What parents need to know

Facebook continues to update its privacy policies. Every time Facebook makes a change, parents and kids should immediately take the time to redo or review their privacy settings.

The changes themselves can be a mixed bag. In the most recent overhaul, many of the Facebook privacy options have been set to defaults that allow broad access to what your children post on their pages or on their friends’ pages. And the default for many privacy options for minors is “friends of friends,” which could be thousands of kids that your kids don’t know. In other words, your kids’ privacy settings must be redone. Our step-by-step video shows you how to do it.

Let us parents beware.

Posted via web from Faith & Life

Dinner with the little woman tonight at a great little St. Louis area restaurant. Tonight was “Nawlins” night.

Sent from my iPhone

Posted via email from Faith & Life

"O Lord our God, have mercy upon us. Forgive us especially, we pray thee again, for our folly – for our foolish talking about our century and the 'modern man', as if anything had changed.

Awaken us, we pray thee, and bring us to see that thy method is still the same, that the truth remains unchanged and unchanging, and that the power of the blessed Holy Spirit is in no sense diminished.

Lord, hear us. Revive thy work O Lord, thy mighty arm make bare. Speak with a voice that wakes the dead and make the people hear. And unto thee, and unto thee alone, shall we give all the praise and the honour and the glory, both now and forever, amen."

Very relevant in 2010, don't you think? Click here to be able to listen to The Doctor pray this prayer.

PS: Our sometimes contributor here, Rob, is pastor of that church.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

I know I'm on a blogging break. But this is worthy of a brief return.

Click here, enter your zip code. You'll see your congressman's name and phone number. Then make the call, even if you already know that your congressman opposes Obamacare. Our calls matter. 

Light up the switchboards! Stop the government takeover of the health care system.

BTW, if you're a liberal who stumbled in here and support Obama, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, et al making our health decisions, click here.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Taking a break…

March 1, 2010

…from blogging, that is. Many other pressing matters for my time. So if you are a usual reader, hang on. Lord willing I'll be back. Who knows? Maybe the other contributor will step up.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Whatever good insights Brian McClaren may offer, his views are (whether he knows it or not) neo-platonic, gnostic, and marcionite. In other words, he's a an arch heretic. (DP Cassidy)

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Al Gore’s Nine Lies

February 27, 2010

Investor's Business Daily writes,

The godfather of climate hysteria is in hiding as another of his wild claims unravels — this one about global warming causing seas to swallow us up. We've not seen or heard much of the former vice president, Oscar winner and Nobel Prize recipient recently as the case for disastrous man-made climate change collapses.

Where is ol' Al?

Posted via email from Faith & Life

William Jacobson explains.

And what Obama wants is to transform our economy into a West European-style economy where free enterprise is minutely regulated from the central government and extraordinarily high marginal tax rates are used to feed government redistribution of wealth in the form of social programs. The fact that West European economies have chronic double-digit unemployment rates as a result of these policies matters not.

 

Obama has signalled that he will do whatever it takes legislatively to get his foot in this door.

 

Republicans in Congress need to do whatever it takes legislatively to slam the door shut. Any and every legislative tactic must be used to stop the Democrats.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Miss Beverly Hills Lauren Ashley is making headlines. And “tolerance” demanding Beverly Hills is not so “tolerant. Seems Miss Ashley has a problem with gay homosexual “marriage.” From an interview about her controversial comments:

“My message is that I love everyone. But the bible is pretty black and white about homosexuality [being] a sin. As a Christian, that’s what I believe.”

Ashley, who says she’s a virgin and brought her own bible with her to the interview, made sure to point out that despite her strict Christian beliefs, she has plenty of gay friends.

“A lot of my gay friends tell me, ‘that’s your belief, I still love you,’” she said. “They know how much I love them and they know I still believe in them.”

Beverly Hills Mayor Nancy Kranse recently expressed outrage that Ashley would associate the city of Beverly Hills with anti-gay sentiment and issued a statement saying that the Miss California USA hopeful does not speak for the city when she condemns gay marriage.

“Beverly Hills has a long history of tolerance and respect,” the mayor wrote, adding that she was: “Shocked to see statements made by a beauty pageant contestant under the name of Beverly Hills.”

Tolerance? Oh wait. But not for Miss Ashley’s views and her right to voice them.

 

Ashley’s response to the Mayor?

“I believe in the rights of the individual and their personal beliefs, and I believe in tolerance and respect for all sides of the issues,” Lewis said on Wednesday. “I hope Beverly Hills exercises the same inclusion.” (source)

Ouch!

