The response to that in terms of organized religion is who is going to stop me?

by Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, May 26

Reflections Upon The Duggar Allegations

Radical homeschoolers argue that parents ought to pull their children out of formalized academic settings and not even allow their daughters to entertain thoughts of attending college because of the numerous incidents of molestation and sexual assault that occur in the halls of learning.

Given the molestations allegations that have come out against Josh Duggar, if that is what goes on behind the close doors of the first family of homeschooling, should Christians now evaluate that form of education as well?

His own sisters are alleged to rank among his victims.

But since he was married by 20 years of age, he is not the deviant.

You are if you are not according to radical homeschoolist propaganda.

Would there be as much outrage over the Duggar allegations if these parents had not attempted to rule over their children with such an iron fist?

Seems to me your son molesting one of your daughters would be more a sign of failed parenting than if your kids kissed someone before their wedding ceremony.

Perhaps this tragic story should be taken as a warning that parents procreating at such a shocking rate don't always pay that much attention to the children whom it is claimed are loved more than the children of those parents that spawn a more manageable one to three.

No wonder the one Duggar girl got married to someone on the other side of the world. Always figured it was to get away from that crowd.

Who would have thought it would have been over something so terrible.

Mark my words.

Before it’s all over with, the Duggar that can’t keep his hands to himself will be addressing riveted crowds on the topic as to why septuagenarian singles shouldn’t even be allowed to sit with one another in church.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, May 21

Review Proves Why Most Christians Films Not Worth Watching

Regarding The Avengers: The Age Of Ultron, radical homeschooler Kevin Swanson is profoundly offended that Captain America verbalized a swear word during the climactic conflict of the film.

Is Kevin Swanson going to maintain that nothing questionable would slip out of his mouth while battling a genocidal Artificial Intelligence on the cusp of perpetrating an extinction level disaster?

The radical homeschooler’s critique of the film went beyond questionable dialog selections on the part of the screenwriters.

Tony Stark in particular was condemned as an individualist and not being much of a team player.

But isn’t that the characteristic of Robert Downey’s interpretation that has made his performance endearing over the course of the interlocking Marvel films and one with which sarcastic loners with a tendency to dance to the beat of their own drum have been able to identify?

As the review progressed, Swanson finally revealed the nature of his ultimate disapproval with the film.

For you see, with the exception of the archer Hawkeye, the protagonists are to be condemned because the are SINGLE (as in unmarried) for a variety of reasons.

For the most part, shouldn’t these characters be applauded for that decision because of the particular vocations in which they find themselves?

Captain America was in suspended animation for over 70 years while the woman he loved, Agent Peggy Carer, aged at a normal rate and if developments in her own TV miniseries are any indication, eventually moved on to marry somebody else as she didn’t even know those many decades that he was even still alive.

So in the eyes of the radical homeschoolers, is Steve Rogers not supposed to work through that profound emotional trauma before wedding someone else that he might not really love?

As to the Incredible Hulk, despite the slight sparks there with Black Widow, perhaps Bruce Banner has character enough to realize that he is better off without a relationship in which the normal stresses of which could set off his condition to the point where he wouldn’t simply snap at his wife in a less than courteous tone but instead level his entire neighborhood.

Though it was amusing to discover that Hawkeye had a secret family that he had concealed from his colleagues in the espionage and costumed adventurer communities and that served as a reminder of what these heroes are fighting for, these are action adventure films (not chick flicks).

While passing romance and flirtations add flavor to the narrative, the primary purpose for these films is to see robots and aliens blown up.

I don’t really care to see Superman flying Lois Lane from store to store looking for new drapes for the Fortress of Solitude.

Perhaps the most disturbing thing said by Swanson in his analysis was that we must be careful not to limit the designation of witchcraft to those claiming to be witches.

Instead, anyone whose power comes from a source other than God is guilty of this grievous offense.

An argument can be made as to the technical accuracy of that claim.

However, it must be remembered that Swanson advocates a political philosophy known as theonomy or Christian Reconstructionism that calls for the implementation of Biblical law as the nation’s comprehensive social policy and statutory code.

Since that is the case, how ought and to whom should the Biblical injunction of “Suffer not a witch to live” be applied?

