Weather Channel Dot Com Sucks Wind

This is the third consecutive heat wave over the last four weeks that Weather Channel dot com has botched. When projected highs of 92 turn out to be 106, I call that a miss. When it's 10am, and it's already five degrees higher than the projected high for late in the afternoon, and the current weather shows a predicted high of 94 and it's currently 99, it's a miss.

Today it was 107, about 10 degrees higher than the predicted high. When I went to the store this evening it had cooled off to 100. Upon returning home, the website said it was 65. This would be a 35 degree drop in one hour. My thermometer says 90. Somebody's smoking something. Or somebody who programmed their computer is smoking something.

Warning: In Case of Rapture, This Blog Will Veer Off Course and Crash

With the rapture being the next event on the end times calendar, and Jesus' pseudo-return to earth to silently snatch His evangelical believers up into the clouds having been scheduled for each of the next Tuesdays for the last hundred years, my blogging days are numbered. I am warning my readers, therefore, that in case of rapture, this blog will no longer have a blogger behind the wheel, and it will veer off course and maybe even kill unsuspecting bystanders in cyberspace. Those left behind - or derriere a gauche - beware for your souls. To those Jews who are left behind, evangelicals - who really, really, really love you - urge you to move to Jerusalem. Where, for some reason, God will love you too, and make sure that the Anti-Christ will kill all of you. Only 144,000 of you will escape an eternity in hell, but move there anyway. Whew, I'm sure glad I'll be outta here and won't have to endure any of this. Which shows just how important it is to call the 800 number on channel 65. Note to those who find my house empty: if the rapture happens while I'm shaving and you find my razor buzzing in the sink, it won't electrocute you because it's only battery operated.

Independence Day Questions

Vache Folle raises a good 4th of July question about who authorized the Declaration of Independence. His ancestors in Georgia were not part of that, yet it happened. Their consent, he concludes, was therefore engineered for them. A good religious question is whether the American Revolution was righteous and biblical, and should a Christian have supported it. Christians debate among themselves about this. One church I attended held that this was ungodly rebellion against a legitimate civil government - the British Crown - and no Christian should support such activity. Others, like Rushdoony-style reconstructionists, see the early colonies as having established biblical local civil governments, with the actions of Parliament being rebellious against them. The American Revolution, then, to them, wasn't so much a revolution as it was a justified defensive counter-revolution. Parliament and the Crown were the rebellious bodies against legitimate civil governments. In general I tend to hold to the latter.

But as Vache Folle has held regarding the Civil War, I've come to think that there were as many reasons for the revolution as there were people involved. I've read historical accounts that call this war the "pastors' war," as many of the soldiers who fought against the British were Puritan pastors, convinced from a biblical standpoint that such a war was just. A religious decline following the war resulted since there were so many pastors lost in the battles.

Some believe that we should legitimately be under British rule to this day, but such an idea would apply at most to only the original thirteen colonies. California, for example, didn't join the union for some 70 years later. It might have been an independent state, set apart from the British Crown, and some of my ancestors may have settled elsewhere. Many of them wouldn't have met each other, and I wouldn't have been me. Scary thought.

Wrong Again and Again and Again

Ron McKenzie at the Blessed Economist posts briefly about the false predictions of the bible prophesy buffs who have related certain news items regarding the political nation of Israel with the end times. Although these false predictions are by no means limited to those who hold to the dispensational premillenial view of eschatology, it seems they have the lion's share. I'm sick of these self-proclaimed experts who couldn't predict their way out of a wet paper bag.

Not only are these newspaper eschatologians wrong about what Ron mentioned, they are never right about anything at all. They tell us about how Israel will be at war with the Soviet Union. They when it collapses, they simply make up a new future. Russia, then Iran then a central Asian republic. When the first Gulf war started, I remember, even though I wasn't a convert yet, waves of "bible believing Christians" called into radio talk shows explaining that the US attack on Iraq was the beginning of the end. It never happened. All kinds of parallels were made between Saddam Hussein and Nebuchadnezzar. Bible verses were allegorized to fit CNN Headline news.

All these years the soon-to-be ten nation European Union was viewed as the ten horned beast from the book of Revelation from which the Anti-Christ would come. Then it grew to eleven, then twelve nations. Yawn. Y2K, 9/11, Harold Camping, Jack Van Impe. All wrong. Always. Yet Christians continue to believe.

Eschatology for my kids means bed time. Ni-night.

Recipients of Grace

Throughout my wife's pregnancy and birth of our new baby boy, we have been on the receiving end of people's charity. With high "risks" of miscarriage, as well as a few other factors, she was on bed rest briefly, and limited duty for most of the pregnancy. Many of our family, friends, church, and even complete strangers helped our family out with housework, shopping, babysitting and meals. Our church has a meal ministry for mothers of newborns, and we'll be receiving them for a while.

It is amazing to see all that the people have done for our sake. We are thankful and have been humbled.

It's a BOY!

Mrs. Scott and I welcomed our latest blessing from God into the world on Friday morning. Our little bundle of joy looks just like me, according to close family and strangers alike. I don't see it when looking in the mirror, but I sure see it in my own baby pictures. Mom and baby are doing fine at home. Thanks to everybody who encouraged us in this long period of time.

Protestantism's False Gospel

Keith Darrell echoes my recent thoughts about the doctrine of Justification by Faith, but from within the context of the Presbyterian church's wranglings over the Federal Vision controversy. His post has prompted me to post about this pet doctrine of Protestants.

In my indoctrination as a Reformed Evangelical Protestant, I've been instructed many times by many sources that the doctrine of justification by faith alone is not only the gospel, not only the central issue on which the very church stands or falls, but also the main theme of the New Testament. Uhmm, no. This doctrine is mentioned maybe three times in Scripture. Okay, two and a half, but I rounded up to be merciful.

As Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15, the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the center of the gospel, matters of first importance. Justification by faith, while I believe is true, is NOT the gospel, is NOT the doctrine on which the church stands or falls, and it is most certainly NOT the central theme of the New Testament. The Lordship of Christ is the central message of the NT.

"Justification by faith alone" is a reactionary doctrine. It was used in reaction to the Judaizers in the bible who wanted to add circumcision to the requirements for salvation, and it was used in the argument against the medieval Roman church, who, it was believed, added works as a requirement for justification.

Today's postmodern America, where anything and everything goes, is almost by definition certainly not inclined to hold to a works-based salvation religion. They have no idea what we're talking about when we preach justification by faith alone. If you ran for office, would you run with the slogan, "no taxation without representation"? Of course not; it would be irrelevant and you would lose the election. We Protestants are preaching a reaction to something that doesn't exist in our culture. Something that happened 400 years ago on the other side of the world isn't of much interest to today's America. So when we substitute the doctrine of justification by faith alone for the gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, it's no wonder nobody listens. And we thought it was their fault the whole time.

"Impeach The Next President, Too"

...My latest bumper sticker idea.

Evangelicalese Dictionary for Germans

Gene Redlin from Northern Gleaner posted this priceless gem about English speaking German tourists on vacation in the US. Quote:

BONN, Germany — It was becoming a common annoyance. Curious German tourists were visiting evangelical churches in the U.S., and had no idea what was being said. A German travel agency finally issued a 55-page Evangelical-English Dictionary which sells thousands of copies a month to Germans vacationing in the U.S.

Cultural relevance? Nevermind.

MURDER! In the Neighborhood

I drove up on my way home from work today, and the meat wagon, tons of cops and plenty of yellow tape blocked the street about five houses down. Neighbors were out in force and yakking. I knew instantly that it was probably a murder.

The cops are silent, but the one thing they let on to is that it wasn't a home invasion. The rumor mill has a few extra juicy pieces. It's supposedly a 26 yr old male on one account, but another has the cops unable to tell if it's male or female. I don't know how scary to take that. Also a rumor that a dead dog was found, too. But the house was bought about 6 months ago, and I've never met the neighbors. Apparently, the owner wasn't the one killed. It'll be on the news tonight for sure.

[UPDATE:] The homicide made the news, and the camera that shot the crime scene footage was right out in front of our house. The news reported the victim was a 27 yr old male. I also recall being heckled by some kids (late teens/early 20's) a few days ago while jogging past that house.

Zoning Laws (Part 11) Combined With Other Laws (2)

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws can also have a combined effect with other laws such as strict building codes, local building ordinances and building permit processes. Building codes and ordinances make construction more expensive, and the permit process not only adds more cost, but sets a time limit for completion of construction. This adds hidden expense in that a greater amount of money is needed up-front for a project.

