|
Scott's Blog - 4/30/07
Life's Most Lasting Lesson
If we could imagine the Word as a Heavenly Barnes and
Noble's, what section would you most like be found in?
The prophecy buffs would be easy to find, right on the corner
of Daniel and Revelation. Those no nonsense, down to business
types would be enjoying a double cappuccino over in the James
section. There would probably be quite a crowd of natural born
encouragers hanging out in the Gospel of John stacks. We would
see the deep thinkers would be parked in their comfy couches
over in the book of Romans.
But over in the corner marked "Ecclesiastes", well,
there would probably be plenty of good seats still available.
Let's face it, this sad book, written by an aging King
Solomon is not light reading. The life lessons learned by a man
who had too much of God to be happy in the world, and too much
of the world to be happy in God can be quite a downer. But since
Ecclesiastes was written by one of the most brilliant men to
ever live on this planet, there are some amazing insights to be
found in its pages.
Try this one on for size.
Sorrow is better than laughter,
For when a
face is sad a heart may be happy.
The mind of the wise is in the house of
mourning,
While the
mind of fools is in the house of pleasure. (Ecclesiastes 7:3-4)
Now Solomon isn't suggesting we go through life with our
lower lip dragging on the ground. But there are certain
absolutely invaluable lessons we can learn only by going through
hard times.
A classic example of a perspective on what really matters in
life gained by paying some pretty substantial tuition in the
school of hard knocks moved on the wire services today.
|
WASHINGTON, April 30, 2007
|
Tony Snow Happy To Be Back, White House Press Secretary Returns To Work After Cancer Surgery - CBS News
DAVIDSON, N.C. (AP) - White House Press Secretary Tony
Snow, who'll soon begin chemotherapy for a cancer recurrence,
told fellow alumni at Davidson College Saturday that he felt
great and plans to return to work on Monday.
"No, it doesn't mean I'm going to be gray, shriveled
and in the fetal position," he told about 600 alumni and
family members at a 30-year reunion. "To my classmates
who think I'm going to lose my great hair, forget about
it."
Snow, 51, has been on medical leave following a March 27
announcement that doctors determined a growth in his abdominal
area was cancerous and had metastasized, or spread, to the
liver.
Snow had his colon removed in 2005 and underwent six months
of chemotherapy after being diagnosed with colon cancer.
He graduated from Davidson in 1977. While Snow originally
planned just to attend the reunion, Davidson officials said he
agreed to speak to students on Friday and alumni on Saturday,
The Charlotte Observer reported.
During an impromptu question and answer session Saturday,
Snow said he has become closer to God and his family because
of the cancer.
"I am actually enjoying everything more than I ever
have," he said. "God hasn't promised us tomorrow,
but He has promised us eternity."
Tony Snow Says Cancer Has Brought Him Closer to God, Family Christianpost.com
What Solomon expressed, Tony Snow has realized. We tend to
carry with us an illusion of indestructability. Death is
something that happens to other people, certainly not us. The
reality of eternity seems a step removed from our thinking.
And then the phone rings. The doctor says, "I'm
sorry..". Everything changes.
But one thing never will - God's amazing love for us.
What then shall we say to these things? If God is
for us, who can be against us? He who did not spare His
own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not
with Him also freely give us all things? Who shall bring a
charge against God’s elect? It is God who justifies.
Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died,
and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand
of God, who also makes intercession for us. Who shall separate
us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or
distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril,
or sword? As it is written:
“ For Your sake we
are killed all day long;
We are accounted as
sheep for the slaughter.”
Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through
Him who loved us. For I am persuaded that neither death nor
life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things
present nor things to come, nor height nor depth, nor any
other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the
love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord. (Romans
8:31-39)
The person who lives this life with a weather eye on the
next, is the person who ultimately will enjoy this life to the
fullest.
Scott's Blog - 4/27/07
Are You a Bapticostal?
img_0186
There is an old saying that imparts a time tested bit of
wisdom - "In every argument there are three sides - Yours,
mine and the right one."
In my journey through the Christian life I have found this to
be inescapably true.
There have been times when I have taken bold stands on
controversial issues that had more to do with respect for
certain earthly teachers than a clear understanding of the
Scriptures. I have even taken positions on certain issues mainly
because I didn't particularly care for a particularly rude and
offensive proponent of the opposite point of view.
Let's face it, the desire to please certain people, to belong
to a certain group, or to put a healthy distance between
ourselves and others we don't respect are not the most effective
ways to discover how God looks at a particular issue.
Take for instance my experience with the issue of the gifts
of the Holy Spirit. Talk about an issue that tends to generate a
lot more heat than light in Christian circles!
Early on in my Christian experience I didn't see what the big
hubbub was about. I read I Corinthians 12-14. OK. There are
special gifts that are given to believers through the power of
the Holy Spirit (Chapter 12). Whatever gift or gifts we have are
worthless without love (I Corinthians 13). Here's how the gifts
should be practiced decently and in order (Chapter 14).
No big deal. Relax and enjoy.
That is until one traumatic incident changed the whole way I
looked at the gifts.
I was just starting to attend a non denominational church in
Ventura, California. The pastor was a gifted evangelist. I mean,
this guy could do an invitation at the end of a sermon that
would bring everyone in the place who had a functioning
conscience to the front for prayer!
The only problem was with the "decently and in
order" part.
Some Sundays things would be mellow and laid back. The Word
of God would be shared in power. People would get saved and
altar call regulars like me would go forward at the end of the
service and be blessed.
Other times, however..Yikes!
Pew jumpin', roll-on-the floor-old-time-religion would break
out.
I'd ask an elder, "What was that?"
"I don't know, but it sure felt good!", would be
the reply.
Then came the fateful day. My Dad, trying his best to figure
out this "born again" thing his son was into, asked if
he could go to church with me sometime.
"Great! Let's go tonight!"
I was so excited! I had been praying for my Dad since I
came to know the Lord. He was nominally Episcopalian, but had
told us often that religion was something for little old ladies
and people who didn't sleep well at night.
My Dad? At church? What an answer to prayer!
Or at least I thought it was. Then this possibility dawned on
me - What if tonight was "Wild Kingdom Night" in
Ventura?
No! The thought was too traumatic to entertain. "You
wouldn't do that to me, would You Lord?"
And so we went to church. I was as nervous as the proverbial
long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs.
The service began with the standard opening song,
"All hail the power of Jesus' name! Let angels
prostrate fall! Bring forth the royal diadem and crown Him Lord
of Lords!"
No craziness. No outbursts. The residents of the Wild Kingdom
seemed to be in hibernation.
Announcements began. Let's face it - announcements are
probably the least spiritual part of any church service. I
relaxed. Just a couple of more songs and we'll be home free to
the sermon!
Then it happened.
Right in the middle of a particularly inspiring word
concerning the upcoming church picnic, a rather large woman in a
floral print Hawaiian Muumuu stood up right in front of us. She
threw back her huge arms, narrowly missing my Dad! She then
proceeded to bellow out in an unknown tongue with the melodic
tone of a wounded seal.
I stared straight ahead, every muscle in my neck tensed. I
couldn't bring myself to look over at how my Episcopalian raised
Dad was reacting to this display.
When I finally peeked over, I saw my Dad roll his eyes and
slowly shake his head.
That which I had greatly feared had come to pass.
Billy Graham could have been the guest pastor that night and
it wouldn't have made a dent in his heart. The damage had been
done.
I walked out into the damp and foggy coastal California night
at a loss for words. I only knew this: To paraphrase Scarlett
O'Hara in "Gone With the Wind", I said to myself,
"With God as my witness, I will never be embarrassed like
that in church ever again!"
And so, I allowed one overly enthusiastic woman in a floral
print Muumuu to figuratively rip I Corinthians 12 and 14 out of
my Bible.
I immediately went and joined a church where they taught that
the gifts of the Holy Spirit (apart maybe from "helps"
or "administrations") had died off with the last
apostle.
I would argue strongly for that position with friends who
were from the other side of the church fence on the issue.
