Today's News | Christian Views
| Home | Community | WorldMagBlog | Commentary | Previous Posts | Podcasts | Contact Us | Subscribe |
Family man
Michael Oher went from the streets to the NFL because of an adoptive family
FULL STORY
Humility regarding what man does. Faith in what God does. That means skepticism about politicians' plans to run health care.
Executives who run companies should be self-effacing. Add “I” to run and the result is ruin.
Good morning!
Today’s quote is from a 1981 film classic:
“God made countries, God makes kings, and the rules by which they govern. And those rules say that the Sabbath is His. And I for one intend to keep it that way.”
All original content Copyright © 2009 WORLDmag.com and may not be reproduced without permission
Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Special Student Discount for WORLD!
Click to Print
Include Comments
back to top56 Comments to “Whirled Views 11.11”
Chariots of Fire
Report comment to moderator
Hi Austen, haven’t seen you in a while.
The Sabbath (or Sunday observance) is the one commandment that most Christians, including me, blatently ignore. “The letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”, I know, but Sunday used to be a special day. I think we lose something when we have disregard-disrespect it.
I got an e-mail yesterday warning me of a possible virus. It seems someone sends out an e-mail saying that FedEx (they could use someone else) has tried to deliver a package, but couldn’t. They ask you to download something to help them. It is fake, and contains a virus.
They didn’t say what the virus does.
Snopes says this is true.
They say don’t even open the e-mail, if you get it.
Report comment to moderator
Chas, can’t this be explained away by the New Convenant? That’s what a blogger told me a few years ago when I was agruing this same point. It seems that “working” on Sunday is AOK now, at least according to her? Is this a sin punishable by death? And do Christians do a weekly repent?
Report comment to moderator
Scott, I am not a legalist, obviously. However, did the New Covenant do away with the other nine? In the Jewish Theocracy it was punishable by death (the guy gathering sticks on the Sabbath,). However, we don’t have, and shouldn’t have, a theocracy. I agree with secularists on Blue Laws. However, as a Christian, I try to make Sunday a special day. We always go out to lunch after church, otherwise, I never cut grass, etc. on Sunday. Sorta, kinda, maybe keeping it a little holy, huh?
Report comment to moderator
AAAhhh…Austen! Nicely done correctly guessing a line from my all time favorite film. Winner of alot of oscars.
So, how you doin?
Report comment to moderator
I agree with Chas on the Sunday concept. I am a chef, and as most folks would understand, we don’t get weekends off. I am one of those who are preparing meals for the “after-church” crowds. Fortunately though, I am blessed by a place which schedules me for MY after church shifts, so I can worship with my congregation!
So I am blessed both ways!
Yaaaaaay for Jesus
Report comment to moderator
The Sabbath is Saturday. It is also an attitude of the heart which works outward in practical ways.
Report comment to moderator
When I worked for a religious Television Network I remember sitting at work one Sunday monitoring a program on respecting the Sabbath. Odd that I had to work on Sunday so people could hear that they shouldn’t work on Sunday.
Report comment to moderator
I posted this last night, but it didn’t spark much–I’ll try again. Thanks, TRS, for your insight.
Did anyone see Boston Legal last night?
I’m sorry I didn’t see the entire episode, but the tenor of the show, especially at the end, was rather pro-life. The practice took a young girl as a client that wanted the court to override her mother’s non-consent to terminate her pregnancy.
I was surprised to see them portray the pregnant girl’s mother (Ming-Na) sympathetically, concerned over her daughter and not wanting her to learn the hard way; and the girl as an immature twit who knew her legal standing but needed to learn a lesson or two in life.
They won the decision from the judge, but they certainly didn’t celebrate it, and did not feel good about it, either. They really drove home the point that abortions ‘haunt’ the would-be parents for years later. The Candace Bergen character certainly was not keen about the idea of participating (indirectly) in an abortion, and she found a way to argue against the “judicial bypass” of parental consent. The end of the show, where the Spader and Shatner characters chat over a cigar, was very introspective and thoughtful.
I wondered if anyone else had seen the show, or at least more of it than I did. I was very encouraged by what I saw, even if it was just a few minutes of TV. I certainly did not expect to see that attitude portrayed on network TV.
Any other thoughts?
Report comment to moderator
Kbells, too funny.
Lance, I don’t watch Boston Legal much, Shatner annoys me, but I’m sorry I missed that one. Despite all the political rhetoric, it seems abortion is losing in the polls so to speak. We of the Roe V. Wade generation thought we were so free (I’m speaking in generalized terms obviously), but our daughters understand the “haunting.”
Report comment to moderator
Sunday is the day of His Resurrection.