The overall effect of all these laws is a higher minimum standard of living. But this standard of living is mandated by law without allowing for the means to attain this standard. People who cannot meet this minimum level created by law sometimes end up homeless. Homelessness is often mandated by law without people knowing that this is the case.

Part 10 . . . . . . . . Part 12

Those Wacky Legalists (1-10)

. . . . . . . . (Newer Entries, 11-20)

Baby Update

Blogging has been slow of late. Mrs. Scott is now 8 1/2 months pregnant, and all kinds of fun stuff is going on around here. With the little one expected anytime now, things are a bit different.

Touchy-Feely Christianity

I don't know what it is, but modern evangelicalism contains a lot of touchy-feely things. Even those who generally reject modern types of things hold to these things. I grew up in a family that wasn't big on touchy-feely. We had no group hugs and gush wasn't an emotion we expressed. Swaying back and forth with Bic lighters during a Neil Diamond ballad type of emotion I've never grown to embrace, and I don't like those kinds of things.

A large group of people holding hands during the prayer for a meal? It ain't me. Not into holding hands unless it's my wife or kids. I also hate the electric piano. You know, like in the Styx song "Babe." It gives me the touchy-feely gag type creeps. A lot of contemporary chorus music sung in church or by "Christian" music groups uses the electric piano to yank gush emotion out of you during the song. I don't complain to my church, because I know others are edified by such things. I nearly avoid contemporary Christian music altogether. I've always gotten the impression that it is an artificially forced form of "worship," like from a network marketing scheme telemarketer or something. Grown men swaying back and forth with eyes closed, hands out and palms up in that John Tesh concert at Red Rock that repeats ad infiniteum on late night paid advertising TV that you wake up to after falling asleep on the couch? Pass the Oprah magazine. Ain't me.

And what's with breaking into small groups for prayer that lasts 5 minutes? Especially when it's done as a form of promoting "accountability." I've experienced this in retreats, conferences, bible studies, Sunday school, you name it. Across denominational boundaries and varying church circles. It always takes the same pattern. Groups of four or five, and we never have enough time for each person in our group to pray. There's always at least one complete stranger who I wouldn't tell any of my secrets to anyway. "Time to start wrapping up." But we're only half done because this other person prayed about his life story and wouldn't shut up. Who thought this up anyway? And why would anybody want to repeat it? I always feel like these types of things accomplish nothing. At least for me.

Eminent Domain - The Sin of Jezebel

In my last post, I asked if anybody would name their daughter Jezebel. Well, nobody would because she was one of the most evil, wicked women in all of history. And what was her most notorious sin? The sin of what today is called Eminent Domain (aka compulsory purchase, compulsory acquisition or expropriation in other countries). This is where modern governments use coercion in taking private property away from citizens without their consent. As evil as this practice is, modern Christians hardly speak a word against it, and in many cases whole heartedly support it.

In 1 Kings 21 (read this whole chapter here), the most wicked king in the history of Israel to that day, Ahab, coveted the vineyard of Naboth, his nearest neighbor, for his own use. He even offered Naboth money for it. Naboth refused, citing that even God forbid that his inheritance be parted with. Jezebel, the wife of Ahab, found out and hired false witnesses to testify against him, had him put to death, then took possession of Naboth's land.

In the most bone-chilling verse in this chapter (v. 15), we see an almost exact pattern of the modern state, "...Jezebel said to Ahab, 'Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth, the Jezreelite, which he refused to give to you for money; for Naboth is not alive, but dead." The state usually offers money in return for property, but if refused, the state takes it anyway. The only difference is that the state only threatens murder via an armed police, whereas Jezebel carried it out. Today, the state bears false witness in court against those who refuse the state's condescending offers.

As a result of this, God brought down judgment upon Ahab and Jezebel. Read the further accounts in 2 Kings 9, here and here. The final judgment upon Jezebel is this: "This is the word of the LORD, which He spoke by His servant Elijah the Tishbite, saying, 'In the property of Jezreel the dogs shall eat the flesh of Jezebel; and the corpse of Jezebel shall be as dung on the face of the field in the property of Jezreel, so they cannot say, "This is Jezebel."'"

This is a horrific thing to think about with respect to today's politicians that play games with Jezebel's abomination. May they hear this, repent, and do good before God.

Would You Name Your Daughter "Jezebel"?

It's fun to pick out names for a baby that will soon be born. Especially for a girl. Even though my wife is pregnant with a boy, we picked out a girl's name before we knew the gender. The last girl's name we would ever choose is Jezebel. I'm sure that's the case with most people.

But why? What's so bad about Jezebel? Just the name itself conjures up thoughts of dastardly evil. It is a name used to defame a woman to the lowest level possible. It is one of the harshest remarks possible, and imputes the sleaziest of whoredoms, oozing with the most depraved and vile form of wickedness. Would you name your daughter Jezebel?

Was the Apostle Paul the Rich Young Ruler?

Last January, I wrote a brief post wondering where Saul of Tarsus (later the apostle Paul) was during Jesus' earthly ministry and crucifixion. He was present at Stephen's stoning which means, in the historical timeline of the book of Acts, that he was almost surely alive during His ministry. He was schooled by Gamaliel, and he was a Pharisee, so he would have been familiar with the happenings in Jerusalem. I wondered if he could have been the rich young ruler spoken of in the gospels.

Well tonight at our bible study, we looked at Matthew 19's account (read Matthew 19:16-30 here) in the context of God's seemingly "unfair" system of rewards with the first being last and the last first. It struck me that he would have been the last of the apostles, but first in fame and writer of more NT material than the rest. He was known as the apostle to the Gentiles. When He told His disciples that it was hard for a rich man to enter heaven, they wondered who could enter. Jesus said that with God, all things are possible.

He could have been prophesying about this man right on the spot without any of them knowing it. If this were Paul, the rest of them would have come to know him later on. Paul would fit the rest of this passage, too. He would be one of the twelve who sat on a throne, he was rich, a young ruler. His rejection by Christ because of his covetous heart toward material things could have triggered a resentment toward Him. He went away grieving, but that could have turned to malice and persecution of those who were followers. Of course, all this is speculative reading between the lines. Maybe some archaeologist will dig something up on this someday. Until then...

Read Part 2 and Part 3

Ron Paul For god - and - Libertarian Fearmongers

Two topics lumped into one short post. Okay, Ron Paul won't win the election in 2008. But his running for president is bound to bring up some much needed discussion on topics that have been left under the rug. Some people, it seems, are so enraptured with him that they are ready to thrust him past the presidency and into the position of God. A little less Ron Paul worship, please.

Some libertarian writers are really no different from the fearmongers of other ideological persuasions. Whether from no-nukes, neo-cons, environmentalists or religious fundamentalists. Yes, we know that the state is dangerous and commits many evil acts, but the idea that the state will plunge us into a totalitarian abyss of hell in just a few short years is taking things a bit far. A little more optimism, please.

Jewish Rabbi Against National Israel and Zionism

A friend sent me a YouTube clip (approx. 4 min.) of a Jewish Rabbi who opposes the existence of the nation of Israel and the "false" religion of Zionism. He claims that the Jews, Muslims and Christians have lived in peace in the Middle East for years, and only the phenomenon of Zionism has created the huge problems there in recent decades. I've heard things like this before. There is a Jewish community in Iran and has also been Jewish member of the Iranian Parliament.

It makes me question even more the US involvement in the Middle East and the bizarre eschatalogical doctrines found in dispensational pre-millenialism.

WWII Bombers Overhead

When I was a kid I loved watching World War II documentaries. I was fascinated by the war as history and loved the "conventional" (i.e. pre-nuclear, pre-jet, pre-electronic technology) aspect of it. I was particularly interested in allied bombers.

This last week, a group of touring, restored WWII bombers have been flying out of our local airport. Occasionally, maybe annually, this group of bombers comes to our area. This year, a B-25, a B-24 and a B-17 are featured. You can take tours of the planes, and for $425 you can fly in one. Our house is within a few hundred yards of the flight pattern on the last loop before landing. They also fly close to the freeway down to where I work, so I've seen them several mornings on my drive in. Today, they've been flying overhead all day.

The noise they make is awesome. It's hard to imagine thousands of them at a time flying out of England on their way to Germany. While typing, a B-17 (my favorite) just flew low over head just a few blocks away. Whoa!