It would drive me crazy when a particularly good friend would
ask, "Where in the Bible does it say that the gifts of the
Spirit aren't for today?"
I would try to piece together a case from I Corinthians 13:8
("where there are tongues they shall cease"), but in
all honesty my position was more about passion generated by bad
experience than principle.
It took some real rocking in my world to bring me back to an
important consideration. Just because some people misuse and
even abuse the gifts of the Spirit, does that change anything
the Bible has to say on the subject?
The crucial missing piece of the puzzle on both sides of this
issue is found again in a remarkably simple set of instructions
found in I Corinthians 14.
Therefore if the whole church comes together in one place,
and all speak with tongues, and there come in those who are
uninformed or unbelievers, will they not say that you are out of
your mind?
How is it then, brethren? Whenever you come together, each
of you has a psalm, has a teaching, has a tongue, has a
revelation, has an interpretation. Let all things be done for
edification. For God is not the author of confusion
but of peace, as in all the churches of the saints. Therefore,
brethren, desire earnestly to prophesy, and do not forbid to
speak with tongues. Let all things be done decently and in
order. (I Corinthians 14:23, 26, 33, 39-40)
What it took years for the Lord to teach me was that truth
wasn't to be found in reaction, but in revelation - the clear
teaching of His Word. There is a place for the supernatural
gifts of the Spirit. But the Holy Spirit doesn't move
chaotically. He will only move in harmony with His Word.
I don't want to find myself defending some emotion driven dog
and pony show that exalts the emotions and does little to build
true devotion to Jesus. But neither do I want to become a member
of the "frozen chosen", so wise in my own eyes that I
feel like I can tell God what and when His Spirit can
work.
Both sides of this controversy seem to get irritated with me
these days. My Baptist friends call me Pentecostal and my
Pentecostal friends call me a Baptist. I guess that makes me a
Bapticostal!
But if we can set aside our commitment to experience and ask
God to teach us what His Word has to say on the subject we can
return to a beautiful simplicity and enjoyment of the true work
of the Spirit in our lives.
And what could be better than that?
(For a remarkably well balanced book on the Gifts of the Holy
Spirit, visit our "Resource Offers" section and order
a copy of "Living Water" by Pastor Chuck Smith
- You'll be glad you did!)
Scott's Blog - 4/26/07
Can We Have Cake and Eat It Too Without Getting a
Spiritual Bellyache?
“It is the knowledge and experience of the Incarnation, the
wisdom and warnings given by Jesus in the Gospels, and not least
the Resurrection that in the final analysis are all that
matters."
Hard to argue with that.
Unless you consider the source and what he stands for.
This quote comes from Dr. Simon Conway Morris, a British paleontologist
and professor of evolutionary paleontology at Cambridge
University in England. He was honored this week with the Trotter
Prize for outstanding work in the field of origins studies.
Morris is most noted for his research on the "Cambrian
Explosion", a layer of fossil strata that indicates an
incredible variety of highly developed life forms came on the
scene in a remarkably abrupt manner. His research is thoroughly
grounded in Darwinian evolutionary concepts, to the point where
he has spoken out publicly against the concept of Intelligent
Design.
Yet he claims not only to be a Christian, but a believer in
the actual historical resurrection of Jesus from the dead.
The big question - can we have it both ways?
Morris certainly thinks so. Along with his seemingly biblical
statement of faith, he delivered a lecture at Baylor University
this week entitled "Darwin's Compass: How Evolution
Discovers the Song of Creation." Doug Huntington of the
Christian Post provides this review:
In it, the “origins” expert made sure to cite the
evidence in favor of evolution over intelligent design – a
theory that argues life is a result of an ultimate
“designer” – which he disagrees with.Christian 'Origins' Expert Promotes Evolution at Texas Universities Christianpost.com
Yet in almost the same breath he states, "There is no
reason an evolutionary biologist could not subscribe to
something transcendent," explained Morris to the Baylor
Lariat, Baylor University’s student newspaper. "It would
be a mistake to assume that all scientists are materialists, and
they are not."Christian 'Origins' Expert Promotes Evolution at Texas Universities Christianpost.com
So can we have it both ways? Is there a balancing act that
can be mastered between an evolutionary world view and
confidence in the teaching of Jesus?
Some have tried to pull this off by trying to put up a wall
between spiritual and physical reality. "When I want to
find out about Heaven, I turn to the Scriptures. When I want to
find out about Earth I turn to science." Or so the argument
goes.
And that approach just might work - if we ignore the
Scriptures.
Inconvenient truths from the mouth of Jesus like,
"If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how
will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?" (John
3:12)
Jesus refused to allow His truth to be pigeon holed into some
ultimately irrelevant corner of our consciousness. What the
Bible tells us about earthly events, including our origins, is
just as trustworthy as what it has to say about our final
destination.
What has Jesus told us about "earthly things"?
Rather than seeing humanity as an "inevitable" product of
nearly random chance and millions of years of natural selection,
Jesus said:
"But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made
them male and female."(Mark 10:6)
Natural selection as the driving force of creation also runs
into some major problems both scientifically and biblically.
Following the end of the sixth day of creation, God had an
interesting comment on the state of things.
Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it
was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth
day. (Genesis 1:31)
The phrase, "very good" in Hebrew is
emphatic. All creation was exactly as God intended it to be.
If we try to wedge evolutionism into this statement we run
into a theological brick wall. What kind of God would look at a
creation driven by "natural selection" - that is not
only the survival of the fittest, but the continual death of the
unfit, and pronounce it "very good"? The kind of God
who would set up a system of misery, suffering, "nature red
in fang and claw" is not the God Who reveals Himself to us
in the Bible.
What about the death and resurrection of Jesus? Can this be
held in the same breath as Darwinism?
Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world,
and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because
all sinned— (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin
is not imputed when there is no law. Nevertheless death reigned
from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according
to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of
Him who was to come. But the free gift is not like the
offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more
the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus
Christ, abounded to many. And the gift is not like that
which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which
came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but
the free gift which came from many offenses resulted
in justification. For if by the one man’s offense death
reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance
of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life
through the One, Jesus Christ.)
Therefore, as through one man’s offense judgment came
to all men, resulting in condemnation, even so through one
Man’s righteous act the free gift came to all men,
resulting in justification of life. For as by one man’s
disobedience many were made sinners, so also by one Man’s
obedience many will be made righteous. (Romans 6:12-19)
It doesn't take much deep thought to see that the Bible tells
us death was the result of Adam's sin, not the driving force of
God's creative process. Defeating sin, the ultimate cause of
death in this world was why Jesus became a man at the
incarnation. Taking advantage of God's victory over sin and
death was the main point of Jesus' teaching. Defeating the last
enemy, death, was the reason for His resurrection.
Where does any of this fit into Darwinism?
It doesn't.
And so we must make a choice. Who will we believe?
The funny thing about Dr. Morris' "origins
studies" is that they must be taken on faith. No one was
there to witness the "Cambrian explosion". The speculations
the good Doctor is lauded for are neither testable or
repeatable. They took place in an inaccessible past. All
conclusions are based on unprovable assumptions. They must be
taken on faith.
On the other hand, we must ask, "Why should we believe
Jesus?"
Aside from a sinless, miraculous life that fulfilled over 100
specific Old Testament prophecies, and a historically verifiable
resurrection from the dead, I can't think of much.
What we believe about origins must go hand in hand with what
we believe about the One who was behind it all. Jesus Christ,
the Creator, has given us insight enough to see all things from
His consistent, trustworthy world view.
Let's not fall into the trap of trying to please the God
rejecting world by embracing a view of origins founded on
atheism, while trying to please the God Who created all things
at the same time.
It simply can't be done.
Scott's Blog - 4/25/07
A Privileged Planet?
It is an established fact of human nature that people tend to
see only the things they really want to see. Proof positive of
this phenomenon happens every Spring when fans of the Chicago
Cubs inevitably say "This year is gonna be our year!"
By the first of June the hard facts of life and the disabled
list will rob us of our illusions.