For if definable limits are not placed upon such a principle, it could certainly be manipulated as a clever way to justify executing your political and philosophical opponents.

Vigilance is required whether one is dealing with a maniacal artificial intelligence or a podcasting minister that hasn’t fully considered the implications of his theological pronouncements.

By Frederick Meekins

Tuesday, May 19

Pastor Threatens Damnation Of Children To Silence Critics

Pastor Jason Cooley at SermonAudio homilized that, if you are critical of the pastor in front of your children, your children might apostatize from the faith in the future.

Dependent upon what the pastor is accused of doing, if the deed is sufficiently egregious, doesn't the pastor also bear some of the responsibility for this potential religious abandonment?

What this pastor was doing from the pulpit was attempting to frighten critics into silence.

Pastor Jason Cooley admonished in the sermon that one ought to largely remain silent regarding a pastor's errors or mistakes.

He likened this form of criticism and analysis to a form of backbiting or secret whispering spoken of unfavorably in Scripture.

Often a pastor's sermons consist in large part of what others have done wrong even if the names are changed.

Therefore, what is so wrong with the average Christian, as part of their own ministry, exposing errors on the part of pastors so that all throughout Christendom might be better protected against them when spiritually assaulted by similar doctrine and pastoral malfeasance elsewhere?

Scripture warns about spreading secrets and talking about that which one ought not or which there is no verifiable proof.

However, a sermon is a public oration.

As such a discourse, it is open to reflection by and cogitation upon by those that hear it. The role of the pastor is to protect the flock.

Then shouldn't it be the role of studied voices from within the flock to protect the flock from the pastor even if that protection consists of little more than assurance that more than one mind is formulating these kinds of concerns?

By Frederick Meekins

Monday, May 18

Pastoral Ego Nearly As Large As The Political

A pastoral round table discussion posted at SermonAudio as part of the News & Focus program of the Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, North Carolina snidely remarked that Mike Huckabee was only running for president to acquire additional name recognition and that he had no chance of winning.

The analysis is correct.

However, it elicits a number of additional observations.

I'm not really much of a Huckabee fan.

I just don't really care for candidates that insist that the government should track the weight of your children for national security reasons when some of their own offspring from an official family photo look like they top the 300 pound mark.

However, according to these pastors, are we to take away the impression that whether or not we attempt something should be predicated upon the possibility of earthly success?

Secondly, which of the candidates isn't running for name recognition in the form of the prestigious positions or lucrative book deals and speaking engagements that will accumulate at the end of the campaign trail?

What in life is not done for name recognition?

On an episode of Futurama, it was joked that all of civilization was just an attempt to impress the opposite sex.

When you come down to it, one of the primary reasons human beings procreate is so that your name will continue after you are dead.

Name recognition, in part, is why people get involved in ministry.

Sure, there is a deeply spiritual motivation to spread the Gospel.

However, if that is the only reason, why did the church posting this podcast attach its name to the file as well as those of the participating pastors?

By Frederick Meekins

Apostate Coopts Mother’s Day To Denigrate Whites

Click On The Headline

Friday, May 15

Serving God As A Single

Overly Stringent Requirements Chase Away Potential Members

To a number of Christians, it is not enough to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

One is also obligated to become a formalized member of an organized congregation.

Then perhaps the requirements to join should not be so strenuous for some of them.

It might be one thing to ask the aspirant to renounce their sins and to give when they can.

However, there seems to be nothing in the pages of Scripture where one is required to join a “growth group” and to volunteer an hour a week to the church.

If you are attending the Sunday Service, that ought to be considered the hour that you are contributing.

Furthermore, isn't it challenging enough for the socially awkward and anxious to come to a neutral centralized meeting place?

I am sure as Sheol as part of these growth groups not going to the home of people I barely know to areas where I know next to nothing about the off site or on street parking.

Furthermore, isn't it enough for someone to confess that they believe in Christ for the remission of sins?

Should membership be contingent upon how dramatic or shocking one's past life testimony happens to be?

Joining a church should not have to be an audition for American Idol or some other reality series.

By Frederick Meekins

Thursday, May 14

Headline Potpourri #71

A liberal pundit on Cashin In on Fox News insisted that the riots were the result of racist housing policies in Baltimore. Maybe these Blacks should be interspersed into rural areas where the Rednecks wouldn't be afraid to exercise the Second Amendment when threatened by uppity deadbeats.

