Significance...

Chely Wright, the country singer sings in her song Unknown:

 

I don't want to be unknown
The little things that make me who I am
I need to share
I need to know that someone cares
That I drink coffee black
That I sing when I drive
That I sleep with the TV on
More then anything
I don't want to be unknown

 

...

 

Unknown
I don't want to be unknown
The little things that make me who I am
I need to share
I need to know that someone cares

 

That I write down my dreams
That I love when it rains
I burn candles when I'm alone
More then anything
I don't want to be unknown
More then anything
No one wants to be unknown

 

I was listening to this song in the car the other day, and it dawned on me that no one wants to be unknown. Being unknown signals that we are insignificant to others and as a result we are worthless; we have no value.

 

Now, I live in South Africa and here there are beggars on almost every street corner. There are also many (sometimes as many as 30 people standing on these street corners) trying to sell something to us from newspapers, to pirate DVDs, to sunglasses, clothes hangers and a host more. What struck me was that when these informal sales people (ISP) approach vehicles, most of these occupants would simply ignore these ISPs. I don't know if you have ever tried to get someone's attention but were simply ignored. It is like a slap in the face. You feel like you are insignificant in their eyes. I am sure that this is exactly what these ISPs feel when they are ignored. When our significance is denied it is our own sense of dignity that gets eroded.

 

Sure, there are many problems caused by these ISPs. They sell stolen goods and many of them have grabbed handbags and cell phones from vehicles waiting for the light to change to green. The very existence of these ISPs in South Africa is a blot against the South African government's ability to deal with two major issues in this country: crime and unemployment.

 

It is not now the time to start blaming the government for these issues, even though I believe that the blame rests squarely on their very soft shoulders. The point that I want to make is that we should as citizens of our various countries try to make changes on the micro level--person to person. What will it cost me to smile at an ISP and to say "no thank you?" Politeness and friendliness cost absolutely nothing.

 

The golden rule has not changed: Treat others as you would want them to treat you! It is no wonder that our world is where it is. We show no respect to others. We all want to be number ONE! Of course the philosophy of number ONE is that only number ONE counts and all must be done to elevate number ONE above all others. If we can all start to help one another instead of just ourselves this world will definitely be a better place.

 

Just thinking...

Microsoft did not support gay-rights bill

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Schism in the Catholic Institution?

It always amazes me that people will join a group or company or marry someone knowing the predefined contracts and rules necessary to join, but once they are in they want everything changed!

 

With Cardinal Ratzinger's election to pope, many--like the Women's Ordination Conference--are already dismissing him as someone who will further divide the church. They claim that the Catholic hierarchy is out of touch with the people in the pew. Allegedly, over two-thirds of US Catholics support women's ordination in the 1500 year old institution. Have they ever thought of the possibility, nay... probability, that over two-thirds of US Catholics are out of touch with God? Just because some feminists, and others who have abdicated in their adherence to the Bible, have decided that women's ordination is correct does not make it so!

 

Gay groups have come out to say that they are dismayed at the election of Ratzinger. According to them Jesus is the loving Good Shepherd who reaches out to the ones separated from the flock while Ratzinger is decidedly anti-gay. Sure, Jesus does reach out to sinners, but he requires that they repent. Without true repentance there is no salvation or forgiveness! Gays feel alienated from the church because of the new pope. Have they ever thought that perhaps they have alienated themselves from the church through their despicable behaviour? Na-ah! They have rewritten the laws of the Bible to suit their own abominable ways.

 

The Human Rights Campaign hopes that the pope will express love and compassion to all. Love and compassion does not equate to acceptance of sin! It will be the duty of the pope, in fact a Biblical mandate, to call sin what it is... SIN! If the pope capitulates to the demands of these depraved groups, then he will prove himself not to be a man of love and compassion. It is his duty to warn people of the approaching cliff and to hedge them away from it! This is how love works! It warns others of impending danger, and when it has the authority, it lso ensures their safety by stipulating proper boundaries!

 

The Human Rights Campaign would welcome positive conversation with the pope. All I can say is that the most positive conversation will follow the following lines:

 

"REPENT!"

"Yes, Lord!"

It is amazing that the Rev. Troy D. Perry, a homosexual activist and moderator of the Metropolitan Community Churches calls the new pope one of the most homophobic religious leaders in the world. I would rather say that gays are especially hagiophobic. They have an intense fear of living holy lives. They have no fear of God.

 

The Bible is clear that wisdom and knowledge are preceded by the fear of God.

 

Just thinking...

Killing people using euphemisms

Terri Schiavo came she saw and was conquered. Conquered by a society and a system that no longer upholds the sanctity of life. Western society is obsessed with "choices" instead of life.

"Choice" has become a value to this society. This value of "choice"--which is merely a euphemism for selfishness--has murdered over 40 million babies in the USA since 1973 alone.

As Charles Colson writes:

"'Choice' over what to do with one's own body became the defining value of the 1970s and 1980s--all the while ignoring the fact that choice itself cannot possibly be a value and that value depends on what is chosen."[1] [emphasis by original author]

This culture of choice has gone so far that it has chosen the death of a woman who did not deserve to die. Sure, we will all die one day and we all deserve to die one day and stand before the judgement seat of God. However, none of us deserves to be condemned by the very system that was created to protect and serve the innocent. But, in the new America with a country ruled by despots called judges none is safe anymore. Then on the other hand, as the old saying goes, we deserve the government set over us.

