Russell/Kent: I wouldn’t necessarily say that the American experiment is focused ont he idea that people are capable of self-government, but rather than anything else is bad. That is, people have shown that they must be governed, and rather than trust anyone else to do it, like a king, we’ll take turns. The first way of looking at it does in fact fail to take into account man’s depraved nature, while the way I’ve suggesting is subtly different enough to take it into account fully. We limit the power of government at every step within the Constitution, precisely because we don’t trust people in power, even for the short-term.

Kent: Don’t worry about Jim. He pooped all over the place when I asked for questions for J.I.Packer, then frothed at the mouth a short time later over Manning, so give him enough time and he’ll be using “dovetail” in a sentence as well.

Michael: On Socrates vs Parsely, don’t tell me that you’re equating good theology with salvation! I actually have no reason to believe that Rod Parsley isn’t saved, despite his nonsense. I have no reason to believe that Socrates was. So I would say that Parsely was closer.

I’ve been in the P/C churches for a long time (I’m being confirmed as an Episcopalian tonight), and I can tell you that the majority of people in those churches are Believers. Misguided, sure, even wacky. But as has been said over and over in here, we are not saved by perfect doctrine, but by the Grace of God. Frankly, I don’t know what the exact percentages are, but I’d be surprised to learn that the percentage of P/C youth who “lose their faith” in college is any higher than the percentage of mainline or even (gasp!) reformed youth.

As my mom has mentioned to me (paraphrasing), “Yeah, law vs gospel, etc. I know a lot of really bratty reformed kids.” And by “kids” she means teens, usually.

Russell: Then wouldn’t we have a problem with the converse, if we limit depravity to soteriology, how do we explain the bad stuff Ted Turner does outside of issues directly relating to his salvation?

It’s possible I’ve been doing intellectual gymnastics for so long I don’t notice it anymore, but I guess the reality is that I don’t see total depravity out there. I see some pretty depraved people on both sides of the (salvation) fence, but I see good works from both sides as well. Hitler got the trains to run on time…built up the economy too. But we know that there isn’t a balance “up there” with our good works on one side and our bad on the other.

One time a (pagan) psychiatrist told me that; “most people do whatever they do in order to get their perceived needs met, if you figure out that part, you’ve got it licked.” None of us is good, but good is done by us “no-goods”, at least good from our perception. The trouble is that when you’re sitting at the bottom of the depravity well, how’re you to even know what’s good?

See, I just argued myself around in a circle…

Kurt: Loved that link, I can find out if Fido goes to heaven for only $8, I got my credit card out already…this almost made me become a dispy the other day, then I saw my wife.

If Truth = Cash Flow definately Rod Parsley. Otherwise Socrates. But what I really want to know is which of them is good.

Group: Who is closer to the truth of the Gospel: Socrates or Rod Parsley?

Kent: Pagan does not mean Occultist, as far as I am concerned.

Russell: Let me give you an example of what “proving Genesis by scientific facts” will do to you. (Or use “modernistic description” if that helps you.) I have a friend who is a serious YE creationist. The most serious one I’ve ever met. He’s totally puzzled by my rejection of what he believes proves the Bible true. He’s devoted to Kent Hovind, and is as well read and conversant on this subject as anyone I’ve ever encountered.

So one day we are having devotions, and he announces that he’s changed his view on Geness 1. I think “This is interesting.” Then he explains his change. Apparently, his previous interpretation of the second day wasn’t literal enough. In case the class has forgotten, the narrative says:

6 And God said, “Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.” 7 And God made the expanse and separated the waters that were under the expanse from the waters that were above the expanse. And it was so. 8 And God called the expanse Heaven. And there was evening and there was morning, the second day.

My friend said that instead of believing the early earth was covered by a water canopy, he now believed that the entire universe was covered by a water canopy.

Of course, my notion that a prescientific mind found a water canopy the best explanation for a blue sky that deposited rain, etc every so often is a rejection of any modernistic understandings of the text. Making Genesis 1 conform to scientific reality is a bandwagon I will never get on.

I just finished reading Robert Capon’s book “Genesis: The Movie.” The old rebel follows Augustine to say the seven day creation week is how it all existed in the mind of God, not how long it took to spin it all out. I would just say God choose to inspire a prescientific text that comes fully and completely from the roots of a particular ancient culture. It isn’t scientific in any way and it’s violent to try and make it scientific. It tells us God made the universe. And us. It is was very good. It’s a prescientific text with a theological purpose. In the Story/Conversation that is the “Bible,” it’s the way the story is told, so it’s the truth that matters for us. Who needs the vote of scientists or historians to verify anything about it?

I don’t want to be writing about this. I’ll stop. Please read the essays folks.

Russell: We do have recourse to take a rather unpopular (but in my view, Biblical) position concerning so-called “good deeds” performed by the reprobate.

We can simply say that these deeds may be good, in the relative sense that helping an old lady across the street is “gooder” than mugging her. BUT, in the final and ultimate sense, no deed is good unless it is done with a love for God, as well as a love for neighbor. And since the unbeliever does not love God, his deeds are not “good” in the absolute sense. This is no way “twisting” our minds; it’s simply taking the truth of fallen creation seriously. When Adam sinned, God cursed everything in Adam: we are dead creatures, and dead creatures can no more do a good work than they can save themselves.

That, and there is no biblical reason for limiting human depravity to soteriology alone. Besides, don’t postmoderns like to gently remind us that soteriology isn’t such a narrow category anyway?

Do we have any dispensationalists left here? If not, we’re gonna have to import one or two, so I can have somebody to offend. I stumbled across this linkage, thanks to reading something else on Drudge, and I thought I’d share Rapture Ready with you folks. Be sure and check out the Hal Lindsey oracle cartoon. (The artist was told to draw cartoons for Hal by God).

I run in circles which contain a lot of pagans, from nominal to dedicated to loosey goosey. I have to say I like them very much, and I prefer their company to many religious people I know. This isn’t to say I don’t LOVE those religious people. I love them with a love I can’t articulate to the pagans, and fortunately for me that is one of the few signs which gives me some comfort that I may actually be a Christian (I love all sorts of Christians, even wierd ones.) However, make me choose in a second and I’ll take a ride with one of my pagan associates over many of my Christian ones.