Sabbath is sundown Friday to sundown Saturday.
Did I miss some other memo?
Report comment to moderator
Chas, good question! Here is what one confession from your tradition (The London Baptist Confession, based on the Westminster Confession of Faith) says about both the Law of God and the Sabbath. I’ve added italics for emphasis:
Chapter 19: Of the Law of God
1. God gave to Adam a law of universal obedience written in his heart, and a particular precept of not eating the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil; by which he bound him and all his posterity to personal, entire, exact, and perpetual obedience; promised life upon the fulfilling, and threatened death upon the breach of it, and endued him with power and ability to keep it.
( Genesis 1:27; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Romans 10:5; Galatians 3:10, 12 )
2. The same law that was first written in the heart of man continued to be a perfect rule of righteousness after the fall, and was delivered by God upon Mount Sinai, in ten commandments, and written in two tables, the four first containing our duty towards God, and the other six, our duty to man.
( Romans 2:14, 15; Deuteronomy 10:4 )
3. Besides this law, commonly called moral, God was pleased to give to the people of Israel ceremonial laws, containing several typical ordinances, partly of worship, prefiguring Christ, his graces, actions, sufferings, and benefits; and partly holding forth divers instructions of moral duties, all which ceremonial laws being appointed only to the time of reformation, are, by Jesus Christ the true Messiah and only law-giver, who was furnished with power from the Father for that end abrogated and taken away.
( Hebrews 10:1; Colossians 2:17; 1 Corinthians 5:7; Colossians 2:14, 16, 17; Ephesians 2:14, 16 )
4. To them also he gave sundry judicial laws, which expired together with the state of that people, not obliging any now by virtue of that institution; their general equity only being of moral use.
( 1 Corinthians 9:8-10 )
5._____ The moral law doth for ever bind all, as well justified persons as others, to the obedience thereof, and that not only in regard of the matter contained in it, but also in respect of the authority of God the Creator, who gave it; neither doth Christ in the Gospel any way dissolve, but much strengthen this obligation.
( Romans 13:8-10; James 2:8, 10-12; James 2:10, 11; Matthew 5:17-19; Romans 3:31 )
6. Although true believers be not under the law as a covenant of works, to be thereby justified or condemned, yet it is of great use to them as well as to others, in that as a rule of life, informing them of the will of God and their duty, it directs and binds them to walk accordingly; discovering also the sinful pollutions of their natures, hearts, and lives, so as examining themselves thereby, they may come to further conviction of, humiliation for, and hatred against, sin; together with a clearer sight of the need they have of Christ and the perfection of his obedience; it is likewise of use to the regenerate to restrain their corruptions, in that it forbids sin; and the threatenings of it serve to shew what even their sins deserve, and what afflictions in this life they may expect for them, although freed from the curse and unallayed rigour thereof. The promises of it likewise shew them God’s approbation of obedience, and what blessings they may expect upon the performance thereof, though not as due to them by the law as a covenant of works; so as man’s doing good and refraining from evil, because the law encourageth to the one and deterreth from the other, is no evidence of his being under the law and not under grace.
( Romans 6:14; Galatians 2:16; Romans 8:1; Romans 10:4; Romans 3:20; Romans 7:7, etc; Romans 6:12-14; 1 Peter 3:8-13 )
7. Neither are the aforementioned uses of the law contrary to the grace of the Gospel, but do sweetly comply with it, the Spirit of Christ subduing and enabling the will of man to do that freely and cheerfully which the will of God, revealed in the law, requireth to be done.
( Galatians 3:21; Ezekiel 36:27 )
Chapter 23: Of Religious Worship and the Sabbath Day
7. As it is the law of nature, that in general a proportion of time, by God’s appointment, be set apart for the worship of God, so by his Word, in a positive moral, and perpetual commandment, binding all men, in all ages, he hath particularly appointed one day in seven for a sabbath to be kept holy unto him, which from the beginning of the world to the resurrection of Christ was the last day of the week, and from the resurrection of Christ was changed into the first day of the week, which is called the Lord’s day: and is to be continued to the end of the world as the Christian Sabbath, the observation of the last day of the week being abolished.
( Exodus 20:8; 1 Corinthians 16:1, 2; Acts 20:7; Revelation 1:10 )
8. The sabbath is then kept holy unto the Lord, when men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering their common affairs aforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all day, from their own works, words and thoughts, about their worldly employment and recreations, but are also taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship, and in the duties of necessity and mercy.