So, why does the US have the government it has? I don't mean a Republican or a Democratic led government. Why does it have a government run by judges bent on the destruction of the true American way? America has slowly but surely turned its back on its past. A past filled with the Bible and personal moral accountability. The founding fathers of the US built their country on this foundation. However, there are many "reinterpreters" today wanting to sever all ties with the proper meaning of the US Constitution and its resultant laws. Udo Middelmann, in his introduction to Schaeffer's Death in the City, explains:

"Turning from the clear teaching of the Bible will not give us a vacuum to be freely filled with personal religious views or preferences. Instead there will be both the experience of the wrath of God and the experience of painful human and even stupid intellectual consequences. The removal of the biblical roots to our life and thought will necessarily dry up the many fruits we have treasured in the past in the form of a responsible, ethical, and creative society."[2]

One of these "stupid intellectual consequences" is how Terri Schiavo was treated by her husband, the courts and even the media. Seeing Michael Schiavo as the devoted husband wanting to rid his wife of a life of misery and pain is like calling Hitler a humanitarian! The courts on the other hand were absolutely despicable! Why would the courts not put any value on hearsay in murder trials, but when it came to Terri Schiavo's will to live or die, that is about the only thing that the courts used to sentence her to death? According to Terri's adulterous husband, more than fifteen years ago, in a casual conversation, Terri allegedly said that in such a situation she would rather die. Right up to the US Supreme Court, the majority of judges--may God have mercy on their souls!--agreed to send Terri Schiavo to her certain death! The only moral fibre that these judges have is that which exists in a golf ball! And the media... What can be said about them? If ever there was an inkling of a conspiracy against life and morality we can find it here. In all their flash polls they did with the American people, the Americans apparently overwhelmingly said that Terri should have been left to die and that the American government should not have tried to intervene. What they do not tell us is that in their polls they have already fed the American people so much misinformation and that their polling questions were set up to get the desired answers. In the week after Terri Schiavo's death, Zogby, a professional polling organisation, did a poll with proper information about the real situation surrounding Terri Schiavo's needs and death. The result was overwhelming. Americans did not want Terri's feeding tubes to be removed and they wanted the government to intervene. Even after Terri Schiavo's death, the highly regarded Time magazine still harpooned the American mind with the drivel of the polls performed by the media. Joe Klein, in his article A New Idea for Democrats: Democracy, wrote that the [Republican] government in signing "the Schiavo legislation all found their just rewards in the polls that revealed an overwhelming public disgust with the political shenanigans."[3] The Zogby poll has proven this notion to be completely false.

We can define a pro-life statement as follows: Protecting the sanctity of human life from conception to natural death. This includes opposing abortion and euthanasia; however, it is not necessary to prolong human life artificially.

The constitution gives no right to anyone to kill innocent human beings. Apparently the judges felt otherwise. Neither is there any explicitly stated right to privacy in the US Constitution. It seems that many in the US believe that a person's right to privacy precludes a person's right to life! So, whatever Michael Schiavo wanted to do in the privacy of his relationship with Terri had nothing to do with anyone else. However, these people conveniently forget that Michael Schiavo had to involve other people (doctors) in his murderous mission! Yet, on the other hand, since when could I murder someone in the privacy of my home without the government wanting to hold me responsible for that act? The categorically stated right to life in the Fifth and Fourteenth amendments of the US Constitution clearly takes precedence over any privacy issues. According to the Declaration of Independence we are endowed by our Creator with the unalienable right to life.

There is no mercy in killing a sufferer. Killing deformed infants and adults who are suffering does not avoid suffering, but it rather inflicts the suffering of death. Avoiding suffering through euthanasia cannot be justified since the end does not justify the means. Killing the innocent is evil and not good.

Many claim that a person should be able to decide when he wants to die by which method. Physical illness affects the mind and the body. As a result, these stressful situations always lead to difficulty in coming to a well-adjusted decision. Patients may one day want to die and another day want to live. Which day will be reckoned as his final decision?

It is far too easy for voluntary euthanasia to slip into involuntary euthanasia. It is necessary to continue making the elderly and the sick feel "valued" in order to make them value themselves. Failing to do this may make them feel valueless leading them to feel obligated to ask for euthanasia so as not to be a burden.

The last time I checked no one in my family carries a price tag. Perhaps if I owned the mafia a lot of money! Should euthanasia be legalised because it will relieve the family and society from extreme financial strain? According to this rationale we should protect and preserve life only if we can afford it! This is certainly not moral thinking but materialistic. How can we put material value on a spiritual life made in God's image? Thinking that euthanasia will alleviate society of a great burden overlooks the fundamental value of a human life.

There are two types of passive euthanasia: unnatural passive euthanasia--withholding natural means of life support in order to allow a person's death; natural passive euthanasia--withholding unnatural life support to allow a person's death.

Unnatural passive euthanasia is the deliberate withholding of natural means in order to maintain human life. This would include withholding water, food and air. Unnatural means include respirators and artificial organs. As a result, starving someone is called passive euthanasia, but allowing that person's death due to starvation makes one responsible for taking that person's life, which is morally evil. Such an act leads directly to that person's death, which then amounts to negligent homicide. On the other hand, withholding unnatural means, leads only indirectly to the person's death. Natural passive euthanasia is a morally justified category of passive euthanasia.

