Do Black Lives Matter?

Do Black lives matter?  

 Well, apparently not all black lives matter, because the same night that Alton Sterling was shot by police in Baton Rouge, LA and Philando Castille was shot in St. Paul, MN, there were twenty-one African-Americans shot by other African-Americans nationwide yet no Black Lives Matter protests were staged for these deaths.  There were no appearances by race baiters like Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton and there was certainly no reporting by the mainstream media.  This is probably because these latter deaths did not fit the narrative that the cops are racists and kill African-Americans at the slightest pretense.

The media has bought onto that narrative at the expense of the truth and shame on them.  Probably the most egregious example is Ferguson, Mo, which produced the lie, “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” which the BLM movement is still proclaiming and the media reporting as if it were fact.  That there is a shaping of the story to fit an agenda is beyond dispute.

The facts are that only four percent of violent deaths suffered by Blacks are at the hands of the police.  The other ninety-six percent are the result of Black on Black crime.  The fact is that African-American cops are three times more likely to use deadly force against Blacks than White cops are, but every white cop now knows that the media will concentrate on them.  Who cares about facts, when you can have a good story on racial strife.

The BLM movement has come on the scene to fan the flame of that racial strife.  It is a hate mongering racist movement that chants, “What do we want?  Dead cops.  When do we want it? Now.”  We have seen the results of runaway emotions as lone-wolf African-Americans have murdered police officers all over the nation.

There are two solutions to the Black-Police conundrum.  The first is for the BLM leaders to undergo training scenarios where they have to make split second, life or death, decisions on whether to shoot or not shoot.  They will then find out the tremendous difficulties that police face on a daily basis. 

The second can be summed up in one word: compliance.  All African-Americans have to do when stopped, regardless of the reason, is to comply with the police officer’s instructions to the letter.  No resistance, no lip, just compliance.   There is no policeman alive who wakes up in the morning and decides that he is going to kill a Black man that day, but every policeman wants to go home to his family at the end of his shift. 

Since we are created by God, in His image, all lives matter.  Black lives, white lives and even the lives of the men in blue.  The sooner we learn that, the sooner the violence stops.

Choose Just Men

-->

Most people remember Noah Webster as the guy who wrote the dictionary, but Webster was a major player in Colonial times, one of the two hundred or so men known as the Founders; men without whom the United States would have never come into existence.  He served as a legislator, judge and educator and was largely responsible for Article 1, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution.

In the middle of an election year, we would do well to remember Webster’s wisdom from a section of his “Value of the Christian Religion” entitled “Advice to the Young”:

“When you become entitled to exercise the right of voting for public officers, let it be impressed on your mind that God commands you to choose for rulers, just men who will rule in the fear of God.  The preservation of a republican government depends on the faithful discharge of this duty; if the citizens neglect their duty, and place unprincipled men in office, the government will soon be corrupted; laws will be made, not for the public good, so much as for selfish ….. purposes; corrupt or incompetent men will be appointed to execute the laws;  the public revenues will be squandered ……. ; and the rights of the citizens will be violated or disregarded.  If a republican government fails to secure public prosperity and happiness, it must be because the citizens neglect the divine commands, and elect bad men to make and administer the laws…..”

Right now we have presidential candidates in one party consisting of an avowed socialists who would radically alter our form of government to conform it to the failed model of the former USSR and a chronic liar who sacrificed the lives of brave men for political purposes and who seems to have no governing worldview except the pursuit of raw political power.

In the other party we have a narcissist as front-runner who has no solutions to any problem facing the country and no answers to any question except, “I’ve made a lot of money” and “I’m a great negotiator”; a candidate who professes Christianity, but whose life is totally devoid of the evidence for that faith.

Is this the best we can do?  Apparently so, because here we are in 2016, a nation who has abandoned sacrificing self-interest for the public good and exchanged that worldview for one based on envy, greed and entitlement; a nation that elects politicians, not on the content of their character, but solely on the basis of extravagant promises of free stuff.

After the fall of the Soviet Union, someone asked Alexandr Solzhenzisyn, the great Russian author how a people could have allowed the horror of seventy years of communism.  His answer:  “Its simple, we forgot God”.   Unless we remember the foundation of our Republic was a reliance on God, and start electing people whose lives reflect an adherence to those “General Principles of Christianity” as John Adams phrased it, someone in the future will give the same answer to the question, “How could we have allowed this to happen?”

Kim Davis and Unjust Laws

Liberals are rushing to lampoon Rowan County, KY, County Clerk who was sent to jail because she refused to issue marriage licenses to homosexual couples.  The jokes are fast and furious about her multiple divorces, her out of wedlock children and so forth. What none of these media hyenas note though is the change in her life since surrendering it to Jesus Christ.  Nor do they look into what brought about her transformation.  Maybe that is because they have no clue as to what a life yielded to an authority beyond one’s self looks like.