( Isaiah 58:13; Nehemiah 13:15-22; Matthew 12:1-13 )
Here’s a link to the whole document:
http://www.vor.org/truth/1689/1689bc00.html
Report comment to moderator
To state it in a simpler way, there is a general recognition of the law of God existing in three distinctions: the moral law, the ceremonial law, and the civil law. The civil law consisted of specific rules being given to the old covenant nation of Israel and have ceased with the end of that nation (although there are moral duties extending from those laws — put a parapet around the roof of your house, don’t muzzle an ox while it is threshing the grain, etc. — that may have practical implications for today; e.g., you should put a fence around your swimming pool to keep neighborhood children from drowning, you should pay your pastor, etc.). The ceremonial law, which included the sacrificial system, was fulfilled in the atoning death of Christ and is thus no longer applicable. The moral law, however, is of a perpetual nature, extending from the nature of God. The Ten Commandments are a summary of the moral law of God, but the actual moral law existed before the TC (Sabbath, for example, is a creation ordinance, existing before the Fall; Sabbath observance was practiced by Israel before Sinai).
Hope that helps. Sounds like good discussion over desert!
Report comment to moderator
Chas, I’ve been here! I just don’t comment that much because I’d rather read what those older and wiser than me have to say.
Theophilus…one of my favorites, too! I love, love, love the soundtrack. And the sets/scenery.
Report comment to moderator
Auto bailouts. Can you believe it?
Report comment to moderator
Christians worship on Sunday because that is the day we celebrate the Resurrection. We keep the Sabbath holy when we gladly hear and learn God’s Word. Our Sabbath rest is Christ, because He has done the work of our salvation on the cross and we can now rest in Him.
Do not forget that many people serve in vocations that require them to work on Sunday.
Report comment to moderator
The Westminster (and the LBC, I bet) make exceptions for works of mercy (like medical folks) and necessity (public works employees).
Report comment to moderator
Yeah,
Say it ain’t so!
Report comment to moderator
Cameron and Grandma, is it necessary for Theopololis to work to provide lunch for people like me?
As TJ says, we may talk about it over desert.
But maybe something else will come up before then.
I see on Drudge that the Obama team leaked details of the private discussion. Obama needs to know that there are no secrets in Washington. Not only is it insulting to Bush, who is still president, but it bodes poorly for the beginning of his term.
Report comment to moderator
I decided years ago I needed to figure out a way to differentiate Sunday from the rest of the week, if only for the good of my own soul.
So I don’t do laundry–unless it’s an emergency. I don’t go shopping–unless it’s an emergency. I try to finish all my household chores on Saturday (that’s me up late in the night with the laundry). I make spaghetti sauce the day before so I don’t have to cook much (a 160-year tradition in my family). It has helped to have the luxury of not having to do things on Sunday–and it can become a day of rest.
It doesn’t have to be Sunday, but we should take some time out once a week to reflect on the goodness of God and allow our mind, soul and body to rest.
I did a whole retreat on this subject–contact me for the notes!
Oh, and I love Chariots of Fire, too. I just gave a copy to my son for his birthday.
Report comment to moderator
Here is a problem I have with the “Sunday is the Sabbath” folks, posted by Chas (whom I respect in many ways and wish he were meeting GWB as the incoming pres):
I agree with secularists on Blue Laws. However, as a Christian, I try to make Sunday a special day. We always go out to lunch after church, otherwise, I never cut grass, etc. on Sunday.
This statement is contradictory in that (at least in Missouri) Blue Laws meant that restaurants could not open on Sundays, as they were a luxury, but grocery stores could, since they were a necessity. I have always thought people hypocrites who claim the Sabbath means they cannot work, yet go to a restaurant after church, perhaps causing someone else to miss out on church. The most blatant I heard of were Mennonites in Iowa who refused to work at the restaurant on Sunday, yet went there for lunch after church. Hello?
Grandma answers the question best in post #16, IMHO.
Report comment to moderator
I know a minister who makes a very good and sound scriptural argument that absolutely no one should work on the Sabbath, whether it is taken as Sunday, Saturday, or Thursday. He is very firm and eloquent and unshakeable on this point.
He wakes up on Sunday morning to the chimes of his electric alarm clock, resets it to the soothing worship music broadcast from the local Christian radio station while he reviews his sermon in his mind, then rolls out of bed, flips a light switch on (crews are still working to restore power to some parts of the city – he is glad his has been restored), washes his face in nice hot water from the faucet in the bathroom, dresses, goes into the kitchen where his wife had gotten up ahead of him and prepared him his favorite Sunday breakfast of eggs and bacon and rolls.