Unnatural passive euthanasia and active euthanasia directly cause death. Therefore, from a Christian viewpoint, it is morally unacceptable since it rejects God's sovereignty over human life. These means of euthanasia attempt to preempt God of His sovereign right over human life. Since human life is made in the image and the likeness of God it is sacred. Because of the sacredness of human life we ultimately attack God when we kill another person.

Suicide is also a rejection of God's sovereignty over life and an attack on the sanctity of life. God is sovereign over human life whether this life belongs to us or someone else, since it is still created in God's image. Whether euthanasia (not natural passive euthanasia) is self-inflicted or imposed by someone else, it remains a form of homicide. Even the few cases of suicide mentioned in the Bible are condemned by God.

Euthanasia is an intrinsic humanistic ethic. This can be clearly seen from Humanist Manifesto II. Euthanasia denies the divine ownership to life. A secular humanistic ethic rejects God's ownership to life and therefore destroys the barriers that protect human life.

Geisler points out:

"When we do not respect life before birth, it affects our attitude toward life after birth. When we do not respect the dying, it affects our attitude toward the living."[4]

The very same case can be made for killing mentally and physically handicapped infants after birth as can be made for killing them before birth. Abortion and euthanasia go hand in hand. How do these two go hand in hand? Abortion leads to a disproportionately ageing problem, and as result euthanasia becomes the solution to the economic problems caused by abortion.

Terri Schiavo had an unalienable right to life, and the very "reinterpreters" of the law that were supposed to protect her against selfish adulterers like Michael Schiavo, sentenced her to an agonising death by starvation.

My wish and prayer is that the US government will not allow this to happen again. It is now the time, while this case is still fresh in everybody's mind to set about to enact watertight laws that cannot simply be overthrown by judges who themselves act illegally by scrapping legal laws.

Since killing someone by starvation is obviously a homicide, I wish someone will have the guts to sue the relevant judges--from judge Greer up to those in the Supreme Court--together with the relevant senators who voted not to save Terri Schiavo; including the medical staff who disconnected the feeding tube and most of all Michael Schiavo, for the murder of Terri Schiavo. In this case, the notion that government officials cannot be sued while performing official duties must be challenged.

How could people have been so spineless to have followed a command that was so obviously immoral and therefore had no legal grounds?

------------------------------------
[1] Charles Colson and Nancy Pearcey, How now shall we live?, Tyndale House Publishers, Wheaton, Illinois, 1999, p120.
[2] Francis A. Schaeffer, Death in the City, Crossway Books, Wheaton, Illinois, 2002, p12.
[3] Time, April 11, 2005, Vol. 165, No. 15, p51.
[4] Norman L. Geisler, Christian Ethics: Options and Issues, Baker Book House, Grand Rapids, MI, 1989, p166.

Change Your Vote and Save Terri

I have sent the following email to some of the Florida senators that voted "No" for the bill that was to save Terri Schiavo's life.

 

These senators' names can be found at http://www.blogsforterri.com/archives/2005/03/florida_senator.php#more.

 

If more could write, but especially call them by phone, they might just change their votes.

 

The subject of the emails to these senators is the same as today's blog.

 

---

 

Dear Senator <name>,

 

My email probably does not mean anything to you, since I am a South African living in South Africa.

 

However, I would like to bring to your attention that decisions made in the USA still make people sit up in other countries, even South Africa.

 

In my opinion, a decision against life and for death, especially in the Terri Schiavo case can have terrible repercussions across the globe and not just in the USA. Make such a decision and not long from now the downward slide will start in other countries. If the greatest nation in the world does not respect living human beings, why should lesser nations? This is exactly what happened with Roe vs Wade and the abortion apocalypse.

 

I do not believe that Terri deserves death, especially not in this excruciating way of starvation. Terri is not in a comatose vegetative state. She still has cognative abilities which have already been proven. Is it right that murderous criminals have more legal representation than does Terri Schiavo? Is it right that an unelected judge who in reality does not represent the people make a death-decision of such great proportions?

 

You represent the people, and I am sure--if I understand the greatness of the American people--that the people themselves would vote for life in this case. Please, represent the people who voted for you and make the right decision. Vote for Terri's life, not her death!

 

Please uphold the true constitution of the USA and not that one so reinterpreted by unelected judges!

 

Thank you for your time and may God bless you!

 

---

William Dicks

"Moral crusaders with zeal but no ethical understanding are likely to give us solutions that are worse than the problems."
	-- Charles Colson How Now Shall We Live?

Just thinking... (My blog)

---

 

---

 

Just thinking...

Tutu reveals who he really is...

Former archbishop emeritus Desmond Tutu this week revealed who he really was when he stood up in support of the "gay" lifestyle.

 

At the opening of the Gay and Lesbian Film Festival in Rosebank, Johannesburg, Tutu told gays and lesbians "[y]ou should love who you are." In his speech Tutu, according to News24.com, said that "sexuality was about creativity and self expression, and alternative sexualities should be celebrated."

 

How is it that Tutu never tells adulterers that they should "love who they are?" Hasn't some quack of a psychologist or scientist shown that adulterers are genetically disposed to adultery? For every sin listed in the Bible, some "scientist" has shown that that particular sin was genetically wired into some people. Do you sin? Don't worry! Its in your DNA. Are you gay? Shame, you can't help it. Its in your DNA! Even Tutu has fallen for that garbage!