Zoning Laws (Part 10) Combined With Other Laws

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws are combined with other laws to create some more road blocks to freedom. Tax laws are frequently used along with zoning laws to create excessive incomes for governments to play with. Property is re-zoned according to the amount of tax money that is projected for governments to receive. Property taxes are often used to fund public schools. Sales taxes also act as an incentive for governments to re-zone property as commercial. Eminent domain laws are used to confiscate private property in the re-zoning process without regard to private property rights.

Part 9 . . . . . . . . Part 11

Justification By Faith - Alone?

T.B. Vick at Shadows of Divine Things has an interesting post about the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone. Read it here.

I Always Wondered Why Gas Stations Never Had Sales or Discounts on Gas

But now I know why.

Slow Holiday Blogging

I've noticed over the last year or so that blogging, or at least with the blogs I read, takes a nap at holidays. This being Memorial Day weekend in the US. I'm not sure why. Other projects? Out of town? Excessive barbequing? Too much to eat?

Maybe some of you could comment on what you did this weekend.

Taking Things for Granted

Quite often Christians are warned against taking things for granted, as if such a thing were a sin or at least a problem. But what about taking things for granted that have been granted to us? Occasionally, I hear warnings against taking our salvation for granted. But God has granted it to me. So, if I take it for granted, is it a problem or a sin? What, is God going to take it back from me? If I take it for granted, then I know that I don't have to toil in perfectionism in order to keep it, and this is good.

So, we should only refuse to take things for granted that haven't to our knowledge been granted to us.

A Dad Named Sue

The father of the St. Louis Cardinals pitcher, Josh Hancock, recently killed in a car crash is suing everybody in the phone book for being contributors to his son's death. Hancock was drunk, speeding, talking on his cell phone and not wearing a seat belt when he slammed into a tow truck that was helping a stalled car on the interstate. But it's everybody else's fault.

Named in the lawsuit, according to this Comcast article, are Cardinals radio announcer Mike Shannon's restaurant, Shannon's daughter and restaurant manager, the towing company, the tow truck driver and the driver of the stalled car. Apparently the stalled car and tow truck were not out of the way of oncoming traffic. The driver of the stalled car is being sued for being "negligent in allowing his vehicle to reach the point where it stalled on the highway, and for failing to move it out of the way of oncoming traffic." It's not clear whether the Cardinals or Major League Baseball will be added to the lawsuit. They probably won't, since they have enough money to squash this guy in a lawsuit of such high profile.

What's interesting about this is that using the father's own logic, a case could just as easily be made, and maybe more easy to win, that his own negligence as a father in raising somebody who would do such a thing contributed to the damage to the tow truck and to the now stained name of the driver of the stalled car. I can't wait to see if the name of the person Hancock was talking to on the cell phone is released and why that person wasn't named in the lawsuit. He or she probably could tell he was drunk and that he was driving a car. Now that would be a freaky thing, to be talking to somebody on the phone and have them die in an accident during your conversation.

Glove Romney

When it comes to baseball, I have a good understanding the difference between a mitt and a glove. When it comes to politics, I have no clue.

Zoning Laws (Part 9) McMansion Suburbia

Read entire series here.

SuperSize me. American suburbia has entered a phase where house sizes are continually increasing for the same (or smaller) size families that live in them. This is often criticized as consumerism run rampant, is looked upon as an increase in selfishness and materialism, and is preached against by both environmentalists and religious leaders. But a closer look reveals something different.

Since zoning laws dictate minimum lot sizes, and thus limits the availability of lots, an artificially high price of land results. This is true of land prices, but not of construction costs. So over time there is an increase of land value versus house value. The piece of dirt is the biggest factor in the price of a home. What this does is creates a false sense of value through building a larger house. If a buyer could buy a 1000 square foot house for $1.1 million and a 3000 square foot house for $1.2 million, most are likely to opt for the latter. Those marginalized people who can afford a $1.1M house, but not a $1.2M house will simply buy the 3000 square foot house in the next community level down. Living life in one's house is more important than living on the land that house is on, even though the land costs more. For only 10% more money, one can obtain three times the house on the same piece of land. So, for the value, the largest house makes the most sense. Developers know this very well. People want a house, but the land is the biggest cost.

This has led to the latest building fad here in the San Francisco area, known as the "knockdown." People are now buying houses, let's say a ranch house built in the 60's, and they don't like the ugly architecture or small size. They bulldoze the house, because it's value is so small compared to the land on it. They then build a new, larger house in its place. It sounds ridiculous, but it makes economic sense.

Now something about value. Buying the "family size" product at the store is of value because at a larger size, the cost per unit is lower. It is more valuable for a family to buy this size than twice the amount of the regular size. But there's a side to it that we tend not to think about. For the individual, actually buying the smaller size, even though it has a higher cost per unit, can have the most value. If the bulk size item is too large for me to consume and will go bad before I can use it, or if I don't have the space to store it, then the smaller size is the best value for me because I won't be wasting money on something I can't fully use.

But for many people, zoning laws actually prohibit them from gaining the best value in land because the smaller size land item is unavailable. Imagine that. Getting a good land value is against the law! So people simply do what is the next best thing. Value is transferred from the land to the house. McMansion suburbia has more to do with reacting to zoning laws than with greed and selfishness.

Part 8 . . . . . . . . Part 10

God and His People: Limiting the Use of Biblical Metaphors

The bible uses quite a number of metaphors to describe the relationship between God (and/or Christ) and His people. This is because the relationship is complex. Many metaphors are used, as analogies, simply because this relationship can't be described in its fullness. Every analogy fails at some point, so each metaphor has its limitations.

So when we restrict the number of metaphors used in describing this relationship, we do violence to this relationship. Off the top of my head, here are some metaphors describing our relationship to God:

God is our God, we are His people. God is a Father, we are His children. Christ is the vine, we are the branches. God/Christ is the Lord/King, we are His subjects. Jesus is the Master, we are His disciples. Jesus is Master, we are servants. Christ is the head, the church is the body, with individuals being members of the body. Christ is the bridegroom, the church is the bride. Christ is the heir, we are co-heirs. We are brethren, Christ is our elder brother. Christ is the temple, we are the stones. We are the temple, the apostles are the foundation, and Christ is the cornerstone. Christ is the shepherd, we are the sheep (individuality) and Christ is the shepherd, we are the flock (community).

Some, like the high-church types, limit our relationship to maybe a few of these metaphors. Others, to quote a pastor friend of mine, "like Rome, almost drop the metaphor completely and assume a genuine ontological reality - the most obvious example is what they do with the 'body of Christ.' It's a metaphor, not an ontological statement about the extension of Jesus' incarnation!" Much of what goes on in Protestant theology, as well, limits our existence to the confines of the church, and its few metaphors, when the greater applications of metaphors suggest that the kingdom, and our relationship to God in it, is far greater than the church.

How The Government Turns Potential Destruction Into Guaranteed Destruction

Have an ash tree in your yard? Even if you don't, read this over at the Anti-Positivist.

[UPDATE: Gene Redlin, who makes a living at horticulture, made a comment on the ash tree disease story I linked. Thank you, Gene, for the additional information.]

How Did The Devil Get Control Of The Earth? (Part 2)

And he led Him up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "I will give you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours." And Jesus answered and said to him, "It is written, 'You shall worship the LORD your God and serve Him only.'" Luke 4:5-8 NASB

Read Part 1 here.

My answer to my question in Part 1 is that the devil gained control of the earth through Adam's disobedience in the garden. God gave Adam and Eve control of the earth. Authority was delegated to them. God was still ultimately in control, but authority over the land, the animals and plants were given to them. The animals also had authority over the plants as food. It could be argued that within the marriage, there was a kind of authority structure between husband and wife, too.

Satan was left out of this chain of command, left out of the picture altogether, and was envious. The chain of authority went like this: God, then man (and Adam then Eve within the marriage), then animals, then plants including the forbidden fruit. Satan wanted to be God. So to get to be God, he turned the authority tree upside down. He presented the fruit to the woman. But to keep the authority relationships in order, he had to enter the scheme as an animal; he chose the serpent. So he used the fruit, as a serpent, to deceive the woman, who deceived the man, and both of them took Satan at his word, replacing God's word. Satan tricked them into listening to him now instead of God.