Judge David L. Bunning sent a clear message in sending Davis to jail: Criticism of homosexuality will not be tolerated.  Philosopher J. Budziszewski says, “Things are getting worse.  The list of what we are required to approve is growing longer.  Consider just the domain of sexual practice.  First we were to approve sex before marriage, the without marriage, and [now sex] against marriage”.  Bunning’s actions seem to be the latest in this movement.  They have nothing to do with the law, as he violated the constitution in prosecuting Davis.  His actions have nothing to do with defending someone’s civil rights, but have everything with protecting a particular form of sexual behavior and attempting to elevate it to a plane equal to heterosexual sex.

There has been much debate on this issue.  Liberals, and even some Christians have put forth the argument that Davis was a government employee and was duty bound to uphold the law.  What reveals the hypocrisy of this argument is that when the mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsome, illegally issued marriage licenses to homosexuals, liberals cheered.  When President Obama picks and chooses what laws he will uphold, not a peep is heard from anyone.  If Davis belongs in jail, then so do these two individuals.   

In any case, the argument that Davis, as a government employee, was duty bound is specious.  Davis is protected under the 1964 Civil Rights Act, also the law of the land, which requires the government or any employer to make every reasonable accommodation to an employee’s religious beliefs and practices.  There were numerous accommodations that were offered by Davis’ attorney which could have easily been made, but Judge Bunning ignored them in his zeal to punish Miss Davis for her belief that homosexuality is immoral behavior.

This is the crux of the matter.  Democrats Obama and Clinton have stated that they will defend the freedom to “worship” as one chooses, but that is not what the Constitution protects.  The Constitution states that ‘Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.  The Dutch theologian Abraham Kuyper once said, “There is not one square inch in all of creation over which Jesus Christ does not cry out, “Its mine””.   The free exercise of a Christ Follower’s religion does not stop at the church door, but involves all of life, especially in how they represent Christ in the workplace as Mrs. Davis is certainly doing.

Her defiance of Judge Bunning’s dictates is right in line with the great Christian thinkers from Aquinas to Blackstone to Martin Luther King, who by the way is also cheered by liberals.  King wrote that man’s law must be in compliance with God’s law, and if not, man’s law is an unjust law. In his Letter From A Birmingham Jail, King wrote:  “One has not only a legal, but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”  Davis, like King, was willing to face the penalty for following the dictates of her faith, which is all the state can ask.

If Davis had been a Muslim, the courts would have bent over backwards to accommodate her religious beliefs.  But she isn’t.  She is a Christian.  This is just the tip of the iceberg, because the real goal here isn’t to recognize homosexual “marriage”.  The real goal is to marginalize and delegitimize Christianity in the public square.  Miss Davis is just the latest casualty in this campaign.  There will be more to come.

The Problem is Islam, Not Islamic Extremists

-->

Enough is enough.  When the President of the United States refuses to name Islam as the motivating factor in the violence occurring in the Middle East and infers a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam. he has crossed a bridge too far in political correctness.  Mr. President, with all due respect, I will see you the few thousand killed by “Christians” in the Crusades, which, by the way, were a response to the military conquest of Jerusalem by Muslims, and raise you the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, killed by Muslims in the last thousand years as they spread their religion by the sword.

Are all Muslims violent?  Certainly not, but to refer to ISIS or al Qaeda as “radical Islamists” or “violent extremists”, as the president, print journalists and the talking heads on TV are suggest, demonstrates either intentional deception or willful ignorance.

Two things guide Muslims:  the Quran and the sunna, which are the life and teachings of Muhammad.  A close examination of both would reveal that the problem is not “radical Islamists” at all.  The problem is Islam itself.

Regarding Muhammad, most Muslims don’t investigate his life for themselves, instead they are taught an airbrushed image presented to them by Imams; hence they revere Muhammad as peaceful, humble, and virtually flawless.  The reality is quite different.  In  1.24 of Sahih Bukhari’s commentary on the hadiths, Muhammad says, “I have been ordered by Allah to fight against people until they testify that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that Muhammad is Allah’s Apostle, and offer the prayers perfectly and give the obligatory charity ….then they will save their lives and property from me.”  Muhammad lived this out in his military conquest of the Arabian peninsula when, to offer one example, after the Battle of the Trench, he captured and beheaded over five hundred men and teenage boys from the Jewish tribe of Qurayza and sold their women into slavery.  Fast forward to ISIS and al Qaeda in 2015.

