esunahistorialarga.net vwlanghorne.com

Archive for 'Religion'

Ten Commandments

Posted on December 9, 2009, under Religion.

I often see blogs by people who hold Christianity in contempt, and have quotes from Christians to prove why Christianity is contemptible. One of the latest such quotes was attributed to Robert T. Lee.

Raising your children under americanism or any other principles other than true Christianity is child abuse.

This is a quite strong statement, certainly over the top when compared to real child abuse, but understandable from the position that a child’s soul needs protection as much as their body does. The problem here lies in calling for the government to enforce this idea. Not wanting to accept something that might be out of context, I did a dogpile search. What I found at Robert T. Lee’s “Society for the Practical Establishment and Perpetuation of the TEN COMMANDMENTS!” (at www.tencommandments.org) is actually pretty fairly summed up as an American Taliban movement. Robert T. Lee and his son appear to be advocating a new government based on a theocratic dictatorship with no civil rights, and enforcing the Ten Commandments as civil law with the death penalty for infractions. There’s no word on how much of the rest of Mosaic law he wants to bring back as well.

(Mr. Lee’s site also has a laughable use policy that purports to disallow even reading any material on his site without his permission, and forbids “fair us”. So I’ll rely on my ‘fair use’ rights here.)

OK, so Mr. Robert T. Lee appears offensive, dictatorial, and perhaps as much of a rabid moonbat as some people might claim. He makes a variety of claims including: God has made the Ten Commandments the most glorious Laws in all of creation; when Adam was created he was bound to obey the Ten Commandments; God requires that every individual person perfectly obey the Ten Commandments; and hypocritical professing so-called Christians are among the heathens who say that the Ten Commandments are no longer in effect. But is he Christian? He apparently thinks he is, and he refers to himself that way, but does he follow Jesus Christ in truth? I don’t think so, since there is much in Gospel and Scripture that he is either ignorant of or ignoring.

The Ten Commandments are glorious Laws, but they are not the ultimate in laws. The Mosaic covenant, of which the Ten Commandments are only a part, is definitely inferior to the New covenant. Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-19 that the law was not to pass, but went on (in the Sermon on the Mount) to demonstrate the imperfection of the Ten Commandments and the rest of Mosaic Law.

One is rightly entertained by the concept of Adam before the Fall being enjoined from working on the Sabbath (in Eden?), or coveting his neighbors’ possessions, let alone seeing Adam and Eve honor their fathers and mothers. Adam was bound not to the Ten Commandments but to a much simpler Law of Faith and Obedience. Indeed, Abraham so fulfilled the Law of Faith that it was accounted to him as righteousness, thus proving that the Law of Faith is superior to the later Mosaic Laws.

Reading scripture, not only does God not require every individual to obey the ten commandments, but there are repeated warnings that simply following the law is an apostate teaching. No one (other than Jesus) can be righteous under the law (Romans 3:10,19-20), the law can only condemn to death, it cannot save a single soul. Jesus taught a new ‘law of the Spirit’ based upon Faith and Grace. The believer must be dead to the law that Faith and Grace may make them live unto God.

If hypocritical professing so-called Christians are among the heathens who say that the Ten Commandments are no longer in effect, I guess we must include the Apostles Matthew, Paul and John in the heathen. Through these ‘heathens’ we see that Mosaic law was added to Abraham’s covenant of Faith as a preparatory discipline, a foreshadowing of Grace. Mosaic law was abolished, blotted out in Christ. Just as Jesus was better than Moses, so is Christ’s covenant perfect where Moses’ was faulty.

Given the above examples of specific errors on the part of Mr. Lee, I would be remiss to not mention that this type of error (legalism) is rebuked in many places in scripture, and false teachings are noted. This form of heresy is not Christianity, and to accuse all Christianity based on this heresy is an accusation both unfair and untrue.

*16/706/13*

Google Bookmarks Digg Reddit del.icio.us Ma.gnolia Technorati Slashdot Yahoo My Web

Conservatives Against Intelligent Design

Posted on December 9, 2009, under Religion.

There’s a new blog around named

Conservatives Against Intelligent Design. I like some of what they say, but I can’t support them. I think they’re fighting the wrong fight.

IMO, the ID issue came up primarily in response to just one thing. Students being taught about evolution, followed by the statement in the classroom “So there’s no need for God”. Granted, the young earthers have other issues with it. But if you accept the young earth theory, you also accept that God has deliberately tried to fool people, so why do you complain when He is successful? Except for young earth theories, there is no real problem reconciling evolution with Christianity. ID is that reconciliation.

Now, if you are a Christian, and you don’t like having your kids told that God doesn’t exist, you have three choices. You can pay for a public school and then pay again for a private school. You can pay for a public school and pay again to home school. Or you can try to force the public school to include your point of view.

The ID debate comes down to an argument over the curriculum in a socialist public school system. It’s not really anything else.

CAID is founded to wrestle over the control of a socialist one-size-fits-all approach to education that deliberately excludes choice and competition. I don’t think that’s the right approach for a Conservative, and I know that’s the wrong approach for a lover of liberty. On this one, I’m in Ogre’s camp when he says “If everyone were free to make their own decisions regarding their own education without any government interference, each family could decide for themselves if they wanted ID, creationism, or evolution taught in whatever manner they wanted.”

CAID is arguing about what children have to learn against their parents wishes. CAID has no problem with socialized education, as long as they are in control of it. In another context, that’s what make a RINO.

*6/706/13*

Google Bookmarks Digg Reddit del.icio.us Ma.gnolia Technorati Slashdot Yahoo My Web