Monthly Archives: May 2012

Attacking the Traditional Family

“A man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife.  The two shall become one flesh.”  Genesis 2:24

“The family is ordained by God (Genesis 2:23-25) and is a fundamental social institution.  The Bible strictly defines the family and its role in society.  James Dobson and Gary Bauer say that a family exists when ‘husband and wife are lawfully married, are committed to each other for life, and [the family] adheres to the traditional values on which the family is based.’

“George Gilder and may other Christian sociologists believe that the condition of marriage and family in any given society describes the condition of the entire society.  If the family is trouble, then society is troubled.  Encouraging and building up the God-ordained institution of marriage and family is, therefore, advantageous to society.’

“Unfortunately, society today does more to discourage marriage and family than to build it up.  The many forces working against marriage and family are primarily a result of the Secular Humanist-inspired sexual revolution.  For example, children in public schools are taught that homosexuality is a normal lifestyle; student s are given condoms and encouraged to use them instead of practicing abstinence until marriage; teenage girls are taught about abortion and how to obtain one without their parents’ consent or knowledge.  Dobson and Bauer label these practices ‘a crash course in relativism, in immorality and in anti-Christian philosophy.’

“Attacks on the traditional family come largely from proponents of relativistic, materialistic worldviews.  Humanists, Marxists, and many Postmodernist deny the existence of the soul, thereby devaluing the importance of the family.  The Christian worldview recognizes marriage and family as the institution that nurtures the whole person.  In this view, the family provides an environment that encourages mental, spiritual, social, and physical growth.” David A. Noebel, Understanding The Times, p. 250, 251 logo

  The President’s ‘Other Gospel’

By Cal Thomas – May 26, 2012

It is one thing to talk about “fairness” when it comes to allowing gays and lesbians to marry; it is quite another to claim biblical authority for such relationships.

President Obama cited the “Golden Rule” about treating others as you would like to be treated, but in doing so he ignored the totality of Scripture and the Lord Himself, who alone gets to set the rules for human behavior.

The president says he is a “practicing Christian.” It is difficult to be one while simultaneously holding a low view of the Bible, which his position on several social issues might suggest.

The same Book that informs him about the Person he told Pastor Rick Warren in 2008 is his “Savior,” also speaks to the beginning of human life (he has done nothing to limit abortions), fornication between adults of the opposite sex (no word yet on his position on that subject), marriage, and adultery, which the Seventh Commandment and New Testament passages condemn.

I recently wrote that it is becoming increasingly difficult for people who believe the Bible is God’s Word to impose their beliefs on those who disagree with them. But it is something altogether different for those who disagree to claim the Bible doesn’t say what it says, in effect calling God a liar. President Obama apparently hopes there are sufficient numbers of biblical illiterates — and he could be right about this — that either won’t notice his sleight of hand, or don’t care.

Thousands of years of human history have sustained marriage between one man and one woman. Even human biology testifies to a natural order.

Genesis 2:24 says “…a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife. The two shall become one flesh.” Jesus, Whom President Obama likes to selectively quote when it suits his earthly political agenda, honored traditional marriage at a wedding feast in Cana (John 2:1). He also reaffirmed the Genesis passage in Matthew 19:5.

Paul, the Apostle of Jesus, wrote in Ephesians 5 about husbands and wives, male and female.

Scripture teaches that the marriage union between a man and woman is an illustration of how Christ and the church are one (Ephesians 5:32). It also teaches that since God made us, conceived of marriage and created sex to be enjoyed within the marital bond, He gets to set the rules and establish the boundaries for human behavior, not because He is a curmudgeon who wants to deny us pleasure, but because He knows what is best for us.

Liberal theologians have tried to modify, or even change, what is contained in the Bible and there are those in our time who are following their example with the issue of same-sex marriage. People are free to accept or reject what Scripture says. What they are not free to do is to claim it says something it does not. In modern times that’s called “spin.” In an earlier time it was called heresy. Continue reading

Human Rights: North vs. South Korea

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”  Winston Churchill

“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy.”  Winston Churchill

“South Korean President Lee Myung-bak deserves praise for one accomplishment above all others:  He has put human rights in [Socialist/Communist] North Korea on the world’s agenda.  This certainly has hit a nerve in Pyongyang.  The late Kim Jong II cut off talks with the South, and now Kim Jong Eun has embarked on a campaign of abuse against President Lee that is vile even by that regime’s standards.

“A new report by South Korea’s National Human Rights Commission provides further vindication.  It documents the suffering of Pyongyang’s roughly 200,000 political prisoners, held in a network of labor camps across the country.  The report contains detailed and harrowing account from 200 former prisoners.  The shocking nature of the crimes they witness should convince the Obama Administration that making any deal to provide aid that extends the life of such a regime is immoral.