On the way to church, he stops to fill up his car with gasoline, uses his debit card to pay the on-duty clerk (which mandates phone use and satellite real-time links and electronic controllers all over the globe). He buys some cough drops; as he is departing the gas station, a gas tanker truck is pulling in to replenish the station’s tanks with fuel.
He notes with approval that a police cruiser on a nearby road has pulled over a speeder and is issuing the miscreant a ticket. He is somewhat aggrieved when he is momentarily delayed by a utility crew working on a water main break.
An ambulance flashes by him on the way to the hospital; he offers up a short prayer for both the occupant and the crew in the vehicle and the doctors and staff in the hospital.
Once in the church, he checks to see that there are plenty of fresh doughnuts from the local bakery (baked just that morning!) on the hospitality tables. The church has just installed a magnificent lighting and sound system and it is in fine form today, he is happy to see; the lights are bright and the speakers are vibrating with electric power, most nicely. Outside the building an electric utility truck is parked where a serviceman is working on a road-side box which feeds the enormous power requirements of the church.
Before the start of the first service, he pulls aside a Deacon and instructs him to turn the air conditioner down a bit; it seems a bit stuffy to him. Deacon informs him that a team of servicemen from the vendor are at the moment working on the massive AC units on top of the building trying to find the problem.
His sermon is well-delivered and well-received, with a number of his congregation pleading guilty and emotionally pledging afterwards to not profane the Sabbath in the future by working, but to set it aside as a true day of rest, and spend it in prayer and contemplation and worship.
After church, he goes to a local eatery with a number of his parishoners; the service is excellent and the food is well-cooked by the invisible chefs in the kitchen; he orders a seafood dish which he particularly likes; the seafood is trucked in fresh daily, seven days a week.
Later that day his wife reminds him that the gutters need the leaves cleaned out and that it is due to rain that very night.
This, of course, he absolutely refuses to do.
It is, after all, the Sabbath, he sternly reminds her.
Report comment to moderator
Drill,
After I made my post, I started thinking about how complicated it gets when we try to ‘obey to the letter of the law’. You point out very clearly what I was thinking. It does get very complicated. In fact I was just heard that the Religious leaders in Jesus day had thousands of laws, so there were no loopholes.
As I said before, our true rest is in Christ.
Report comment to moderator
Marvin, Marvin!
Marvin!
How could you, in A very bad war, miss the absolute best WWI book ever written? And also maybe the most grim. Book.
I’m talking about Horne’s The Price of Glory.
I almost cried when I saw the omission.
Report comment to moderator
I did cry as I read that book.
Report comment to moderator
It looks like Austen can’t read what I post, then (I’m certainly not “older and wiser”).
Report comment to moderator
Chas,
While I’m a bit ahead of dessert, I would say that it is not a necessity for me to eat out.
However, I also don’t expect unbelievers to act as believers; if business owners wish to be open on Sunday, they may. I do prefer and patronize businesses that don’t, however (Hobby Lobby and Chik-Fil-A, for example).
What frustrates me are secular owners who make little to no concessions for their employees who wish to worship on Sunday–we have an associate member at our church who can rarely attend because she is a junior chef at a local 5-star hotel. She asked for every other Sunday; she has been off three times in six months, one of which was for a family member’s death.
Report comment to moderator
Just as an added thought about the law: while the Pharisees sought to “fence” the Torah by adding to it, to say that they were preventing “loopholes” is not correct (at least not in every circumstance). For instance, part of the Sermon on the Mount is a “closing of loopholes” of the Pharisees by Jesus. An example: the law states that we are to love our neighbors; Jesus says the crowds had heard we are to love our neighbor but hate our enemies. The latter portion was an addition (a “loophole”) designed to justify the exclusion of people groups like Gentiles. The Pharisees had plenty of “loopholes”, just not the kind we usually think of.
Report comment to moderator
Rio, I should have said older and/OR wiser. ; )
Report comment to moderator
Friends,
Check out the second post in my repeat of the debate between Jim Babka (of Downsize DC) and Dr. Gregg Frazer (of the Master’s College). In this one Dr. Frazer expands on his argument that the US revolt against Great Britain was not consistent with Calvinism.
Jim, while I cannot speak for Jon, it seems to me that his point was that one must move away from Calvin (whether to Arminianism or Unitarianism) in order to support revolution. Also, while Baptists and Methodists and others played a role in the Revolution, they were minority groups. The key for the revolutionaries was to find a way around Calvinism (because it was the majority theology – particularly in the hotbed of New England) in order to fill the ranks of the revolutionary armies.
[...]