 

Homosexuality or lesbianism are not alternative sexualities! There are no sexualities apart from being male and female! Tutu is right in that sexuality is about creativity. However, explain to me how homosexuality and lesbianism can be about creativity! Nothing can be created out of this type of sex! Sex can only be creative between a man and a woman. This sex was preserved by God for a man and a woman within the marriage covenant.

 

Since when does a man who claims to be a Christian tell sinners to love who they are? It seems to only happen to those who have denied the very God they claim to serve. Those who deny the very Word that God has given us for our own benefit will do this kind of stuff. We as Christians, especially those who preach from the pulpit, should rather preach the full gospel and make a call to holiness!

 

Maybe former archbishop emeritus Desmond Tutu should not just stand up against unrighteous governments, but also against unrighteous sinners who have defiled their bodies with despicable acts! Sure, show them love, but also show them undeniable truth.

 

Just thinking...

The Law and Terri Schiavo

Michael Schiavo, the former husband of death-sentenced Terri Schiavo seems to think that the US legal system is the be-all-and-end-all! How can a person be so dense as to find it "uncomprehensible (sic) to think that a private family matter that has gone through the judiciary system for the past seven years - I mean, we're talking all the way up to the United States Supreme Court - and for a governor to come into this without any education on the subject and push his personal views into this and have his Republican legislation pass laws so that this doesn't happen." How much eduaction does one need to know that starving someone to death is murder the same as someone being shot to death! I am sure even a first grader can understand this point! And, since when is the starvation of a former wife a private family matter? Effectively causing the death of another person is certainly not a private matter! Further, since when has the Supreme Court the power to decide life or death for anyone but a dangerous criminal? Simply because the Supreme Court agrees with Michael Schiavo does not mean they are right. Even if the majority of Americans decided Terri should die does not make it right! Morality and ethics are not decided upon through democratic elections. Way much less through unelected US Supreme Court judges who presume to play God!

 

Michael Schiavo claims that Jeb Bush is "basically jumping right over the state court's decision. We might as well not have any state courts." Funny he should say that. Since when do state courts and Supreme Courts make laws for the land? They are supposed to enact the law in the courts, not reinterpret and demolish the original meaning and intent of the constitution and laws. Many of the judges in the US these days run roughshod over the US constitution and its laws with their depraved little minds imagining themselves the original interpreters of American life and its values. When will the US government stand up against these runaway judges and tighten the reins around what they are allowed to do and what not? The three branches of the US government are supposed to keep a check on each other, but so far in the last 40 or so years, no one has kept a check on the judicial.

 

All of Michael Schiavo's protestations against anybody standing in the way of the murder (starvation) of his ex-wife make me think he has something to hide. Is he scared the real truth about her condition will come out if she regains her speech? We simply do not know. It makes one think, however!

 

It is time for Michael Schiavo to realize that there really is a higher law in the land. The law of God. Whether he acknowledges that law or not is besides the point. One day each of us must stand before our Maker. How will you fare Michael Schiavo?

 

Let Terri Schiavo live!

 

Just thinking...

 

What does it really matter?

My wife and I completed the Cape Argus Cycle Tour on 13 March 2005. It is the largest individually timed race in the world with a limit of 35,000 entrants. It is a hilly 109Km (67.73mi) race with some of the most spectacular scenery to be seen. It was also a day with strong winds that caused many speed wobbles on a route that was covered with cyclists from beginning to end.

My wife and I ride a tandem bicycle and we started with the social tandem category at 08:40 in the morning. The winner of the race finished 12 minutes after we started. I still believe there should be a category for people like my wife and I and some other tandem riders: the VERY social tandem category. Our VERY social status can be seen in the time it took for us to finish the race: 6 hours 4 minutes. During the race our tandem's back wheel had 3 punctures and the back chain also came off. To top it off, my left quad, that had been giving me lots of troubles for the last 3 months, started hurting real bad with about 64Km (39.77mi) left in the race. At the top of the highest point in the race with about 14Km (8.7mi) left in the race I decided to stop for some physio. Needless to say, we finished the race and I am glad we did it.

My wife has been asking if we could have done better in the race. I suppose we could have if we did more than the odd Saturday ride in the last 6 weeks before the race.

This made me think of the 1000s of riders who did not make their goal times on race day. Some missed it by a few minutes while others missed it by much more. Some are very upset that they missed their goal times by those few minutes. My question is this: What does it really matter? If we are not challengers for top honours and we end up missing our own goals by those few minutes, what do we gain by being upset by it? Some get so upset by this that it makes me think that it is such a great matter of importance to them that it literally defines their lives.

Now, some of these people are Christians and it makes me wonder how these people think if this is something that defines their lives. In these cases the sin of pride rears its ugly head. It ends up that all these people can talk about is cycling and the few minutes they did not make. Please, do not read between the lines here since I am not writing ANYTHING between the lines. I believe it is wonderful when people can push themselves to do better in every field of life, but when Christians' lives are defined by anything but the Lord Jesus then they have propped up an idol in their lives.

Way back in 1993 I ran my first Comrades Marathon. I went on to run 3 of them with my last one in 1995, the same year my first child was born (a beautiful little girl who turned 10 this year). I soon realized that my goals of running and training for the Comrades Marathon (90Kms) took too much time away from my daughter. That is when I decided that running was not as important as my daughter. The same goes for cycling. If it starts interfering with my family relationships (wife, daughter and son), it will have to go. I think it is this attitude, which my wife shares with me, that ensures that we will never be one of the fast tandems. Since our training day is a Saturday, and our kids have sporting events on many Saturdays, we end up not riding as much as we could. My rule is this, if my kids have events on Saturdays, we simply do not go ride.