Since God delegated authority to Adam and Eve, Satan by tricking them gained that authority he wanted by having them substitute him for God. An analogy would be if a father entrusted the family inheritance, a coin collection let's say, to his son to pass on to future generations. The son had legitimate control over the inheritance. But, neglecting his father's will, he sold the coin collection to the pawn shop to use the money for his own, new ideas. The pawn shop, even though it now had control over something that was never intended to be theirs, now had some form of legitimate claim over the coins. The father, seeing the stupidity of his son, went to the pawn shop to buy back the coin collection. Buying back is known as redemption. Not at a cheap price, either.

That's how I think Satan gained control of the earth, and he offered it to Christ - if He would but worship him - as the final action of gaining authority over all, as God. More later.

Vache Folle Isn't Quite Himself - Neither Am I

Vache Folle readily admits that his name is not really Vache Folle. To quote:

Why do I go by the moniker of Vache Folle instead of using my real name? I don’t want my employer to know all my opinions on things. I have a stuffy job and some unorthodox views, and these might not mix all that well. I also want to be able to report on the attitudes and opinions of my coworkers without their knowing that I am doing so. I also want to write about religious issues without my coreligionists’ being able to identify me and brand me a heretic. That’s the extent of it. Not too creepy, is it?

When I started blogging a few years ago, I wrangled over using my real name. Each reason that VF brings up has spun around in my mind. I've even blogged about my blogging anxiety. This Sunday I was talking to my pastor after church, and I told him I was doing a lot of thinking about zoning laws and other state activities that ruin our lives on a day to day basis. He said, "I know. I found your blog." Whew! One anxiety down. Mrs. Scott and I had a good laugh over that one on the way home.

There are many things, I guess, that I'd like to write about that stem from my real experiences in life, but my name being out there prevents me from doing so in a full way. That's really not that bad for me. Maybe my name being attached might help me to gain confidence in my internal believing function (or whatever you call it.) In any case, my blog is my blog. Love it or ostracize, excommunicate or jail me.

When Friends Don't Mix

Most of my friends are friends because I have more in common with them than not. Many I would say I agree with them on maybe 90% of what they believe and on 10% I disagree. But occasionally, there is occasion for certain friends of mine to mix with other friends. When one friend's 10% that I don't agree with runs into another friend's different 10%, it can be quite a clash.

Recently, a number of blogsite friends of mine have gone to war with other blogsite friends on their sites. I can count five different incidents, some of which are ongoing, just off the top of my head. Now, where to stand if I'm put on the spot?

Killing Jerry

I'm no fan of Jerry Falwell's politics. Or his fundamentalism. Or support of the GOP, or the war, or his foreign policy, or his dispensationalism. But the absolute venomous hatred spewing out from some of his opponents is beyond tasteless. Some of these people are absolutely sick. I don't know if it's the internet that makes it seem this way, but this is as bad, if not more so, than when Richard Nixon died.

Falwell Death A Hoax

The liberal news media have been reporting all day that the Rev. Jerry Falwell has died. Since you can't believe anything the liberal media says, the only conclusion is that his death is a hoax. Fabricated, no doubt, by liberals, gays and feminists.

But seriously, this shows us the value of Jesus' instructions in the sermon on the mount about judging others (not that we shouldn't) because the way in which we judge others will be meted out against us in return. I did a Google blog search and it's simply amazing the number of Falwell's quotes that are being used against him, rightly or wrongly. Especially those quotes that have to do with God's judgment.

Zoning Laws (Part 8) Israel as Community

Read entire series here.

The last time I read through the four gospels, I noticed something I hadn't seen before. Quite often, Jesus' dealing with the people came in settings where the social classes were integrated. In the account of the woman who wiped His feet with her tears, the Pharisee thought to himself that if Jesus knew what manner of woman she was, he wouldn't be associating with her. But the striking thing about this account is that she was in that very Pharisee's house. If he knew what manner of woman she was, why was she in his house to begin with? It seems that the poor had access to not only the neighborhoods the rich lived in, but sometimes to their property too.

Gleaning laws, and others, put the rich and poor together in the same community. Ruth, a Moabite woman, happened upon a prominent member of the community, Boaz. The rest is history as they say. When rich and poor live together in the same community, it is far easier for the rich to minister to the poor. God understands this well, but we moderns prefer zoning laws that prevent such mercy.

Part 7 . . . . . . . . Part 9

More Sermon Prep

A couple of posts ago I wrote concerning Gene Redlin's question about prepping for a sermon. In reviewing my own post, I seemed to continue a bit on my comments over there, and left with a possible misunderstanding of my view of preaching. I'm not suggesting that the pulpit is wrong, just that it is a tradition, mostly used for good, but sometimes abused. If it is placed above other essentials, to their neglect, then it can be idolatrous. I have a friend that told me he did 60 hours of prep to substitute for one Sunday school class. Things can be overdone.

Occasionally, I hear sermons with little prep, such as when the regular preacher has something come up at the last minute and can't do it. Prep can be helpful, but I think that a life in the Word, with preaching on something many times before, can help with a spontaneous sermon.

Masters of Imputation

We Protestants love our doctrine of imputation. Our sins are imputed to Christ and His righteousness is imputed to us. But doctrine without "practice" - or practical application to the real world - is meaningless. So we become masters at imputation.

What I mean by this is that we take the formal, official doctrines of a given church - no matter how minute or how old or outdated - and impute them, all of them, to every one who attends that church. We don't like what the medieval Roman church had to say about justification by faith, or what they said about those who hold to the Protestant view (Trent)? Well, then, every Roman Catholic living in 2007 implicitly believes the same thing, and none of them can be saved as a result. Read some comments here about Francis Beckwith's "conversion" to Catholicism. We drive by a playground full of Catholic schoolgirls in their plaid skirts playing teatherball and say, "Yup. There's the Council of Trent in action right there, you betcha."

If we applied some of these ways of thinking consistently, then we should conclude that Martin Luther, who didn't want to leave Rome, but simply reform some things, didn't become saved until he was excommunicated. We should also impute the hellish religious doctrine of the scribes and Pharisees to Jesus and His band of followers. Some of his closest followers (the bible calls them apostles) continued to attend synagogue on Saturdays, even with the same rulers in charge, well after Jesus was crucified.

Preparation for a Sermon?

Gene Redlin at Northern Gleaner questions the necessity of preparation for a sermon. I'm convinced that the Protestant doctrine of the pulpit is simply a tradition within Protestantism, and not mandated by the bible. Preaching is biblical and quite necessary, but how the pulpit is worked out isn't. Often, the pulpit takes precedence over other biblical necessities when we assemble, seen most when the preacher goes over his normal time and other things are squeezed out. Many pastors study all week as a "full time job" simply in preparation for their sermon, when the bible calls them to shepherding of the flock. Shepherding requires spending time with the sheep; time that sermon prep often cuts out.

Also, a high view of the pulpit can lead to other manufactured practices or twisted beliefs. Don't you dare get up to go to the potty during the sermon in some churches. Even if God gave you a small bladder. Sermons are often tailored to the length of a cassette tape, yet can go just far enough beyond the end of the tape as to render the tape less than ideal.

Saturday Night Potpourri

• I saw a fire engine a few hundred yards ahead of me on the freeway with its lights flashing. I saw another one passing on the other side of the freeway. If each had gone to each other's emergencies, wouldn't they have gotten there faster?
• I've seen thousands of women apply their makeup in the car mirror on their way to work in the morning. But I recently saw one at night. She was using the lighted compact mirror in the sun visor.
• I had an off-brand alarm clock that was driving me nuts. The snooze would occasionally work only once and I would wake up late. The buttons also made a very loud clicking noise that would wake up my wife if already asleep. Get what you pay for.

Zoning Laws (Part 7) Scarcity of Lots, Not Land

Read entire series here.

Because zoning laws have set minimum lot sizes within a jurisdiction, not only is a minimum wealth threshold set for living there, the number of lots available in that community is fixed. Land owners do not have the freedom to subdivide into lots small enough to accommodate market needs. Instead, the number of lots available is limited by law. An artificially low supply of lots is maintained, and with no decrease in demand, land costs are artificially higher than they would be with a free market. This further hinders the poor (or middle class) from being able to live in a desirable community.

Part 6 . . . . . . . . Part 8

Zoning Laws (Part 6) Separation of the Poor

Read entire series here.

Since zoning laws essentially set the threshold wealth level of each community, the poor have little choice but to live only in the communities that they can afford. This means that the poor are usually lumped all together in a given community. The rich can afford to live elsewhere, so they usually do.

