Hmmm...it's almost like men should teach their sons to cherish and protect the women in their lives. To honor those women. To hold the door open for them. To speak to women respectfully, and not like they would to "another guy." To practice modesty and act in a chivalrous manner. To treat women better. In other words, to act like a real man.
And then to expect the same honorable behavior from their brothers, friends, and fathers.
Roger, we can't confuse acceptance with effectiveness. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only effective solution to the problems being discussed at these interfaith events. But that does not mean it will be accepted by all those present, particularly by the leadership in charge of such events (and invited back to the next event). Think of Paul preaching to the Jewish leaders.
The religion that you have said you practice is more likely to be accepted by politicians, liberal Christian leaders, and leaders of other religions, because it does not ask them to repent or change. It is seen as inclusive and non-judgmental. On the other hand, a clear presentation of the Gospel of Jesus requires people to submit to His authority. That is not very popular with the leaders in these circles!
The irony is that even those who have rejected the Gospel of Jesus benefit from the peace and tranquility the Gospel brings to humanity.
Ken, you are absolutely correct. I should have put the word "more" in front of those actions. More honor. More respect. I definitely don't mean that men should treat the men in their lives in an un-Biblical way. Or that women have free reign to be disrespectful. That's a good call on your part.
I'm running into many people who say they believe in global warming, but they've done nothing in their personal life to drastically reduce their CO2 emissions. This includes people who would be considered "sold-out" global warming evangelists. I like to ask people about this, from a standpoint of pure curiosity, but people get very defensive about it.
8 - )
I wouldn't say "personal CO2 reductions" and "speaking out in favor of a CO2 tax" are either/or. Certainly people who believe in global warming should do both. I'm just saying one is a guaranteed way to have an effect now (but will cause the person some minor discomfort in their personal life), while the other will not be happening anytime soon (but causes no personal discomfort).
And it fascinates me that people who proclaim the immediate and catastrophic destruction of life as we know it won't do the former, but will do the latter.
Hi Ken. As part of my participation in the Cooler/Smarter series being sponsored by the Climate Witness Project, I have been doing a LOT of research into this area. The more I learn, the more it becomes clear that the potential of wind & solar is vastly overstated, and the damaging environmental impact of wind & solar is vastly understated. They are useful in certain situations, and I'm certainly thankful to God for them in those situations. But wind & solar are totally inadequate for replacing coal, oil, and natural gas. (Side note...solar energy is AWESOME in its power for warming our planet and feeding our plants...but that is through direct sunlight and not through solar panels).
8 - )
I look forward to sharing my findings in the future, and I hope you will continue to interact with my posts. Thanks!
Tom, Chapter 15 ("On Thin Ice") of Katherine Hayhoe's book "A Climate For Change" (again, I'm reading it as part of my involvement in OSJ's Cooler/Smarter series says (page 97):
"Today, scientists suggest the summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as 2015. There is no way to stop it."
The only range of possible outcomes Hayhoe gives is:
"Just a decade ago, scientists were speculating that the summer Arctic might be ice-free toward the end of the twentyfirst century. A few years ago, the best projections were showing an ice-free Arctic as early as 2040. Today scientists suggest the summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as 2015. There is no way to stop it."
In other words, things are getting dramatically worse! Except these "scientists" prediction was wrong by 1,700,000 square miles. Whoops.
Ken, you were not mistaken at all. My post is definitely thanking God for blessings, specifically the blessing of coal, oil, and natural gas, which provide almost all of the energy that all of us use on a daily basis. Simply put, these resources keep us alive. Not only that, but fossil fuel resources are a main reason that humanity has advanced so much in the last 150 years.
Many of us are alarmed that God's blessing is being called a curse. Thus the reason for my Prayer of Thanksgiving for Fossil Fuels. It is to set the record straight, and start thanking God for something that others take for granted at best, and at worse they demonize and complain about.
As to the questions and responses to your post, it is because of your statement that "the Lord is now giving us alternatives to accomplish the same thing that are better for our environment He created!" That statement deserves to be questioned because it is simply inaccurate (assuming that you are referring to wind & solar...if you are referring to nuclear energy then you have a valid point). No one is questioning you or your thankfulness. On the contrary, I welcome your input! You are free to question anything I write. I have no problem with that.
Pease consider these 3 questions:
- Are wind & solar truly capable of accomplishing the same things as coal, oil, & natural gas?
- Are wind & solar truly better for the environment than coal, oil, & natural gas?
- Are people being accurate, or fair to God, when they consider coal, oil, & natural gas a curse?
While I agree that with Doug that the BEST course of action would be for the CRC to pull totally and completely out of the global warming debate, until and unless that happens one thing is very clear.
By choosing to enter the fray on the issue, Synod, CRC employees, and others connected to the CRC have thrown the door WIDE open to having a public debate about the issue. Any attempt to silence those of us who enter the discussion on the side of skepticism and wanting better science is completely out of line. (And frankly, it makes me suspect the weakness of one side in the debate.) We in the CRC cannot open the door, then complain that people want to walk through the door, from one side or the other.
