Good Morning!
It’s Saturday! Yay! 🙂
On this day in 1798 Benjamin Stoddert was appointed as first Secretary of the U.S. Navy.
In 1802 Great Britain declared war on Napoleon’s France.
In 1917 U.S. Congress passed the Selective Service Act, which called up soldiers to fight in World War I.
In 1942 New York ended night baseball games for the duration of World War II.
And on a side note, today is also the birthday of Baltimore’s Brooks Robinson, who spent his entire 23 year career as an Oriole. Now that’s loyalty. 🙂 It’s also the birthday of some guy named Reggie Jackson. Perhaps you’ve heard of him? 🙂
Anyway, in 1951 the United Nations moved its headquarters to New York City.
And in 1980 Mt. Saint Helens erupted in Washington state killing 57 people and causing 3 billion in damage.
____________________________________________________
Quote of the Day
“If it’s a good song and it fits me, that’s what I’m going to do, I’m not out there trying to change the world. I’m just out there trying to sing country music the best way I can.”
George Strait
____________________________________________________
Today is George’s birthday, so here he is with the fake AJ. 🙂
We also have Joe Bonsall of the Oak Ridge Boys with a birthday. Now I could obviously find plenty of Oak Ridge Boys on YouTube. They’ve been around for a long time. But I found one I really like that’s them doing a cover of “Seven Nation Army”, by the White Stripes, which I also like. It takes a little getting started while they explain the reason for the song, but I must say they do it well. 🙂
And it’s also Mr. Como’s b-day too.
And this is the song the Oak Ridge Boys covered above. I love the way 2 people pull it off as well.
That’ll do a number on your eyes huh? Mostly I just like the way he uses the guitar as a bass too. 🙂
____________________________________________________
Does anyone have a QoD for us?
Wandering Views 
I spent a day chopping down crepe myrtle plants at camp Ton-a-wanda (If that’s how you spell it. It’s a boy scout camp on Wadmalaw Island near Charleston.).
Happy Saturday morning everyone. It’s really raining in Hendersonville. But it’s 61.4 degrees outside. I don’t mind.
LikeLike
It’s cloudy here, but no rain yet.
Looking in the mirror this morning I see it’s time for a haircut. Guess I’ll walk to the barber shop later this morning.
LikeLike
From yesterday’s thread – Cheryl, ‘baobab’ is pronounced bay-oh-bob (bay as in the body of water, oh as in the exclamation and bob as in the man’s nickname – though of course, a southern accent would probably distort that somewhat 😉 ). I don’t know what language the name comes from as the tree has different names here, depending on the tribal language. It is only the westerners who call it a baobab.
LikeLike
Cheryl- Since no one guessed your tree, I’ll take a stab and say it is a miniature rose bush, like the one in my yard. But since that is a bush and not a tree, I suppose you wouldn’t call it one, considering you said the saguaro is not a tree. Perhaps it is a dogwood?
LikeLike
Peter, I looked up “rose tree” after I got home from taking the photo, thinking that might be it, and didn’t see anything that looked like it–what they show looks more like a rose bush, only with a taller stalk. I don’t think the leaves on this one look like a rose bush. Dogwoods look different, though my hunch is that whatever this is, it’s a “cultivated” variety of something else, and could have started as almost anything.
When I stopped to take the photo, the garage door was open, and if anyone had been visible I’d have asked permission to take the photo and also asked what the tree was. Since I didn’t see anyone, I just stayed on the sidewalk and didn’t linger as I took three or four photos. I may take the photo to a nursery sometime and see if they know.
LikeLike
Cheryl, it looks like the wild variety of a camelia
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camellia_japonica
Camelia’s are grafted onto the root stock of the Japonica plant to give more variety. If you google “wild camelia” you will see more photos that look like yours.
LikeLike
Kim, that’s a good guess. I have a friend who likes camellias a lot, so maybe I’ll e-mail her the photo and see what she thinks.
LikeLike
I have them all in my back yard. The difference in your photo and my trees/bushes is the leaves. The leaves on my camelias are glossy dark green but mine are all hybids.
LikeLike
It’s a beautiful sunny morning here – had breakfast with hubby out on the lawn, now for some chores before he heads off to work. I’m a long weekend widow now – he works long hours during the summer long weekends – but he sure loves his job 🙂
I think that flowering tree is just gorgeous. My double flowering plums are almost blooming – many, many more buds on it this year than last. Amazing what a bit of care and pruning can do.
We will also likely have to mow the lawn, for the first time this year, in the next few days.
LikeLike
CMT is reporting from the Hangout Festival
LikeLike
I’ve noticed a lot more ads popping up websites these days, the kind you have to click on the ‘x’ (if you can find it) to get rid of. I don’t know about anyone else, but I never, NEVER look at these, I always kill them asap.
In a way, that’s bad news for me because newspapers more and more are trying to switch their prime advertising revenue source to digital as print continues to dry up.