Those verbalizing the word “thug” have been accused of actually thinking the “N-word”. And what if they did? Those saying the word “thug” weren't the ones rampaging in the streets and destroying property.

The Iranian Supreme Leader has Tweeted that, in America, police kill citizens for no reason. That is opposed to as in the Islamic Republic where law enforcement put to death woman going out in public with uncovered heads and toss homosexuals off of multistory buildings.

Donald Trump condemned the Muhammad cartoon exhibition as being unnecessarily provocative of Muslims. Should his beauty pageants be abolished for the same reasons? Those of that particular faith aren't too keen either on broads prancing about in high heels and skimpy swimsuits with their boobs jacked up and their hindquarters swaying in the breeze.

In a church membership class posted on SermonAudio, those in attendance for the proceedings were required from the sound of it to fill in a seating chart of those around them each week supposedly for the purposes of learning the names of the fellow students. If Independent Baptists insist that their practices are derived from sola scriptura, where is the precedent for the described classroom procedure described in the pages of Holy Writ? If a church requires such rigmarole, doesn't the church run the risk of alienating those with social anxiety? For I know I'd go running out of their at the end of the class like Chiroptera fleeing Ghenna.

A number of supporters are listing among his qualifications for the Presidency that Ben Carson is Black. Perhaps Rand Paul's should list among their preferred candidate's qualifications that the Kentucky ophthalmologist is White?

If the White House can serve tacos during its celebration of the contrived Mexican holiday of Cinco de Mayo, why is it condemned as racist for assorted student grounds to serve these dishes at assorted activities and functions?

On a News and Focus program, William Strum of Berean Baptist Chuch condemned short term missions trips. But aren't the shortcomings of those undertakings more the fault of professional religionists that shame the average Christian for little involvement with transborder outreach and how even something like vacation has to be justified on the grounds of profound spiritual implication? Can't someone just go to the beach or mountains to be going to the beach or mountains? Does the reason have to have a string of Bible verse references following it?

According to an academic study referenced on Generations Radio with Kevin Swanson, Nigerian children are supposedly better off than than those in Baltimore. Does that include the 214 girls rescued from Boko Haram that are now pregnant. At least those impregnated outside of marriage in Baltimore probably had a bit more say in the matter.

A Facebook theologian admonished that one should only pray for a request if it is God's will. But unless one possess precognition or clairvoyance, regarding a variety of morally ambivalent issues of which Scripture is not necessarily definitive, you aren't really going to know what God's will is until a chronometric potentiality has already elapsed.

Speaking in reference to the Muhammad Cartoon Contest, Al Sharpton insists that, even if you have a right to do something, that does not mean you should do it. Mind you, this is the street thug that applauds those that do that to which they have no right such as the vandalism of private and public property. One of the acts he instigated at one time even resulted in the loss of innocent human life.

Are those outraged by the restaurant sponsoring a White Appreciation Day discount as bent out of shape over President Obama establishing programs such as My Brother's Keeper that benefit only Colored youth?

The Afrosupremacists outraged over southern youth posing with Confederate paraphernalia are the same subversives and terrorist sympathizers that exhibit little concern or condemnation of the property destruction that takes place during riots in ghettos such as Ferguson and Baltimore.

The same Afrosupremacists outraged over southern youth posing with Confederate paraphernalia are the same subversives and terrorist sympathizers that exhibit little concern or condemnation of the property destruction that takes place during riots in ghettos such as Ferguson and Baltimore.

In a Lutheran Sunday School class, an Ethiopian pastor smugly remarked that Ethiopia is mentioned around forty times in the Bible whereas America is not mentioned. If Ethiopia is such a wonderful place, why is the pastor here rather than in Ethiopia. And if he is counting among those references those mentioned in the Book of Daniel, I don't recall those being all that positive. From that text, it sounded like Ethiopia would become part of some Islamist or Third World alliance that would attempt to attack Israel towards the end of the age.

Shouldn't the fact that most Westerners have had few encounters with actual demonic sorcery or witchcraft serve as a testament to the power and vitality of the Christian worldview rather than as a pretext to launch a rant on how dimwitted Whitey is? If you are teaching from Acts 8 and skip over the encounter with Simon the Sorcery instead to harp how wonderfully crosscultural the encounter between Phillip and the Ethiopian eunuch, don't you as a pastor bear the responsibility for failing to teach Americans as to the reality of these spiritual dangers?