“The report is broadly similar in content to one the Committee for Human Rights in North Korea published in April. The North’s totalitarian system imprisons people for seemingly trivial offenses, such as singing a South Korean song, and one person’s perceived disloyalty can doom an entire family.  Once in the camps, prisoners suffer from malnutrition, exposure and overwork.  Then there are guards who enjoy torturing those under their control, or play sadistic games with them.

“Some may question the significance of exposing all of this, given that everyone already knows North Korea is not the workers’ paradise it claims to be.  But it is important that the Human Rights Commission, an independent and well-respected body funded by Seoul to safeguard human rights in the South, has put so much evidence on record.  The testimonies could form the basis for a Nuremberg-style trial after the North collapses.

“”That might help prisoners right away. More and more information about the outside world filters into the North, especially among the elite, so officials’ responsible for the labor camps should become aware of the danger of future prosecution.  Knowing that their crimes are being recorded will serve as a deterrent to gratuitous cruelty.

“Of course, the agony will only truly end when the Kim family is overthrown. And based on the experience of the last two decades, that is unlikely as long as they can play the game of nuclear blackmail to extract the resources they need from Seoul, Washington and other donors.  Exposing the true nature of the regime should refute claims that change through engagements is possible and close the aid spigots.

“It is encouraging that South Korean public opinion toward the North has undergone a dramatic shift in this direction over the last few years, largely as a result of the growing number of defectors.  More than 23,000 now live in the South, and their stories and concern for the families left behind have led to pressure on Beijing to stop repatriating North Korean refugees caught in China.

“Consider the news this week of Kim Young-hwan’s arrest in Dalian, China, where he was trying to help North Korean defectors.  Mr. Kim is a member of the ‘386 generation,’ South Koreans who were born in the 1960s and fought for democracy in the 1980s.  Like many of his fellow student leaders, Mr. Kim once sympathized with North Korea but has become disillusioned.  He and many other former supporters of Presidents Kim Dae-jung and Roh Myoo-hyun’s ‘sunshine policy’ of engagement now work in NGOs that broadcast into the North or publicize the refugees’ stories.

“Reports like these deserve wide attention so that the rest of the world has the same epiphany.  Sustaining Pyongyang with aid only extends the misery of those imprisoned in the North’s gulag.” Editorial, The Wall Street Journal, May 18, 2012, p. A12

Editor’s comment:  Communist Cuba is to the United States what Communist North Korea is to South Korea.  Both Communist Cuba and Communist North Korea are equally vile and depraved and yet the American left (and especially the Congressional Black Caucus) heap praise upon the Cuban leadership.  Come to think about it the Pope’s last visit to Cuba was a disaster too.  Would the Pope treat North Korea and its Communist leadership the same way he treated Communist Fidel and his brother and their partner Hugo Chavez?  Good question! 

Origins of the Left

“Lest we forget at least an over-the-shoulder acknowledgment to the very first radical from all our legends, mythology and history (and who is to know where mythology leaves off and history begins—or which is which), the first radical known to man who rebelled against the establishment and did it so effectively that he at least won his own kingdom—Lucifer.”  Saul Alinsky, Rules for Radicals, title page

“Alinsky formed the Industrial Areas Foundation (IAF) in 1940…Hillary Clinton’s senior honors thesis on Saul Alinsky, written at Wellesley College…Biographer Sanford Horwitt has claimed that U.S. President Barack Obama was influenced by Alinsky and followed in his footsteps…Horwitt furthermore has asserted that Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign was influenced by Alinsky’s teaching.”  Wikipedia, Saul Alinsky

“Rush Limbaugh asked a question recently—and it got me to thinking. ‘Who was the first leftist?’

“Rush suggested we ought to find him and string him up, but it’s probably far too late for that—or is it?  So who was the first leftist?

We could look at the question strictly historically and come up with answers:  When was the term ‘left’ as a political position even invented?

“If we start there, we begin in 1789, at the time of the French Revolution.  Members of the National Assembly divided themselves, according to their political loyalties to the left and the right of the president.

“One deputy, the Baron de Gauville, explained how it happened: ‘We began to recognize each other:  Those who were loyal to religion and the  king look up positions to the right of the chair, so as to avoid the shouts, oaths and indecencies that enjoyed free rein in the opposing camp.’

“But that’s simple semantics. Perhaps that was the first time the actual ideological labels were used, but the worldview behind them began long before.

“It may have begun at the Tower of Babel, when Nimrod, aptly named, decided he was wiser than God and set out to bring the whole world together in one place in defiance of the wishes of the Almighty.  Ultimately, isn’t that what the ‘leftist’ philosophy is all about at its core?  Wasn’t that what the spirit of the French Revolution and those who followed in its footstep all about?

“Yet, the more I think about it, the more I am persuaded the first lefty came well before the story of Genesis 10. Continue reading