I’m afraid most Internet users, me included, simply see the ads as an annoyance and unnecessary distraction.
The only ads that tend to catch my eye are ones that have been programmed for me based on whether I’ve been looking for something in particular online lately — and I’ve also recently noticed (is this a coincidence? I don’t know) that all the pet/dog ads that show up on pages I visit feature border collies. Hmmm.
Either border collies are getting popular or the ad folks have found a way to discern even what breeds you gravitate to and they populate your ad with those dogs.
If that’s the case, I have to hand it to them.
LikeLike
To be honest, I don’t really know a lot about how the abstinence-only message has been taught. So I was a bit surprised to read this commentary (from what appears to be a blogger who supports chastity before marriage) and was wondering if any of you had any comment on the “curriculum” that’s been available on this topic?
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/barefootandpregnant/2013/05/sloppy-seconds-sex-ed.html
LikeLike
Who is this “Elizabeth Smart”?
LikeLike
Donna, I’ve heard of it being treated like that, and I’ve also heard of some ways that are done better. One image I liked was to girls (the book was to girls); it told her she had three different ways she could present herself to boys, and how she presented herself would affect how he would treat her. She could be careless, and be a styrofoam cup to be used and thrown away; she could be a ceramic mug, a bit nicer but still nothing special; or she could be a fine-china tea cup that you don’t misuse but treat with care. I personally think that’s better than the spit-in-it-and-have-someone-drink-it imagery.
At the same time, in a day of multiple STDs, I think that the dirty-water imagery really could have a useful place. Two glasses of clean water can be poured together and you have only clean water. But take a third cup that has dirt in it (an STD), and pour it into one of those glasses, and then pour those two glasses together, and you spread the disease farther.
I don’t think the problem is abstinence-only sex ed itself. And certainly I think any teacher of it would be horrified by the idea of a young girl being traumatized that someone done TO her against her will is the equivalent of her choosing to seduce a man, or even that her choosing sexual sin is unpardonable. Abstinence until marriage should be taught as the only biblical option–it just needs to be taught well.
I think the biggest place we have failed is in communicating the goodness of sex in its proper place. The last couple of years I’ve seen (in blogs) a lot of the fallout from women entering marriage with the “sexual purity means sex is bad” message ingrained. Some think that their husbands are dirty for enjoying it; and some simply think that they themselves are only supposed to tolerate it. And some enter marriage with sexual sin in their past (with their spouses or with someone else), and have huge problems getting past “you’re damaged goods.” And I hear that some also make it to marriage as virgins but have a struggle of a different sort, that they’ve repressed sexual thoughts for so long they have trouble turning them on. So yeah, some good questions are being asked, and need to be asked.
I recently worked on a book about family. And it caught my attention that practically the only mentions in the book about sex were in the chapter to singles. The book wasn’t about sex, so it made sense in one way that the chapters to married people didn’t mention sex . . . but in another way, I think Christians could easily be more proactive in “married sex is good!” (I was working with a study guide for the book, so I didn’t have a chance to edit the book itself or I’d have suggested a mention or two of sex in the marriage chapters.) In fact, I hear all the time that the church is so pro-marriage that single people “feel left out.” Maybe in some circles that is true, I don’t know, but as a woman who was single until age 44, I rarely experienced that. (I did experience some various forms of stupidity, but not an over-emphasis on “marriage is good.”) I think if anything we lean too far the other way. Someone ought to be pushing young men a little harder to seeing marriage as a good thing, and being more pro-active about seeking a wife. And we ought to make sure it’s clear that marriage and sex are great choices. Singleness is good as well . . . but I really don’t think it’s true that we don’t say this enough. I don’t think we say enough, “Marriage is good. Men, get married. Many godly women are waiting for real men to come along, and marriage is a good gift from God. Choose a wife.”
LikeLike
Chas, Elizabeth Smart was the girl kidnapped from her bedroom as a teenager, by a man who had worked for her family, and then basically held as a sex slave of sorts by the man and I think his wife. She escaped 14 months later or so. Her message now seems to be “abstinence training messed me up, since being raped made me feel worthless.” But from what I’ve heard, being held as a sex slave would probably be just as hard on a girl who wasn’t a virgin. I think she is focusing on the wrong “message.” People teaching abstinence messages really do need to be aware that sometimes girls are unwilling victims, and they do need to be aware that some in the crowd have probably already had sex. They must emphasize forgiveness. But the abstinence-until-marriage message is not the problem; the problem is how it’s delivered.
But keeping in mind that 70-80% of professed Christians don’t make it to their wedding day as virgins, obviously something about the message isn’t getting through well. I personally think a big part of it is probably our individualistic culture–dating couples don’t ask for accountability, they think they’re “strong enough” to hang out alone behind closed doors, and no one in their lives asks the hard questions either. I think the idea that you are responsible to others for your beahvior–that parents and church leaders have a right to inquire into your personal life–is healthier here. But it’s fairly un-American.