My greatest fear for so many Christians that get involved in sport, is that it becomes their defining activity in life. Instead of always having Christ before them and encouraging one another in the faith, one only hears about the sport that they do. I do not want this to happen to me or my family. I still endeavour to live out the motto that "God is most glorified in us when we are most satisfied in Christ." If we find our satisfaction in anything but Christ, how can God be glorified in us? How can we glorify God if our lives are defined by a sport, or a job, a car, a house, a neighboirhood or the money we make?

Eric Liddell from Chariots of Fire fame said: "I believe God made me for a purpose, but he also made me fast. And when I run, I feel his pleasure." The difference between Eric Liddell and many of today's Christians in sport is that Eric Liddell never forgot God's purpose for him and he ended up dying in China proclaiming the gospel to a lost nation.

How many of us as Christians can truly say that God has a higher purpose for us than riding pieces of metal or carbon fibre and finding personal worth in that?

Just thinking...

Born that way?

In the Sunday Times of March 6, 2005, Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane from the Anglican Church in South Africa gave a few insights into the latest meetings they had as a church community. Obviously, the homosexual issue was in the forefront of the discussions.

 

He writes that "[i]t was felt that both Americans and Canadians had seriously offended against the spirit of our common life." Is that all they offended? How about offending a holy God who clearly spelled out His position on sexual depravity, including homosexuality and lesbianism!? He also writes "[w]e must give the Americans and Canadians the space to take counsel at every level, right down to the parishes, and support them with our prayers." Why is it that they must take counsel at every level, but they are not instructed to take counsel from the Bible. It is because they have taken counsel at every level from fallen humans and not from God Himself as He defined His thoughts for us in the Bible that they are in this mess right now! When will people stand up for what is right before God and His Word and not for what is right in the eyes of depraved men and women?

 

The Archbishop continues: "The Anglican Church in Southern Africa will consecrate a homosexual or lesbian person as long as they are celibate, and there are many homosexual and celibate clergy in the church. The Anglican Church requires all unmarried clergy to be celibate and understands marriage as being between a man and a woman. We have on numerous occasions repeated our unreserved commitment to the pastoral support and care of homosexual people." As long as a gay is celibate? What does that mean? It would be the same to say that the church will consecrate celibate adulterers! It doesn't mean anything. How about consecrating murderers that haven't killed anyone yet? What nonsense!

 

He still continues: "There also needs to be more listening by the church generally to the experiences of gay and lesbian Christians, as the 1998 Lambeth Conference resolution required." Perhaps we should listen more to those murdering "Christians" too? How about listening to the pedophiliac "Christians?" Wouldn't that be nice? The church should listen to anyone, but ALWAYS respond with the truth and nothing BUT the truth so help us God!

 

The Archbishop also makes the statement: "I admit that I am dismayed whenever I hear language that seeks to make distinctions among people or discriminates on the basis of things over which we have no control — such as race, colour, gender or sexual orientation. These are aspects of the way we are born — and, as Christians, we believe each one of us is created reflecting the image of God. I personally experienced prejudice, exclusion and injustice for more than two-thirds of my life, simply because I was born black." The Bible is clear, God made us male and female. Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve! To cast homosexuals into the same group as blacks and so claim that that discrimination amounts to the same is an affront to blacks in this world. Blacks are born black, males are born male and females are born female. To discriminate on any of these issues is simply wrong. However, males are not born female or vice versa! There is not a shred of evidence that any homosexual was born that way. There is no homosexual DNA! There is black DNA. Male DNA or female DNA. But no homosexual DNA! Our dear Archbishop is cowering up to a tiny minority of depraved individuals to sound like he is tolerant. He is not tolerant! He simply is denying the Bible and the God of the Bible!

 

Denying consecration to homosexuals is discriminatory. So is denying consecration to a two year old. Are we making a fuss about that? If God demands holy lives from the pastors of the church, then so should we!

 

Just thinking...

Life should be precious..

In a world that claims to be running on values, how is it that we find so little? Especially values connected to the value of life? The Green Peace crowd will go so far as blow up labs that experiment on rats, because these rats have the right to life and dignity. Yet, isn't it amazing that unborn human beings do not have that same right of life and dignity! Isn't it horrific to know that one day your life may be cut short by a judge who thinks he is 'god.' There is such a judge. Judge Greer in Florida, USA. He has sentenced Terri Schiavo to death by starvation starting at 1PM on 18 March 2005.

 

One would think that the days of starving unwanteds to death like in Roman days were over. But think again! The human condition hasn't changed. It is still as corrupt as ever. Mankind will continue to find ways to please itself. How do we get rid of those that burden our sorry souls? Simply get a liberal judge to sentence them to death! No crime is needed for such a death sentence. Simply be in the way of people in this narcissistic age. We have gone so far down the self-love and self-esteem highway of hell that we have forgotten that the golden rule is to love others as we love ourselves. Yet, we would rather murder someone like Terri Schiavo than care for her! It is always the easy way out, isn't it? What is it with modern man? From instant coffee to instant death! Modern man is no more civilised than old Rome was. We have gone full circle. From the Romans who would leave unwanted, helpless babies to legally starve to death under the sun, moon and stars; to legally starve to death unwanted spouses, parents or children.