Kent – unless we limit depravity to soteriology we have no way of explaining the humanist good actions unless we twist our minds by saying that charity done by Ted Turner really isn’t charity because he doesn’t believe the right things.

Exo 20:8 “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor, and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a Sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work, you, or your son, or your daughter, your male servant, or your female servant, or your livestock, or the sojourner who is within your gates. 11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Am I just naieve to think “For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth…” means He made heaven and earth in six days? Is it just listed here as a pattern for concept in enforcing Sabbatarianism?

Russell: I don’t believe that “fallen-ness” is limited to “soteriological matters”, Romans 8:18-25 seems to indicate that all of creation is fallen as well. I remember Michael commenting not too long ago something to the effect of (forgive me if I blow it!) “how can we expect fallen man to have perfect theology”, that made a lot of sense to me.

I see laws and limitations as necessary aspects of humans living in proximity to one another. I don’t trust my neighbors to govern themselves, I pick up too many booze bottles out of the ditch near to road to be so naive.

I agree that the US was not formed only by, nor was it intended to be, a “Christian Nation” (as if a nation can actually be redeemed). I’m more trusting of (and would rather live next door to) a rational humanist than an irrational Christian.

Michael: Concur on the Pagan vs. P/C’er thing. For the record, are we defining “pagan” as “atheist/agnositic” or believer in Wicca, etc?

Russell: The whole Bible is prescientific. That doesn’t mean every passage means the same thing. I know you aren’t going to be one of those people who treats me like I mean “a blatant untrue lie” when I say “prescientific.” :-) (JN)

And Exodus is as prescientific as Genesis. Probably written about the same time.

Does someone think if God said it then it must be scientifically true? Literary genre people. Don’t be afraid of it.

Kent R, I don’t know about you, but the Reformed views that I have read don’t consider Total Depravity to mean that we are incapable of doing Good Things™. The fallen nature is fallen specifically in how we relate to God an our salvation. This sort of goes into the same discussion of predestination and predeterminism, but I digress. It seems perfectly harmonious for the founders of this country to have in full view man’s depravity in soteriological matters, and hope for man’s abilities in self-governance.

Another thing to note is the USA wasn’t put together by Christians alone. Rational humanists, deists, and biblicists worked together for one common goal.

Alex,

An expected and well written response. I’ll probably respond to it with a blog post sometime.

Michael,

Do you think Exodus 20 is also prescientific?

Regarding Pagan vs. Bad Christianity, I wonder how many people are actually realizing the conclusion of their pagan paradigms. Francis Schaeffer’s advice seems to have gone unheeded when it comes to engaging the culture. On the other hand, a few people I spoke with at the Wilsonite church this weekend had come out of P/C/foofoo churches due to the scrappiness of the “faith” and moved into Reformed land. I didn’t stick around long enough to see how many ex-pagans were there.

Jim: Though I own and enjoy using one of these, my tool of choice for dovetails is this.

Could we substitute the word “reconcile”?

Danny: I am not trying to dodge your question at all, but I think I’ve addressed all the issues around my views on young earth creationism in my essay on the subject. I have also addressed my own approach to the Bible in general in an essay that’s driven some people on here nuts, so I am very proud of it. Please read it and join the shocked masses.

As to your specific question, I said the following in the FAQ of my creationism essay:

Question 6. Aren’t you just turning plain historical passages into symbols or allegories? Isn’t that damaging the text as you accuse creationists of doing? A good question, but not a careful one. I don’t believe Genesis is symbolic or allegorical. I believe it is prescientific. If I explain the birth of a baby to a three year old child, I speak differently than I would do a college senior. I am not lying, using symbols or allegories. I am using language appropriate for the setting. Genesis is written in language appropriate for the culture, the purpose and the setting. It wasn’t written to or by or for modern scientists.

Looking at the literary purpose of a passage does put some subjectivity on the interpreter. No doubt about it. That means even more care and caution in saying what a text is all about and how it should be read. I understand some people prefer the security of saying all texts are literal. I feel that blanket approach hurts the text and doesn’t help us understand it.

I live in an area where mountain preachers just open the text and start preaching, as if the middle of Ezekiel needs no literary appreciation or semi-sophisticated approach. When I look at Genesis 1-3, I do NOT see literal science. I see liturgy and story. I see prescientific theological narrative. When I look at the crucifixion, I see literal history. When I read the account of Paul’s shipwreck, again literal history. When I read Revelation 20, I read Apocalyptic code and symbolism.

IOW, I take literary genre seriously, and I don’t buy into the bullying tactics of so-called Biblical conservatives who seem to want to import modernist science into Genesis because they think that substantiates their claim that the Bible is true. Uhhh….the Bible is true if there isn’t a word of science in it. Twisting the text into something it’s not isn’t good exegesis.

Other Confused BHTers: Read my lips: Pagans are probably closer to embracing the Gospel than the majority of nutcase P/C Christians. Pentecostal/Charismatics are, by and large, on their way out of the faith into disillusionment. Pagans are quite often moving TOWARD the faith as they discover the insufficiency of their worldview. Luther said that they given the choice of having people in bad, no gospel churches, or no churches at all, he picked no churches at all. I totally agree.

Kent, here is how I dovetail things.

Russell: Had a thought about some of your words:

The purpose of the American experiment is to show that people are inherently responsible for themselves, and capable of self-government, rather than requiring a maximum of external government control in order to function.

How do we dovetail this statement/expectation with man’s fallen nature?

I don’t intend to say this in an inflamatory way. I agree with your statement but I found (during a conversation over dinner with my wife) that there seems to be an internal “disconnect” with agreeing with your statement and believing what I believe about man’s nature.

Okay Russell, you asked for it.

I couldn’t keep my mouth shut.

Since I know you are all not tired of postmodernism and its fun cousins...

Regarding Marxism and government, have alla’y’all read the Federalist Papers?

I have updated my ‘nickname’ to reflect the generous title you have bestowed upon me. I made some mean drinks in my day. I doubt I know any one who works there anymore. Lattes all around!

