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.
Steve, thanks for your comment about "refugees" (asylum seekers) and "immigrants." I'm glad you brought it up, as there is an unfortunate trend in conflating the two. Sometimes this is done intentionally, to add emotional power to pro-illegal immigration arguments. Other times the confusion between the 2 terms is totally unintentional. But the 2 are completely different situations.
If the US/Mexico border had no legal points of entry, and if the US had no embassies or consulates in Mexico, where refugees could seek asylum, you would have a valid point in saying that refugees are forced to attempt dangerous, often times deadly, illegal border crossings into the US. There certainly are places on earth where such crossings are the only option for refugees.
Thankfully, the southern border of the United States is not such a place! People seeking asylum are 100% able to do so safely and legally, rather than dangerously and illegally.
And as pointed out by others, there is growing evidence that people who are not refugees are being encouraged to give false information in order to claim they are. Encouraging false asylum claims lessens the ability of true refugees too seek asylum. That is an injustice to genuine refugees.
A secure border, including physical barriers where appropriate, is definitely part of comprehensive immigration reform, and immigration justice. Border security does not criminalize asylum seekers in any way. Rather, it protects them.
Hi Peter, thanks for your comments. To determine whether or not Jesus is a "rebel" or a "conformist," we first have to determine what is God's ORIGINAL design and created order. If Jesus is bringing things in line with the original design and created order, then He is conforming to that, correct?
Was Satan a rebel? Or a conformist? Nuff said...
Secondly, Scripture does indeed instruct us Christians to show care & concern for the material state of our neighbors. But why? Is it to earn our salvation? Or is it out of gratitude to God for saving us? And is care & concern for the material state of humanity the primary purpose for Jesus' mission on Earth?
Did Jesus have the power, when he was here on Earth, to eliminate all sickness, poverty, and "oppression"? Did He do so?
These are all things which the author of "The Rebel Jesus" misses. And I think the clear reason he misses them is because the Holy Spirit is absent in his life. He wishes to use Jesus to promote a certain political worldview. Thus he misses the Truth.
Good points, Jason. One of my goals in writing this was to demonstrate that open borders does not equal "justice" in this situation.
It would be helpful for CRC denominational staff, particularly at OSJ, to weigh in and clarify how they interpret Synod's instructions on immigration: 1) the US government does have the moral authority to place limits and deny entry even to people who are simply seeking a better life, or 2) Scripture requires that we welcome any and all who seek a better life
Thanks for the comment, Brett. I did not miss the message that Browne promotes in his song "The Rebel Jesus." I intellectually understand the worldview that he is trying to promote. It's just that Scripture does not agree with Browne.
Did Jesus have the power, when He was here on Earth, to end all material poverty, sickness, and political oppression?
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.
Thanks for your comments, Edwin. I think what you are missing is the underlying, foundational, created order. It would be helpful if we started with this question:
Thanks for sharing your ideas, Brett. It sounds like you (like the author of the song) prefer a Leftwing, socialist economic & political system. That is fine...it is your opinion. But it certainly is not in line with Scripture or with Jesus' life here on earth. He had the power and means to END poverty worldwide. Yet He chose not to. He had the power to implement "northern European" models of democratic socialism. But He chose not to.
The author of this song is trying to tell us who Jesus is. (Actually, he would say "was" because the author believes that Jesus is dead.)
So answer this question: Should we give credit to someone who claims to speak for Jesus, who does not even believe that Jesus is the living, eternal Son of God, and Savior of the world?
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!
Jodi, fortunately you don't have to speculate about the author's attitude in attending the A1B meeting. Because I'm the author. No need for speculation.
8 - )
I attended the meeting with an attitude of 100% gracious listening. Just think about it...I took time out of my busy schedule to attend the event. I listened attentively for almost 2 hours. I even took notes...that's how closely I listened. I knew going into the event that the presenters agenda is to transform the CRC into what they call an "inclusive" denomination. I knew they probably would not allow any other perspectives to be presented. Yet I listened respectfully the entire time. Who is more gracious: the one who listens for 2 hours to ideas that he disagrees with, or the one who does not allow opposing viewpoints to be given?
Had the All One Body folks presented a convincing case using Scripture, they would have won me over. As Martin Luther said when he was commanded to change his ideology...if you can refute me from SCRIPTURE, I will be the first one to burn my books.
Well, if All One Body can convince me from Scripture, I will be the first one to go along with inclusiveness. But they cannot. They presented a false ideology of feelings, built on a quicksand foundation of personal stories.
I hope the CRC will be courageous enough to make the same statement Martin Luther did: HERE I STAND.
2 Timothy 3:16-17: "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
To discount Scripture and rely instead on the effectiveness of personal anecdotes betrays the weakness of A1B's position. The context of the speaker's statement was very telling. It wasn't personal experiences, flowing from the truth of Scripture. In fact, the very concept of Truth was completely lacking from A1B's philosophy. It was personal experiences. Period.
Don Baxter5, rather than focusing on your subjective measure of inflammatory, wouldn't it be better to try to figure out whether this account of A1B's goals is accurate?
If it is accurate, I would hope that CRC members who stand for the truth of Scripture would be inflamed with a desire to stop A1B's desire to transform the CRC.
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.
Posted in: Immigration Justice Requires Border Security
Steve, thanks for your comment about "refugees" (asylum seekers) and "immigrants." I'm glad you brought it up, as there is an unfortunate trend in conflating the two. Sometimes this is done intentionally, to add emotional power to pro-illegal immigration arguments. Other times the confusion between the 2 terms is totally unintentional. But the 2 are completely different situations.