A pastor praised the Baltimore mother that slapped her son for participating in the riots. From the pulpit, the minister announced that this woman should be nominated as mother of the year. But wasn't what we witnessed more a last ditch effort to interdict a lifestyle of failed parenting? To remain consistent, shouldn't a minister that just a week or two before suggesting that Bruce Jenner is mentally screwed up because of the increasing number of women that wear pants not lift up as the ideal Proverbs 31 mother someone that has birthed multiple children outside of marriage by as many men and who is covered with tattoos?

As part of a mother's day sermon, a pastor condemned young women for not knowing how to cook from scratch. Where is it detailed in the Scripture that meals must be prepared from scratch and cannot be out of a can as ridiculed in the pastor's snide comment regarding Chef Boyardee? If a pastor is going to hold women up to such an impossible standard, is he adept at what would be considered manchores such as gutting his own livestock or even auto repair? Shouldn't someone that lives in an apartment complex where the staff handles the yardwork and maintenance be reluctant about criticizing other basic tasks no longer completed as they were in the 1800's?

A Lutheran Church I visited needed over $3000 for its vacation Bible school program. Who knew cloth puppets and snack cookies were such big business. $2000 was to be for advertising. Are they flying in Davey & Golitath to film a commercial?

Rick Perry said it is healthy to question the government but not the military. But is not the military part of the government? How about when the government through the military is used to implement anti-Christian, pro-gay policies? Composed of fallen individuals like every other human organization, though it can be respected, free citizens are still within their rights to question the military.

The Colorado restaurant celebrating White Appreciation Day has extended the discount to all customers. Does the United Negro College Fund now intend to be as broadmindedly magnanimous in the disbursement of the organization’s scholarships?

In a sermon, a pastor admonished that, if a member was not able to attend a given Sunday, they were obligated to listen to the sermon online. That was so the truant parishioner could receive their “marching orders”. Where the member ought to march is straight out of the church. For down the road, you could very well find that the marching order you are given is to guzzle down the funny-tasting Koolaid.

Mooch Obama gave a graduation speech blaming Whitey for all of her problems. Denzel Washington's commencement oration emphasized the importance of recognizing God to a person's success. Here's a novel idea. How about doing away with celebrity speeches and just hand out the diplomas?

An online meme pictures a man carrying a bow and arrows. The text reads, “Your dad doesn't hunt? Well, happy Mother's Day to your dad.” I've yet to see a Biblical text proving that men that don't like to hunt are effeminate. If anything, if Esau and Nimrod are among the foremost examples of hunters mentioned in the Bible, they don't seem to be spoken of all that favorably. Nothing screams masculinity like running off into the woods with a bunch of other men because that is what the group pressures everyone into doing.

The Washington Post insists that marriage is a constantly evolving social institution that has not always consisted of our current understanding as a relationship between a loving man and woman. If that is the standard, technically there is really nothing wrong when ISIS savages take toddler brides. And if a man and woman come to an agreement where the man can horsewhip the woman when she fails to prepare dinner to his liking, are we as pluralists and relativists required to publicly ascent to that as well?

In coverage of the horrific Philadelphia train derailment, CNN ran the headline “Midshipman Among The Fatalities”. Will the occupational backgrounds of the other victims also merit a broadcast graphic? Given that the tragic passing of this individual was not related to his Department of Defense status, is he worthy of more pity than the others? Why not make public lamentation for the deceased passenger with the largest bank account?

A Calvinist meme reads, “If you as a man are at liberty to choose your own house, friends and wife, has not the Lord God the liberty to do the same? The thing of it is, though it might feel like you are living in Hell if you select the wrong spouse, the person you don't select to marry does not burn throughout all eternity as a result. Furthermore, the use of marriage as an analogy in matters of soteriology ultimately breaks down. Christ might have the church as his metaphorical bride. However, that bride is ultimately composed of multiple individuals. You, as an individual, according to the moral law established by this God, are limited to a single mate (contrary to what certain populations in Utah might insist). Under predestination, if God is free to select as many as He wants to incorporate into this mystical body, isn't He ultimately at fault if He allows an individual to slip into Hell?