Russell: Then the government of the US is Marxist.

Governments are instituted among men for the purpose of guaranteeing the inalienable rights vested by our Creator, not for the purpose of the mysterious “public good.”

This is a pretty good statement of what our founding fathers believed, but Romans 13:1-7 is not explicit about “property rights”, but does allude to “public good”.

Our focus seems to be “our ownership”, what about “our stewardship”? Doesn’t being concerned with the “public good” make us good neighbors?

• First, I strongly suspect that an awful lot of those who fit the category of “Nuthouse Christianity” that Michael’s talking about are committed enough to some form of works salvation to qualify as “pagan” anyway…
• Second, isn’t it also true that to the extent that were such “Nuthouse Christianity” (hypothetically) confused by our offspring (hypothetical or otherwise) as the genuine salvation-by-grace-alone article (decidedly not hypothetical), it would (hypothetically) represent a (hypothetical) failure at some level on the part of the (perhaps hypothetical) parent of that offspring?

Job, not Job, called and said I didn’t get the job. God is sovereign.

But I think I found more purpose now.

Matthew: You used to work at Common Grounds?! You are officially the coolest BHT member. I love that place. Just thinking about it gets me all happy.

Can’t you be an old earther and still think Noah’s Ark set sail around 6000 years ago?

Oh… I would much rather my kids be pagans than on their way to rejecting Christ because of nuthouse Christianity. Hands down. No problem.

Well put.

Michael: We’re all busy working on our parts for my forthcoming film opus, The Passion of the Bob. Those of you who know what I mean, know what I mean.

One guy who gets the grace and works business right- I think- is Jerry Bridges.

The YE Creationists can get excited again. They’re going to look for Noah’s Ark.

What if the BHT commissioned this PDL Opera? We could get out name on it and collect massive cash.

Jim’s rant is as close to a comprehensive statement of reality as I’ve ever seen. Mail it to at least ten friends, with some sort of mystical promise attached if they do the same.

So…here’s an idea. Instead of banning all smoking in bars and restaurants in Lexington, why don’t the nanny state busy bodies just let me throw out smokers if I want to? Or beat them up? Then the health conscious majority can have their eats and booze without smokers ruining their day. Really, the idea of the police showing up to arrest someone for lighting up is byond bizarre. Come home America! Weird, man. Weird.

BTW- How many times did some of you watch The Insider anyway? (JN)

Kentucky is finding several replacement crops for backy. Meth. Pot. Hemp. And Catfish ponds. Those are great imo. The Catfish ponds.

I am noting some of my co-workers apparently about to crack. I’m glad God has given me a 90% easy going temperament. And the other 10% of the time you people can all burn in hexx for all I care. (JN)

I am glad God speaks to so many of you. Could I see the hands of those who have seen a large white rabbit in the last few days?

I wonder if there is anyone great enough to set the key points of PDL into an opera of P&W songs? Is God calling some of you?

Oh…I would much rather my kids be pagans than on their way to rejecting Christ because of nuthouse Christianity. Hands down. No problem.

Asking employees to go work somewhere else is a little harder than asking diners to go eat somewhere else. It’s a lot harder to find a job than it is to find another place to get ribs. I think they should develop tobacco products that are 100% absorbed, so there’s nothing to exhale or spit. Non-smokers would be happy, smokers would get more of a chemical kick from their habit and oncology doctors would make millions. (jn)

If smoking is banned in Lexington then it is a fairly recent occurance. I worked at Common Grounds coffee shop on E. High St. for a while and it was definitely a smoking environment. Miserable. I hate to admit it, but the 2nd hand smoke gave me such bad nicotine cravings that I actually dipped Copenhagen for a spell (and violated my school’s ethos statement). Did I say it was miserable? All joking from yesterday aside, it isn’t cool to ask employees to breathe that crap 8 hours a day so I understand and agree with smoking bans from that standpoint. I have nothing else to say about smoking except that Kurt is a man in the know.

Tom: We’re not all from Kentucky, you know! Smoking has been banned in restaurants in Carrollton for a while, and is now banned in most restaurants in Dallas as well.

Defending smoking may trip someone’s political correctness trigger, but are we really supposed to moderate the topics we discuss because it doesn’t look good? Christianity itself doesn’t look good, buddy!

Anyway, smoking is essentially one minor point in the whole overall question of how intrusive, exactly, we’re going to allow government to be.

First they came for the cigarette smokers, but I didn’t speak up, because that is a nasty habit anyway…blah blah blah…Then they came for me!

If I am not mistaken, smoking is banned in Lexington. As for Bono, read his defense on the front page sidebar of “Thunderstruck”. I thought it was an imaginative excuse, and I give him full credit for it, the bloody Irishman! ;)

Kent:

My intent was to illustrate that how you choose to use your private property, in this case starting a business in which the general public would have access to your property, would limit how you can use your property.

See, I happen to be quite libertarian on property rights. Basically, if you own it, its yours and you should be able to do what you want with it. I don’t believe governments own nature, but this is how it works in America. Governments are instituted among men for the purpose of guaranteeing the inalienable rights vested by our Creator, not for the purpose of the mysterious “public good.” Individual rights trump the state every time, unless the government is Marxist. The purpose of the American experiment is to show that people are inherintly responsible for themselves, and capable of self-government, rather than requiring a maximum of external government control in order to function. When we’ve degraded into a society which controls which LEGAL substances can be consumed in which specific contexts, we show the experiment has failed miserably.

Michael,

I would rather my children be pagan than be in 90% of Pentecostal/Charismatic churches.

Are you serious? I can laugh at that, but at the end of the day, if I had a choice between my son being pagan and being part of a Pentecostal church… well… I just wonder if you’re serious.

PWinn:

We can label it “junk science,” but somehow people hear that label and still think “well, it could be true.”