If the US/Mexico border had no legal points of entry, and if the US had no embassies or consulates in Mexico, where refugees could seek asylum, you would have a valid point in saying that refugees are forced to attempt dangerous, often times deadly, illegal border crossings into the US. There certainly are places on earth where such crossings are the only option for refugees.
Thankfully, the southern border of the United States is not such a place! People seeking asylum are 100% able to do so safely and legally, rather than dangerously and illegally.
And as pointed out by others, there is growing evidence that people who are not refugees are being encouraged to give false information in order to claim they are. Encouraging false asylum claims lessens the ability of true refugees too seek asylum. That is an injustice to genuine refugees.
A secure border, including physical barriers where appropriate, is definitely part of comprehensive immigration reform, and immigration justice. Border security does not criminalize asylum seekers in any way. Rather, it protects them.
Posted in: "The Rebel Jesus" - Worst Christmas Song Ever?
Hi Peter, thanks for your comments. To determine whether or not Jesus is a "rebel" or a "conformist," we first have to determine what is God's ORIGINAL design and created order. If Jesus is bringing things in line with the original design and created order, then He is conforming to that, correct?
Was Satan a rebel? Or a conformist? Nuff said...
Secondly, Scripture does indeed instruct us Christians to show care & concern for the material state of our neighbors. But why? Is it to earn our salvation? Or is it out of gratitude to God for saving us? And is care & concern for the material state of humanity the primary purpose for Jesus' mission on Earth?
Did Jesus have the power, when he was here on Earth, to eliminate all sickness, poverty, and "oppression"? Did He do so?
These are all things which the author of "The Rebel Jesus" misses. And I think the clear reason he misses them is because the Holy Spirit is absent in his life. He wishes to use Jesus to promote a certain political worldview. Thus he misses the Truth.
- Dan W -
Posted in: Immigration Justice Requires Border Security
Good points, Jason. One of my goals in writing this was to demonstrate that open borders does not equal "justice" in this situation.
It would be helpful for CRC denominational staff, particularly at OSJ, to weigh in and clarify how they interpret Synod's instructions on immigration: 1) the US government does have the moral authority to place limits and deny entry even to people who are simply seeking a better life, or 2) Scripture requires that we welcome any and all who seek a better life
Posted in: "The Rebel Jesus" - Worst Christmas Song Ever?
Thanks for the comment, Brett. I did not miss the message that Browne promotes in his song "The Rebel Jesus." I intellectually understand the worldview that he is trying to promote. It's just that Scripture does not agree with Browne.
Did Jesus have the power, when He was here on Earth, to end all material poverty, sickness, and political oppression?
- Dan W -
Posted in: Violence against Women – It’s a Men’s Issue
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: "The Rebel Jesus" - Worst Christmas Song Ever?
Thanks for your comments, Edwin. I think what you are missing is the underlying, foundational, created order. It would be helpful if we started with this question:
Was Satan a rebel? Or a conformist?
Posted in: "The Rebel Jesus" - Worst Christmas Song Ever?
Thanks for sharing your ideas, Brett. It sounds like you (like the author of the song) prefer a Leftwing, socialist economic & political system. That is fine...it is your opinion. But it certainly is not in line with Scripture or with Jesus' life here on earth. He had the power and means to END poverty worldwide. Yet He chose not to. He had the power to implement "northern European" models of democratic socialism. But He chose not to.
The author of this song is trying to tell us who Jesus is. (Actually, he would say "was" because the author believes that Jesus is dead.)
So answer this question: Should we give credit to someone who claims to speak for Jesus, who does not even believe that Jesus is the living, eternal Son of God, and Savior of the world?
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: Turning the CRC Into an Lgbtq+ Ally
Jodi, fortunately you don't have to speculate about the author's attitude in attending the A1B meeting. Because I'm the author. No need for speculation.
8 - )
I attended the meeting with an attitude of 100% gracious listening. Just think about it...I took time out of my busy schedule to attend the event. I listened attentively for almost 2 hours. I even took notes...that's how closely I listened. I knew going into the event that the presenters agenda is to transform the CRC into what they call an "inclusive" denomination. I knew they probably would not allow any other perspectives to be presented. Yet I listened respectfully the entire time. Who is more gracious: the one who listens for 2 hours to ideas that he disagrees with, or the one who does not allow opposing viewpoints to be given?
Had the All One Body folks presented a convincing case using Scripture, they would have won me over. As Martin Luther said when he was commanded to change his ideology...if you can refute me from SCRIPTURE, I will be the first one to burn my books.
Well, if All One Body can convince me from Scripture, I will be the first one to go along with inclusiveness. But they cannot. They presented a false ideology of feelings, built on a quicksand foundation of personal stories.
I hope the CRC will be courageous enough to make the same statement Martin Luther did: HERE I STAND.
Posted in: Turning the CRC Into an Lgbtq+ Ally
2 Timothy 3:16-17: "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."
To discount Scripture and rely instead on the effectiveness of personal anecdotes betrays the weakness of A1B's position. The context of the speaker's statement was very telling. It wasn't personal experiences, flowing from the truth of Scripture. In fact, the very concept of Truth was completely lacking from A1B's philosophy. It was personal experiences. Period.
Posted in: Turning the CRC Into an Lgbtq+ Ally
Don Baxter5, rather than focusing on your subjective measure of inflammatory, wouldn't it be better to try to figure out whether this account of A1B's goals is accurate?
If it is accurate, I would hope that CRC members who stand for the truth of Scripture would be inflamed with a desire to stop A1B's desire to transform the CRC.