LikeLike
I don’t want to go to deep here but there is a disconnect between sex, “making love”, being sexually abused, and a few other things. If I could just call Cheryl and tell her what I want to say she would be able to write it out more coherently for me.
I was molested as a small child. My parents figured it out and stopped it. I confronted the man when I was 18 and he admitted it to me and gave me a reason why.
You grow up “about to jump out of your skin” around males. You hear that sexually abused children tend to abuse other children so you don’t babysit. You go to Christian school where you hear sex is dirty. It’s a sin. The only thing your mother tells you about sex is “Don’t”. Yeah, you grow up a little warped.
I am finding out that I obviously am not the best mother in the world, but I didn’t want my own daughter to grow up as warped and damaged as I was. I was an obsessed crazy women when she was small. I wouldn’t walk out of a room and leave her alone with any man but her two grandfathers and her father. I told her anything her bathing suit covered was private and no one could touch her without her permission and if they did to scream and keep screaming until another adult did something about it. I told her that no one could hurt mommy nor daddy and not to believe them if they said they would. I told her that her virginity was a precious gift that she could only give away one time. She could toss it away or she could hold out for something special. When she wanted to spend the night with friend I instructed her that if anyone was in the bedroom after she and her friend went to bed that she shoulld scream and demand the parents call me to come get her. When she wanted to spend the night with questionable people I told her no and that things could happen that I couldn’t pay for enough therapy to fix.
Yes. I did try to read Elizabeth Smart’s story but I couldn’t. It dug too deep and hit too raw of a nerve. If I could do anything I would put my arms around Elizabeth and tell her she isn’t dirty and she isn’t the one who should feel shame…those monsters are.
LikeLike
Kim, I think you’ve said it well.
LikeLike
Quote from Donna’s link: It shows that too many Christians, too many proponents of abstinence-only education, have put their concern for the welfare of a quasi-political movement above their concern for the welfare of a human being, of human dignity itself.
That says it all right there.
I can’t speak for abstinence-only education in the schools, but the homeschooling program I ended up in during my teen years went through the whole women can be pure or damaged goods routine. They also stated that immodest dress could cause a woman to be raped. Even after I realized that program was legalistic, I had trouble shaking the idea of purity raising my marital worth – and worried about my worth as a result of the hurt I got as a young child. It was learning that Islam also blamed rape upon immodest dress that set me on the right track. On re-reading Leviticus (which the program quoted in fragments to prove its points), I realized that even the Mosaic law was more discerning in placing the blame of rape and even seduction solely on the man. I mentally picked up all those ideas on sexuality that the program had instilled, and dropped them in the discard pile of my mind. I still say no sex until the man has sworn before witnesses to protect and cherish me until death do us part, but I am no longer bound by a rigid code of human honour and retributive religion.
LikeLike
I found the commentary interesting — and disturbing if this is the way abstinence is being taught.
Something about the “purity culture” she makes reference to has, in fact, bothered me, but I could never really put my finger on why exactly. Perhaps it is the legalistic tone — and also bothersome to me, I guess, is very public aspect to it all. Now “being pure” is something to be heralded? It’s just odd to me.
I realize, though, that it is primarily a reactive movement — whether it’s being done well or not — to our culture’s very dramatic slide in sexual ethics over the past couple generations. So I get that. Gone is what once was the societal consensus (among believers and nonbelievers alike) that sex was meant for marriage.
Lapses of that standard have commonly occurred in all times and cultures, of course. But in our time it wasn’t until fairly recently that the standard itself was jettisoned (and that was called good).
It’s a challenging & confusing time to be growing up these days. 😦 I feel for parents (and churches) trying to navigate it all.
LikeLike
And, of course, childhood/teen abuse really makes it all that much tougher. I’m not sure if abuse is more prevalent now — or simply talked about more openly and reported.
LikeLike
Cheryl’s good suggestion — about the importance of emphasizing the positives of sex within marriage — is what I thought was being primarily taught, I guess. ?
Sure, there need to be warnings about the “downsides” of not waiting. But it sounded from the commentary that those issues were being completely over-emphasized?
There’s also the danger of pushing a message that translates (intentionally or not) into a works-based salvation. If kids are hammered with these really stark messages for years — and then they fall in that particular area — will they feel so horrible and ashamed that they begin to doubt their very standing with God?
LikeLike
I’m talking to myself again, aren’t I?
LikeLike
Not entirely Donna, but have you noticed that the only comment made by a guy since 8:30 this morning is my question about Elizabeth Smart?
The men are wisely staying out of this.
But you ladies have at it.
Wait till football season. 😆
LikeLike
Donna – I am currently in contact with a culture with rigid moral codes. From personal experience, the stories of others and medical encounters, I can firmly state that human nature remains corrupt and expresses that corruption in spite of the most strict rules for behaviour. There is nothing more pure about a legalistic religion controlling a culture.