How true, how true. I find this goes for religion as well. A friend of my wife’s was studying with the Jehovah’s Witnesses for a while, and since my wife grew up in that cult she explained to her all the serious problems with it, the least of them being doctrinal. From personal experience my wife related the control, manipulation, deception, etc. and yet her friend still maintains “They might be on to something…” The JW’s were very sincere people and seemed to have answers for everything so who are you, even if you have mountains of first hand experience and factual data, to say they are wrong? Segue to smoking, it’s the same thing. The conversations that I don’t enjoy having with Christians about smoking include actual facts and distinguishing between the smoking process of cigarettes and pipes and yet, after all is said and done, the usual response is “Well, I just think any smoking is bad.” or some such nonsense.

Tell that to glaucoma patients.

And what right does an employee have to decide what their work environment is like? Oh yeah, the part where they agree to be employed! We really have become a nation of protecting ourselves from ourselves.

Jim, the purjorative use of “puritanical” is a misnomer, and of course you make reference to such. I believe the religious movement which actually gave us the “puritan” attitudes toward sex drugs and rock & roll is the Shaker movement. They made great furniture, but since they couldn’t breed, they died out quickly.

Danny,

Watch out, that yellow thing is going to crap on your mitt!

Is banning smoking really an issue in Kentucky, anyway? I mean, apparently not. Again I ask: are there not better issues for people, especially Christians, to get involved in? Defending smoking doesn’t look real good. Kind of like Bono cussing on TV.

New member of my family.

Meet Calvin. He’s a about 1.5 weeks old.

Guess who is taking an anti-smoking ban position in an article for her Lexington, Kentucky-based school paper? I know you’re all oh-so-proud, you don’t have to tell me ;)

1) Should the government have the power to regulate what happens in a bar in Lexington where not a single one of you is compelled to go, or welcome to come to if you don’t like smokers?

“He does not bear the sword for nothing,” although I suspect that Paul didn’t exactly have “telling people not to put burning paper and leaves into their mouths” wasn’t exactly what Paul had in mind.

2) Why is smoking such a Nanny State obsession? Why not alcohol?

Because we Americans are Puritanical about public sins. I’m using “Puritanical” in the pejorative sense that it’s come to mean, not in the sense that the Puritans themselves understood freedom, grace, and sin (for the most part, although that bit about sewing your daughter’s boyfriend’s nightshirt into the bedding so they could sleep together is a bit weird, don’t you think?) We have, by the way, very similar attitudes toward recreational drug usage. And our attitudes on sex and alcohol aren’t that far off, either. While we don’t revile people for public sexual indiscretions or drunkenness, there’s a certain stigma attached to alcoholism that parallels our attitude toward smoking.

3) Why are smokers increasingly treated as criminals and addicts? (All the Oprah outrage is bizarre.)

Because it’s safe to be anti-smoking. Americans have a strong need to oppose something, but many of the things we should oppose (gun control, abortion, the Democratic party, invading Middle Eastern countries, giving helicopters and rockets to Israel so they can defend themselves against wheelchair-bound Muslim clerics, the coming environmental catastrophe, the coming oil crisis precipitated by environmentalists not letting us drill for oil in ANWR because it might upset the population of disease-ridden black flies that live there, John Kerry’s plastic surgery, etc., etc., etc.) are so hotly contested and trigger such a broad range of responses that it’s not safe to do so. If I was to stand up at work and announce that I was opposed to gay marriage, I’d be pilloried – even though there are plenty of people who privately would agree with me. But being opposed to cigarettes is OK, because, like, who is in favor of selling addictive substances that cause cancer to children? (Well, OK, with the exception of McDonalds…)

4) Why do we allow all this lying that goes on about smoking?

Because we allowed tobacco companies to lie to us for so long, and we feel guilty? Because subconsciously, we all feel guilty that African slaves were brought to this country so that Thomas Jefferson could enjoy a pipe after intimacies with his mistress? Because it’s our nature to over-react? Or maybe, because lying is inherent in the media entertainment industry, and all of our societal communication is converging on that industry?

OK, somewhere someone dies at 73 instead of 80. It’s their choice people. Less social security for you baby boomers to pay. But from the junk science we have to listen to, you’d think 25 year olds are dropping dead like flies from lung cancer. What turned Noel into a libertarian? Those idiotic “Truth” ads, that are right up there with the best propaganda ever produced.

OK, so someone dies at 73 instead of 80. 10 years later, one of his grandsons is a hot-shot attorney from Yale, and (because lawyers are basically idlers with too much time on their hands) he realizes one day that Grandpa coulda had at least 7 more “quality” years in the Sunnydale Home for the Criminally Ignored Elderly if only he hadn’t been suckered in by the Marlboro Man while he was slogging through the trenches of France, fighting the war to let his kids spoil their kids and send them to Yale to study law rather than goose-stepping to bad music. So Jr. realizes also that this smells of “class action”, because that’s where the big money is, and he goes after the Marlboro Man in a big way.

The problem is, your mortgage was probably funded by someone who had a bit of extra scratch because he made a killing buying cartons of cigs in Virginia and U-Hauling them up to New York to sell tax-free. Or maybe he just bought Philip Morris stock. He and 16 billion other teachers, doctors, telephone linemen, garbage collectors, and other assorted folk who never even knew that they were paying the Marlboro Man to entice little boys into back alleys and give them cancer; they thought they were just being smart and planning for retirement in Florida so that their Yale Law sons wouldn’t ship them off to Sunnydale like we did Grandpa. So the crisis is that Daddy’s 401K, which he desperately needs because Roosevelt’s mark-of-the-beast shell game called “social security” is going to come down to the one guy left in America whose job didn’t get outsourced to New Delhi paying for the retirements of the 16 billion other slobs who thought that all that money going to fancy places like with names like “FICA” on their pay stubs meant someone was actually putting money in a bank account with their name on it, when in fact what really happened is that the money for FICA goes to pay for the 40-odd hotel rooms that Hilary Clinton needs when she visits Baghdad to serve turkey to the troops after she gets elected president (and we get to call Bill the “First Guy” or something more colorful.)