 

I call this murder, because that is what it is! Simply because a judge orders Terri Schiavo's starvation to death doesn't make it right!

 

If the Bush family is so pro-life, how is it that they could allow rogue agents of the state such as these liberal judges to commit murder in the name of the state? It is high-time that presidents and governors put a stop to judges that make laws. These judges are there to explain the law to the people, not make them! Jeb Bush claims that he would do everything within the law to stop this starvation order. If this is the case, then he should have this "judge" arrested for attempted murder together with Terri Schiavo's ex-husband!

 

Come people: STAND UP FOR LIFE!

 

Just thinking...

Governments afraid of justice

Most governments state in their constitutions or laws that they themselves are there to protect and bring justice to its people. As a result, when things go really bad in one criminal area (say murder, or fraud) of the country, then the government will perhaps create a new crime fighting unit for that specific issue. In South Africa, such a unit was created specifically to fight financial crime (fraud...). This unit is called the Scorpions. The Scorpions as a unit is not connected to the police, but rather the justice department.

 

The Scorpions have been immensely successful, since they do not take nonsense from anyone. However, then they started taking on the vice-president of South Africa in a bribe case. He was apparently bribed by a French arms company to give an arms deal worth R42m ($7m) to them. The Scorpions wanted to charge him with a crime and there was a so-called "hearing" on these charges. What seemed typical at the time, there were counter charges at the head of the Scorpions of that time (Bulelani Ngcuka) of being an informant of the "apartheid" government of the pre-free democratic elections of 1994. Naturally, the goverment gets out of any complaint against it by blaming the apartheid-years government. This time it was no different. Naturally, with great haste, the government set up a committee to investigate these accusations against Ngcuka. These charges were found to be of no substance.

 

The committee set up to either validate or invalidate the charges against the vice just seemed to fizzle out after a while hoping that no-one would notice. People seemed to still be interested in the case; so the government, as usual, made an executive decision that the vice would not be prosecuted. Once again the ANC government protected one of its own against the run of the law. However, they decided to prosecute a small player in the arms deal to make it seem that they were serious about the corruption in the deal.

 

Recently, the government has decided to perhaps move the Scorpions out of the normal justice department and into the police. There have been so many corruption charges against members of the police that I think that this is a strategic move on behalf of the government. If they can get the Scorpions to become a part of the police, then perhaps the Scorpions will have no credibility anymore and will not be this thorn in the government's flesh anymore.

 

Is the government really serious about fighting crime? Then it is time they start fighting crime among their own. Root out those in government who are squandering the money of the people while creating promising careers for criminals. Is the ANC government going to do anything serious against its own members of parliament in the current Travelgate scam? We wait with baited breath!

 

Read more about the Scorpions issue.

 

I just wish for once, that the people would get a government they deserve! Oh, yes...! They did!

 

If only we could have a government, found on honour, justice and the true welfare of its people!

 

But, the Bible tells us that in the end people will call evil good and good evil, and it seems that the goverments of this world are standing at the head of this perilous slope into destruction!

 

Just thinking...

 

Unrighteousness in the church

It has been happening through the ages, since Christ instituted His church on this planet. Churches once filled with the righteousness of Christ Himself start moving in the direction of unrighteousness. The scary thing is that these churches do not even know that they are moving away from the righteousness in action that Christ expects of them. They will vehemently deny that this skid is happening, to their own detriment. The thing about cancer is that it needs to be detected early for a good success rate in fighting it. Deny its existence and cancer will take your life. It is like putting a frog in cold water and slowly turning up the heat. Without knowing it the frog will be boiled to death. So it is with any church that denies that skid on the icy surface towards unrighteousness.

 

Some churches that started off well, mixed their doctrine with false doctrine. This mixture of good and false doctrine creates a poison that works very quickly through a group of people if no one recognises it and stands up against it. It creates a mutant more dangerous and destructive than even Godzilla. In the end, this church is no longer a Christian church, but merely an institution that mixed its own unbiblical anti-Christian ideas with that of the Bible, but still wanting to be called "Christian." This is clearly a synergistic type of belief which is very prevalent in Africa, where Christian beliefs have been mixed with their ancestor worship. In essence, this can no longer be called "Christian." This includes the largest "christian" church in the world today!

 

Other churches, while keeping a check on their doctrine, go into practices that are dubious. Things like the shepherding crisis of the late 70s and 80s. In those days, many so-called men of God started a shepherding model where the church flock had to get "permission" from their pastors to go ahead with moving house or changing jobs, etc. People no longer learnt wisdom from God through ardent study of God's Word, they became dependent on their "shepherds" for guidance in this world. In many cases this took on awesome proportions which led to many cult-like activities. Other churches would go overboard on issues like tithing to the church. They would make their people feel like second-hand citizens of heaven if they did not pay their tithes to the church.