The same immorality which is visible in the West seethes beneath the surface here. There is abuse, but the young girls who come to the clinic with STDs would never dare to tell us who did it. Both sexes sleep around in spite of polygamy, early marriage and religious practice – I was told by one man who approached me for a temporary relationship while I was here that there was nothing wrong with it, and he had just finished his evening prayers. Homosexual activity is recreational between teenage boys, and crude language and jokes are as common in conversation here as in the West.
All that isn’t to say that the people here are disgusting – they are simply fallen human beings whom Christ would have loved and associated with; or even that they are out of control – I can walk alone in the village without fear of rape. It is just that man’s rules are not strong enough to deal with the impulse to sin. See also Romans 7 and 8.
LikeLike
Something I’ve been hearing about lately is “rape culture”. I don’t fully understand what that means, but part of it is the disconnect between what we say – “Rape is a terrible thing” – & what we do – rapists often only get a figurative “slap on the hand”. I guess what also goes along with it is the idea many have that a scantily-dressed woman is “asking for it”, as well as the downplaying of date rape.
Interesting bit of info I read recently – Rape does not increase in the summer months when women show more skin.
On a whole ‘nuther topic – Some of you were mentioning thumb-sucking the other day. My friend Marilyn said she had thought it was not a good idea to let a baby suck his thumb, but then she saw her baby sucking her thumb on an ultrasound, & changed her mind.
A story that made me sad was told by a friend’s husband years ago. His mother put little mittens on her babies’ sleepers so they couldn’t suck their thumbs, & she also stopped responding to their night cries when they turned 6 weeks old. Not only were they left to cry, they couldn’t even comfort themselves by sucking their thumbs. This just makes me shudder.
LikeLike
I figured it was easier to throw away a “pappy” than to cut off a thumb. Baby Girl’s Pop wourth with her when she was just a few weeks old. He would suck on the pappy for a minute and put it in her mouth and let her suck on it. He said “nobody liked an ol’ dry pappy”. I tried not to think about his emphysemia when he did this.
She had her pappy until we left it at the dentist’s office when she was 21 months old. 😉 Big Girls who had been to the dentist for the first time and had their teefies cleaned didn’t need an ol’ pappy anyhow.
LikeLike
Know what, Kim? Just a couple of weeks ago I saw an actual study that children of parents who put the pacifier in their own mouth had a much lower incidence of asthma or allergies (I forget the details) than parents who washed it if it fell on the floor. Something about the immune system needed something fairly harmless to fight against or it turned against normal things instead.
LikeLike
Abstinence: we teach that here. With the understanding that what went on before has nothing to do with what goes on from now on. Sure, it will have an impact on their behavior, but not on their choices. They are not dirty for what happened before, they are forgiven. Same as we all are in Christ. And we move forward. They are still fighting the idea that they have something to be ashamed of, we keep reminding them that whatever it was, that is why Christ died. When He says we are clean, we are clean.
Thumb sucking. Some of my children sucked their thumbs. I did not care. They have all stopped. Even the ones in their thirties.
LikeLike
Mumsee, there is a book about what you are teaching your children that reinforces that what happened before is past and going forward is what counts. I had it in a Kay Arthur Bible Study but I can’t remember what it is now. (I know you are shocked that I know there is a book)
LikeLike
Kim, there is another one we use called the Bible. I hear Kay Arthur is quite good at explaining the Bible but I tend to have a struggle getting through Bible study books. Perhaps I could get some for the children though, they might enjoy that sort of thing.
LikeLike
Karen, I admit I’m a little ambivalent about “the downplaying of date rape,” because I think the term sometimes elevates improper behavior to the status of a serious, violent crime when it isn’t. In other words, date rape is sometimes “as serious” as stranger rape and sometimes it isn’t. When a girl says a very definite no to her boyfriend and he pushes past it and forces her, that is rape. But when she regularly gets drunk and sleeps with him, and one time she says a giggly no and later calls it rape, I think we do a disservice to the language to put that in the same category as someone forcing his way into a woman’s home and body.
And yes, that means I have a bit of sympathy for the courts that look into the woman’s history to find a defense. Not that a “loose” woman is asking to be raped, but that she’s less likely to have said a clear, understandable no. If she has recently said yes to this particular man, then he should get the benefit of the doubt–not that there should be no chance to prove rape in such a case, but that it should have to be really proven. And what if part of their sex includes her letting him tie her up while she pretends to resist, and one day she really is saying no but he doesn’t understand it? Is it really completely his fault that he didn’t understand? (I’m not “into” bondage, myself; but I did once see “the rules” for it, and they include something of the sort “Choose a ‘safe word’ to mean ‘Stop’ other than ‘No’ or ‘Don’t’ or ‘Stop.'” Which means, I assume, that the “rules” say that if you say one of these words, the person can keep going, that “stop” doesn’t really mean “Stop”! OK, I have a serious problem with that . . . but if you’re playing that “game” and the two of you have different rules, you have a problem, and it’s not fair to blame only one partner for the communication problem!)