Peaceful Muslims also have to ignore the Muslim doctrine of “abrogation” which is applied to the Quran.  This simply means that when a verse, which was handed down later, conflicts with an earlier verse, the later verse overrules the earlier one.  There are multiple Quranic verses that state this principle in one form or another.  One of the many peaceful verses considered to be abrogated was Sura 2:109 on which Ibn Kthir, a noted Muslim scholar who lived in the 1300’s had this to say: “ “But forgive and overlook, till Allah brings his command”[Q2:109] was abrogated by the Ayah, (verse) “Then kill the Mushrikin [idolaters] wherever you find them” [Q9:5], and , “Fight the People of the Book [Christians and Jews] ….[Q9:29].  Allah’s pardon for the disbelievers was repealed….it was abrogated by the Ayah of the sword [Q9:5]”  Again, fast forward to al Qaeda and ISIS in 2015, who are merely obeying the teachings of their Prophet.

Another problem for peaceful Muslims when engaging the West is the doctrine of taqiyya, a doctrine that encourages Muslims to lie to an “infidel” if it will advance the cause of Islam.  So when Arsalan Iftikhar of the Council on American-Islamic Relations [CAIR] claimed that Islam did not motivate the Fort Hood massacre, he was practicing taqiyya.  Iftikahar is quoted as saying, “Most of the world’s 1.57 billion Muslims know that the Holy Quran states quite clearly that, “Anyone who kills a human being … it shall be as though he has killed all of mankind. … If anyone saves a life, it shall be as though he has saved the lives of all of mankind.  Accordingly, it should come as little surprise to any reasonable observer that when Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan recently committed his shocking acts of mass murder at Fort Hood, Texas, America’s Muslim community of over 7 million felt an added sense of horror and sadness at this senseless attack against the brave men and women of the U.S. armed forces.”

But Iftikahar’s quotation was selective.  The full version of Sura 5:32 says, “Because of that, We decreed upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in the land - it is as if he had slain mankind entirely. And whoever saves one, it is as if he had saved mankind entirely. And our messengers had certainly come to them with clear proofs. Then indeed many of them, [even] after that, throughout the land, were transgressors.   The admonition of Sura 5:32 is addressed to Jews, not Muslims and corruption in the land is viewed as practicing another faith.

Iftikhar also conveniently failed to mention Sura 5:33 which follows, “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption [practice another religion] is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”  This presents and entirely different picture of the motivation of Maj. Hassan and, in view of taqiyya, presents a credibility problem for Islamic apologists who defend Islam as teaching peace.

The upshot is that ISIS and al Qaeda practice Islam as it was taught by the Prophet Muhammad and is taught by the Quran.  Many Muslims can say that beheadings and slavery are wrong at this historical juncture, but the cannot condemn them out right without contradicting the Quran and Muhammad.  To say that core texts of the Quran or certain teachings of Muhammad ae wrong would be and act of apostasy.

Muhammad’s goal was a worldwide caliphate under Islamic rule.  ISIS is here to make that a reality.   It is the peaceful Muslims, and there are plenty of them, who are radical in having to ignore the violent teachings of the Quran and the violence perpetrated by Muhammad during his lifetime in order to practice their religion in a peaceful manner.
 
President el-Assis of Egypt has called for a “religious revolution” within Islam to adapt it to the Western values of freedom of speech, freedom of religion, etc.  Let us pray that he was sincere and that Islamic leaders will take him up on it. 


-->

Showing Grace

We are working our way through Philip Yancy's "What's So Amazing About Grace" and that week"s discussion was on how to show grace in maintaining a relationship with  those who refuse to acknowledge their sin.  Although not the only sinful practice discussed, homosexuality was a focus of the  discussion since Yancy had a deep friendship with Mel White who was an avowed homosexual and the lesson centered around how Yancy handled their relationship.

It was then that one of the participants chimed in with what I thought was an excellent Christian response to the homosexual.  A response filled with grace while not denying truth.  It went like this:

"This is what I would say to the homosexual:  "Given the things that I have done in my life, I am a much worse person than you.   There is a difference between us though.  I am broken.  I have acknowledged my offenses against God, have confessed them before Him, have asked forgiveness for breaking His heart  and thrown myself on His mercy by trusting that Jesus paid my debt.  Moreover I have turned from my sin because I have come to love Christ more than I loved what I was engaged in and because I love Him, I want my life to be one of obedience.

You on the other hand are not broken.  You want have it both ways.  You want to trade on the love of God while refusing to acknowledge that the behavior that you are engaged in is an affront to Him when He clearly says that it is.  God loves the sinner, but will not welcome the sinner who trades on His love to remain in sin.  God is holy and those who seek His friendship must strive to be holy also.  Our right of access to God through Christ does not give us the right to do whatever we like.