But this tendency to either ignore the facts or embellish
reasons for hope beyond all reason isn't just the province of
misguided major league baseball fans. It can happen with the
white lab coat set as well. Consider this eye catching headline
story - complete with realistic looking sci-fi graphics.
ESO
Artist's impression of the planetary system around the red
dwarf Gliese 581. Using the instrument HARPS on the ESO 3.6-m
telescope, astronomers have uncovered 3 planets, all of
relative low-mass: 5, 8 and 15 Earth masses.
Scientists find most Earthlike planet yet - Space.com - MSNBC.com
WASHINGTON (AP) -- European astronomers have found
the most Earth-like planet outside our solar system, and here's
what it might be like to live there:
The "sun" wouldn't burn brightly. It would hang
close, large and red in the sky, glowing faintly like a charcoal
ember. And it probably would never set if you lived on the sunny
side of the planet.
You could have a birthday party every 13 days because
that's how fast this new planet circles its sun-like star. But
watch the cake -- you'd weigh a whole lot more than you do on
Earth.
You might be able to keep your current wardrobe. The
temperature in this alien setting will likely be a lot like
Earth's -- not too hot, not too cold.
And that "just right" temperature is one key
reason astronomers think this planet could conceivably house
life outside our solar system. It's also as close to Earth-sized
as telescopes have ever spotted. Both elements make it the first
potentially habitable planet besides Earth or Mars.
Astronomers who announced the discovery of the new planet
Tuesday say this puts them closer to answering the cosmic
question: Are we alone?
"It's a significant step on the way to finding
possible life in the universe," said University of Geneva
astronomer Michel Mayor, one of 11 European scientists on the
team that found the new body. "It's a nice discovery. We
still have a lot of questions."
There's still a lot that is unknown about the new planet,
which could be deemed inhospitable to life once more is learned
about it. But as galaxies go, it's practically a neighbor. At
only 120 trillion miles away, the red dwarf star that this
planet circles is one of the 100 closest to Earth.
The results of the discovery have not been published but
have been submitted to the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.
Alan Boss, who works at the Carnegie Institution of
Washington where a U.S. team of astronomers competed in the hunt
for an Earth-like planet, called it "a major milestone in
this business."
The planet was discovered by the European Southern
Observatory's telescope in La Silla, Chile, which has a special
instrument that splits light to find wobbles in different
wavelengths. Those wobbles can reveal the existence of other
worlds.
What they revealed is a planet circling the red dwarf
star, Gliese 581. Red dwarfs are low-energy, tiny stars that
give off dim red light and last longer than stars like our sun.
Until a few years ago, astronomers didn't consider these stars
as possible hosts of planets that might sustain life.
The discovery of the new planet, named 581 c, is sure to
fuel studies of planets circling similar dim stars. About 80
percent of the stars near Earth are red dwarfs.
The new planet is about five times heavier than Earth, and
gravity there would be 1.6 times as strong as Earth's. Its
discoverers aren't certain if it is rocky like Earth or if its a
frozen ice ball with liquid water on the surface. If it is rocky
like Earth, which is what the prevailing theory proposes, it has
a diameter about 11/2 times bigger than our planet. If it is an
iceball, as Mayor suggests, it would be even bigger.
Based on theory, 581 c should have an atmosphere, but
what's in that atmosphere is still a mystery and if it's too
thick that could make the planet's surface temperature too hot,
Mayor said.
However, the research team believes the average
temperature to be somewhere between 32 and 104 degrees and that
set off celebrations among astronomers.
Until now, all 220 planets astronomers have found outside
our solar system have had the "Goldilocks problem."
They've been too hot, too cold or just plain too big and
gaseous, like uninhabitable Jupiter.
The new planet seems just right -- or at least that's what
scientists think.
"This could be very important," said NASA
astrobiology expert Chris McKay, who was not part of the
discovery team. "It doesn't mean there is life, but it
means it's an Earth-like planet in terms of potential
habitability."
Eventually astronomers will rack up discoveries of dozens,
maybe even hundreds of planets considered habitable, the
astronomers said. But this one -- simply called "c" by
its discoverers when they talk among themselves -- will go down
in cosmic history as No. 1.
Besides having the right temperature, the new planet is
probably full of liquid water, hypothesizes Stephane Udry, the
discovery team's lead author and another Geneva astronomer. But
that is based on theory about how planets form, not on any
evidence, he said.
"Liquid water is critical to life as we know
it," co-author Xavier Delfosse of Grenoble University in
France, said in a statement. "Because of its temperature
and relative proximity, this planet will most probably be a very
important target of the future space missions dedicated to the
search for extraterrestrial life. On the treasure map of the
Universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an
X."
Other astronomers cautioned it's too early to tell whether
there is water.
"You need more work to say it's got water or it
doesn't have water," said retired NASA astronomer Steve
Maran, press officer for the American Astronomical Society.
"You wouldn't send a crew there assuming that when you get
there, they'll have enough water to get back."
The new planet's star system is a mere 20.5 light years
away, making Gliese 581 one of the 100 closest stars to Earth.
It's so dim, you can't see it without a telescope, but it's
somewhere in the constellation Libra, which is low in the
southeastern sky during the mid-evening in the Northern
Hemisphere.
Even so, Maran noted, "We don't know how to get to
those places in a human lifetime."
But, oh, the view, if you could. The planet is 14 times
closer to the star it orbits. Udry figures the red dwarf star
would hang in the sky at a size 20 times larger than our moon.
And it's likely, but still not known, that the planet doesn't
rotate, so one side would always be sunlit and the other dark.
Two teams of astronomers, one in Europe and one in the
United States, have been racing to be the first to find a planet
like 581 c outside the solar system.
The European team looked at 100 different stars using a
tool called HARPS (High Accuracy Radial Velocity for Planetary
Searcher) to find this one planet, said Xavier Bonfils of the
Lisbon Observatory, one of the co-discoverers.
Much of the effort to find Earth-like planets has focused
on stars like our sun with the challenge being to find a planet
the right distance from the star it orbits. About 90 percent of
the time, the European telescope focused its search more on
sun-like stars, Udry said.
A few weeks before the European discovery earlier this
month, a scientific paper in the journal Astrobiology theorized
a few days that red dwarf stars were good candidates.
"Now we have the possibility to find many more,"
Bonfils said.
Scientists find most Earth-like planet yet - CNN.com
As we have mentioned before in this space, the announcement
of discoveries of this kind are often loaded with enough weasel
words and qualifiers to impress the most ethically challenged
used car salesman. I was surprised the headline didn't read:
Earth-Like Planet Complete With Rocky Soil and
Liquid Water Found!*
* Void where prohibited. Licensed speculators only. Your
discovery may vary.
The driving assumption behind speculative stories like these
is pretty easy to spot. There is no Creator. Life on Earth
happened by chance. Since the rise of life isn't special, and it
happened here it must happen everywhere.
So is our planet "nothing special"?
The facts that we can observe argue in precisely the opposite
direction. Consider this stunning summary.
The Earth: Unique in All the Universe
by Jerry Bergman, Ph.D
The Scriptures declare that "God ...
formed the earth ... to be inhabited" (Isaiah 45:18). An
impartial study of the Earth soon convinces the student that
there is a tremendous amount of meaning behind this simple
statement.
The Earth
The Earth is the only planet circling our
sun on which life as we know it could (and does) exist. A
brief glance at the Earth and all other known planets finds
many startling contrasts. The Earth as a planet consists
mostly of iron, oxygen, sulfur, silicon, magnesium, and nickel
(total, 98%), with the other two percent consisting of about a
hundred other elements. Like no other planet, ours is covered
with green vegetation, blue-green seas, streams, rivers,
mountains, and deserts which produce a spectacular variety of
color and texture—all other known planets are covered with
lifeless soil which varies only according to slight movements
made by wind or mild air currents. Completely barren, the
surface of most planets is totally in contrast to the Earth's
with its blue lakes, green oceans, huge land masses and
500,000 islands. Even from a distance, its colors are quite
lively—bright greens, blues and whites—whereas the surface
of all other known planets are rather dull.