When the poor are lumped into one community, and the rich and their businesses can afford to thrive in other communities, the poor have diminished access to good jobs, thus reinforcing their poverty.

Part 5 . . . . . . . . Part 7

Twice the Son of Hell - Legalism and Tyranny of the Conscience

Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you travel about on sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much a son of hell as yourselves. Matthew 23:15

It's been my experience that when legalism exists within the leadership of a church or Christian circle, even if to a small degree, that those legalisms are magnified greatly among the followers. Jesus sums this up in another place by saying that a little leaven leavens the whole lump. The first two churches I attended were what I would call greatly legalistic. Not as bad as some, but pretty bad.

In the first church, the prominent teacher also had a nationally broadcast nightly call-in radio program. Listening every night was common among his followers. I listened to him for years. Among his simplest legalisms were the beliefs that partaking of alcohol, tobacco, dancing and going to the movies were sins in and of themselves. All kinds of Scripture-twisting gymnastics were involved in backing up these beliefs. But this had a monstrous affect on the consciences of his listeners (and church attenders), most of whom only knew him from his radio show. I heard untold hundreds of callers ask the question, "Is it a sin to [fill in the blank]." Some would call-in and ask, "I'm a clerk at a grocery store, and I know it's a sin to use alcohol and tobacco. But my job requires me to ring up items and place them in shopping bags, and this sometimes includes alcohol and tobacco. I can't help but feel that I'm contributing to the sins of others. Is it a sin to be a grocery store clerk?"

Guilt by association is one of the errors of legalism. It also causes people to question God's creation and dealing with other people in good faith. Legalism also causes people to seek black and white answers to all of life's minutae, instead of the building up of personal convictions within the gray areas as a result of life's experiences. Legalism is the lazy man's shortcut to the leading of the Spirit.

But far worse than my example above where somebody asks the question is the one where the answer is already decided as, "Yes it is a sin" and then goes through life condemning all others who dare be attached, even if remotely, to the sins of others. A little leaven leavens the whole lump, and those affected are twice the sons of hell. Woe to you, Pharisees.

Too Late, Too Tired

This week I've been up/out too late with having to get up too early to have much time to blog. And any time I've had to blog has been met with blogger's cramp, brain clog or whatever you want to call it. Time to go to sleep

Role Reversal and Losing the War in Iraq

James Leroy Wilson has about the best take on the war in Iraq as I've seen. Read his short blog post here. American conservatives, religious ones included, are the biggest supporters of this war. And who are these conservatives?

Well, ideologically they are the ones who believe in small, de-centralized government, low taxes, individual freedom and the personal responsibility that goes along with it. They warn us of the world threatening dangers of Islamofascism, and urge an all-out fight against Islamofascists in the Middle East. And who are these Islamofascists?

Well, ideologically they are the ones who believe in centralized government, controlled by their religion, who decry individual freedom as the Western evil.

Yet, the conservatives want the war to be fought by the military of the centralized, US government, with the cost paid by the American taxpayers. Individual freedom to oppose this war is an act of treason and an aid to the enemy, while personal responsibility is viewed by them as a duty to support such war, and is the definition of patriotism. Not only this but the tool of war, the US military, is one of the most centralized, top-down entities there is. There is no personal freedom for its soldiers, as they are taught to obey their superiors at all costs. All for a salary of about $20k per year.

The biggest irony of all is that the war strategies of each side are a reversal of roles from the ideologies of their respective societies. The US is using a top-down, centralized, micro-managed standing army, while the insurgents are de-centralized, hide-behind-the-bushes, know-your-own-neighborhood bands of renegades. A complete reversal of the role we had in our own Revolutionary War. We took Iraq's standing army no sweat, because our standing army was superior. Bush declared victory. But then, as if it were some kind of surprise, the real war started. Is it any wonder our butts are getting handed to us? Those who refuse to listen to history are bound to repeat it.

To the supporters of this war I say: If this war is so important to the future of both Christianity and Western Civilization, why aren't you acting on your individual freedom and taking personal responsibility to make sure victory is secured? Go fight yourself, or pay for somebody else to do so. Or are you like the social liberals that you hate so much who think they've done their fair share by simply going to the polls and pulling their party's lever?

Zoning Laws (Part 5) Bad Traffic

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws effectively establish a minimum wealth level to live in a given community. But jobs within those communities do not all pay at a level that allows the worker to live there. Most must live elsewhere. The only way for them to get to work is to commute from an affordable community where they live to a community that will offer jobs that pay well enough.

This creates bad traffic. Each community I've worked in has been way beyond my means to live there. The last few have been very wealthy suburban bedroom communities that have also had huge corporate business parks, stretching for miles, that offer tens of thousands of jobs at all pay levels. The freeways are parking lots at commute hour.

Part 4 . . . . . . . . Part 6

Zoning Laws (Entire Series In A Single Post)

I've decided to put all the parts to this series in one post, in consecutive order, and update this post each time I add another part and link to it. So, here it is, in its entirety so far:

Zoning Laws (Part 1) - State Control Over Life

My grandfather had as one of his rules of life, this: he would never live (or work) anywhere that would not allow him to walk to work. Such can only be a dream for me. I've never been able to even come close to living close to where I work, or working close to where I live. This is true for many Americans.

Modern zoning laws have among the highest negative impact, and least acknowledged affect, of any legislations of civil government. They are foundational to the American way of life itself, yet are instrumental in causing or enhancing many of our social ills. They dictate where people can live, work, shop, recreate - every aspect of life is governed by zoning laws. Not only this, but they essentially create segregation by class, and are responsible for creating many of the problems with homelessness we see. Low job availability, long commutes, traffic jams, urban sprawl, racism and contempt for the poor are planted, watered and harvested by zoning laws. Yet most people don't have a clue that this is true.

I'll be looking at zoning laws and their affects in this new series.

Zoning Laws (Part 2) Segregation by Class

One of my blogging friends recently wrote that he lived in a well-to-do community and that the churches in communities like his needed to be creative in carrying out God's commands to help the poor. Wealthy communities have very few or no visible poor at all. Another blogging friend wrote that he grew up in a very poor community and that the poverty he experienced gave him some reservations about capitalism as an economic system.

One thing these two had in common, and this is true in news stories of every nature, is that entire communities have a class status. They are wealthy, or poor, or lower-middle class, or the 'hood, or upper-middle class or blue collar, etc. We live in communities with a fairly consistent level of wealth of those who live there. We simply accept this as part of the landscape of life and never give it a second thought, or even a first one.

Starting with residential housing, zoning laws establish minimum lot sizes on which a house can be built. The simple law of supply and demand establishes "market value" for that community. Because there is a minimum lot size, and a corresponding market value for that size lot, zoning laws effectively establish the minimum level of wealth required to live in that community. Communities that are more desirable to live in have higher wealth thresholds. This effectively eliminates the ability of the poor to live in those communities.

In part 1, I mentioned that I've never been able to live in a community where I worked. If I were allowed to buy smaller lots, even to build a smaller house, than what zoning laws currently allow, I could live close to work. But I'm not allowed to do that, so I can't live in the community where I work.

Zoning Laws (Part 3) Segregation by Class

Zoning laws also limit the number of dwellings and/or families that can live within a piece of property. "Single family" residential is just that. One family must bear the burden of the minimum "market value" price of the minimum lot size combined with maximum numbers of families allowed to live there.

Only recently did my county allow secondary "in-law" units to be built on a piece of property. They're starting to notice the immense problems their zoning laws have created. The sad part is that they fail to realize their laws created the problems to begin with.

Zoning Laws (Part 4) Segregation by Class

I live in the fourth largest, and the most expensive housing market in the US - the San Francisco Bay Area. Since zoning laws essentially mandate a minimum level of wealth necessary to live in any given community, each community has its own threshold. Generally, the closer to the financial center of the area, the more expensive the housing because that's where the best jobs are.

But since zoning laws create an artificial threshold for living in any given community, job holders in the wealthier communities must live further away in outlying communities. Back in the 90's, the Bay Area's more upscale suburban cities began to discover that most of their "essential" city employees (i.e. police, fire, parks maintenance, etc.) weren't residents of those cities. They lived elsewhere. That's because it was impossible for these people to live in those cities on the salaries they received - the artificially imposed housing prices were too high. And since the only candidates for these positions had to live far away in less expensive communities, it became much more difficult to fill these positions.