So Jr. sues the Marlboro Man, which “action” wins a gazillion bucks for the “class”, which it turns out to be mostly Jr. and a bunch of other attorneys who’ve been running around for 40 years trying to dig papers out of Philip Morris’ trash cans that actually prove that the Marlboro Man was trying to lure kids into dark alleys, and that those coughs that Grandpa had weren’t just something left over from being gassed by the Hun, and that – horror of horrors – the Evil Geniuses™ that ran tobacco (and who actually, it turns out, did a pretty good job for the 16 billion teachers, doctors, telephone linemen, garbage collectors, and other assorted folk who they actually worked for, at least from the perspective that their 401K accounts are full of money just waiting to be spent on a condo in Florida.) And the upstart of it all is, Daddy can’t retire to Florida and escape being warehoused by Jr. when he gets too old to remember to take his pills, because all the money for the condo evaporated when the Evil Geniuses™ figured out that they needed cut their losses and seek asylum in Cuba with the rest of the rich criminals in this age of hunger.

But, you see, Your Government is run by Very Smart People™, some of whom actually went to Yale Law themselves (and are buddies with Jr., but let’s not go there, because this is too complicated already), so they come up with a plan to take the money that they used to give to the Marlboro Man so he could grow his evil weed and instead give it to the Marlboro Man’s advertising agency so that we could have another round of TV commercials like the egg one, with some Hollywood hunk (who’s probably an in-the-closet gay, if the truth were told) putting lots of oregano and Tabasco on top of the eggs and saying things like, “These are your lungs, if you walk within 3 miles of someone who’s smoking, just once in your entire life,” over a bed of MTV’s latest hip-hop music, all of which makes the Marlboro Man’s paltry attempts to lure kiddies into a life of crime and cancer look like Amateur Hour.

Now, if all of this is way too complicated for you to follow, then understand that Daddy goes out into the world where things like this happen every day, and has to work in it, which is why he feels like s**t when he comes home and doesn’t want to do anything except drink a lot, eat things that Mom says will kill him, and watch the Sopranos in the hopes that Tony will visit the BadaBing long enough for him to get a glance at one of the babes. (Hopefully, one with good teeth.)

The Wall Street Journal had an article on the state of the tobacco industry in NC. The industry’s dying, and the companies don’t have nearly the power that they used to. Some campuses are even banning selling cigs on campus. So, if you’d like to read more about it, go over to their site and see if you can find it.

So how do you “fix” the worship scene? Continue singing “The Heart of Worship”? It is already overplayed and fancied up so as to destroy it’s purpose.

I’d like to see more techno during service. Umsha Umsha Umsha Umsha weee Umsha Umsha Umsha weeee. Big fan. :) With an obligatory Romans 9 quote.

We’ll know we’re making progress when we find a theological website on which an Moslem has posted a “Why They Hate Us” article that mentions some of this.

Worship music has been the “new” golden calf for about 10 years now.

Oh, and by the way, I asked God about the rain at Ichthus, and the prophetic word came: the angels just needed to take a leak.

Michael, that’s funny, because I was just talking with God the other day:

Me: and forgive me my trespasses, even though I pretty much stick to my own yard these days, as I forgive those brats who left beer bottles on my lawn last week, and lead me not into temptation, but direct my path to the uttermost parts of the mall to avoid passing Victoria’s Secret, and keep me from even thinking about going to Hooters ever …

The Lord: Forgive, check. Lead not, check. Hooters, will do. Anything else?

Me: Um, well, apart from that bit that you know, about it being your kingdom and all, I guess I’m pretty much done. Oh, one other thing. Today on BHT, Michael seemed a bit out of sorts about some cow orkers heading to one of those “Creation” knock-offs going on in Kentucky….

The Lord: [sighs] Oh, I’m all over that one. Gonna send a clear message. It’s scheduled to pour. Buckets. Hope they plan to bring some gopher wood [chuckles].

Me: Um, not to question your providence or wisdom or anything (after all, this is my personal devotions, not BHT), but are you sure that rain is the right approach here? I mean, will they get the message?

The Lord: Of course. How could they miss it? Bickel’s theology stinks, and when you stink, you take a shower. I mean, it’s so obvious. Just like that thing I did with Moses and the serpent on the stick, right? I mean, do I have to spell everything out? Isn’t there some room for creativity here?

Me: Well, I guess you’re right, you being the Lord and all. And you do have a point; I mean, it’s hardly your fault if we dweebs miss the message, right? I mean, Paul pretty much nailed that one.

The Lord: Look, I’m an artist. I have to be free to express myself; I can’t get caught up in how people are going to interpret things. I’m DaVinci, not Thomas Kinkade. I go in for that subtle stuff. Oh, and by the way…

Me: [anxiously] Yes, Lord?

The Lord: Be sure to tell them it’s “Ichthyus™. And one last thing…”

Me: Yes, Lord?

The Lord: Take a good hard look at yourself, and then remind yourself that I love lots of other losers besides you.

Me: For ever and ever. Amen.

The Lord: Thanks. Have a nice day!

Michael: I’m amazed that this topic is still going. I’ll do my part, though, and answer your questions:

1. It depends. Yes, the government should be able to prohibit murder in a bar in Lexington, etc, but not to prevent people from wearing stupid hats. In fact, if you really think through the dividing line, it doesn’t change much for public vs private property.

2. Because we tried prohibition of alcohol and it didn’t work. Moralists learned that you cannot successfully impose moral order by fiat, so they have engaged in a campaign to convince us to impose moral order on ourselves by popular vote, one locale at a time. The truth is that control is the obsession, and smoking is merely the least popular of a series of unpopular activities to be banned over time.

3. Never underestimate the power of stupid people in large groups.

4. This is really my answer to the last one: Smokers are treated as they are because of disinformation, and we allow any disinformation because in our post-modern society we are not allowed to state that something is truly wrong. We can label it “junk science,” but somehow people hear that label and still think “well, it could be true.” The only time we’re allowed to use the “lie” word is if we’re talking about politicians, and then we usually apply it to situations in which the politicians (surprisingly, for politicians) didn’t actually lie.

The truth is that smoking cigarettes is truly harmful. Study after study has shown this to be true for years, with few exceptions. Interestingly, smokers tend to cost the state (meaning you and me, fellow taxpayers) less money overall, because they die younger of lung cancer rather than live longer with more expensive diseases. But leaving aside the economic issues, smoking does kill, and we’ve known this for at least forty years.