I really do think it’s fair to say that a woman who gives mixed messages is more likely to find herself misunderstood. If her every action would lead a husband to think she wants to be bedded, is it really fair if her boyfriend is expected to understand the nuance of “go only as far as I want to go on this particular evening”? Sex was made to be a progressive activity–dress a certain way, give eye contact a certain way, kiss a certain way, touch a certain way, and you’re saying, “Take me.” And if you have meant “Take me” five times in the last two weeks, then you’d better be very, very clear if you don’t mean that tonight. The rules for nonmarital sex these days are supposed to include getting a yes for each progressive step. (“Is it OK if I kiss you? Is it OK if I . . .”) But if you have no moral grounds for setting a specific standard, if you aren’t waiting till marriage to have sex, then it’s really just arbitrary. And sex doesn’t work that way! You kiss him; you undress him; you just do it. You don’t “ask.” If you both have the same standards, or you’ve talked about exactly how far you’re willing to go, and you both stay within those guidelines, it’s OK. But if one night it’s OK if he has sex with you (even violent sex), and the next night you really mean “no,” it’s not reasonable to expect him to know the difference.
Again, I am not saying “Immoral women deserve to be raped.” I am saying we have created a very dangerous world, sexually, and that a woman who opens herself up to sexual activity with someone other than her husband is playing a dangerous game. I feel pity for such a woman . . . enough pity that I long for society to re-stigmatize her behavior a little bit. (And add a stigma to the man who dares take advantage of her, even if she’s willing, while we’re at it. The double standard is unjust.)
Sex outside of marriage is dangerous. It can get you pregnant, it can get you a reputation, it can break your heart, it can give you a disease, and yes, it can put you in the way of physical harm. That does NOT mean that no chaste woman ever gets raped; that clearly isn’t true. But we really don’t do girls any favor when we say that they can wear whatever they want and do whatever they want, and any time they say “Stop!” the guy will stop right that moment. Should he? Yes. But a driver should stop if a drunk pedestrian runs across his path at midnight–but to rely on the driver stopping is foolishness. The reality is that a girl who says no well before sexual activity, and enforces that no, and goes out only with guys who respect that no, is a much safer young woman.
And to the young man: Don’t make her push your hands away; when you marry her, you don’t want to have her in the habit of pushing you away. You want her to have the habit of saying “yes” to you, because you haven’t asked for anything that she can’t honorably answer with a yes. Let her long for the day you reach for her sexually, within marriage, rather than fighting you.
LikeLike
Cheryl – I agree the waters can be muddied by certain circumstances. By “the downplaying of date rape”, I meant when an actual rape occurs, but people think it’s excusable because she went to his room/apartment or was drunk. I wasn’t thinking of cases in which the two had previously had consensual sex.
LikeLike
Roscoro, good points. I will say I still think the civil law (at its best) should reflect the moral law. But that can’t replace a culture that takes God seriously.
I know people say you “can’t legislate morality,” but all legislation, basically, reflects someone’s morals.
That said, we’re fallen creatures to be sure and we will do what we do.
Which is what makes the pure gospel such Good News, amen? 🙂
LikeLike
This has all been quite the subject. I don’t have a son but I do think boys need to be warned that if they are accused of date rate it can ruin their life too. I had a fellow realtor who was showing property to a very nice couple and he was a registered sex offender because he had been accused of date rate in college. In my book a few moments of pleasure isn’t worth a lifetime of having to explain why you can’t live within so many feet of a school, daycare, or church.
Just as much responsibility needs to be put on the males as the females.
I am off for the day on some sort of adventure Mr P has planned. One of those reality show type things where they salvage logs and other things…he knows Kracan (sp?) About to hit the road for a long drive. Kracan’s dad was P’s dive buddy and P spread his ashes under water after he died.
LikeLike
KIm, I didn’t understand none of that. But I hope you have a great time.
🙂
LikeLike
That was me. I don’t know what happened to my “whatchacallit”. I don’t know how to get it back.
LikeLike
Donna, I agree the civil laws must have a moral code, otherwise there would be anarchy. What I was saying was that there has never been a society which truly does hold to their moral code. None of them takes God seriously. How can they? Humans are spiritually dead. People often point to an era like Victorian England or the 50s in North America, as times when society took God seriously. But church membership and Sunday morning attendance are mere outward observances. I have read of the lives of Victoria’s statesmen, and soap operas pale in comparison. My mother grew up in the 50s, and I saw many of her peers come and tell her of horrific sexual abuse in their childhood. Things are getting worse now only in the sense that people are no longer ashamed to display their infamy. They just have ceased being hypocrites.
I often think of Daniel’s prophecy concerning the statue of gold, silver, bronze, iron and feet of iron and clay. Since Rome fell, we have been living in that iron and clay. We cannot expect that any earthly nation will last, no matter how intuitive their laws, no matter how moral their codes, for they are all built on those feet of clay. The only kingdom that will last is the one of individuals from every earthly nation, built on the Stone not made by human hands. It is that kingdom that Christians should be working to build, rather than, as the author of your article said, putting their concern for a political movement above the welfare of other human beings.