Imagine passing a law that mandates the segregation of people according to class. A huge uproar among the people would occur. Such a thing would be unthinkable in America today. Although completely unintended, this is exactly what zoning laws accomplish.

Zoning Laws (Part 5) Bad Traffic

Zoning laws effectively establish a minimum wealth level to live in a given community. But jobs within those communities do not all pay at a level that allows the worker to live there. Most must live elsewhere. The only way for them to get to work is to commute from an affordable community where they live to a community that will offer jobs that pay well enough.

This creates bad traffic. Each community I've worked in has been way beyond my means to live there. The last few have been very wealthy suburban bedroom communities that have also had huge corporate business parks, stretching for miles, that offer tens of thousands of jobs at all pay levels. The freeways are parking lots at commute hour.

Zoning Laws (Part 6) Separation of the Poor

Since zoning laws essentially set the threshold wealth level of each community, the poor have little choice but to live only in the communities that they can afford. This means that the poor are usually lumped all together in a given community. The rich can afford to live elsewhere, so they usually do.

When the poor are lumped into one community, and the rich and their businesses can afford to thrive in other communities, the poor have diminished access to good jobs, thus reinforcing their poverty.

Zoning Laws (Part 7) Scarcity of Lots, Not Land

Because zoning laws have set minimum lot sizes within a jurisdiction, not only is a minimum wealth threshold set for living there, the number of lots available in that community is fixed. Land owners do not have the freedom to subdivide into lots small enough to accommodate market needs. Instead, the number of lots available is limited by law. An artificially low supply of lots is maintained, and with no decrease in demand, land costs are artificially higher than they would be with a free market. This further hinders the poor (or middle class) from being able to live in a desirable community.

Zoning Laws (Part 8) Israel as Community

The last time I read through the four gospels, I noticed something I hadn't seen before. Quite often, Jesus' dealing with the people came in settings where the social classes were integrated. In the account of the woman who wiped His feet with her tears, the Pharisee thought to himself that if Jesus knew what manner of woman she was, he wouldn't be associating with her. But the striking thing about this account is that she was in that very Pharisee's house. If he knew what manner of woman she was, why was she in his house to begin with? It seems that the poor had access to not only the neighborhoods the rich lived in, but sometimes to their property too.

Gleaning laws, and others, put the rich and poor together in the same community. Ruth, a Moabite woman, happened upon a prominent member of the community, Boaz. The rest is history as they say. When rich and poor live together in the same community, it is far easier for the rich to minister to the poor. God understands this well, but we moderns prefer zoning laws that prevent such mercy.

Zoning Laws (Part 9) McMansion Suburbia

SuperSize me. American suburbia has entered a phase where house sizes are continually increasing for the same (or smaller) size families that live in them. This is often criticized as consumerism run rampant, is looked upon as an increase in selfishness and materialism, and is preached against by both environmentalists and religious leaders. But a closer look reveals something different.

Since zoning laws dictate minimum lot sizes, and thus limits the availability of lots, an artificially high price of land results. This is true of land prices, but not of construction costs. So over time there is an increase of land value versus house value. The piece of dirt is the biggest factor in the price of a home. What this does is creates a false sense of value through building a larger house. If a buyer could buy a 1000 square foot house for $1.1 million and a 3000 square foot house for $1.2 million, most are likely to opt for the latter. Those marginalized people who can afford a $1.1M house, but not a $1.2M house will simply buy the 3000 square foot house in the next community level down. Living life in one's house is more important than living on the land that house is on, even though the land costs more. For only 10% more money, one can obtain three times the house on the same piece of land. So, for the value, the largest house makes the most sense. Developers know this very well. People want a house, but the land is the biggest cost.

This has led to the latest building fad here in the San Francisco area, known as the "knockdown." People are now buying houses, let's say a ranch house built in the 60's, and they don't like the ugly architecture or small size. They bulldoze the house, because it's value is so small compared to the land on it. They then build a new, larger house in its place. It sounds ridiculous, but it makes economic sense.

Now something about value. Buying the "family size" product at the store is of value because at a larger size, the cost per unit is lower. It is more valuable for a family to buy this size than twice the amount of the regular size. But there's a side to it that we tend not to think about. For the individual, actually buying the smaller size, even though it has a higher cost per unit, can have the most value. If the bulk size item is too large for me to consume and will go bad before I can use it, or if I don't have the space to store it, then the smaller size is the best value for me because I won't be wasting money on something I can't fully use.

But for many people, zoning laws actually prohibit them from gaining the best value in land because the smaller size land item is unavailable. Imagine that. Getting a good land value is against the law! So people simply do what is the next best thing. Value is transferred from the land to the house. McMansion suburbia has more to do with reacting to zoning laws than with greed and selfishness.

Zoning Laws (Part 10) Combined With Other Laws

Zoning laws are combined with other laws to create some more road blocks to freedom. Tax laws are frequently used along with zoning laws to create excessive incomes for governments to play with. Property is re-zoned according to the amount of tax money that is projected for governments to receive. Property taxes are often used to fund public schools. Sales taxes also act as an incentive for governments to re-zone property as commercial. Eminent domain laws are used to confiscate private property in the re-zoning process without regard to private property rights.

Zoning Laws (Part 11) Combined With Other Laws (2)

Zoning laws can also have a combined effect with other laws such as strict building codes, local building ordinances and building permit processes. Building codes and ordinances make construction more expensive, and the permit process not only adds more cost, but sets a time limit for completion of construction. This adds hidden expense in that a greater amount of money is needed up-front for a project.

The overall effect of all these laws is a higher minimum standard of living. But this standard of living is mandated by law without allowing for the means to attain this standard. People who cannot meet this minimum level created by law sometimes end up homeless. Homelessness is often mandated by law without people knowing that this is the case.

Zoning Laws (Part 12) Zoning As Theft

Jim Fedako at Anti-Positivist carries one of his own articles on zoning laws. He suggests that zoning laws constitute theft of private property, and those who support zoning laws are the thieves. Read it here.

To see all the posts in this series in reverse consecutive order, click here.

How Did The Devil Get Control of The Earth?

And he led Him up and showed Him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time. And the devil said to Him, "I will give you all this domain and its glory; for it has been handed over to me, and I give it to whomever I wish. Therefore if You worship before me, it shall all be Yours." And Jesus answered and said to him, "It is written, 'You shall worship the LORD your God and serve Him only.'" Luke 4:5-8 NASB

Several things are striking in this passage about the temptation of Jesus. The devil claimed control over all the kingdoms of the earth. Additionally, Jesus neither corrected him nor rebuked him for this statement. He did, however, correct and rebuke for the idea that He should worship the devil. The devil said that domain over the kingdoms had "been handed over" to him.

Question: who handed the domain over to him and how did it happen? I'm thinking about this and I think I have an answer. It is certain to impact my view of kingdom history, and I think it sheds some light on other very important theological questions that have direct bearing on us Christians living today and how we should view our lives. Lord willing, I'll be writing about this soon.

Cheapskating Ourselves To Death

Gene Redlin has this over at Northern Gleaner on being cheap. Some people idolize frugality, and it will return to them. Sow the wind, reap the whirlwind, I s'pose.

Zoning Laws (Part 4) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

I live in the fourth largest, and the most expensive housing market in the US - the San Francisco Bay Area. Since zoning laws essentially mandate a minimum level of wealth necessary to live in any given community, each community has its own threshold. Generally, the closer to the financial center of the area, the more expensive the housing because that's where the best jobs are.

But since zoning laws create an artificial threshold for living in any given community, job holders in the wealthier communities must live further away in outlying communities. Back in the 90's, the Bay Area's more upscale suburban cities began to discover that most of their "essential" city employees (i.e. police, fire, parks maintenance, etc.) weren't residents of those cities. They lived elsewhere. That's because it was impossible for these people to live in those cities on the salaries they received - the artificially imposed housing prices were too high. And since the only candidates for these positions had to live far away in less expensive communities, it became much more difficult to fill these positions.

Imagine passing a law that mandates the segregation of people according to class. A huge uproar among the people would occur. Such a thing would be unthinkable in America today. Although completely unintended, this is exactly what zoning laws accomplish.