   

You can't fatten a pig on market day.

This is from search ministries:

Market Day

We were in the middle of one of our golf-themed events, where one of the chaplains interviews a couple of PGA players about life on tour, favorite golf memories, best tournaments, and a bit about their faith. 

Depending on time and circumstance, we'll let the audience throw in a few questions, this was one of those nights. 

All three of our panelists this evening had been excellent student-athletes, and a proud father asked what advise they could give his son who had earned a Division 1 golf team scholarship. 

Stewart Cink threw out some good words about honoring the significance of the contract that the scholarship represented, and spoke about getting ahead in your preparations and practice. Then he unleashed this bit of redneck wisdom that had our suburban crowd jumping for their smartphones:

You've got to fatten the pig ahead of the fair. You can't fatten a pig the night before market. 

Perhaps this timeless wisdom is commonplace in your neck of the woods. Nobody at my table, or the two beside us, had heard it before. I watched a half dozen phones light up to EverNote, Facebook, or Twitter. 

It speaks deeply of the tension of our age that this picturesque parable meant to convey the idea that some important things take a long time can be captured, categorized, and broadcast worldwide in a matter of seconds. 

So much of life these days seemingly can be accomplished in a short burst of time that we lose perspective and patience on the things that take time. That list is pretty long, and full of the things that we don't really want to think about. 

I want to draw your attention to three of them, that are the keys to a relational approach to sharing your faith. 

1. We need to earn the right to be heard. Relationships take energy spent over a long time. Very few adults are open to trusting new or strange acquaintances. If we'd like a voice into their life, we'll have to demonstrate that we can be trusted to have their best interests in mind. This takes time. 
2. We need to have something intelligent to say once we've earned the right to be heard. Preparation takes time. Do you know what issues they wrestle with? Can you handle at least the most common objections and misconceptions about faith? Can you share the message of salvation clearly? You can't master these in a night, or even a week. This takes time to do well. 
3. We need to have a faith worth sharing. What is the spiritual life you are calling them to? How is your own personal relationship with God? This relationship takes no less time to develop than others. Do you love Him? Do you seek out His presence? Do you hunger for the scriptures? This takes time. 

They say the best time to plant a tree is twenty years ago. The second best time is today. Start today investing in all three of these areas. Look for ways to deepen relationships. Make plans to sharpen your skills or broaden your knowledge. Seek hard after God. Don't wait until one of these trees blossoms to start planting the others. 

You can't fatten a pig on market day.

Cultural Malaise

"Public virtue cannot exist in a nation without private [virtue], and public virtue is the only foundation of republics." -John Adams

There is no surer indicator that the culture is headed down the toilet than the case of Mark Sanford, former governor of South Carolina.  As a reminder, when Governor, Sanford suddenly disappeared, not even telling is staff where he was, to run off to South America to be with his “soul mate”.  The only problem was that Sanford was married at the time.

Now he is trying to resurrect his political career in running for the House seat vacated by Tim Scott in South Carolina”s District 1.   Here is where the cultural malaise kicks in:  amazingly, Sanford won his primary and now is in the midst of a tight race with his Democratic opponent.

Think about it.  Here is an individual who violated the most sacred vow that a man can make, his wedding vows, and no one seems to care.   What makes voters think that if Sanford had no problem in rationalizing his lack of integrity in his marriage that he would have a problem with violating his oath to uphold the Constitution?

Now along comes an organization that really illustrates how sick the culture has become.  An outfit called AshleyMadison.com has made Sanford their poster boy.  It founder Noel Biderman is quoted as saying that, “He represents what we have been articulating for the past decade, which is, what happens in someone’s personal life, that’s their personal choice—it doesn’t mean that they’re not able to govern….”

This seems to be the conventional wisdom in a culture that doesn’t believe in moral absolutes: that one can separate public and private virtue.  But truth is born out in reality, and experience shows that any politician who routinely indulges in immoral practices in his private life, very quickly betrays the office he has sworn to uphold.  Examples abound, Newt Gingrich, John Edwards, Anthony Weiner, but the most famous is Bill Clinton, who had no core ethics, but would go wherever the political winds blew.

In his book the, “The Meaning of Marriage”, pastor Tim Keller quotes Sara Lipton of the New York Times:  “For most of Western history, the primary and most valued characteristic of manhood was self mastery……A man who indulged in excessive eating, drinking, sleeping or sex—who failed to “rule himself”—was considered unfit to rule his household, much less a polity.”  My how times have changed.

We are a society that derisively dismisses Biblical ethics and find it strange that politicians sell us out at every turn.