By Frederick Meekins

Wednesday, May 13

Are Sloppy Homiletics An Acceptable Mother's Day Gift?

A pastor praised the Baltimore mother that slapped her son for participating in the riots.

From the pulpit, the minister announced that this woman should be nominated as mother of the year.

But wasn't what we witnessed more a last ditch effort to interdict a lifestyle of failed parenting?

To remain consistent, shouldn't a minister that just a week or two before suggesting that Bruce Jenner is mentally screwed up because of the increasing number of women that wear pants not lift up as the ideal Proverbs 31 mother someone that has birthed multiple children outside of marriage by as many men and who is covered with tattoos?

As part of a mother's day sermon, a pastor condemned young women for not knowing how to cook from scratch.

Where is it detailed in the Scripture that meals must be prepared from scratch and cannot be out of a can as ridiculed in the pastor's snide comment regarding Chef Boyardee?

If a pastor is going to hold women up to such an impossible standard, is he adept at what would be considered manchores such as gutting his own livestock or even auto repair?

Shouldn't someone that lives in an apartment complex where the staff handles the yardwork and maintenance be reluctant about criticizing other basic tasks no longer completed as they were in the 1800's?

By Frederick Meekins

Titus: The Importance Of Healthy Doctrine

Titus: Healthy Doctrine from Aletheia College Park on Vimeo.

Wednesday, May 6

Are Church Membership Requirements Exceedingly Intrusive?

In a church membership class posted on SermonAudio, those in attendance for the proceedings were required from the sound of it to fill in a seating chart of those around them each week supposedly for the purposes of learning the names of the fellow students.

If Independent Baptists insist that their practices are derived from sola scriptura, where is the precedent for the described classroom procedure described in the pages of Holy Writ?

If a church requires such rigmarole, doesn't the church run the risk of alienating those with social anxiety?

For I know I'd go running out of there at the end of the class like Chiroptera fleeing Ghenna.

Some churches require potential members to endure lengthy interrogations and questionnaires that go beyond determining whether or not the catechumen ascents to the basics of the Apostles or Nicene Creeds before being granted that particular status.

If failure to answer in the preapproved manner will result in a denial of membership, what is to prevent the applicant from simply answering in the manner that the leadership expects to hear?

For example, is it really the business of a Christian school administrator whether or not your child has a TV in their room in the privacy of your own home.

Furthermore, who can blame these applicants for fudging their answers when across Christendom the believer is berated and beaten over the head homiletically on a regular basis if one is just an attender and not necessarily a formalized member?

By Frederick Meekins

Monday, May 4

Headline Potpourri #70

Hillary Clinton commented that we ought to get rid of the divisions that have broken down the nation's politics. That translates that it ought to be against the law to disagree with her.

If Al Sharpton has gone on a hunger strike over something as trivial as the confirmation of an Attorney General, the malcontent should be allowed to starve to death.

In a sermon, a pastor berated the congregation for not knowing where Zephaniah was in the Bible. Perhaps he would rather they never return to the church he pastors.

If personality tests are being used to screen out job applicants, what is to prevent the applicant from not answering the assessment honestly but rather in the manner that they deduce is most likely to secure them the position?

If personality tests are being used to screen out job applicants before objective criteria are applied, would the individual be responsible if they could not find employment?

In a sermon on Christian apathy, fanatic legalist Jason Cooley condemned the entire U.S. military over the actions of a few errant soldiers. Therefore, extrapolating the pastor’s logic, ought we to condemn the entire Independent Fundamentalist Baptist movement for its errant sex crimes that are comparable to any Vatican debaucheries?

In a sermon, a pastor admonished that not only is one required to come to worship but that one must come in a spirit of Sabbath rest. Some people just can’t turn off their minds. Once again, would it rather be preferred that people don’t show up at all?

If you learn about Alexander the Great under the auspices of a traditional Western Civilization course, it is racist oppression. However, if you learn about him during a course on homosexual history, you are being liberating from the heteronormative hegemony.

With that maniacal cackle, you almost expect Hillary to say, "I'll get you my pretty and your little dog too."