Part 3 . . . . . . . . Part 5

Saving the Planet

It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One is indeed the Savior of the world. John 4:42. NASB

Jesus is the savior of the world. Saving the planet, then, is an inescapably religious concept. But Jesus is also Lord of the world, and as such, He determines the means by which the planet will be saved. Any other architect of saving the planet than Jesus is a false savior, and any other means of saving the planet than by His Word is false religion - idolatry.

The planet will be saved when more and more people are converted to Christ, and they start living as God-delegated rulers of this world, and do so by His word. Environmentalists, who want to save the planet without Christ, and misguided Christians who don't care about God's creation because they think it will all be burned up some day real soon, both need to heed God's word.

Zoning Laws (Part 3) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

Zoning laws also limit the number of dwellings and/or families that can live within a piece of property. "Single family" residential is just that. One family must bear the burden of the minimum "market value" price of the minimum lot size combined with maximum numbers of families allowed to live there.

Only recently did my county allow secondary "in-law" units to be built on a piece of property. They're starting to notice the immense problems their zoning laws have created. The sad part is that they fail to realize their laws created the problems to begin with.

Part 2 . . . . . . . . Part 4

Zoning Laws (Part 2) Segregation by Class

Read entire series here.

One of my blogging friends recently wrote that he lived in a well-to-do community and that the churches in communities like his needed to be creative in carrying out God's commands to help the poor. Wealthy communities have very few or no visible poor at all. Another blogging friend wrote that he grew up in a very poor community and that the poverty he experienced gave him some reservations about capitalism as an economic system.

One thing these two had in common, and this is true in news stories of every nature, is that entire communities have a class status. They are wealthy, or poor, or lower-middle class, or the 'hood, or upper-middle class or blue collar, etc. We live in communities with a fairly consistent level of wealth of those who live there. We simply accept this as part of the landscape of life and never give it a second thought, or even a first one.

Starting with residential housing, zoning laws establish minimum lot sizes on which a house can be built. The simple law of supply and demand establishes "market value" for that community. Because there is a minimum lot size, and a corresponding market value for that size lot, zoning laws effectively establish the minimum level of wealth required to live in that community. Communities that are more desirable to live in have higher wealth thresholds. This effectively eliminates the ability of the poor to live in those communities.

In part 1, I mentioned that I've never been able to live in a community where I worked. If I were allowed to buy smaller lots, even to build a smaller house, than what zoning laws currently allow, I could live close to work. But I'm not allowed to do that, so I can't live in the community where I work.

Part 1 . . . . . . . . Part 3

Zoning Laws (Part 1) - State Control Over Life

Read entire series here.

My grandfather had as one of his rules of life, this: he would never live (or work) anywhere that would not allow him to walk to work. Such can only be a dream for me. I've never been able to even come close to living close to where I work, or working close to where I live. This is true for many Americans.

Modern zoning laws have among the highest negative impact, and least acknowledged affect, of any legislations of civil government. They are foundational to the American way of life itself, yet are instrumental in causing or enhancing many of our social ills. They dictate where people can live, work, shop, recreate - every aspect of life is governed by zoning laws. Not only this, but they essentially create segregation by class, and are responsible for creating many of the problems with homelessness we see. Low job availability, long commutes, traffic jams, urban sprawl, racism and contempt for the poor are planted, watered and harvested by zoning laws. Yet most people don't have a clue that this is true.

I'll be looking at zoning laws and their affects in this new series.

Part 2 .

Free Market Reactionism

No human activity, I suppose, invites rebellion more than a moral, legal or religious requirement placed on others that God Himself didn't place. This might be true, to a smaller degree, of requirements placed on us from our economic and social environments. We react to the pressures placed on us from all around us. If the government increases my taxes to pay for its programs, I will not suddenly become a believer in those programs. In fact, I will despise them all the more. Laws forced upon me will not change my heart. External laws never do. Salvation by law cannot work.

It is in this sense that we are free to react against those things that would place unwelcome or unwarranted restraints upon us. If my county raises sales taxes, I can do my shopping in the next county if it benefits me. If I were looking for a wife, and my church had a low level of good prospects, I could look elsewhere. If something I usually buy becomes illegal, I can resort to the underground or black markets. I am also free to disbelieve what others tell me, and can act accordingly. We can also put off doing good things until there is a better environment in which these things can be done.

It is good, then, for those who would force their false morality upon others via coercion (or even passively through taking joy in cultural norms that would have the same desired result), that their targets can react in a way to combat or avoid the desired results. Even though these people may never understand this, I'm optimistic that in due time, they will all fail and be regarded as failures.

Hey, I'm an Illegalist!

If adding to God's word is legalism, and disobeying a law of the state is illegal, then since all state laws are additions to God's word to begin with, any belief that opposes legalism is illegalism, and since I oppose legalism I also out of necessity oppose the state; which would make me an illegalist!

Double Header the Hard Way

Wednesday saw me go to what I call a "double header the hard way." That's two baseball games in one day, but in two different ballparks. Read about it over at my baseball blog.

Seek Ye First The Kingdom of God

But seek first His kingdom and His righteousness; and all these things shall be added to you. Matthew 6:33.

All these things shall be added to us? What things?

Do not be anxious then, saying, "What shall we eat?" or "What shall we drink?" or "With what shall we clothe ourselves?" For all these things the Gentiles eagerly seek; for your heavenly Father knows that you need all these things. Matthew 6:31-32.

Truly I say to you, there is no one who has left house or brothers or sisters or mother or father or children or farms, for My sake and for the gospel's sake, but that he shall receive a hundred times as much now in the present age, houses and brothers and sisters and mothers and children and farms... Mark 10:29-30

Why would God add these things to us?

Then God said, "Let us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." Genesis 1:26

Because He wants us to rule over the earth and its things. But in seeking His kingdom, we need righteousness. Man's rule over the earth in righteousness is God's kingdom.

Here We Go Again

I first heard of the Virginia Tech murders while listening to the radio in my car. I had almost no reaction whatsoever. No shock. No surprise. No sympathy for yet-unknown families of victims. No horror, no outrage, nothing. Just another top-of-the-hour news story.

I think all of those potential reactions were nullified by the realization of what was about to occur. Something much more painful. The endless media spin, analysis and regurgitation of this event for many years to come in every media outlet there is. It only took a few hours for the usual suspects to start babbling their predictable slop. Gun control, armies of therapists sent to help, how could this possibly happen here?. Next will be psychological profiles, irate politicians, and hours of children crying. No, I don't think ill of children crying over a tragedy at all. Just the way that it will be packaged and marketed to us by the media.

As an added note, James Leroy Wilson has some interesting comments over at Independent Country.

Our Reward In Full (annual tax day post)

(This is a re-posting of every year's tax day post:)

This being April 15, or tax day, I'll raise a question regarding alms giving. In Matthew 6, Jesus warns about practicing our alms giving to be noticed by men. Those who do have as their full reward just that: the notice by men. He warns that we are to give in secret, with only our heavenly Father knowing. Of course, necessity might require the one receiving the help knowing too.

If we are to give in secret, then why are we telling our accountants, our states and the IRS? Not only that, but any other agency or organization that requires a peek at our tax returns. "Hey, IRS, look at how righteous I am! I gave this much to the poor! Now, gimme my deduction!" Might this pittance be our reward in full? The subtlety of hypocrisy.... built right into the system.

Taxes Suck

My wife and I spent the whole weekend doing taxes. I want to kill anybody who ever thinks it a good idea to force people to pay taxes. Of course, that wouldn't be the best option, as vengeance belongs to the Lord, so I'll settle for God casting all these people into hell to burn for an eternity. Well, he can save a few, of course, or maybe many, which would be a great show of His mercy. I'll be first in line for restitution when repentance bears its fruit, though.

Illegal Is a Sick Bird - Clarification

Ron McKenzie brings up a good question in the comment section of my last post. Better clarify. I'm using these terms in context of personal experience of usage. I see "legal" used more in context of the American legal system, a body of man's rules, and "lawful" more in terms of God's law. I admit there is some cross over. But men who add to God's word are considered "legalists" and not "lawfulists." I hear Christians use "legal" in terms of civil government law, and "lawful" in terms of God's law.

Additionally, I see American sports' use of "legal" for context of their rules, as they are man made. Illegal formations, illegal defenses, illegal procedure, illegal pitches, etc. I guess I should consult a dictionary and a cultural sociologist before assuming definitions for terms. Maybe my terms are too subtle, like Ron suggests. Oops. If all this confuses you - nevermind.