LikeLike
Roscuro, I completely agree. And your one comment — “Things are getting worse now only in the sense that people are no longer ashamed to display their infamy. They just have ceased being hypocrites” — makes an excellent point, one I think I was trying to get at.
We now live in a western culture in which immoral behavior is openly celebrated, which in turn has an effect on young people who are confused enough as it is.
Not that a society of hypocrites is better in terms of God’s kingdom. But I do think when a culture at least officially upholds good behavior, the sanctity of marriage, the wrongness of abortion, etc., it creates a more civil climate (and can exert an influence that will protect its children and teens).
One of my gripes with libertarianism is its longstanding (among the more pure at any rate) position on the legalization and decriminalization of drugs that are now illegal.
I believe drug laws, in some instances, protect those who might otherwise be tempted go down that road in their youth.
But you are right in that the kingdoms of this earth are built on sand and will, in time become part of the rubble.
Still, this is God’s world. And that makes it incumbent upon us, as stewards, to take an active interest in promoting good and not evil when it comes to things as mundane as government.
LikeLike
I see I got my avitar back. 🙂
Phos: “Things are getting worse now only in the sense that people are no longer ashamed to display their infamy. They just have ceased being hypocrites.”
It really is worse today, not only that people are not ashamed to display infamy. It is worse.
When I was a kid, in 1941, I used to sell peanuts on the Battery in Charleston. I collected about $4.00, equivalent to $40-50 or more today. I wasn’t afraid. I used to play in downtown Charleston when I was 11-12 years old. I wouldn’t turn a kid loose down there now.
Not all young women were pure, but they were expected to be so. Not all men were gentlemen, but they were trained to be so. (No man would sit down to eat with a hat on, not even at home.) Men cursed and told dirty jokes to each other, but not when women were around. (I mentioned that concerning Sophia Wilder, I was a 41 year old guy before I heard women using such words.) We heard of gang murders in Chicago, but they were rare most other places. There was no drug trade, and kids used to sneak smokes.
There was lots of evil, there always is. But the society was no as corrupt as it is now. And most of the sins we promote today were practiced in secret t those days.
Part of it is the natural effect of the Overton Window. Part of it is the effect of various “liberation” movements.
In foreign affairs, we knew who the bad guys were, and we didn’t try to protect their belief system.
I could go on.
LikeLike
I’m reading a book called Desperate for God on my Kindle.
From a woman’s testimony: “….. Under Islam I was always grieving. We have three months when we grieve for Hussein. When I would feel like this, my peace would leave. I thought this was my fault because I’m such a horrible sinner.
I would parade in the street with the others, walking without any shoes until it was very painful. This was a ritual performed for cleansing.
As ninth graders, we would pitch a tent on the school grounds. Men would come with sticks bearing chains and beat themselves on their backs during worship. They would bring tambourines and drums to make them focus while they flogged their bodies. We women would hit ourselves with only our hands………” etc. “These fanatic groups still exist today.”
This is something I didn’t know about Islam. I am familiar with such practices in Hindu, but not Islam. I know of no such requirement in the Koran.
LikeLike
Donna isn’t the only one who talks to herself.
LikeLike
I was thinking some during church about our discussion on here. I think part of what it boils to is that those teaching our youth decided long ago that the Bible isn’t “enough” for young people. We need to be relevant and interesting.
We could do an in-depth Bible study about what the Bible says about marriage and sex. Everything from “this type of man/woman makes a bad spouse” (look at what the Bible says about contentious women, or men who won’t lead, or dishonest people) to “this is what a good husband / wife looks like,” and from “this is what sex outside of marriage is like” to “this is what God says about the purpose of sex in marriage and the beauty of sex in marriage.” They never heard Paul say, “And such were some of you . . . but now you are washed, you are sanctified”; under Jesus’ blood you are holy.
But we know kids won’t listen to stuff like that. We need skits and visuals they’ll remember. They’ll remember seeing dirt in water more than they’ll remember hearing about taking fire into one’s bosom.
And so we turn around 20, 30, 40 years later and find out, yeah, they remember seeing it. Oh boy, do they remember. But they never heard of the grace of God or the goodness of sex within marriage; they never heard a strong “God said it’s wrong, and that’s really all you need to know” to counter the culture’s powerful “any and all sex is good.”
Maybe Proverbs would be more compelling than silly skits? Maybe Paul’s wisdom is greater than that of a 25-year-old youth pastor trying to scare kids so that they’ll “be good”? Maybe Jesus’ “Go and sin no more” is better than “Nobody will want you if . . .”?
LikeLike
Donna, yes, we should promote good where we can. Too often though, the methods adopted, as in the case of these abstinence-only programs, are Machiavellian – the ends justify the means. That cannot ever be honouring to God.