Some type of life is found in every niche
on the Earth. Even in the extremely cold Antarctica, hardy
microscopic beings exist in ponds, tiny wingless insects live
in patches of moss and lichen, and even two types of plants
flower yearly. From the top of the atmosphere to the bottom of
the oceans, from the coldest part of the poles to the warmest
part of the equator, life persists here. To this day no sign
of life has been found on any other planet.
The Earth is immense—8,000 miles in
diameter and weighing roughly 6. 6xl02l tons. If
the Earth traveled much faster in its 292-million-mile-long
orbit around the sun, centrifugal force would pull it away
from the sun, and if too far, all life would cease to exist.
If it traveled slightly slower, he Earth would move closer to
the sun, and if it moved too close, all life would likewise
perish. The Earth's 365 day, 5-hour, 48-minute and
45.51-second-round-trip is accurate to a thousandth of a
second! If the yearly average temperature on Earth rose or
fell only a few degrees, most life on it would soon roast or
freeze. This change would upset the water-ice and other
balances, with disastrous results. If it rotated on its axis
slower, all life would die in time, either by freezing at
night because of lack of heat from the sun, or by burning
during the day from too much sun.
The Sun
Of all the energy the sun gives off, only
one billionth of its daily output is picked up by the Earth.
The sun does provide the Earth with more than 130 trillion
horse power each day, about fifty thousand horse power for
each current resident. Even though there are likely several
hundred billion galaxies in the universe, there is only one
atom for every 88 gallons of space, which means most of the
universe (the vast majority, actually) is empty space!
If the Moon were much nearer to Earth, one
result would be huge tides which would overflow onto the
lowlands and erode the mountains (and with the continents
leveled, it is estimated that water would cover the entire
surface to the depth of a mile and a half)! If the Earth was
not tilted 23° on its axis, but was at a 90° angle in
reference to the sun, we would not have four seasons. Without
seasons, life would soon not be able to exist here—the poles
would lie in eternal twilight, and water vapor from the oceans
would be carried by the wind towards both the north and south,
and would freeze when close enough to the poles. In time, huge
continents of snow and ice would pile up in the polar regions,
leaving most of the Earth a dry desert. Eventually the oceans
would disappear and rainfall would cease. The accumulated
weight of ice at the poles would cause the equator to bulge
and, as a result, the rotation of the Earth would drastically
change.
The Miracle of Water
Another example which illustrates the
rigidity of environmental variations for life to exist is that
of water. The Earth is the only planet with huge bodies of
water—70% of its surface area consists of oceans, lakes, and
seas surrounding huge bodies of land. The few planets that
have water contain only moisture floating as vapor on their
surface, not large bodies of liquid water as on Earth.
Water is unique in that it absorbs large
amounts of heat without much alteration in its temperature.
Its absorption speed is extremely rapid—about ten times as
fast as steel. During the day, the seas rapidly soak up a
great deal of heat, thus the Earth stays fairly cool. At
night, the oceans release the vast amounts of heat that they
soaked up during the day, which combined with atmospheric
effects, keeps the surface from getting too cold at night. If
it were not for the tremendous amount of water on the Earth,
there would be far greater day and night temperature
variations. Many parts of the surface would be hot enough to
boil water in the day and the same part would be cold enough
to freeze water at night. Water is an excellent temperature
stabilizer. The large oceans on Earth are a vital part of our
survival!
The large amount of water on the Earth
could create problems, though. If something is heated, it
expands, and when cooled, contracts. Thus, given two objects
of the same size and material, if one is cooler, it will be
heavier. This may not seem like a problem, but in the case of
water, it would be, if it were not for a rare anomaly. Water,
as almost all other substances, contracts when cooled, but in
contrast to virtually all other materials (there are very few
exceptions, such as rubber and antimony), it contracts when
cooled only until it reaches 40 Centigrade then it, amazingly,
expands until it freezes. If water continued to contract when
cooled, it would become heavier and thus sink to the bottom of
the ocean. Further, when water turned to ice, it would
likewise sink to the bottom of the ocean. One result of this
is that the ocean bottom would be extremely cold—and many
fish would die. In time, more and more of the ocean would
become ice as more froze on the surface, sank, and accumulated
at the bottom.
Thus, for much of the Earth, the ice that
forms in seas, oceans, and lakes stays near the surface where
the sun and the warm water below melts it in the summer. Water
that is warmer than 4°, being heavier, sinks to the bottom
and warms the depth of the oceans. This process of surface
water warming and sinking to the bottom, plus the Coriolis
effect produces ocean currents. These currents, among other
things, insure that most of the ocean stays in a liquid form.
Indeed, "The Lord by wisdom hath founded the earth; by
understanding hath He established the heavens." Proverbs
3:19.
The Miracle of Air
On the land, the opposite happens. Air,
after it is warmed, rises—and the air close to the surface
of the Earth is heated via light energy from the sun. The air
near the surface then rises upward. The result is that the air
near the Earth's surface maintains a temperature in which life
can exist. If air acted the same way that water did, the
temperature on the Earth's surface would be unbearable—and
life could not survive for very long. The temperature a few
hundred feet above the surface, on the other hand, would be
quite cold and, likewise, life could also not exist there. The
only habitable region would be a thin slice of air, but even
here life could not exist for long. Plants and trees which
would be necessary to support the life in the atmosphere could
not survive as they would be in the cold zone. Thus birds
would have no resting place, or food, water or oxygen. But air
rises when heated and thus life can exist on the Earth.
The movement of warm air from the surface
rising upward creates air currents (wind) which are an
important part of the Earth's ecological system. They carry
away carbon dioxide from areas which overproduce, such as
cities, and move oxygen to areas in need of it, as large urban
population centers.
The mixture of gases usually found in the
atmosphere, without man's pollution, is perfect for life. If
it were much different (more oxygen, less carbon dioxide,
etc., or the atmospheric pressure was much lighter or
heavier), life would cease to exist on Earth.
If our atmosphere were thinner, many of the
millions of meteors which now are burned up would reach the
Earth's surface, causing death, destruction and fires
everywhere.
Adaptation to Environment or Creation of
Environment for Life?
If evolution works to evolve life to fit
the existing environments, why has it not equally conquered
all of the environments here and elsewhere? Earth is far
better suited for life than any other planet, yet most of the
environments even here, are either too hot or too cold, too
far underground or too far above ground to support much life.
In the several thousands of miles of changing environments
from the center of the Earth to the edge of its atmosphere,
there are only a few feet of habitable environment, and
therefore almost all creatures are forced to live there.
Although only the Earth was made to be inhabited (Isaiah
45:18) in our solar system, even on the Earth only a thin
slice is ideally suited for life.
This thin section, though, is teeming with
life. It is estimated that an acre of typical farm soil, six
inches deep, has several tons of living bacteria, almost a ton
of fungi, two hundred pounds of one-cell protozoan animals,
about one hundred pounds of yeast and the same amount of
algae.
Conclusion
The extremely fine line between an
environment where life can and cannot exist is illustrated by
the fact that it is estimated that a one-degree temperature
change in the average worldwide temperature would, in time,
seriously affect life on the Earth, and a two-degree
temperature change could be disastrous to life. The tolerances
are extremely small, and if there are any other planets in the
universe, it is unlikely that any of them could have life, due
to the extremely rigid conditions necessary for life to exist.
The chances of a planet being just the
right size, the proper distance away from the right star,
etc., are extremely minute, even if many stars have planets
circling them, as some speculate. The mathematical odds that
all of these and other essential conditions happened by chance
are astronomical—something like billions to one!
Articles Impact The Earth Unique in All the Universe - Institute for Creation Research
The more we search our universe, the more this place where we
live looks an awful lot better. In fact the more we examine the
place we live, the more we see that the Creator of Life has not
been subtle about His role in bringing about this perfect place
for life to flourish. This was no small feat. No wonder this
song is sung in Heaven itself!