Illegal Is a Sick Bird

My dad was a career California Highway Patrol officer. So growing up we had many goofy questions for him regarding driving and the law. "Dad, is it illegal to ___ (fill in the blank)?" His reply was usually, "Illegal is a sick bird," trying to impress upon us a distinction between legality and lawfulness, "do you mean lawful?"

I think I know what he meant, but this distinction needs to be impressed upon American Christians today. Most of the Christian faith has been made "illegal" by politicians, and from my experience, most Christians view "legal" as the same as "lawful," because of their false interpretation of Romans 13. So when good is outlawed, doing good is often not even viewed as good by many people. Just like Jesus and the apostles when they did good but were roundly condemned by legalists for disobeying false authorities.

Legalism vs. Illegalism

Is the opposite of a "legalist" an "illegalist?" I dare to say most legalists, and all statists, would think so.

I'm Repeating Myself

My last post is almost identical to a post from last year.

Kingdom vs. Church

Jesus spoke a great deal about the kingdom, but very little about the church. We have reversed this. At what cost?

Another 9/11 Oddity

One type of eyewitness testimony, that I would figure would be widespread in the news, that I've never heard is from somebody in the twin towers seeing the planes come at them while looking out a window.

The reporter covering firemen who caught the first plane hitting the first tower on film is famous. Millions saw the second plane hit, whether in person or on TV. Many people had stories of passing firemen in the stairwells. But were no people witness to the planes as they came at them? If 3000 died, there were tens of thousands at work already. Nobody was looking out the window? Maybe I missed it, but it's odd that I can't recall a single story.

Trinitarian Theology and From The Pew

The following is an excerpt from a letter I wrote to somebody starting a blog ministry that explains part of the reasoning behind my blog, From The Pew:

Now for the thing I mentioned to you about one of my basic ideas. It's a bit long, but please bear with me. I am an unashamed Trinitarian, and believe the doctrine of the Trinity can be practically applied to how the church operates, and how we as individuals fit into both the church and the kingdom. The basic premise is this: God is both One God, and three persons simultaneously. Neither is more important than the other. God as One is no more important than God as Three, and vice versa. We see this philosophy of the One and Many in many areas of life. The whole and its parts, unity and diversity, community and individuality, a team and its players, the body of Christ and its members. When Paul said to be imitators of God, I think he meant more than our personal attention to Christlikeness. I believe there is much value in structuring our churches, our organizations, and many other areas of life after the pattern of the Trinity. While the Scriptures don't explicitly demand this, God's structures for these things that are revealed in Scripture do follow this pattern. Paul asserts that the body, for example, is made up of diverse members, each with unique functions, and that we should all exercise our gifts, individually, for the sake of the body. No one member or type of member is more important than the other members. The body isn't an eye, for how would it hear? Etc.

Human history has been full of attempts to make either the whole or its parts most important. Communism on the one hand versus radical anarchy on the other. An authoritarian heirarchy in the church on the one hand, where the rulers are in control (community is most important), versus radical individualism seen in the American evangelical church on the other (individuals are most important). When the One is stressed above the Many, individuals aren't important, and can be easily dismissed. Think Roman Catholicism's church structure. Or many legalistic churches where the narrow official church doctrine governs all, and you can just leave, or we'll kick you out, if you don't agree with us. When the Many is stressed, unity is lost in favor of doing what you feel is right. Many constructs in history also stress both the One and Many, but they are held in tension with one another. "Nobody better tell me what to do, but I think everybody else should be forced to believe what I do." With God's structure, both the One and Many are held together in harmony, not in tension.

This is one of the foundational ideas of my blog, From the Pew. I state as my subtitle, "Because for too long it has been coming from the pulpits, seminaries and denominations." Little room has been left in many of our modern churches for individual thought and development of doctrine. They control the beliefs, and the believers have no choice but to be swept along with the tide. This is where I think the blogoshpere is and will continue to be used by God in the future for obtaining the proper balance of church and its members. A community of believers has been created that is not controlled by the "learned." Church leaders could stand a little instruction from those in the pews, because we have been gifted by both the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit. In the story of the blind man in John 9, the blind man witnessed to the Pharisees about Jesus' healing powers. When they refused to believe him, he answered, "Well, here is an amazing thing, that you do not know where He is from, and yet he opened my eyes." (John 9:30) The Pharisees replied in v. 34, "'You were born entirely in your sins, and are you teaching us?' And they put him out." They were unwilling to learn.

This is where I think your idea of using a blog to spread the truth about the state can be valuable. Many pastors and other church leaders are out there blogging, too, and quite frankly, a number of them are listening. There are also many lay people coming to truth and doubting some of the beliefs of their churches in regards to the state. I am optimistic regarding the future of the doctrine of the state as it relates to both the church and individual believers.

I hope this helps you in seeing what I'm wrangling with on a daily basis as I live my life in the presence of other believers and an unbelieving world. It does no good as a witness to the lost to tell them they have to obey the state no matter what. They merely see the chruch in bed with the state. Some abundant life! If you have any other questions, feel free to ask. Keep in touch regarding the progress of your project.

Happy Anniversary Two Pew

Today marks the second anniversary of my first post at From the Pew. I still believe what I wrote in that first post, although it doesn't seem like two years ago. Looking forward to the next year.

How Income Tax Works

Read this from Jim Fedako, the Anti-Positivist, on how our income tax system works, using a real life analogy.

Pet Peeves

Literally. The last few months have seen me shovel nice, neat little piles of dog crap off my front lawn, and cat crap out of my back yard. I know from whence the feline feces come from, but the canine poopies are a mystery. Near as I can tell, they're probably the product of a pre-dawn dog walk. I hate scumbags that let their dogs do this to other people's property. I've witnessed this so many times in my life (I'm an every day morning jogger) I could write a book. When I was a kid, somebody did that in our front yard while my mom was looking out the window. She ran outside and confronted the loser, who made it clear that it was unthinkable that somebody could be upset about it. Man.

I want to put up a vulgar sign in my front yard about shooting dogs and their owners, even though I wouldn't follow through. Would it be less than Christian of me to find out whose dog it is and return the package to their front porch? At least it would be more visible than on the grass.

Polling the Pollsters

Okay, I took the Presidential Candidate Selector poll that James Leroy Wilson and Vache Folle took. My results came out like this: Joseph Biden 100%, Duncan Hunter 94%, Mike Huckabee 88%, Ron Paul 86% and Condoleezza Rice 83%. When I clicked through again to post the results (only a few hours later), the poll changed and had additional questions.

As usual on polls of this type, I can't help but question the reasons for each question. I had no more than 3 selections that were not answered "neither," so without the pollster having a clue as to what I do believe about each issue, how is it even possible to match me with a candidate? Some of the questions are impossible to answer anyway because the question is either the wrong one or disqualifies itself by its contradictions. Question 3 about balancing civil rights and security creates a false dichotomy, because these two items go together, and are not on opposite sides of a balance. Civil rights ensures individuals with the rights and responsibilities of defending themselves with arms, even numerous arms, creating security. The false dichotomy is based on the reality that enabling one to defend himself is itself viewed as an act of terrorism because of the strong emphasis on so-called security.

The updated poll had more specific questions about health care, marijuana and taxes. Here are my new results: Theoretical Ideal Candidate 100%, Kent McManigal 94%, Ron Paul 81%, Chuck Hagel 71%, then a bunch lumped together. The first poll had McCain, Giuliani and Clinton way down about 10%-20%, yet the updated one had Clinton the same, but McCain and Giuliani at 67% and 47% respectively.

He Is Risen!

Even so consider yourselves to be dead to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus. Romans 6:11

In Romans 6, the apostle Paul shows how the death and resurrection of Jesus relate to our own lives. His death frees us from the slavery to sin and from its penalty. But His resurrection allows us to live life. Reformed Protestants are so busy focusing on His death, and the cross that caused it, that we miss the better event, His resurrection. Our justification comes at a point - a starting point; our entire life follows.

Imagine being in prison because you can't pay your debt. Now imagine somebody paying it off for you and you become free. While this is wonderful in its own right, now what do you do? Let's say you are freed from prison, but this occurs at 5:30am in January in Northern Minnesota, and you are released with only the t-shirt and shorts you came with. You sit huddled on the sidewalk outside the prison, shivering, trying to rejoice in your new freedom, all the while not noticing that the limo parked at the curb is waiting to take you away to a vacation in Hawaii. That is the resurrection!

He is Risen! Live, ye dry bones!