Smoking cigars is less harmful than smoking cigarettes. Smoking pipes is so un-harmful that it is statistically beneficial. Presumably, though there is scant research on this, second-hand smoke would be less harmful than smoking cigarettes, but somewhere in the neighborhood of smoking a cigar or pipe. That is, somewhere between “less harmful than Houston air pollution” and “more healthy than fresh air.”

After all, think about it: every cigar or pipe smoker is inhaling second-hand smoke—from himself! If I draw in on my pipe, hold it in my mouth, and then blow it out, the next breath I draw into my lungs is clearly going to include the smoke I just blew out, no? Okay, it’s pipe smoke instead of cigarette smoke, and I’m sure that’s the difference, but let’s not forget that second-hand (pipe) smokers actually live longer than non-smokers.

I’d like to see a bit more research on second-hand smoke before pronouncing it distinctly unhealthy. I suspect air pollution, including the kind Uncle Frank likes to let loose after a meal, is more harmful.

However, harmful != pleasant. At lunchtime, at least, I would rather gargle whatever can be wrung out of the cloth used to wipe down the tables than sit next to a cigarette smoker. It may not be unhealthy, but it is disgusting.

Kurt: In California, the first state to impose a statewide smoking ban in restaurants and bars, they did so using labor law. Any bar that has no employees is still welcome to allow smoking, but as soon as you employ your first employee, you must ban smoking to protect the rights of employees to work in a smoke-free environment. Puts a twist on things, eh?

Tom: North Carolina doesn’t smoke ‘em all – we just roll in the money the govenment pays us not to grow the tobacco for other states…

Seriously, NC’s in trouble because tobacco is a dying industry (along with textiles and furniture). We’ve been trying to move to more high-tech and biomed stuff, but I’d guestimate that 30-40% of the former tobacco fields in my county are now housing developments. Including the one I live in. Strangely, when we have grass fires, we get lots of people running around trying to breathe the smoke…

On the upside, tho, our farmers have had to become creative to stay in business. Some plant more peanuts and soybeans. Some plant corn. Other, more intrepid farmers, have converted from one sin tax to another, realizing that my area of North Carolina produces some mighty fine grapes for wine production, including the fine Muscadines and Scuppernogs which, when discovered by the Europeans in 1524, were called better than anything the French, Spanish, or Italians had.

Worship music is the new Golden Calf.

I would rather my children be pagan than be in 90% of Pentecostal/Charismatic churches.

The Vineyards have one very appealing quality: spiritual generousity. It’s also their most dangerous quality, and I think they learned it in the Toronto mess. By assuming that the Holy Spirit MIGHT be working in anything, they allowed some clearly anti-Christian movements loose into the church.

No one can dispute that scripture speaks of prophetic gifts in the New Testament era church. What can be disputed is the nature of New Testament prophetic utterance. The Prophecy movements that I am concerned about- i.e. Kansas City, etc.- believe the prophetic actually provides new information about the workings of God in history. The prophets are privy to the the Divine direction of end times events, such as judgement, revival, historical disaster, national directions, etc. With this assumption, they keep their flocks fascinated with interpretations of events as having mammoth import and significance.

For example, it rained all weekend at Ichthus. Mike Bickle said that God audibly spoke to him that this rain was God “raining on their” parade and was analagous to what God is going to do to the church in preparation for revival. (Yawn) It substantiated this with stories of how God spoke to him in the past and he knows his voice (Thank you Mr. Blackaby.)

This is dangerous stuff. It changes New Testament prophecy from an encouragement and application of the Gospel message to an elevation of the prophet to the status of a Key person who hears and sees what others cannot AND who goes BEYOND SCRIPTURE in revealing God’s truth.

The inevitable elevation of prophets to a status beyond the scripture (even if it is argued that it is not involving revelation concerning the Gospel) is an attack about the “Final Word” nature of the Bible, and the “Final Word” nature of Jesus. Where is it said in scripture that God has “more words” of revelation on ANY topic?

Michael got my curiosity up about smoking statistics by state. And it looks like, indeed, Kentucky has the highest percentage of adult smokers, 30.5%. I really expected North Carolina to be at the top since they are known as a major tobacco-growing state, but they are only at 26.1%. Oklahoma, my state, seems to be kind of in the middle at 23.3%. Unsurprisingly the least smokingest state is Utah at 12.9%. So show the Mormon’s that they’re full of **** and light one up today! (JN)

This day started well. First, I got 8 hours of sleep, which is extremely rare for me since I got into my 40’s. And the Reds won again, keeping them in a first place tie with the Cubbies, who were blanked by the Diamondbacks 9-0, and amazingly, beaten by Randy Johnson for the 12th straight time.

Then I got to my e-mail, where there was all kinds of good news. My father-in-law got a good report on some tests, AND several things of a personal nature have the day looking up. Did you know my mortgage was approved? And I can enlarge various parts of my body? And someone has a date for me in my area? And I can get really cheap drugs? I’m a lucky guy.

Then I don’t have to preach until tomorrow, and I have a ball game tonight just up the road in Manchester. Defense and hitting guys. Defense and hitting.

One of my co-workers went kind of bonkers yesterday because someone referred to someone as “Reverend,” and she spent the rest of the day making a big deal that the Bible prohibits this blasphemy. So all day, people are coming to me asking if the Bible says it’s wrong to call someone reverend. I say the word reverend isn’t in the Bible, which for some reason makes me look like a wise cracker. Then I said it was OK to use titles to refer to your ministers, as long as you know they are just ordinary shmucks like the rest of us. Apparently this answer didn’t satisfy.

Smoking culture in Ky is different, and I recognize that. One of the biggest defenders of the right to smoke that I know of is my daughter, who is about as far from a smoker as you can get. I hate the smell of smoke, but I’ve grown up with it all my life. Our high school students are allowed to smoke, which is mind boggling to a lot of people, but allows us to take all kinds of kids whose only crime in the world has been smoking. Tobacco is more than part of Ky’s economy. It’s a way of life. A third of adults smoke here, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was half in Clay County. People smell like smoke. It causes massive health problems, but as usual, all efforts to inform us that smoking is killing us just gets the rebel/hillbilly back up against the wall and we stuff cigarettes in the mouths of our babies and start teaching them to smoke.