“ You are worthy, O Lord,
To receive glory and honor
and power;
For You created all things,
And by Your will they exist
and were created." (Revelation 4:11)
Scott's Blog - 4/24/07
When Truth Is In Limbo
In the Scott's Blog Files under "So You Wanted to Be
a Pastor?" is one of the most heart wrenching
experiences one can go through or even observe from a distance -
the loss of a child.
There are few things more difficult than having a parent look
at you with grief stricken eyes and hear them ask, "Do you
think our baby is in Heaven?"
How do you answer a question like this?
In reality there are only two options - speculation or
revelation.
We can spot speculation by it's characteristic uncertainty,
it's reliance on human philosophy, and attempts to generate
answers by committee.
Consider a major course change on the issue of the spiritual
fate of children being considered by the Vatican.
Reuters
Photo: Pope Benedict XVI waves as he arrives to lead his
weekly general audience in Saint...
Pope approves report on teaching limbo
By NICOLE WINFIELD, Associated Press Writer Fri
Apr 20, 5:48 PM ET
VATICAN CITY-
Pope
Benedict XVI has reversed centuries of
traditional Roman Catholic teaching on limbo, approving a Vatican
report released Friday that says there were
"serious" grounds to hope that children who die
without being baptized can go to heaven.
Theologians said the move was highly significant —
both for what it says about Benedict's willingness to buck a
long-standing tenet of Catholic belief and for what it means
theologically about the Church's views on heaven, hell and
original sin — the sin that the faithful believe all
children are born with.
Although Catholics have long believed that children
who die without being baptized are with original sin and
thus excluded from heaven, the Church has no formal doctrine
on the matter. Theologians, however, have long taught that
such children enjoy an eternal state of perfect natural
happiness, a state commonly called limbo, but without being
in communion with God.
"If there's no limbo and we're not going to
revert to St. Augustine's teaching that unbaptized infants
go to hell, we're left with only one option, namely, that
everyone is born in the state of grace," said the Rev.
Richard McBrien, professor of theology at the University of
Notre Dame.
"Baptism does not exist to wipe away the
"stain" of original sin, but to initiate one into
the Church," he said in an e-mailed response.
Benedict approved the findings of the International
Theological Commission, a Vatican advisory panel, which said
it was reassessing traditional teaching on limbo in light of
"pressing" pastoral needs — primarily the
growing number of abortions and infants born to
non-believers who die without being baptized.
While the report does not carry the authority of a
papal encyclical or even the weight of a formal document
from the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the
Faith, it was approved by the pope on Jan. 19 and was
published on the Internet — an indication that it was
intended to be widely read by the faithful.
"We can say we have many reasons to hope that
there is salvation for these babies," the Rev. Luis
Ladaria, a Jesuit who is the commission's secretary-general,
told The Associated Press. He stressed that there was no
certainty, just hope.
The Commission posted its document Friday on Origins,
the documentary service of Catholic News Service, the news
agency of the American Bishop's Conference.
The document traces centuries of Church views on the
fate of unbaptized infants, paying particular attention to
the writings of St. Augustine — the 4th century bishop who
is particularly dear to Benedict. Augustine wrote that such
infants do go to hell, but they suffer only the
"mildest condemnation."
In the document, the commission said such views are
now out of date and there were "serious theological and
liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die
will be saved and enjoy the beatific vision."
It stressed, however, that "these are reasons for
prayerful hope, rather than grounds for sure
knowledge."
No one can know for certain what becomes of unbaptized
babies since Scripture is largely silent on the matter, the
report said.
It stressed that none of its findings should be taken
as diminishing the need for parents to baptize infants.
"Rather ... they provide strong grounds for hope
that God will save infants when we have not been able to do
for them what we would have wished to do, namely, to baptize
them into the faith and life of the church."
Vatican watchers hailed the decision as both a
sensitive and significant move by Benedict.
"Parents who are mourning the death of their
child are no longer going to be burdened with the added
guilt of not having gotten their child baptized," said
the Rev. Thomas Reese, a senior fellow at the Woodstock
Theological Center at Georgetown University.
He said the document also had implications for
non-Christians, since it could be seen as suggesting that
non-baptized adults could go to heaven if they led a good
life.
"I think it shows that Benedict is trying to
balance his view of Jesus as being central as the savior of
the world ... but at the same time not saying what the
Evangelicals say, that anyone who doesn't accept Jesus is
going to hell," he said in a phone interview.
Pope approves report on teaching limbo - Yahoo! News
This seems to be a well intention attempt to answer a tough
issue that raises more questions than answers.
Consider just a few.
Although Catholics have long believed that children who
die without being baptized are with original sin and thus
excluded from heaven, the Church has no formal doctrine on the
matter. Theologians, however, have long taught that such
children enjoy an eternal state of perfect natural happiness, a
state commonly called limbo, but without being in communion with
God.
How can anyone enjoy perfect happiness (natural or otherwise)
without having a relationship with God? The Bible tells us,
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and
comes down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no
variation or shadow of turning. (James 1:17)
I appreciate the attempt at kindness that lies behind this
doctrine, but without the One Who gives us every good and
perfect gift including even the capacity to experience
happiness, the hope for such things is just an illusion. As CS
Lewis once said, "God cannot give us a happiness and peace
apart from Himself because it does not exist. There is no such
thing."
The document traces centuries of Church views on the fate
of unbaptized infants, paying particular attention to the
writings of St. Augustine — the 4th century bishop who is
particularly dear to Benedict. Augustine wrote that such infants
do go to hell, but they suffer only the "mildest
condemnation."
The Bible does speak in clear and unmistakable terms
concerning Hell. Jesus called it "outer darkness"
and a place where there will be "weeping and gnashing of
teeth." (Matthew 8:12) Never is it called a place of "natural
happiness" or "mildest condemnation."
St. Augustine was certainly a brilliant man, but I would much
rather trust Jesus' view on such a crucial subject.
In the document, the commission said such views are now
out of date and there were "serious theological and
liturgical grounds for hope that unbaptized infants who die will
be saved and enjoy the beatific vision."
I am not sure what the day on the calendar has to do with
such an eternal truth, but it would seem that something as
important as the eternal destiny of children wouldn't be subject
to occasional "updates". In contrast we are told,
"Known to God from eternity are all His works."
(Acts 15:18)
The bottom line is this. The word "Limbo" is no
where to be found in the Bible. The concept arose when well
intentioned people attempted to resolve a deep spiritual
problem.
The problem inherent with speculation presents itself when
the simple question is asked, "Are you sure about
that?"
When we find ourselves dealing with the loss of a child,
speculation simply doesn't cut it.
At this point you may be asking another obvious question -
"So what do you say to people who have lost a
child?"
Me? I have no great wisdom or insights to share in that
situation. But we can rely on what God has to say on this issue
- that is revelation.
Although the Bible doesn't give us as much specific
information as we might like on this issue, it does tell us some
significant things that can point us on the pathway to peace.
First we are told that children are a high priority to
Jesus.
Then they brought little children to Him, that He might
touch them; but the disciples rebuked those who brought them.
But when Jesus saw it, He was greatly displeased and said
to them, “Let the little children come to Me, and do not
forbid them; for of such is the kingdom of God. Assuredly, I say
to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God as a little
child will by no means enter it." And He took them up in His
arms, laid His hands on them, and blessed them. (Mark
10:13-16)
Jesus loves children. All children. He cared about them here
on Earth. He cares about them in Heaven. He cares enough to be
personally involved with children.
Second, we are told that God does all things well, including
determining the eternal destiny of each and every human life.
Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right? (Genesis
18:25)
These two simple passages point to a profound truth. God is
the One Who holds each life, no matter what stage of life, in
His hands. He will do what is right and just and yet loving and
kind in every circumstance.
We can trust Him. Even in the death of a child.
That is where revelation ultimately leads - back to faith and
trust in the unchanging character of Jesus. We do ourselves no
favors by coming up with man centered speculative answers to try
to satisfy the mind, when God wants to deal with the heart.