Regarding the gyrocopter assault on the Capitol lawn. Is life so miserable as a result of campaign finance reform to likely endanger a post office pension over?

“Tired of the partisanship” is actually a euphemism that the person wants to abolish the First Amendment.

Of me, it was said, “Obviously, you just like to call people, whom you do not like, names for the sake of attacking them.” Everyone has got to have a hobby. Furthermore, it is considerably less expensive than wine and woman.

It was criticized that most youth pastors are young. Maybe so. But if aspiring ministers don’t start at this level, when these individuals apply for more senior positions later in their careers will search committees toss in their faces that they are insufficiently experienced?

How is that blond sportcaster chick telling the tow company clerk to loose weight really any worse than how we are constantly ordered by Queen Sasquatch and her "Let's Move" propaganda?

ESPN personality Britt McHenry was caught verbally boring into a tow company clerk. Did she unload unprovoked or did the clerk say something that set her off? Social media widely condemned her remarks and her network suspended her. Yet she still hasn't destroyed as much property as the average Occupy Movement beatnik or Ferguson vandal whom are usually adored by the media.

Does Brittney McHenry invoking her celebrity status in a confrontation with a tow company differ all that appreciably from the verbal manipulations engaged in by law enforcement, racial activists, and even certain veterans in the attempt to get their way?

On the BBC version of Top Gear, the hosts drove through Alabama with provocative slogans painted across their vehicles. The point was to solicit a violent response in mockery of the conservative culture of the American South. Wonder if these same champions of free speech would drive through Muslim neighborhoods in London in a truck advertising free pork barbecue.

Other than for purposes of social indoctrination, having a gay couple in the recent NCIS: New Orleans infant abduction episode didn’t add anything to the plot. The story would have virtually been the same if a normal heterosexual couple was featured.

It is said security upgrades to the White House perimeter are necessary in light of the ISIS threat. But weren't we told that they were just the "JV" team?

Jeb Bush admits he is concerned that the climate is changing. Apparently not so much so to curtail his travels across the country. That, ladies and gentleman, is a sacrifice you are to endure. Most likely once you are directed shortly to your Walmart reeducation center.

In a speech, Bill Clinton applauded ISIS's spirit of inclusion. Yet that withered sex fiend would probably launch a Branch Davidian style assault on Christian bakers declining to bake gay wedding cakes.

The character that was heterosexual enough to have two girlfriends in his previous X-Men cinematic appearance will apparently turn out to be GAY in the next film. Maybe he can have the hots for the Human Torch who went from White to being Black.

A Jihadist wanting to attack churches in France shot himself in the foot. Interestingly, he then sought medical attention from those he himself had wanted to murder. Would a Christian bent on similar mayhem in an Islamic nation have been extended such assistance or rather summarily executed?

On an episode of Generations Radio in which Adam McManus substituted as host, a Rushdoonyian author chastised the church for failing to heed the call of Douglas MacArthur to evangelize Japan following World War II. But if we are to hold to a Calvinist soteriology that the only ones saved are the ones God wants saved, isn’t that therefore God’s fault? Furthermore, on what grounds do you condemn believers who at the time might have been pursuing other paths God intended for their lives? I don’t exactly recall MacArthur dedicating his life to missions in the Pacific Rim after he was put in his place for insubordination by Truman. Why is it we are expected to neglect the children and elderly here in favor of foreign ones overseas?

In response to some issue, Greta Van Sustern said we should be raising “holy hell”. If the Scientology she holds to is the fundamental creed of the universe rather than Christianity, shouldn't she have instead invoked the name of the Swiss Mountain those of her worldview believe in which the cosmic tyrant Xenu is imprisoned?

A woman is accused of running over her husband with an SUV for failing to vote. Just imagine what the harpy would have done if he had left the toilet seat up.

Approximately half of Americans support gay marriage. If 50% of a population supported loading particular minorities into boxcars for transport for liquidation at designated facilities, would that make that action correct as well?

Regarding the mouthy broad that tried to be a comedian at the White House correspondents dinner. Isn't it hypocritical to denounce the impropriety of Hillary's appearance yet mock Rand Paul for supposedly wearing a wig?

A chess champion was bitch-slapped across social media for suggesting that men might be biologically hardwired on average to be better at chess than women. Do tolerancemongers intend to fly off the handle to the same extent when women are upheld as superior regarding certain activities?