In the end, it is ridiculous, and I hate it. But it also provides a test case for a lot of common sense principles:

1) Should the government have the power to regulate what happens in a bar in Lexington where not a single one of you is compelled to go, or welcome to come to if you don’t like smokers?
2) Why is smoking such a Nanny State obsession? Why not alcohol?
3) Why are smokers increasingly treated as criminals and addicts? (All the Oprah outrage is bizarre.)
4) Why do we allow all this lying that goes on about smoking? OK, somewhere someone dies at 73 instead of 80. It’s their choice people. Less social security for you baby boomers to pay. But from the junk science we have to listen to, you’d think 25 year olds are dropping dead like flies from lung cancer. What turned Noel into a libertarian? Those idiotic “Truth” ads, that are right up there with the best propaganda ever produced.

It’s a nasty, annoying, unhealthy stupid habit. So are a few dozen other human activities. But bringing the government in to shut down my pool hall and pub over it? That’s a genuine evil.

If anyone plans to come into my house smoking or chewing tobacco, they should expect me to return fire in self defense.

I’m going to warn you….this is really funny…and rather disturbing. Don’t let little kids see this. Also, if you are really drunk or high, I’d stay away as well.

Jim is bringing michaelspencer.us into the real world. I appreciate all his hard work.

I’ll try to blog more tomorrow. It’s been a long baseball day, and then I’m getting ready to teach Revelation 2 and 3.

Russell: My intent was to illustrate that how you choose to use your private property, in this case starting a business in which the general public would have access to your property, would limit how you can use your property.

Here in Minnesota I can not legally reduce wetland areas on my land. My land, were it to have wetlands, would contribute to the public good by providing habitat for waterfowl. Another example would be that I cannot shoot a deer on my own private land, technically deer belong to all of the people of the state.

Opening a pub would mean that one would have to obey health department laws in order to not be a threat to public health. There are limitations on how your use private property.

Kent R, Surely you’re not suggesting that second-hand smoke, which has never been proven in any study by anyone to have any measurable effect on the health of anyone, is the same as shooting someone… are you?

Tom: I enjoyed your post regarding your Vineyard experience, it parallels ours, especially during the Toronto “Blessing”. We subsequently attended a YWAM (Youth With A Mission) DTS (Discipleship Training School) which was one of the most weird and wounding experiences of our lives. There is something really sick going on with “authority” in that camp, we were constantly admonished to not “touch the Lord’s annointed”.

One lady who taught in our DTS decided that the Lord “told” her not to wear her glasses because He had so gifted her with spiritual vision that she needed to be “humbled” by asking others for help with her with her daily activities, which meant everyone got to wait on her.

It took a long time to recover from constantly being manipulated and told we where rebellious. We were told a lot of really weird s***, the stories can go on and on.

We too really miss some of our friends, and especially the music. We were involved in the praise team while we were there, as well as youth ministry. There are quite a few people that are still in our hearts and prayers. One thing I really loved was the diversity of people that attended, bikers, cowboys, druggies and yuppies.

The Midwest seems stuffy by comparison…

Eric,

I don’t inhale smoke because I think that’s bad news for the soft moist tissue known as my lungs. But only an idiot would inhale while smoking a pipe or cigar. A friend of mine is one of those idiots.

I can fire my .357 through my woods (private property) with no repercussions (pardon the pun). If I built a bar in my line of fire (still private property), invited people to come in and drink, and then fired my .357, there’d be a problem.

Russell: I do not at all doubt that there are some psychological benefits to a good smoke. I understand that very well, even though I’ve never been a smoker - a good, greasy, double bacon cheeseburger being my own version of psychological easement and stress relief :)

No, I don’t suggest that there are no good effects from smoking. But I still contend that there is a lot of spin and obfuscation required (not on your part, mind you, but on the part of many I’ve talked to) to claim that inhaling smoke is not physically harmful. shrug I guess I should stop harping on it now ;)

Ok, multiple choice:

A bar is:

a) private property
b) public property
c) a great place for beer

A bowling alley is:

a) private property
b) public property
c) a great place for beer

A gambling establishment is:

a) private property
b) public property
c) a great place for beer nuts

Bill Mac:

The number of pipes and cigars you see in public is insignificant.

And such a sad state of affairs it is. I don’t smoke my pipes in public because I’m tired of talking to people. It’s always “Ooh that smells good..” or “My father/grandfather/uncle used to smoke a pipe, I love the smell…” or from Christians “You’re the DEVIL.” and then the questions start… And I’d just prefer to relax while smoking a pipe. And I like expensive cigars while golfing because they’re easier to manage while attempting to chase a stupid while ball around the grass for 3 hours (9 holes – I don’t golf much).

Face it. Smoking’s cool. Why else would people do it? :-/
I picked up “smoking” when I visited the pubs in Ireland. Two pints and a cig walking down and singing with the gang. We’d better see some of that in Heaven. :P

My mother sold doughnuts at church for little profit. Any profits went to the “fellowship committee” which encouraged more fellowship. Awesome stuff in my book. If I see any actual “money making” stuff in a church I get a little upset. There is a church here locally that is full (read:90%) MLM people scamming off the new comers.

Okay, class, pay attention. We’re almost out of time here, and I’m still not sure you have it. Okay, let’s do it one more time.

We have two basic types of properties. We have private property and we have public property. Private property is say, your home, or a business you own. Public property is something everybody’s tax dollars support, like the park, or the library or the street.

You can always smoke on your private property, or on somebody else’s private property if they say that it is okay.

You may never smoke on private property on which the owner does not allow it.

If you want to smoke on public property, then it has to be decided by whatever legislature governs that public property, be it the Parks and Rec board, the City Council or whatever. So if that means the majority of the population doesn’t want you to smoke on the public property, that’s right, you can either put the thing out, or move to a more permissive locale.

It’s really not that hard, class. You all got it? Good! You guys are smart! Class dismissed.

This month’s St. Anne’s Pub tape seems especially appropriate considering the March for Murder and its two prevalent F words.