In times when people are hurting in ways we can't fully begin
to understand, let's make it our business to lovingly and
compassionately point people back to the One who will not only
take perfect care of lost loved ones, but also makes this
promise to all who will trust Him.
And I heard a loud voice from heaven saying, “Behold,
the tabernacle of God is with men, and He will dwell with
them, and they shall be His people. God Himself will be with
them and be their God. And God will wipe away every tear
from their eyes; there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor
crying. There shall be no more pain, for the former things have
passed away.”
Then He who sat on the throne said, “Behold, I make all
things new.” And He said to me, “Write, for these words are
true and faithful.” (Revelation 21:3-5)
Scott's Blog - 4/23/07
The (Not So) Secret of a Growing Church
When you think about the state of Christianity in Europe,
what comes to mind? Perhaps a vision of majestic
cathedrals with thousands of people cleverly disguised as empty
seats?
Sadly, the staging grounds for some of the most amazing moves
of God's Spirit has turned into a bastion of secularism, a
spiritual vacuum that seems to be filled with an increasingly
radicalized form of Islam.
Or so it would seem. Until we take a closer look.
Evangelicals Thrive in England as Other
Churches Struggle
CAMBRIDGE, England (AP) - It's Sunday in England, and
across the country many traditional stone churches are
struggling to fill their pews.
But not C3, the Cambridge Community Church, one of the
country's many evangelical groups. Its mostly white,
middle-class congregants crowd a rented school auditorium with
their arms outstretched to the heavens and their hands fervently
clapping to evangelical sermons.
"I don't need an old church with stained glass
windows where a few people show up out of obligation, not
inspiration," said Ruth Chandler, a former member of the
Church of England.
In England's last census, 72 percent of people identified
themselves as Christian. Many are Anglicans affiliated with the
Church of England, which was created by royal proclamation
during the 16th century after King Henry VIII — who married
six times — broke ties with the Roman Catholic Church in a
dispute over divorce.
But the Church of England has said that less than 10
percent of its members are regular churchgoers. By contrast,
evangelicals make up about 40 percent of all the nation's
regular churchgoers, according to Peter Brierely, head of
Christian Research, a London-based think tank.
Among the thriving conservative Christian churches in
London are rich, mostly white Anglican congregations in the
evangelical wing of the denomination — including Holy Trinity
in Knightsbridge. Years ago, the parish developed an outreach
course for newcomers called Alpha, which explains the basics of
Christianity, that has been so successful it is now used for
evangelism worldwide.
Another is the independent Kingsway International
Christian Center, a predominantly black congregation. Its
rousing services often fill a 4,000-seat auditorium built inside
an old factory in a bleak industrial area. More evangelical
churches can be found across the country, from small rural
villages to university towns such as Cambridge.
Part of the evangelical growth is due to immigration.
Since 2001, Africa has supplied the single largest pool of
new British citizens. Nearly a third of the 160,000 immigrants
granted British citizenship in 2005 came from the continent,
according to official statistics. Many of the new arrivals bring
with them the spirit-filled Pentecostal worship style that has
drawn millions of Africans to Christian churches across the
continent in the last several decades.
Evangelical churches — both black and white — also
intensely evangelize in a way that other British Christians
don't.
Evangelicals Thrive in England as Other Churches Struggle Christianpost.com
What can we learn from this move of God in Britain?
The churches that are thriving are following a pattern set
forth by Jesus Himself. In His letter to the church at
Philadelphia, the Lord commended this fellowship for three
dominant characteristics.
“And to the angel of the church in Philadelphia write,
‘These things says He who is holy, He who is true, “He
who has the key of David, He who opens and no one shuts,
and shuts and no one opens”: “I know your
works. See, I have set before you an open door, and no one can
shut it; for you have a little strength, have kept My word, and
have not denied My name." (Revelation 3:7-8)
The churches that are thriving in Great Britain "have
a little strength" - that is, they place a great
emphasis on the presence and power of the Holy Spirit. When
people are looking for a church they aren't interested in great
traditions, or great reputations, as much as they are interested
in seeing the greatness of God's power to change lives.
The churches that are thriving in Great Britain "have
kept My (Jesus') word" - that is they lay great stress
on teaching God's Word in accessible and applicable ways. When
people are looking for a church they aren't interested in the
opinions or philosophies of men, as much as they are interested
in hearing what God has to say about their lives personally.
The churches that are thriving in Great Britain "have
not denied My (Jesus') name" - that is, they don't keep
faith in Christ to themselves, but boldly share the transforming
truth they have found in a relationship with Jesus with others.
When people are looking for a church they aren't interested in a
shaky faith that doesn't stand up under examination, as much as
they are interested in a faith that they can rely upon
personally and share with others practically.
It has been said that any church, like a chain, is only as
strong as its weakest link.
How are you doing individually?
Have you appropriated these spiritual (not so) secrets
of success in your own life? A Spirit lead, Scripturally guided,
Savior oriented believer is never going to have a faith that is
old, cold, dusty and dead!
Scott's Blog - 4/20/07
Is It Me, or Is It Getting Cold In Here?
One of the most personally challenging predictions of life in
the Last Days is given by Jesus in Matthew 24.
And because lawlessness will abound, the love of many will
grow cold. (Matthew 24:12)
I wonder if we have seen a vivid demonstration of just such
spiritual danger in the aftermath of the tragedy at Virginia
Tech?
It didn't take long for representatives of every
political persuasion under the sun to start weighing in on the
events. And as image after image showed the usual suspects doing
their level best to say "the right thing", a certain
emptiness seemed to follow in the wake.
Wall Street Journal columnist Peggy Noonan seems to have put
her finger on the phenomenon.
I wondered about the
emptiness of the phrases used by the media and by political
figures, and how pro forma and lifeless and cold they are. The
formalized language of loss hasn't kept up with the number of
tragedies. "A nation mourns." "Our prayers are
with you." The latter is both self-complimenting and of
dubious believability. Did you really pray? Or is it just a
phrase?
And
this as opposed to the honest things normal people say: "Oh
no." "I am so sorry." "I'm sad."
"It's horrible."
With all the therapy
in our great therapized nation, with all our devotion to
emotions and feelings, one senses we are becoming a colder
culture, and a colder country. We purport to be
compassionate--we must respect Mr. Cho's privacy rights and
personal autonomy--but of course it is cold not to have
protected others from him. It is cold not to have protected him
from himself.
OpinionJournal - Peggy Noonan
I am haunted by the words, "Did you really pray? Or is
it just a phrase?"
We have all seen examples where saying, "Let me pray
about that" isn't something we really do, as much as it is
a way to politely distance ourselves from others or even from
something we really don't want to do.
We make eye contact with a person sitting in the pews who
looks emotionally over run. We've all experienced times when
simply saying, "I'll pray for you." allowed the
opportunity for a clean get away. Did we even remember to pray
for that hurting person as we moved on to other things?
A need is mentioned, perhaps having something to do with
changing a diaper or two in the nursery. "Oh, I'll
definitely pray about that.", becomes churchspeak for
"Are you kidding me? No way would I ever get near one of
those toxic bombs!"
When we fail to pray two things happen. First our integrity
takes a major hit. When the promise to pray becomes "the
right thing to say" with no reality behind it, we end up
fooling no one but ourselves. People have a funny way of being
able to discern who will really bring a matter before God, and
who won't. No wonder Jesus said,
"But let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your
‘No,’ ‘No.’ For whatever is more than these is from the
evil one."
When we fail to pray, a second thing happens. Our hearts grow
a bit colder. We find ourselves inching a bit closer to the
place Jesus warned of when He said,
‘ This people honors
Me with their lips,
But their heart is far
from Me.
And in vain they worship Me,
Teaching as doctrines
the commandments of men.' (Mark 7:6)
In our times there is no doubt that Jesus prediction is
coming to pass. Lawlessness is increasing, and with it the tidal
pull toward a cold and clichéd Christian life is rising as
well.