 

I have recently heard of a local mega church close by where the pastors are not always treated like the shepherds of the flock. All the pastors are required to pay tithes to the church. However, the way that it was done before was to subtract the tithes from the salary before taxing was applied (pre-tax tithing). Then they heard that another church was being audited and for some "reason" decided to change the salary structures to include the tithe in the salary, let the pastor be taxed normally, and then the pastor could pay the tithes to the church himself. However, now that the tithes have been added back to the pastors' salaries, some of them have moved into the next tax bracket on the tax scale, and now actually get out less than they did before. Some as much as R250 (South African Rand)! The church should cover that loss for the pastors. This with support staff that outnumber the pastoral staff by far. In a church where there are 6000+ members, there are only 11 shepherding pastors. That is an average of 545 members per pastor! In a church where shepherding is hailed as the reason for the church's existence, I am surprised that the pastor/member ratio is so bad! There is no way that such a pastor can actually get to shepherd his flock and even get to know them! These same pastors also have to attend meetings upon meetings, leaving them with precious little time for member visitation. When a church loses its focus from shepherding its flock to running like a business, the people will suffer. Somewhere there is something wrong! Why suddenly change salary structures to avoid being caught by auditors? Is something unrighteous going on?

 

If the church cannot be the best example of righteous behaviour and how to treat its pastors ("managers") with respect and dignity, why should we expect it from secular businesses? Should we not then expect businesses to fail morally? How can we expect the world around us to walk on the moral high ground with regards to itself and how it treats others when the church cannot do the same?

 

When the church walks away from the simple truths of the Bible and incorporates psychology, leadership seminars and the like into its daily make-up, then we can expect to find a church that is morally corrupt, since it no longer has an objective base on which to stand. Rather, it is holding onto the deadly shifting sands of the pop psychology of today and leadership teachers that find it difficult to teach the Bible, but rather need to have "cute" quips to say about how good people need to be like "eagles."

 

I know this is a rather cryptic blog; however, it could be put at the door of much of the modern church today!

 

Just thinking...

 

Christmas is here again!

It happens every year at this time that people simply go nuts. What is it with the Christmas season?

 

Suddenly, people force themselves--or are they dragged along with the season?--to spend so much money that they do not have! For eleven months of the year most of these people use their money almost wisely. Then comes Christmas...! For the next twelve months people must pay off the debts they incurred over Christmas. All in the name of creating happy memories?! What is it with us as human beings? Especially here in the west? After so many years and even decades it has been proven that money and things cannot--and indeed will not--bring us happiness. It is the nature of money that it promises joy and happiness, but it will not deliver! You see, once it delivers the goods, then there is some saturation point at which one can say "I have reached happiness!" When this happens then we can indeed say that we no longer need more money than we already have! As you can get from this yourself, money will not stand for this! As long as it can promise more, the more it will create in us a desire of more of it. How is it that in so many cultures where--according to our standards--the people are poor, that they are happy, and in fact, content?

 

This is also the season when many anti-Christians become completely insecure. Groups like the ACLU in the USA must spoil it for everybody else. They need everybody else to be just as miserable as themselves. They cannot enjoy Christmas, so nobody can. As a result they run to their mommies and daddies (the liberal judges in the US) to get everybody else to stop having so much fun. This they do under the guise of "separation of church and state" as if that is what the American constitution promises them. As if the state can tell Christians where they may or may not celebrate Christmas or live out their Christianity! The state never tells atheists where they may celebrate their heathenistic, self-centred religion. Why should it be expected from the state to do so for Christians? You see, from the early Christian years, the state has been trying to get rid of Christianity. Since the state has not been able to do it through force, now the atheists and others are trying to do so by circumventing democracy via liberal godless judges in the courts! Every Christmas time these people cry "foul" when nativity scenes go up everywhere. Isn't it amazing how a scene with a completely innocent child can make people squirm like that? They want "happy holidays" when it should be "Merry Christmas!" These holiday will be just as empty as other holidays if Christ is removed from it.

 

Christmas is also the time when many Christians forget what Christmas is about. Sure, they say they do not forget, but their actions betray them. It is almost magic. One day their houses look quite normal; yet, suddenly the next day these once modest houses are transformed into Christmas fairy lands with lights, tinsel, angels and Santa Clauses everywhere. Again, under the guise of creating joyful memories. When you ask them where Jesus is in all this, they point to a tiny nativity scene that is complete overwhelmed with everything Santa around it. Of course, many of these Santas have a little button that children love switching on so that Santa could sing them a Christmas carol! Where is Jesus in all this?! Don't tell me that you believe that Jesus is the reason for the season when all I can see in your house is Christmas without the reason for the season, and tens of Santas and hindreds of other modern Christmas trinkets!

 

D. A. Carson writes in his book A Call to Spiritual Reformation: Priotities from Paul and his prayers, (Baker Books, 1992, p109):

If God had perceived that our greatest need was economic, he would have sent an economist. If he had perceived that our greatest need was entertainment, he would have sent us a comedian or an artist. If God had perceived that our greatest need was political stability, he would have sent us a politician. If he had perceived that our greatest need was health, he would have sent us a doctor. But he perceived that our greatest need involved our sin, our alienation from him, our profound rebellion, our death; and he sent us a Savior."

Adding to this, if God had perceived that our greatest need was to get gifts, coloured lights, candles, tinsel and Christmas trees, He would have sent us Santa Claus. Yet, He did not! Santa does NOT exist, yet year after year we would willingly decorate our houses to entertain our children with this fictitious character. A character that cannot fulfill our greatest need. On the other hand, almost never do we decorate our houses with anything that would betray our allegiance to the King of kings and Lord of Lords, Jesus Christ. Santa gets a whole month every year of our external show of allegiance to him, but Christ has to settle for an internal allegiance that, God forbid, anyone should discover we are serious about!

 

If you are serious about Christ, then show it this Christmas season!!

 

Just thinking...