Smokin’

I don’t like the smell of cigarette smoke. What do I do about it? If I smell it I can leave. It’s not my right to stay somewhere that someone is smoking and force them to stop because I don’t like it.

Eric, tobacco is a depressant. It calms you down, reduces stress. Stress is a big cause of lots of maladies. Charles Spurgeon believed that some condition (I don’t know what) of his was relieved by smoking.

Tom, when I drive a car pollutants are released into the air which affect many people in a physical bodily way. This is especially noticable in some of our larger cities. In some areas crop refuse is incinerated in the post-season, which amounts to one group of people profiting gasp from aggravating the health concerns of another group. Where does it all end?

That’s right, boys and girls… I have been exposed to the gentle teachings of the one, the only Rev. Jeremiah Loudenphat. As soon as them heathen liberals in the Justice Department are sent to hell, I’ll order his entire teaching on how long hair will send you to hell.

He’s gonna seize your blessin’!

Any of you guys ever heard this? Absolutely hilarious spoof on a backwoods Jim Bakker wannabe who supports things like tightening up immigration controls so we can keep non-American demons and evil spirits out of America… Really funny. I’ve run into the guy who does this as his hobby on the net, and I don’t think my diaphragm will ever recover from laughing so hard…

Russell: I don’t think the government should ban smoking, as I stated earlier. I feel the more the government stays out of stuff it doesn’t have to get involved in, the better.

No, I just want to know out of curiosity. Seriously. I’m not the government, and I don’t hate smokers. I have just never understood how anyone with a straight face can say that inhaling smoke is anything but unhealthy. I happen to believe it’s peoples’ right to be unhealthy if they want to, particularly in private. But I’d seriously like to hear someone explain this one to me (I swear I’m not trying to be a smart-a#$ by saying that, although no matter how I type it, it sounds like I am).

I just don’t know why as a conservative I’m expected to be pro-tobacco. And I don’t know why some people spend so much energy defending something that really is not such a good thing. I really don’t want to smell your smoke. I mean, I really, really, really don’t. And it’s not offensive like, say, Rosanne Barr grabbing her crotch while attempting to sing the National Anthem. It’s offensive like you are interfering with me in a physical, bodily way. You are making me cough and hack and experience unpleasant sensations in my lungs. Anyway, there are more important issues out there unless you’re Johnny Depp.

I think smokers should be able to smoke where they want to. The gov’t needs to stay out. There, my libertarian rant is over ;-)

I was just nosing through the iMonk archives and decided to read his essay on marriage. Probably the best thing I’ve ever read over here. I think all glazed-eyed lovers need to read this thing and, in fact, I am printing it out (with permission?) to use in premarital counseling. Write something like this about parenting (and yes, I’ve already read the one about Christian parents screwing up their kids.)

Any conservatives feel guilty yet for being almost willing to employ the government to root out smokers? (JN) Ready to deny them health insurance yet? (JN) Ready to pronounce them as “addicts”? (JN) Ready to support those judges that take smoking into account in child custody cases? (JN)

Hey….change of subject: Ben Stein on Heroism. Wonderful, uplifting stuff. Read it and be grateful.

I hope you’re just kidding Russell. I mean, unless somebody is pouring cheap beer upon your lap, I don’t see how you can draw the same analogy to secondhand smoke.

But y’know, maybe people are like that in the Spokane area…

“Pro-life is to Christianity as al Qaeda is to Islam.”

One of the many fine examples of the results of a college education on display at this weekend’s estrogen explosion on the D.C. Mall.

I had a conversation with a girl today who shouted MF—er as loud as she could while in the middle of campus. I calmly admonished her to refrain. She laughed at me.

I have a ball game. That’s a good thing. Religious fanatics have just about put me in the lock-up today.

I found my half-brother’s web site. It’s rather amazing. I’ll post it later. It’s wonderful.

Russell Hey buddy, I am all for a good premium microbrew or tasty import, but there’s nothing like an Miller Genuine Draft when you’re all warm from being outside. It’s cheap, but it goes down easy!

Health issue or no, there’s a sizable population that finds secondhand smoke distasteful. The very nature of smoking means that something one person does affects everybody else in the room. Sort of like, in the case of a cigarette, breaking wind for an extended period of time.

There are several things I find distasteful, and I want them banned in all places where I might happen upon:

1. Neon green shirts
2. Michael Bolton – visual or audio
3. Answering cell phones while in the middle of a conversation.
4. Darth Vadar SUV’s
5. Iceberg Lettuce
6. Toothless people (meaning no disrespect – but it is gross)
7. Pepsi, especially diet.
8. Cheap beer. Especially Coors.

Pipe and cigar smoking are really non-issues. The number of pipes and cigars you see in public is insignificant. I do wonder sometimes why pipe smoke smells relatively pleasant and cigar and cigarette smoke smells like a sewage plant fire.

Aww, people, haven’t we trod this path before? I’m sure it is listed in the annals of “BHT Issues” that our faithful scribe keeps.

Health issue or no, there’s a sizable population that finds secondhand smoke distasteful. The very nature of smoking means that something one person does affects everybody else in the room. Sort of like, in the case of a cigarette, breaking wind for an extended period of time.

That said, there’s really no reason a government entity should be able to regulate it in a private place. Nobody is forced to go into another person’s house, or into a club or restaurant if they don’t want to. If the place that has really good ribs is filled with smoke, your complaint is with the owner of the business, not the city/state/county/whatever.

Public places, on the other hand, are perfectly good targets for smoking/drinking/promiscuity bans. Not that it should be automatic, but if a large enough percent of the population would rather you didn’t puff that stogey in the park, that’s fair game.

Is there really anything more to say on the matter?

Bill, I loved your “God doesn’t speak to me” series because it perfectly sums me up. God doesn’t speak to me.
I don’t know why, but lately, I guess I have been expecting some kind of “divine nudge” or whatever about what I am to do this fall after graduation. Yes, no “voice” or leading” comes to me.
Thankfully, a friend of mine rebuked me for that sort of thinking and told me to “Love the Lord and do what you want.” I thought that was good advice. My options are both good and do not violate any Scripture. So, I will love the Lord and do what I want. Now, what do I want to do?