But we can turn the tide. Consider the legacy of one of the
people who lost their lives at Virginia Tech earlier this week.
By JOANNE KIMBERLIN, The
Virginian-Pilot
© April 18, 2007
Hampton's Lauren McCain is among
the dead in Blacksburg.
Her parents, David and Sherry
McCain, have not spoken to the media, but pastors at her
Peninsula church confirmed that the 20-year-old freshman died in
the rampage.
The family attends Restoration
Church-Phoebus Baptist in Hampton, where members began a vigil
Monday night after the McCains could not reach their daughter.
Four church young people attend the college; the others have
been reported safe.
"You meet a lot of young
people in your life," said Leonard Riley, the church's
former pastor, "but not a lot will make the impression that
Lauren did. To know her was to love her. She was always ready
and willing to do for someone else."
ARTICLE Pastor on Hampton victim 'To know her was to love her' (The Virginian-Pilot -
HamptonRoads.comPilotOnline.com)
Last night Lauren's father did speak to Fox News Channel
anchorman Sheppard Smith. He told the correspondent that Lauren
was the kind of person who undoubtedly prayed for her killer
before she passed away. David McCain then something that left
Smith almost speechless.
"We forgive this poor young man for what he has done. We
are praying for his family."
And when David McCain said that, I immediately believed
it.
On her MySpace page, Lauren made it plain what was most
important to her.
"The purpose and love of my life
is Jesus Christ."
Lauren and her family have
demonstrated that love doesn't have to grow cold, even in the
valley of the shadow of death.
Scott's Blog - 4/19/07
Putting Out the Fire
As I write these words, there is a lock down in progress at
Corona Del Sol High School in Tempe, Arizona. A suspicious
package in a rest room has brought the school day to a grinding
halt. The bomb squad has arrived on scene.
It is not an isolated incident. Across the country over
twelve similar events have taken place. Bomb threats. Threats of
massacres. Students intercepted bringing guns on to school
grounds. Boasts of plans to take out 100 innocent lives.
What is going on?
Experts have their theories. Some believe that this is
coincidental, with the incidents having greater visibility due
to the tragic events at Virginia Tech earlier this week. Others
point out that the fact this is a week of grim anniversaries -
the Oklahoma City bombing, Columbine and Adolf Hitler's birthday
- as a motivating factor.
But could this explosion of menacing behavior have a direct
tie with what one commentator called "The Single Worst
Editorial Decision in The History of Broadcast News"?
Wednesday,
April 18, 2007
Posted by Hugh
Hewitt | 10:48
PM
Soon after the press conference at which
it was disclosed that NBC
had received a package of print, photos and video materials
from the Virginia Tech murderer, I interviewed Howard
Kurtz about how NBC should handle it. (The
transcript will be here later this evening.)
We quickly agreed that any video should not be shown, and
while I think that Howard thought perhaps a picture could be
aired, I and the live audience I was broadcasting in front of
disagreed. I would have published --instantly-- the text
of the killer's statement's for the public to read, but I
would have denied the killer the instant video glorification
he so obviously desired, an immortalization which other
deranged killers of the future will almost certainly seek to
emulate. NBC decided differently.
Hugh Hewitt
There is an old saying that behavior rewarded
equals behavior repeated. It appears that the deranged killers
are lining up to make NBC News and other willing mainstream
media outlets the new American Idol of maniacal manifestos.
The mainstream media news outlets will
obviously counter that withholding video material of a killer's
confessions runs counter to the mission of their departments to
satisfy the public's right to know.
But the consensus opinion of the murderer's
video is that it is a rambling, almost completely nonsensical
exercise in self indulgence. There is no key insight provided
that couldn't be summed up or paraphrased by a commentator.
There was no compelling reason to air the video apart from a
ratings coup.
It is hard not to suspect that the wave of
threats across the country by "copy cats" is fueled by
the chance to find the fame and platform for twisted ideas the
evil and unstable crave.
The question that must be asked of our media
outlets is simple. Just because you can air a video, should you
air a video?
What is true on a large scale is also true in
our individual lives. Maybe you have been made privy to a piece
of information concerning a co-worker, a neighbor, a fellow
church member or leader. Just because you can pass the info
along, should you?
Obviously, if that information could save
someone from danger or prevent a crime, we should share it. As a
pastor if I am made aware of a situation involving child abuse,
I am legally required to inform the authorities.
But what about that juicy piece of gossip?
What about a comment that can tear down a reputation? What about
those "true but unhelpful" things we can say about
others that really are none of our business?
Here's a good piece of personal editorial
policy from king Solomon.
He who conceals a transgression seeks love, But he who
repeats a matter separates intimate friends. (Proverbs 17:9)
We all make decisions everyday concerning the content we will
communicate to others. Perhaps if we make love the filter for
our comments we can be a source of light in a darkening world.
Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only
such a word as is good for edification according to the need of
the moment, so that it will give grace to those who hear.
(Ephesians 4:29)
UPDATE: Seems as if the media is now reconsidering the
decision to go with the video. One executive calls the repeated
airing "pornographic".
|
 |
| Backlash
Leads to Pullback on Cho Video |
 |
 |
Apr
19 01:19 PM US/Eastern
By
DAVID BAUDER
AP Television Writer |
|
 |
| NEW
YORK (AP) - With a backlash developing against the
media for airing sickening pictures from Virginia
Tech shooter Cho Seung-Hui, Fox News Channel said
Thursday it would stop and other networks said
they would severely limit their use.
NBC
News was the recipient Wednesday of Cho's
package of rambling, hate-filled video and written
messages, with several pictures of him posing with
a gun. Contents began airing on "Nightly
News," and its rivals quickly used them,
too.
Family members of victims canceled plans to
appear on NBC's "Today" show Thursday
because they "were very upset" with the
network for showing the pictures,
"Today" host Meredith Vieira said.
Virginia State Police Col. Steve Flaherty—who
praised NBC Wednesday for coming to authorities
first with the package—said Thursday he was
disappointed with what the network showed.
"I just hate that a lot of people not used
to seeing that type of image had to see it,"
he said.
NBC said the material was aired because it
helped to answer the question of why Cho killed 32
people and himself on the Virginia
Tech campus Monday.
"The decision to run this video was
reached by virtually every news organization in
the world, as evidenced by coverage on television,
on Web sites and in newspapers," NBC said in
a statement. "We have covered this
story—and our unique role in it—with extreme
sensitivity, underscored by our devoted efforts to
remember and honor the victims and heroes of this
tragic incident."
NBC and its MSNBC cable outlet will
"severely limit" use of these pictures
going forward, "Today" host Matt Lauer
said, a restriction echoed by ABC
News. At both CBS News and CNN, producers will
need explicit approval from their bosses to use
them going forward.
Fox News announced on the air late Thursday
morning that it would no longer air Cho's
material, saying "sometimes you change your
mind."
These decisions, of course, came more than 12
hours after the pictures became available, after
they already made their impact. The news cycle
dictates they would be used less, anyway.
"It has value as breaking news," said
ABC News spokesman Jeffrey Schneider, "but
then becomes practically pornographic as it is
just repeated ad nauseam."
Jon Klein, president of CNN U.S., said the
decision to air it was a tough call.
"As breaking news, it's pertinent to our
understanding of why this was done," he said.
"Then, once the public has seen the material
and digested it, then it's fair to say, `How much
should we be showing it?' I think it's to the
credit of news organizations that they are dialing
back."
NBC News said it had no indication why Cho
chose it for his message. A Postal Service time
stamp shows it was mailed at 9:01 a.m. Monday,
during the two hours between his first shooting at
a Virginia Tech dorm and his massacre at a classroom
building.
|
|
Backlash Leads to Pullback on Cho Video
Scott's Blog - 4/18/07
In the Shadow of Death - a Glimmer of Life
The attention of our nation continues to be focused on the
horrible events that took place this week on the campus of
Virginia Tech University. The fact that one evil mad man
callously took the lives of 32 students has stirred up debate
and discussion on everything from gun control laws, the
legalities of committing unwilling people to psychiatric
facilities, to safety precautions on college campuses.