Finally, I don’t think Jon (or I) asserted that Calvin’s view of the Bible is more biblical than the others you mention. The point was that: a) Calvin’s view was the majority view in the century leading up to the Revolution and, therefore, had to be removed as an obstacle in order to get majority support; b) that Calvin’s view was more biblical than that of the Unitarians and/or theistic rationalists; and c) that many of the patriotic ministers (those who were theistic rationalists) were much more concerned with what Locke said than what the Bible said. They quoted Locke far more frequently (and accurately) than they did Scripture.
That was just a taste. For the whole thing see:
http://americancreation.blogspot.com
Report comment to moderator
So no one brought up the incident from the Gospels when Jesus was taken to task for letting his Disciples eat grain on the Sabaath?
He says: The sabaath was made for man, not man for the sabaath.
So what’s the mean?
For that matter what does “keep the sabaath holy” mean?
Report comment to moderator
Random thoughts today:
Bookstores Today is the last day of my favorite bookstore (B&N), which is closing and moving to a new location. I shall miss the old location, with it’s walk-up parking and comfy chairs. I knew where everything in the store was, better than most of their employees. Yes, the new store is shiny and bright and big (2 stories). But it has narrower aisles, no more comfy chairs, and is located in a very crowded mall.
Christmas In between all of the football last weekend, I decided to get a jump on my Christmas shopping. For me, Target is the place to go (I don’t do malls). I eyed the LED Christmas lights – they’re awesome. Even in broad daylight they show up. The drawback – they burn out quicker than other lights. I’m debating a color scheme this year – I’m very tempted by gold and brown. In any event, I got my Christmas cards and I bought candy for the women in the office. Yeah, I’m kinda sexist – I only give the women candy. Now, if a man wants to give me a hug and a kiss, I’ll give him candy too.
Basketball I’m traveling in two weeks up to Chattanooga to see the Lady Vols (National Champs!) play Chattanooga. I think Pat Summitt can reach her 1,000 career victory this year. Losing all 5 starters means it’s going to be a tough year for the Lady Vols. But if anyone can do it, it’s Pat. Between Pat Summitt and Bruce Pearl, Tennessee has the best “one-two” punch in basketball in the country. It will help us to get over the miserable football season. Interestingly, I will be back in Chattanooga for the Division 1-AA National Title game in football. If you’ve never been to Chattanooga, it’s a nice little city with a beautiful downtown. And people are friendly.
Cold weather/winter I hate it. If I can’t wear my shorts and flip-flops, it’s too cold. There won’t be many days left that I can do that. I’ve got a feeling this is gonna be a cold winter this year. Fortunately, in January and February I can go further south, where it will be warmer. Winter in Baton Rouge isn’t near as bad as winter in Atlanta. I know – it’s nothing compared to Chicago or Minnesota, but it’s too cold for me. I don’t know how you yankees stand it.
Report comment to moderator
I don’t know how you yankees stand it.
I don’t. I moved south.
I do miss real snow though. No more skis or dog sleds or sledding. Or the look of a freshly fallen snow, or a night time winter landscape under a full moon…
Report comment to moderator
Austen #29: I should have said older and/OR wiser
Whew, that takes a load off my mind. Though older, I wonder if you qualified me as wiser.
Report comment to moderator
Anlir- It’s not that we Northerners stand it, we just know that it is a change from hot and humid (and the colder it gets, the fewer bugs we have in summer).
Report comment to moderator
#32 – “I don’t know how you yankees stand it.”
And I don’t know how y’all stand the heat and humidity.
If you’re cold, you can put on sweaters and wool socks. But when it’s hot, there’s only so much you can take off before you’re indecent!
I love the quiet of a winter night after a snowstorm, when all the sounds are muffled and the world is just dark and still.
Report comment to moderator
As to Sabbath, it does seem to me that the New Testament at least presents it as a gift, a benefit and not a burden. I for one have always refused to work Sunday, and wouldn’t accept a job that didn’t accept that stipulation. (Even my very first job, McDonald’s, accepted that since I wouldn’t compromise on it. My sister worked there as well, and occasionally they scheduled her and she told them she’d work “this time only.” When they sceduled me on Sunday, I told them I was not available, not even “this time,” and as a result they rarely forgot.) These days I will work Sunday only if I have a Monday deadline and I got behind–which means once two years or so. I consider my “word” to my employee to require that in such cases, but I still do attend church. Obviously those who work in medicine or other emergency fields do need to work on Sunday, as do pastors.