A Baltimore mother is being praised for slapping her son over participating in the riots. But aren't some of the same liberals feigning praise for this assertive parenting also responsible for creating an atmosphere where many parents are reluctant to discipline their children for fear of retribution on the part of law enforcement or the social welfare establishment? Relatedly, would the media find this incident as amusing if a father slapped a marauding daughter?

A Baltimore law enforcement functionary asked in a press conference if the public wants force used against 13-15 year olds. If they are rioting and pillaging, why not?

During coverage of the riots, cable and broadcast networks should not bleep the profanity. Let the American people see and hear just how vile these marauders are.

If that one burning building was the White House, would President Obama want it looped over and over again on the evening news?

If President Obama can bring himself to admit that the destruction that transpired in Baltimore was not a protest, why can't he muster the remainder of the moral clarity to admit that it was a riot?

Juan Williams insisted that populations should be allowed to vent. Do these malcontents not have access to social media over their government provided smartphones?

Hillary Clinton laments that her heart breaks for all of these urban young men. And what about those whose property was destroyed? That is just the prelude to the revolution she and her fellow subversives agitate for.

On Fox News, there was a countdown ticker to 10:00 PM, reminding of the pending curfew. From a propagandistic standpoint, isn't that sort of itching for a riot by presenting it as a sort of apocalyptic Time Square New Year's Eve countdown?

The riots in Baltimore might not have been multicultural in the sense that the violence was perpetrated primarily by a ethnically homogeneous horde. However, these disturbances are in these sense that they are the outcome of spineless Whites that have for decades either fawned all over these listless deadbeats or remained tightlipped having been manipulated into believing tolerance and diversity are greater priorities than the protection of life and property. There is little hope when even prominent Fox News broadcasters drone on with class warfare rhetoric little different than whats regularly spewed over the airwaves by MSNBC ideologues.

Dana Perino enunciated on The Five on Fox News that being a single mother is the hardest job in the world. Regarding the ones never married, unless raped aren't these mothers the ones at fault for putting themselves into this lifestyle situation?

Fox News has reported that, during the Baltimore riots, police were initially ordered to stand down because “it is only property” that was to be looted and vandalized. Would the same perspective have prevailed if it was the White House endangered?

The property of innocent people should be valued more highly than the lives of the guilty endangering it.

The lawyer of Freddie Gray's family admonishes that now is the time for all cities to treat all people with dignity. Does this edict also apply to urban thugs that victimize unsuspecting Whites with the knockout game?

It has been suggested that over 5,000 perished in the Nepalese earthquake as judgment for that nation's acceptance of homosexuality. So all 5,000, some of whom dwell in the Earth's most remote regions, endorsed homosexuality? Could it just as easily be that that nation is in the area of the world's tallest mountains that happen to likely be under significant tectonic and seismic stress?

The Mayor of Baltimore vowed that no one in her city is above the law. Therefore, isn't she obligated to have Al Sharpton and one of his minions charged with assault for laying his hands on a Fox News reporter engaged in the exercise of his First Amendment rights?

Prior to his seizure of power, Obama called for the establishment of a national police force just as equipped and funded as the military. Why ought we to believe that it won't be just as deadly?

On The Five, Geraldo Rivera interviewed a demonstrating deadbeat. When asked his impression of the violence in Baltimore, the hoodlum responded that it was not his place to condemn violence. And what if it was this deadbeat's welfare shanty burned to the ground?

As a congressman in the legislative rather than the judicial branch of government, other than to foment additional upheaval and discord, why is Elijah Cummings handing down an opinion regarding indictments handed down in the investigation of Freddie Gray's death? Does this federal elected official provide public comment regarding every other motioned filed by the state's attorney's office? Does Cummings intend to speak out regarding the White resident making the mistake of trying to be a good citizen beaten into a coma for attempting to break up the altercation of two delinquents?

In reference to the Baltimore Orioles deciding to play a game in an empty stadium, Eric Boling of The Five on Fox News was reluctant to offer comment because doing so in his view would undermine the free market process. Too bad the broadcaster is not as respectful of individual families when he chastises and castigates parents reluctant to subject their children to verbally abusive coaches or to the bodily injuries inherent to a variety of organized sports.