But in this time of national mourning, there was also in the
news a small glimmer of hope that the lives of those most
helpless among us may have received a measure of protection.
Supreme
Court OKs Abortion Procedure Ban
WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court's conservative
majority handed anti-abortion forces a major victory Wednesday
in a decision that bans a controversial abortion procedure and
set the stage for further restrictions.
For the first time since the court established a woman's
right to an abortion in 1973, the justices upheld a nationwide
ban on a specific abortion method, labeled partial-birth
abortion by its opponents.
The 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy said
the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act that Congress passed and
President Bush signed into law in 2003 does not violate a
woman's constitutional right to an abortion.
The law is constitutional despite not containing an
exception that would allow the procedure if needed to preserve a
woman's health, Kennedy said. "The law need not give
abortion doctors unfettered choice in the course of their
medical practice," he wrote in the majority opinion.
Doctors who violate the law face up to two years in
federal prison.
Kennedy's opinion, joined by Bush's two appointees, Chief
Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, was a
long-awaited resounding win that abortion opponents expected
from the more conservative bench.
The administration defended the law as drawing a bright
line between abortion and infanticide.
Reacting to the ruling, Bush said that it affirms the
progress his administration has made to defend the
"sanctity of life."
"I am pleased that the Supreme Court has upheld a law
that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial birth
abortion," he said. "Today's decision affirms that the
Constitution does not stand in the way of the people's
representatives enacting laws reflecting the compassion and
humanity of America."
My Way News - Supreme Court OKs Abortion Procedure Ban
Some might take offense to the notion
that to be in favor of what proponents delicately call
"Intact Dilation and Extraction" is to be on the
opposite side of "compassion and humanity". But when
we take a look at what this procedure entails it is much more
difficult to hide behind a scientific euphemism.
Consider this description of the
procedure at issue taken from Judge Anthony Kennedy's majority
opinion.
" 'At this point, the right-handed surgeon
slides the fingers of the left [hand] along the back of the
fetus and "hooks" the shoulders of the fetus with
the index and ring fingers (palm down).
" 'While maintaining this tension, lifting the
cervix and applying traction to the shoulders with the fingers
of the left hand, the surgeon takes a pair of blunt curved
Metzenbaum scissors in the right hand. He carefully advances
the tip, curved down, along the spine and under his middle
finger until he feels it contact the base of the skull under
the tip of his middle finger.
" '[T]he surgeon then forces the scissors into
the base of the skull or into the foramen magnum. Having
safely entered the skull, he spreads the scissors to enlarge
the opening.
" 'The surgeon removes the scissors and
introduces a suction catheter into this hole and evacuates the
skull contents. With the catheter still in place, he applies
traction to the fetus, removing it completely from the
patient.' " H. R. Rep. No. 108-58, p. 3 (2003).
This is an abortion doctor's
clinical description. Here is another description from a nurse
who witnessed the same method performed on a 26-week fetus and
who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee:
" 'Dr. Haskell
went in with forceps and grabbed the baby's legs and pulled
them down into the birth canal. Then he delivered the baby's
body and the arms--everything but the head. The doctor kept
the head right inside the uterus... .
" 'The baby's
little fingers were clasping and unclasping, and his little
feet were kicking. Then the doctor stuck the scissors in the
back of his head, and the baby's arms jerked out, like a
startle reaction, like a flinch, like a baby does when he
thinks he is going to fall.
" 'The doctor
opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into
the opening, and sucked the baby's brains out. Now the baby
went completely limp... .
" 'He cut the
umbilical cord and delivered the placenta. He threw the baby
in a pan, along with the placenta and the instruments he had
just used.' "
FindLaw for Legal Professionals - Case Law, Federal and State Resources, Forms, and Code
In my seminary studies in the Old Testament we were told of
the depravity involved in the worship of an idol called Molech.
Molech was a fertility god, fashioned in the form of an iron pot
bellied stove. It would be heated until the body and arms of the
idol were nearly white hot. A worshipper would then place a
living child on the searing arms of the idol as a sacrifice, as
a guarantee of further fertility and personal prosperity.
The prophet Jeremiah gave this heavenly perspective on this
awful practice.
They built the high places of Baal that are in the valley
of Ben-hinnom to cause their sons and their daughters to pass
through the fire to Molech, which I had not commanded them nor
had it entered My mind that they should do this abomination, to
cause Judah to sin. (Jeremiah 32:35)
God tells us that He found the level of depravity and hard
heartedness involved in Molech worship shocking.
I can't help but think "Intact Dilation and
Extraction" is seen by God in exactly the same way.
According to Planned Parenthood's Alan Gutmacher Institute there
were 2,200 victims of this procedure in 2000.
Law professor and talk show host Hugh Hewitt sums up the
decision in this way.
A victory for life, though not a sweeping or even a secure
one. And a decision that invites state legislatures to
take seriously their obligations to enact laws to protect the
unborn.Hugh Hewitt
Thank God that at least this line has been drawn in our
culture.
For the moment, anyway.
Scott's Blog - 4/17/07
Change a Mind, Change the World
When we hear people talking about ending the tragedy of
abortion, normally the conversation focuses in on voter
registration, promoting and supporting pro-life candidates, or
communicating with already elected officials that defending the
rights of the unborn is in their best interests
politically.
While these efforts certainly have their place, is it
possible that the best way to protect the unborn is by reaching
the hearts and minds of the already born?
As we have detailed in this space, the more science
progresses, the more we learn about the reality of pre-born
existence, the less the traditional argument that a fetus is
somehow not a human being makes sense.
And it appears that the hearts and minds of a new generation
of doctors is being effected. Consider this fascinating story
out of Great Britain.
More young doctors oppose abortions on ethical grounds
The NHS abortion service is heading for a crisis because
increasing numbers of doctors refuse to carry out terminations,
it was claimed. There has been a big rise in young medics with
'conscientious objections' to abortion. The increase has been
revealed by the Royal College of Obstetricians and
Gynaecologists. It says there is evidence of a 'slow but growing
problem' of young doctors opting out of abortion training on
moral grounds.
Some senior doctors have blamed declining interest on the
lack of 'glamour' involved in the work. This has been dubbed
'dinner party syndrome' where doctors don't want to admit to
their friends that they do abortions.
RCOG spokesman Kate Guthrie, who is head of abortion
services in Hull, said: "You get no thanks for performing
abortions, you get spat on. Who admits to friends at a dinner
party that they are an abortionist? It is not a sexy area - it
is a bog standard area of women's care.
"There is an increasing number of young doctors who
are not participating in the training. The college and the
Department of Health are really worried."
More young doctors oppose abortions on ethical grounds the Daily Mail
The reason that many young doctors are opting out of
performing abortions runs a bit deeper than a fear of embarrassment
at a cocktail party. Consider this comment made in response to
this article.
As a medical student, I have had to give the whole issue
of abortion much consideration. I have come to the conclusion
that it is very rarely justified, an opinion shared by many of
my fellow students, both religious and secular, male and female.
Accordingly, I do not intend to have any part in the industry
when I qualify. There is a clear dichotomy between a baby which
has been born, having as much right to life as you or I whilst
another, of EXACTLY the same development, can be terminated if
it is in the womb of a mother who rathers it was not.
Interestingly, the above article does not mention how much money
private abortion services make out of their trade. I dare say
that such businesses are more concerned about falling profits
that are likely to come about from any recruitment difficulties
than the availability of abortion services as they proclaim.
- James, Amersham, Buckinghamshire
There are reasons why the pro-abortion lobby desperately
fights against informed consent laws that require women to know
the state of development of the child they are preparing to
terminate. There are also reasons why crisis pregnancy centers
find that showing women an ultra sound of the baby has an
overwhelming impact on the decision to carry the child to term.
I am not suggesting that political activism has no place in
dealing with the all too prevalent problem of abortion on
demand, at any stage of development. But the more the truth of
what and who is at stake in this horrible process impacts
he |