Xenophobia

 

The world's own downfall

 

Xenophobia is the extreme hatred or fear of strangers, people from other countries, or of anything that is strange or foreign. Based on this definition, racism and homophobia can also be called xenophobia.

 

It amazes me that in the world of today there are so many people that are xenophobic! All over the world people are still fighting each other purely because of this innate fear of other people. Of course this fear is not without its increasing evidences. Especially in Africa and the Middle East we can find groups that want to destroy other groups in order to claim their land. This is a real problem in the world. What happens in many countries in the west is that many people from Africa and the Middle East are literally invading the west illegally, bringing with them not just cultures that are strange, but in most cases unwanted criminal activities. Activities that include things like drugs, money laundering, robberies and many more. This is enough to strike fear into the most mild hearted person.

 

However, the greatest feelings of xenophobia in this world are not simply among different cultures; they are aimed straight at Christianity! How irrational are these fears of Christianity? In America the big thing now is the separation of church and state. Secularists are continuing their push to rid society of all Christian influences. The first victory for them was when prayer was disallowed in schools. It has now become so bad that groups like the UCLA--probably the most insecure group of secularists in the USA--are even trying to prevent children from wearing certain clothes to school, just because their T-shirts have Christian messages on them. They are also trying to rid Christ from Christmas. It has now become politically wrong to wish someone a merry Christmas. It has now changed to "Happy Holidays!" Why are they so scared of Christianity? Are they so insecure that they have to rid society from the presence of everything Christian before they can feel secure in what they believe or not believe? In the so-called most free country on planet earth, we see groups that shout "Freedom!" from the housetops trying their utmost to prevent freedom for those who claim to be Christians! These people, more than most others, suffer the most from xenophobia!

 

Christians do not wish that all of society must be ruled with an iron fist of religion. If that is what some Christians believe, then it certainly is not the Christianity that Christ brought to this planet! Christians want freedom in all spheres of life, not just for themselves but for all people. Even for those that hate Christianity and call themselves atheists or whatever other isms there are.

 

Why are people so afraid of Christianity and hate it so much? Is it because in Christianity they see (from deep within themselves) that God has reached out to a planet bent on its own destruction. They feel that God has no right to infringe on their "privacy" and that they have a "right" to live their lives like they want. Is it not also because people just love their own sin and destructive behaviour so much that they will rather not part with that sin to the point of death. They realize that if they have to acknowledge Christ, that they also have to acknowledge His complete "otherliness" and that He is not like them at all. This is what they fear! So, when people fear someone they cannot and will not understand, they soon start hating that person and all he stands for, even to the point of hating those who have stood up with and for that person. This is what we find when it comes to Christ and Christianity.

 

The fact is that Christianity has brought some of the greatest things to this planet. Things like hospitals, universities, freedom from slavery and freedom for women in many societies just to name a few.

 

What is it that they fear so much, if it isn't their own selves and their own shortcomings in the sight of a holy God!

 

Just thinking...

 

Are you going to stand up for the innocent?

Abortion Bill Allowing Abortion by Nurses Passes South African Legislature

PRETORIA, November 11, 2004 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Today, the South African National Assembly passed, without debate, the Choice on Termination of Pregnancy Amendment Bill. The controversial bill will allow nurses to commit abortions. It will also deregulate control of abortion and allow provincial health ministers to make regulations for the implementation of abortion laws in their own provinces.

South African President Thabo Mbeki's signature is the final requirement for the bill's enactment. Earlier this month, the National Council of Provinces also approved the Bill.

Pro-Life groups and organizations representing health care workers fiercely opposed the legislation. In addition, public opinion surveys have demonstrated massive public opposition to the measure. A recent poll by Research Surveys found 86% of the public opposed to the notion of nurses performing abortions.

DENOSA, the Nurses Union which represents nurses on both sides of the abortion debate, has expressed concerns that the law will place an unreasonable burden on nurses and drive more of them out of the public sector. There are fears that the proposed law may increase pressure on nurses to participate in abortions and violate their constitutional right to conscientious objection.

The South African national group Pro-Life has vowed to continue to fight the legislation and has called on President Thabo Mbeki not to sign this law which will harm women, nurses and babies.

 

---

 

The ANC has proven once again that they will not tolerate any dissent from other parties. This issue has not been allowed a debate in government yet. With the ANC with such a large majority, and ANC members are not allowed to under any circumstances vote against the party line, it was as easy as pie to pass this Bill without a debate. Unfortunately, this is the African way... Do not disagree! We will not listen anyway!

 

What are we, as South Africans going to do about it? While we are all enjoying nice meals at home, sleeping safely at night, buying bigger houses and cars, making ourselves safer against crime, picking up shells on the beach, playing golf, watching the latest game on TV and just downright simply becoming apathetic, around 50,000 babies are murdered every year in this country!

 

It is no use saying that we can't stop the tide! That is simply a defeatist attitude! What are YOU going to do in this WAR of worldviews? Are You going to idly stand by while thousands of innocent citizens are being murdered while the law guarantees the safe passage of these murderers? It is time we stand up for the weak and make our voices heard.

 

Take up a pen, sit down at your computer keyboard, and start writing to your regional representatives and newspapers making known your dissent to this Bill and any other Bill that allows abortion.

 

It is a sick world e live in where the mother's choice has precedence over the life of a child.

 

Come, STAND UP for the innocent!!

 

Just thinking...