Now, as I’ve said on here before, I do go out to eat nearly every Sunday, though I rarely go shopping and I try to get my gas a different day. (It’s usually about a dime cheaper near where I go to church, so sometimes I do end up getting it on Sunday, but not very often. I try to get it on Wednesdays when I’m also out in that area.) I go out to eat because that’s nearly my only meal in the whole week to eat with people and not by myself. (My housemate never eats here.) I would prefer if we were in the habit of going to someone’s house and not eating out, but since “working on Sunday” doesn’t seem an absolute prohibition (and certainly not one to pagans), I think it falls under “acceptable” practice to eat out.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer,
Follow-up question to the one from last week about the bogus company that had promised me work. . . .
The company that connected us was billing me for the fee on this work I never received, and on which I never got paid. So I filled out their “form” for fee disputes and told them I’d never received any work, any payment, any of the promised phone calls . . . and had done research and discovered they were a bogus company. Separately, I sent them a longer e-mail with what I had determined in my research. Unfortunately, they sent my dispute of fees to the company (which had already told them the project had been cancelled, so I have no idea why the bogus company needed to be “in the loop”). Yesterday I received this semi-threatening e-mail from the bogus company. By the way, I didn’t mention “blogs” in my dispute of the fee; I merely said I’d done “research” and discovered them to be “bogus.”
Here’s the note, with the intermediary company’s name removed: “We are not a bogus company and are suing the people who have posted those blogs.
“We do see your comments from [the other company] and do not hope to add you to the list.”
Well, seems to me that threatening a lawsuit rather proves they’re a bogus company, but unfortunately they do now know that I reported them to the intermediary company. Would it be wise to send a response something like the following:
“I did not mention blogs in this comment to [the other company], merely asked them to cancel payment of a fee for money I was never paid. I had already cancelled my connection with you; on the advice of a lawyer friend [that's you] saying only that I was no longer interested in working with you because my schedule is already full. I see no reason that we need to be in further contact, so please remove me completely from your list of contacts. Thank you.”
This sample note doesn’t mention the lawsuit at all, or the word “bogus” at all. But it does give a subtle hint that I know a lawyer, which I have heard is a good way to send impostors scampering. I have forwarded the threatening e-mail to the company that connected us. Comments? I have no idea how likely they are to bring a lawsuit against me; obviously I cannot afford that, and I have done nothing against them other than bringing their questionable status to the attention of the company that connected us. (And that company has to do its own research, so if they determine they are phony, that will only indirectly be because of me; if they determine they are legitimate, no harm has been done. Either way, I don’t see how they have a leg to stand on for even a “nuisance lawsuit.”)
Report comment to moderator
It is revealing that in the two Scriptural instances in which Moses proclaims the Decalogue, separate rationales are used to justify Sabbath observance. In Exodus 20:11 it is because God rested on the seventh day; in Deuteronomy 5:15 it is because the Hebrews were redeemed form Egyptian slavery by God’s outstretched arm.
The two do not stand in opposition. When God rested on the seventh day, He did not sleep in, weary from a week of world making, rise at noon to don a celestial robe, slip His feet into oversized fluffy Noah’ Ark slippers with giraffe heads perched over the toes, to be greeted at the top of Heaven’s staircase by Gabriel offering a cup of coffee and the Jerusalem Post. God at rest means that the world was in perfect harmony with His purposes. Sabbath rest equates with the rich and full meaning of Shalom, or its synonym, salvation, and is not the mere absence of labor, or strife or a ticket to heaven, but a vibrant and harmonious relationship with the Creator God. God’s redemption of His people acted to restore that relationship.
Jesus’s controversies with the Pharisees address this same understanding. For Jesus, Sabbath meant wholeness, restoration, and abundant life in the Kingdom of God, not a scrupulous, religious restriction of activity. It appears that Sabbath observance, (the proper day, Jewish Sabbath or Resurrection Sunday, vexed the early church; Paul (Romans 14:5ff said it didn’t matter) provides a weekly opportunity to let go of daily distractions and realign ourselves with God.
Report comment to moderator
SOMETHING LIGHT
Ron Chapman, filling in for Paul Harvey just said,
“Many parts of Demi Moore are 46 today.”
Report comment to moderator
Like Michelle up in #20, we try to structure Sunday activities so that we have to do very few of our everyday chores like laundry, shopping, or buying gas. We try not to go out to eat on Sunday and try to minimize time spent on the computer and watching TV or videos. We also try to keep Saturday evenings pretty low key, so that we can get the boys into bed at a decent hour; all of us are better prepared for worship on Sunday if the kids get enough sleep.
Our goal on Sundays is to focus on the worship of God and on fellowship with our family and our church family, so we make an effort to be at both morning and evening worship services, trying to have a fairly quiet afternoon in between. It makes for a busy day, but we are blessed by faithful preaching from God’s Word and by the love and support of our church family.