If someone is denied a homestead property tax credit because they earn too high of an income or have too much saved in the bank (meaning it was not squandered on the latest iteration of the smartphone or flashy hubcaps more valuable than the car they spin upon), they’ve given back more than a reasonable share to the COMMUNITY for the upcoming year.

Typical. Baltimore mayor suggesting human filth desiring such should be offered a space in which they can destroy herself lives in a gated COMMUNITY.

By Frederick Meekins

Media Elites Agitate For Christless Christianity

Click ON The Headline

Which Apostate Will Assume The Leadership Of The Episcopal Church?

Click On The Headline

Friday, May 1

No Mere Consideration: The Apologetic Quandaries Found In The Lewis Classic

Psalms 14:1 says, “The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God'.” Only those seeking to live in utter irrationality can ignore the arguments made in favor of the God of the Bible by C.S. Lewis in “Mere Christianity”. Three of the most compelling issues the skeptic will have to confront when reading this classic include the universality of the moral law, the existence of a personal God as Creator of the Universe, and whether Jesus is who He says He is.

Fundamental to the creed of the contemporary skeptic is the notion that everything is relative and that there are no absolutes. However, that is itself an absolute. And no matter how cool it is to feign the attitude that one exists beyond right and wrong, no one wants to be treated as if right and wrong did not exist.

Of this universal truth, Lewis observes, “Whenever you find a man who says he does not believe in a real Right or Wrong, you will find the man going back on this a moment later. He may break his promise to you, but if you try breaking one to him he will be complaining 'It's not fair' before you can say 'Jack Robinson' (15).”

Since law exists whether we like it or not, it must have a source beyond us in order to be binding upon us and to avoid degenerating into a matter of mere preference or opinion. Since this universal law represents the codification of a set of principles, it could not have come about as a result of random choice, but rather through some kind of purposeful intelligence. Thus, a second issue confronting the skeptic in “Mere Christianity” is whether the source of this law is personal or impersonal.

The views regarding God can be divided into two basic viewpoints. On the one hand, pantheism believes, in the words of Lewis, that “God animates the universe as you animate your body: that the universe is almost God (30).” Traditional monotheists, on the other hand, believe that God is distinct from creation in a manner similar to “...a man making a picture or composing a tune...A painter is not a picture (30).”

From our understanding of law as a set of principles established for determining right and wrong, the monotheistic conception would be the one most in keeping with the evidence. For if God and the universe were co-terminus as postulated by the pantheists, by definition whatever is, is ought. Only by being distinct from what He has made is God justified in pronouncing judgment upon it.

Since God is the source of perfection and man so marked by imperfection, there must be some way for these seemingly irreconcilable twains to meet. Since man is imperfect, there is nothing he can do of his own merit to bring himself to God's level. Rather, the imperfect can only be made whole and elevated to a higher status on the terms of the perfect.

Since God is the ultimate authority and source of power, it is up to Him to determine the method through which man can be reconciled to God. Of all of the religions of the world, orthodox Biblical Christianity is the only one where that particular belief's conception of salvation is not granted on the basis of the adherent's own merit or accomplishment but rather as a result through the realization that one's own works are as filthy rags and by throwing oneself on the mercy of a loving God willing to extend forgiveness to those embracing what God has done for them rather than on what they have done for Him. In the Christian tradition, this eternal pardon is granted to those believing that Jesus as the only Son of God lived the perfect life that we could not, suffered and died upon the cross for the sins of the world, and rose in bodily form from the dead.

Thus, the most important issue the skeptic is forced to confront is exactly who do they think Jesus is. Impressed with the morals of Jesus but not wanting to admit that they themselves are sinners, most unbelievers think they are broadminded enough by giving Jesus an esteemed status as an ethical teacher from the past with no present claim on their lives.

However, as Lewis points out, a moral person would not say the things about himself that Jesus said about Himself. Lewis writes, “A man who...said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would be a lunatic --- on a level with a man who says he is a poached egg --- or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice (41).”

Much of the spiritual danger of the contemporary world lies in the numerous distractions available to those preferring to avoid those fundamental questions nagging at the human soul. C.S. Lewis, in “Mere Christianity”, forces the reader to confront these issues in an engaging and forthright manner.

By Frederick Meekins