Chas – I know there was gang violence and the drug trade and teenage pregnancy then, from things I’ve watched and read and heard. Foreign affairs were especially dirty – I have seen endorsements from high officials in 1930s America to the Nazis. As you said, it was just practiced in secret, covered up, not talked about in polite society. Good manners may be more comfortable, but they do not stop inward decay. The phrase about whited sepulchres comes to mind.
Apparently, the Shi’ites practice self-flagellation. It reminds one of the Flagellants in Medieval Europe.
LikeLike
Cheryl – You have hit the nail on the head. It really is only because I know the God of the Bible that I want purity in my life. It isn’t the fear of hell that scares sin out of people, it is the fear of God – the knowledge that He is watching, that He cares what we do. It is the only type of fear that is learned through love, His love.
The recent attempts to reach the youth of the church is really a working of the flesh. It is more for the parents than it is for the children. Parents want to be assured that their children will turn out right, that they won’t die and go to hell. Sadly, the efforts often have the opposite effect of the one they desired. The moment I realised that that homeschooling program – which actually did claim to be able to solve Western society’s problems – was nothing but a Pharisaical shell was when I read Galatians 5:19-20: “Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these…” and realized that Paul wasn’t talking about the effect of worldly activities, but the fruit of fleshly efforts to obtain righteousness through the works of the law.
You see, I could already see those fruits, in my own life, in the lives of others in the program. There is now a widespread backlash against the program (which was in several countries) by former students who declare the teachings to have been heretical (they were), the rules to have been legalistic (they were) and the methods to have been abusive (they were, and I’m not talking about corporal punishment, i.e., spanking, applied by parents). The same result will happen with similar attempts to sustain or regain morality without changing hearts.
LikeLike
Chas is right, I think, that things are worse now; but throughout history you see these peaks and valleys of wickedness and less wickedness, if you will. We’ve perhaps come from several decades or more (prior to say the 1950s?) of less wickedness to (now) more wickedness.
And we’re not nearly as wicked as the days of Nero. Not yet, anyway.
Increasingly, our corporate wickedness becomes more apparent as our government and our laws begin to endorse, embrace and reflect those ‘standards,’ if you can call them that. What was previously recognized as evil now is being called “good” — officially and formally by those who are our civil authorities.
Among government’s role is to restrain evil and protect its people. So in that context, I still hold that being involved in the affairs of the state is an important calling for all Christians. It means that we love our neighbor enough to protect him and his children against a government that has the power to codify evil as good.
LikeLike
The thing that’s hindering us from correcting our culture is a real revival starting with a spirit of repentance. We had a spiritual revival in the fifties, led by Billy Graham and many others. (I was influenced by a radio program called “The Old Fashined Revival Hour” led by Charles Fuller. That is, there were others, Oral Roberts being one.) Many were saved on an individual basis and churches grew. However, there was no spirit of repentance. It was during the time when many individuals were being saved that stores began opening on Sunday, alcohol was sold in most restaurants, Frank Sinatra sang, “what ain’t I got? You know damm well”, and movies had to be rated for parental guidance. Saving lots of souls is good, but it won’t do the culture any good until the Spirit convicts us that sin is a serious thing.
LikeLike
Donna – To protect against a government? The apostles Paul and Peter said that government was God’s instrument to protect the good and punish the evil and they lived (and died) in the days of Nero! We tend to forget the political and societal context in which these words were written. They knew the insecurity of their position as both Jews and Christians in a that decadent Empire but they still meant it.
“Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God’s ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.” – Romans 13:1-7
“Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.
For so is the will of God, that with well doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish men:
As free, and not using your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God.
Honour all men. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honour the king.” – I Peter 2:13-17
LikeLike
In a governmental system that is based on democratic rule, yes. 🙂 Christians should not shirk their duty to participate in such a system.
We submit to the authorities (until it calls us to disobey God). We may not like our government much of the time. But we render unto Cesar. But that doesn’t mean we aren’t also citizens of our nation and don’t have a right — and a duty — to participate in that to extent that we can encourage the good of all.
LikeLike
I’m not at all suggesting this is a “replacement” for true revival. Chas is right, we drift as we do because we have lost the fear of God as a people.
Nevertheless, I will still trudge out to the ballot box and cast the best vote I can. The results are up to a sovereign God in his providence. The government we have can either be a blessing or a curse to its people.
LikeLike
I am not saying Christians cannot be politically involved. It is one of many professions that a Christian can operate in. But in allowing themselves to be politicized to one side or another, they lose the flexibility, the liberty of serving God in whatever capacity He places them in. Imagine if one of Obama’s czars was a Christian, appointed for his ability in a certain field. It is not impossible – Ahab’s steward served God and saved God’s prophets under the very nose of his master’s bloody-minded wife; Esther was the wife of a king who had almost absolute power; John Wycliffe was protected by John of Gaunt, a ruthless and ambitious son of the King of England; Martin Luther gained the ear of the Elector Fredrick. But because Christians have become synonymous with one political side, with only certain movements, it has become highly improbable in our day and age.
