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.
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
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”.
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
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
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