Thanks for the comment, Nocturne. Jesus Himself made it plainly obvious how we can be on His side. And it's not by criticizing His Body, the Church. Jesus said, "If you love Me, keep my commands." And also, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man comes to the Father except through me."
The problem with Browne is that he (so far) is rejecting the true Jesus, and instead is worshipping a false idol of "jesus" that Browne has created in his own mind, an idol that rejects what Jesus taught us. Until the day when Browne submits to the Lordship of Christ, and allows the Holy Spirit to reveal the true Jesus to him, Browne is in rebellion and living in darkness. Which is why his song completely missed who Jesus really is!
Hi Kristen. You probably are being too idealistic. But this world needs more idealism.
Yes, it seems that compromise is the best solution. But it remains to be seen if "bludgeon the other side until they give in" will be the reality of what happens.
I would hope that the Dems can offer money to fund the beginnings of a border wall, allowing Trump to begin construction in the most urgent areas. Then on the flipside, the Repubs can offer something such as permanent legal status to the most vulnerable of the Dreamers. That's the sort of solution the CRC has called for in the past.
In the meantime, the Dems and the media will attempt to bludgeon Trump into submission, demanding a budget with zero money for a border wall. And Trump (who so far, to his credit, has signaled he is willing to compromise), may change his tactics and demand wall-funding with no concessions.
Does anyone know if the Office of Social Justice has something like "adopt a family" for entire church congregations to take charge of 1 family and help them settle into their new home country? I for one would LOVE to help immigrants to America study for their naturalization test, or practice their English, or just feel more "at home" by inviting them over for a Memorial Day BBQ. But I honestly wouldn't know where to start, and that seems like something our OSJ people could help to facilitate?
I've heard from Border Patrol agents and residents on the ground who say that a physical barrier of some kind is necessary on certain parts of the border. I understand the emotional opposition to a "wall". But I would be more inclined to listen to the professionals on the border than to my own fickle feelings. That said, I agree that a Berlin-wall style, concrete barrier stretching the entire length of the US/Mexico border does not fit with American values. Something a little more sleek and strategic would be both effective and more palatable to our emotions.
Posted in: Gillette: The Best a Man Can Get?
Hmmm...it's almost like men should teach their sons to cherish and protect the women in their lives. To honor those women. To hold the door open for them. To speak to women respectfully, and not like they would to "another guy." To practice modesty and act in a chivalrous manner. To treat women better. In other words, to act like a real man.
And then to expect the same honorable behavior from their brothers, friends, and fathers.
Posted in: Where Are the Evangelicals?
Roger, we can't confuse acceptance with effectiveness. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is the only effective solution to the problems being discussed at these interfaith events. But that does not mean it will be accepted by all those present, particularly by the leadership in charge of such events (and invited back to the next event). Think of Paul preaching to the Jewish leaders.
The religion that you have said you practice is more likely to be accepted by politicians, liberal Christian leaders, and leaders of other religions, because it does not ask them to repent or change. It is seen as inclusive and non-judgmental. On the other hand, a clear presentation of the Gospel of Jesus requires people to submit to His authority. That is not very popular with the leaders in these circles!
The irony is that even those who have rejected the Gospel of Jesus benefit from the peace and tranquility the Gospel brings to humanity.
Posted in: Gillette: The Best a Man Can Get?
Ken, you are absolutely correct. I should have put the word "more" in front of those actions. More honor. More respect. I definitely don't mean that men should treat the men in their lives in an un-Biblical way. Or that women have free reign to be disrespectful. That's a good call on your part.
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
I'm running into many people who say they believe in global warming, but they've done nothing in their personal life to drastically reduce their CO2 emissions. This includes people who would be considered "sold-out" global warming evangelists. I like to ask people about this, from a standpoint of pure curiosity, but people get very defensive about it.
8 - )
I wouldn't say "personal CO2 reductions" and "speaking out in favor of a CO2 tax" are either/or. Certainly people who believe in global warming should do both. I'm just saying one is a guaranteed way to have an effect now (but will cause the person some minor discomfort in their personal life), while the other will not be happening anytime soon (but causes no personal discomfort).
And it fascinates me that people who proclaim the immediate and catastrophic destruction of life as we know it won't do the former, but will do the latter.
Posted in: Thank God for Fossil Fuels!
Hi Ken. As part of my participation in the Cooler/Smarter series being sponsored by the Climate Witness Project, I have been doing a LOT of research into this area. The more I learn, the more it becomes clear that the potential of wind & solar is vastly overstated, and the damaging environmental impact of wind & solar is vastly understated. They are useful in certain situations, and I'm certainly thankful to God for them in those situations. But wind & solar are totally inadequate for replacing coal, oil, and natural gas. (Side note...solar energy is AWESOME in its power for warming our planet and feeding our plants...but that is through direct sunlight and not through solar panels).
8 - )
I look forward to sharing my findings in the future, and I hope you will continue to interact with my posts. Thanks!