LikeLike
Well, that’s something we all need to guard against. I doubt I was alone in calling for people to pray quite specifically for the president when he was elected in ’08, especially that he and his family would find a strong church where the gospel was preached. I don’t know if he’s a believer or not. I would never say he was not since he does profess to be a Christian. I’d simply say that many of his policies (and those of his party) now are contrary to biblical positions, abortion probably chief among them.
I’m not a fan of “americanized” Christianity. But neither to I see this kingdom in which we live as insignificant to God.
And I also think God gives people different passions in this life. We must never forget that the word of God is first in any activity we pursue. But some will be more called to public service than others.
I suppose I’m a bit weary of the more severe forms of backlash — though I do understand it, sort of — against pretty much any civic involvement among believers now because of missteps in the past.
There’s a way to do it right. But yeah, probably some of us get caught up more than others in the political waves of the time.
LikeLike
Public involvement, not service, I meant to say — although public service also is a valid Christian pursuit, of course, including elected office.
Guess we’ll have to agree to disagree, though I don’t think what you’re saying conflicts with what I probably agree with as well. But I guess I hit a tender point or something. Sorry.
I realize there’s a growing interest in a more radical view of the ‘two kingdom’ theology — I think we all understand there are two kingdoms we’re talking about here, but I’d just object to an argument that says the earthly kingdom of the “here and now” is just not that important or that Christians should somehow withdraw from much of that.
If the U.S. someday gets a government that is truly (and officially) hostile to the gospel, so be it. God judges nations and few of us here would say the U.S. is immune to that.
LikeLike
Donna – If I hurt you, I am truly sorry, as I respect your judgement and opinions. If I have a tender point, it is that I have seen and heard truly ungodly statements come from Christians about those they oppose politically: threatening violent resistance, stating baldly that the end does justify the means, vitriolic character assassinations, the list goes on. If I didn’t know my Lord was different, I would be inclined to drop the whole concern – I really would. Also, I am learning something of how ‘living a quiet and peaceable life’ is possible even under a government that isn’t the ideal.
LikeLike
No hurt here. And I agree, talk of violence is completely out of line and inappropriate. So is disrespectful name-calling by those who profess to be Christian. Some conservative “commentators” who proclaim to be Christian are people who make me cringe more often than not.
Remember, too, that U.S. politics are a rough and tumble business — and everyone jumps in with passionate abandon, especially every 4 years but certainly not limited to that timeframe. It’s part of our national makeup. It could be our favorite national pastime now that baseball isn’t followed as much as it once was. 🙂
I grew up in a very politically aware home and entered a career that also keeps me intensely aware of the political class.
We’ll never have an ideal government — but we’ve had a pretty good run in the U.S. since its founding. Some of the angst simply reflects the sense that those days have come to an end. But Christ’s church will prevail.
LikeLike
Be careful of those tornadoes, those of you in the plains. 😦
LikeLike
Just glancing thru and it’s kinda odd seeing Chas and the ladies talking about sex. Careful, Chas, don’t want to ruin your chances for the presidency in 2016.
Be careful of those tornadoes, those of you in the plains.
Thank you, Donna. As we were driving home from “the city”, I saw dark clouds in the direction of our town and commented we might get wet. Just then my wife got a weather text alert saying our county had a “severe thunderstorm warning”. When we got here, it looked like the severe storm was north of us (we live in the southern part of our county). Tonight and tomorrow seem like it will be at its worst.
LikeLike
And while I’m here and it’s available, I;ll take #57.
LikeLike
Eeek. Dishes are flying next door, it’s quite the shouting match (in Spanish) going on. Time to close my windows and head to the dog park.
(We love it when Chas talks sexy. 😉 )
LikeLike
Not only is there a crazy argument going on next door, but I keep getting these annoying robo-calls about Tuesday’s LA city election. Hate those calls (I don’t answer them, but I can still here the messages being left).
LikeLike
please pray our pastor is stepping down the church is down to about 12 people. He asked me to send an email to the Bishop offering my services. So please pray folks, My wife and me talked about how this may be God’s way of moving back in the Pastor Role.. Since I have lost my jobs, I have been asking God what does He want me to do.
LikeLike
but I can still here the messages being left
Ooh! The reporter has a typo. I thought I was the only one who often writes “here” when I mean “hear”. That must be some argument to confuse the reporter! But maybe she is used to depending on a proofreader.
LikeLike
Ah, Peter, that’s not the first time. 🙂 here for hear, their for there — whatever for whatever.
LikeLike
Now way I’m gettin’ involved in those conversations. Chas can handle that. 😯
But I did enjoy listening to what the ladies had to say on the matter. 🙂
Pretty smart bunch we have here. 🙂
LikeLike
Chas #1,
Tonawanda (no hyphens) is a suburb of Buffalo, NY. I think it’s funny that your camp has such a similar name!
LikeLike