Report comment to moderator
Lance: Glad you saw the Boston Legal show last night. It ran head on into my major concern about the eugenic use of abortion. I thought it was all handled exceptionally well.
As a classical liberal who is pro-choice, I have deep concerns about folks using pre-natal tests to determine the gender, health, tendencies, traits or other characteristics of their children.
My first concern is pretty objective; we do not know enough about the positive effects of “negative” or even “neutral” genes to risk eliminating them from our collective human genome. It is known that some disease causing genes also protect us from other diseases. Nobody knows how many of these there are. Moreover, hundreds of other genes mediating such things as height, strength, psychological tendencies or behaviours may very well have positive effects of which we yet remain ignorant.
My second concern is that there just might be a positive side to some human suffering.
My third is that such technologies in some way interfere with the free will and opportunities available to those babies which are born.
My fourth is a more classical objection that this technology could be used to further advantage only those who already have advantages.
There are other reasons to be concerned about this, but those will do for now.
BUT, as the judge observed in the Boston Legal case, if one takes the law as it stands, with a right to choose, it is probably impossible to superimpose upon that choice any kind of government screening process to sort out the “acceptable” or “unacceptable” motives of the choosers.
While I remain pro-choice, I will always remain cognizant that abortion that at some point, society might have to find a way to restrict its positive or negative eugenic uses.
Report comment to moderator
I’m sure, while you were not looking, the left leaning Democratic congress passed a $700 billion financial system bailout bill that was sold to you to buy up the Collateralized Mortgage Bonds that were causing the entire world’s financial system to fail,
Well, those lefties pulled a bait and switch on you. Of the $700 Billion – only %60 billion is left adn it is now earmarked by them for the UAW union connected to the auto industry they caused to fail.
And, here is the best part. Not one dime , not a nickel , not a penny was spent of this $700 billion, to buy one Collateralized Mortgage Bond that was causing the world to collapse. I guess the socialists got scared about something more important than the world ending like not being able to pay off the folks that voted for them in the last election.
Well, if this isn’t fiscal malfeasance and politicians stealing you blind with their 3 card Monty routine and shell games, then you are as insane as they are. Follow the money a=nd see where it went and see who donated teh most to the Democrats first and the Republicans second.
Aren’t you glad you reelected theise theives. Republicans should be the most upset since average lefties don’t pay taxes so nothing was stolen from them.
Report comment to moderator
Austen, that’s a nice thought, but I’m sure it gives me way too much credit.
Report comment to moderator
Llama:
You had better check this out!
http://www.theonion.com/content/radio_news/obama_vows_to_wipe_out
Report comment to moderator
Thanks, Arcadia, I think you made some good points.
Report comment to moderator
Granny,
I’m glad you noticed and frequent such a fine base of satire as the Onion. It is the best collection of humor on the planet.
Our herds have hired the ACLU, for unlimited Llama dung tonnage, to try to stop Obama from wiping Obama loving llamas off the planet like his Islamofascist friends want to do to Israel. We are crafty, if illusive and somewhat virtual, 4 hooved spitting beasts that will trample weak wristed Marxists to dust and spread their entrails over ice covered mountaintops as Christmas decorations.
This all started when Michelle refused to switch to Llama Spit Will Give You Fits hair care products. So, it’s not any llama’s fault, as her husband’s athletic supporters think, that his wife’s finely crafted hair got a little messy on occasion. She could have switched to Llama Spit instead of Dippity Doo that can’t do what she wants to do with her hair do.
Watch for Obama’s ‘Arafat’ Liver Lips to take center stage soon.
Report comment to moderator
#38 Cheryl D.
Obama just wrote an executive order to make sure that the IRS collects taxes on the work you were not given nor paid for. It’s all part of his new government work program – you were just first to get some non work or non pay. It’s the least he can do to make sure the this bogus comapany hires as many tax paying CCR’s as possible.
Hopefully, this will sort itself out before a lefty judge makes you go into the military or prison, yur choice.
Report comment to moderator
Our fine socialist government now run by Marxists that nationalized the home loan industry by taking over Freddie and Fannie, just announced that to solve the home mortgage crisis they are going to allow Freddie and Fannie to let home owners, who are 90 days late with their payments, a new 3% loan from them for 40 years.
But, the home owner will still somehow be responsible for paying off all that they originally borrowed, except for those that can’t. For them they will look at reducing the principle that interest is applied to on their loans to be reduced for interest purposes until the principle and interest amount can be afforded by home owner even if the interest is zero and term 40 years.