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
Tom, Chapter 15 ("On Thin Ice") of Katherine Hayhoe's book "A Climate For Change" (again, I'm reading it as part of my involvement in OSJ's Cooler/Smarter series says (page 97):
"Today, scientists suggest the summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as 2015. There is no way to stop it."
The only range of possible outcomes Hayhoe gives is:
"Just a decade ago, scientists were speculating that the summer Arctic might be ice-free toward the end of the twentyfirst century. A few years ago, the best projections were showing an ice-free Arctic as early as 2040. Today scientists suggest the summer Arctic will be ice-free as soon as 2015. There is no way to stop it."
In other words, things are getting dramatically worse! Except these "scientists" prediction was wrong by 1,700,000 square miles. Whoops.
Posted in: Thank God for Fossil Fuels!
Ken, you were not mistaken at all. My post is definitely thanking God for blessings, specifically the blessing of coal, oil, and natural gas, which provide almost all of the energy that all of us use on a daily basis. Simply put, these resources keep us alive. Not only that, but fossil fuel resources are a main reason that humanity has advanced so much in the last 150 years.
Many of us are alarmed that God's blessing is being called a curse. Thus the reason for my Prayer of Thanksgiving for Fossil Fuels. It is to set the record straight, and start thanking God for something that others take for granted at best, and at worse they demonize and complain about.
As to the questions and responses to your post, it is because of your statement that "the Lord is now giving us alternatives to accomplish the same thing that are better for our environment He created!" That statement deserves to be questioned because it is simply inaccurate (assuming that you are referring to wind & solar...if you are referring to nuclear energy then you have a valid point). No one is questioning you or your thankfulness. On the contrary, I welcome your input! You are free to question anything I write. I have no problem with that.
Pease consider these 3 questions:
- Are wind & solar truly capable of accomplishing the same things as coal, oil, & natural gas?
- Are wind & solar truly better for the environment than coal, oil, & natural gas?
- Are people being accurate, or fair to God, when they consider coal, oil, & natural gas a curse?
Posted in: Should the CRCNA Lobby in Favor of Federal Carbon Tax Legislation?
While I agree that with Doug that the BEST course of action would be for the CRC to pull totally and completely out of the global warming debate, until and unless that happens one thing is very clear.
By choosing to enter the fray on the issue, Synod, CRC employees, and others connected to the CRC have thrown the door WIDE open to having a public debate about the issue. Any attempt to silence those of us who enter the discussion on the side of skepticism and wanting better science is completely out of line. (And frankly, it makes me suspect the weakness of one side in the debate.) We in the CRC cannot open the door, then complain that people want to walk through the door, from one side or the other.
Posted in: "The Rebel Jesus" - Worst Christmas Song Ever?
Thanks for the comment, Nocturne. Jesus Himself made it plainly obvious how we can be on His side. And it's not by criticizing His Body, the Church. Jesus said, "If you love Me, keep my commands." And also, "I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life; no man comes to the Father except through me."
The problem with Browne is that he (so far) is rejecting the true Jesus, and instead is worshipping a false idol of "jesus" that Browne has created in his own mind, an idol that rejects what Jesus taught us. Until the day when Browne submits to the Lordship of Christ, and allows the Holy Spirit to reveal the true Jesus to him, Browne is in rebellion and living in darkness. Which is why his song completely missed who Jesus really is!
Posted in: Immigration Justice Requires Border Security
Hi Kristen. You probably are being too idealistic. But this world needs more idealism.
Yes, it seems that compromise is the best solution. But it remains to be seen if "bludgeon the other side until they give in" will be the reality of what happens.
I would hope that the Dems can offer money to fund the beginnings of a border wall, allowing Trump to begin construction in the most urgent areas. Then on the flipside, the Repubs can offer something such as permanent legal status to the most vulnerable of the Dreamers. That's the sort of solution the CRC has called for in the past.
In the meantime, the Dems and the media will attempt to bludgeon Trump into submission, demanding a budget with zero money for a border wall. And Trump (who so far, to his credit, has signaled he is willing to compromise), may change his tactics and demand wall-funding with no concessions.
Please keep your idealism!
Posted in: Immigration Justice Requires Border Security
Diane, that is a great idea!
Does anyone know if the Office of Social Justice has something like "adopt a family" for entire church congregations to take charge of 1 family and help them settle into their new home country? I for one would LOVE to help immigrants to America study for their naturalization test, or practice their English, or just feel more "at home" by inviting them over for a Memorial Day BBQ. But I honestly wouldn't know where to start, and that seems like something our OSJ people could help to facilitate?
Posted in: Immigration Justice Requires Border Security
I've heard from Border Patrol agents and residents on the ground who say that a physical barrier of some kind is necessary on certain parts of the border. I understand the emotional opposition to a "wall". But I would be more inclined to listen to the professionals on the border than to my own fickle feelings. That said, I agree that a Berlin-wall style, concrete barrier stretching the entire length of the US/Mexico border does not fit with American values. Something a little more sleek and strategic would be both effective and more palatable to our emotions.