I may be wrong, (not really) but wasn’t it these no interest teaser rates on 40 year mortgages that went to people who could not or would not pay them back is what caused this problem in the first place? Wasn’t it frauds skaflaws, criminals and lying cheating, whack jobs that are the root of this problem? Now the government is going to give them the same teasers they had originally which were so terrible – so they cannot pay up again adn put you even further in debt?
Why don’t these Marxists take care of those of us that did not default, had our 401k’s destroyed and had our home prices fall off a cliff because of these criminals? Why not us too? Why can’t we get bailed out? It is our money anyway. Why should we give it to these criminals to bail out other bums and criminals when the right and jsutly innocent in all of this need to bailed out – even if it is with our own money.
Why? Because you didn’t vote for a Marxist and those that did, no matter how at fault or criminal, will be taken care of just like the unions at the auto companies and you will pay for it. Yes you – with higher taxes. But the first trillion dollars of bailout is going, going, gone and they will now steal more from you or you will go to jail.
The dregs of society now rule the roost and will be rewarded while those that followed the rules will be punished until they are dead broke or just plain dead.
See you in the Obama soup kitchen line.
Report comment to moderator
Llama: Seeing as how Obama won’t take office for more than two months, how can you blame him for the mortgage bailout? (#49)
Have you finally lost that last tenuous hold on reality?
Report comment to moderator
Go vote on which direction the RNC should go to regain relevance in today’s world. Some very good ideas!
Rebuild the Party. A Plan for the Future: Use this forum to post your ideas about how we can rebuild the party. The best ones as voted by the community may be incorporated in the plan we deliver to candidates for RNC Chairman.
Report comment to moderator
Sunday brunch is known as the worst shift in family restaurants. Lots of work for very little in tips.
As for winter and the cold — I really don’t understand how anyone can live without four seasons a year. Fall colours followed by crisp cold snow followed fresh plants, flowers etc and finally the summer and the beach. Of all that only the a fall hike in the woods is better than a nice evening stroll on freshly fallen snow.
Report comment to moderator
From Rasmussen:
43% say it’s best to compare a candidate to Reagan
A quick run-through:
-43% said that comparing a candidate to Reagan is a positive thing. 26% viewed it as a negative.
-40% see “progressive” as a positive. (Obviously they don’t know that it’s often a euphemism for “liberal”.) 16% see progressive as a negative.
-40% see “moderate” as a positive. 8% see it as a negative.
-37% see “conservative” as a positive label. 22% see it as a negative.
-19% see “liberal” as a positive. 36% say it’s a negative. Of the five labels that were surveyed, it was the only one with higher negative than positive numbers.
Report comment to moderator
Matt Y.: I don’t think “progressive” is a euphemism for “liberal.” It’s actually an indication that times have changed. “Liberal” carries connotations of the ’60s and ’70s, when liberalism really emerged as a distinct social and political philosophy.
Forty years down the road, we’re still fighting the remnants of some of the same battles, but a lot has changed. And we’ve become progressives to indicate that. Conservatives, on the other hand, remain sticks-in-the-mud, as unwilling to move with the times as they are to change their name.
Report comment to moderator
Rambling responses here:
Sure a lot has changed. There may be new battles and the political spectrum may have shifted, but those toward the left of the political spectrum still should get the “liberal” label, and those toward the right should be labeled “conservative”…
…So why don’t we all call ourselves “progressives” and leave it at that? After all, none of us are opposed to progress. We just disagree on what progress is.
…Conservatives could call themselves “constitutionalists” to imply that they support abiding by the Constitution and their opponents don’t. Then, anytime you would see a group call itself “constitutionalist”, you’d know they came from the right of the spectrum (conservatives). In the same way, whenever I see “progressive” as a description of some think tank or other group, I know they’re liberal…
…”Progressive” is a not a NPOV label. “Liberal”, “centrist”, and “conservative” are neutral labels…
…You’re welcome to call yourself progressive. It’s a free country. Just be aware that the area in which you fall in the political spectrum is considered liberal.
Report comment to moderator
#50 SteveG,
The bailout package was crafted by the left in their 450 page document that became law. It was completely written by socialists and passed by them in their progressive, liberal, socialist, Marxist and democratic controlled congress. Only Congress can spend money and this Democratic one sure can do that in spades. They broke the all time deficit spending record last year and then doubled the old high spending mark this year to over a trillion dollars and plan to triple it next year.
You are the one that needs to know the facts and get a grip on reality since your party is and has been responsible for everything spending and economy wise the last two years. They even voted to spend money to comntinue the Iraq war for the last two years after claiming they were against it. They sound like you and claim they really didn’t do it – after they did it. It was all Bush’s fault – right? Where have you been?
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!