 

The National Organization for Marriage responded:

“I’m not surprised that Miss Beverly Hills, Lauren Ashley, opposes gay marriage — after all 45 percent of young Californians voted for Prop 8, as did 7 million Californians generally,” the organization’s president, Maggie Gallagher, told us. “But I have to say, I am impressed with her courage in coming forward and for speaking up for Carrie. The elected officials of city of Beverly Hills are not demonstrating tolerance or kindness by continuing the avalanche of hatred against supporters of Prop 8.”

 

Posted via web from Faith & Life

Well it is about time! An article states, 

"It was time to combine a masculine aesthetic to a traditionally cute product – the cupcake," declares the bakery's website. "Our objective is simple. We're men. Men who like cupcakes. Not the frilly pink-frosted sprinkles-and-unicorns kind of cupcakes. We make manly cupcakes. For manly men."

 

 

The cupcakes come in a dozen flavors, with names like the "Jackhammer" (chocolate cake with chocolate hazelnut filling and hazelnut buttercream) and the "Beer Run" (chocolate beer cake with beer-infused buttercream and crushed pretzels). Others, like the "Rum and Coke" and "Old Fashioned," take their inspiration from the world of cocktails.

 

You won't find any pink and green among the company's products. Each cupcake comes topped with a chocolate disc festooned with a decidedly masculine design: woodland camouflage, wood grain, houndstooth, plaid, checkerboard, or marble. Pictured above is the "B-52," a Kahlua-soaked vanilla cake with a Bailey's Bavarian filling, decked out in camouflage.

Butch Bakery features a line, "Where Butch Meets Buttercream." They even have The Butch MAN-ifesto. How can we guys not like this situation?

Posted via email from Faith & Life

No, I'm not necessarily linking the two. But, I will say that if what the Democrats are proposing, either from the Congress or from the president, passes it will be a social injustice. The big meeting is today. Everyone in the media echos the president about the need for bipartisanship. No, we don't need bipartisanship. We need the conservatives to defeat the Democrats' socialist agenda.

Now on social justice. Kevin DeYoung has a couple of posts up dealing with it. In Stirring the Missiological Pot One More Time he writes,

Just to be clear, I am not against working for societal change, helping the poor, or ministering to the sick. I am hugely for all these things. But the idea I’m toying with is that maybe these things do not constitute the mission of the church. Certainly, we love our neighbor as ourselves in obedience to Christ, which will entail different individual callings and different responses depending on the situation. We are called to do good to all people, especially to those of household of faith (Gal. 6:10). So we need no excuse to love others. Praise God for Christian doctors, teachers, and relief workers all around the world. But it seems to me the mission of the church, what God wants to accomplish on earth through us, is not the meeting of all human needs nor the transforming of all cultures, but the discipling of all nations.

Amen and read the rest. In Seven Passages on Social Justice (1) Kevin begins a series examining some key passages dealing with social justice. The first passage he tackles is Isaiah 1. He begins,

It’s no secret that social justice is a hot topic in evangelicalism, a popular pursuit and also controversial. Some see the renewed emphasis on the poor as nothing less than a rediscovery of a whole gospel. Others worry that an emphasis on social justice distracts the church from the primary role of evangelism. I’m not going to propose a third way between these two poles. I think a concern for the poor is essential to Christianity. And I think saving people from eternal suffering is more important than saving people from temporal suffering. That’s where I stand (and most evangelicals, I believe; the disagreement is in the details). (bold added)

I like his premise and look forward to seeing how he deals with the other passages. One of the things in this ongoing debate about the church and social justice is the nature of the gospel as it relates to social justice. Well intentioned people seem to want to equate social justice with the gospel. Helping the poor or oppressed IS the gospel in their view. These folks' concern for the needy is laudable. But I think they miss something very important and in doing so, actually end up at worst proclaiming no gospel at all (see Brian McLaren) or at best muddy the gospel. Mark Dever said well here:

Mercy ministries display God’s kindness, and they are good and appropriate for the Christian to do. But such actions are not evangelism. They may commend the gospel to others, but only if someone has told them the gospel. They need to have the gospel added to them. Helping others or doing our jobs well, whatever they are, in and of themselves are not evangelism. (bold added)

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Hummers goners!

February 24, 2010

Just heard the news that GM will cease making Hummers. Not sorry to see them go.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

ThirdMill's Matthew Gross responds:

The question of whether church membership is biblical is a good one.  The short answer is that church membership is a biblical concept that has found valid expression in many churches today.  However, nothing in scripture directly commands what might be termed “formal”  church membership, whereby members of the body of Christ are required to swear submission to a particular local church or board of elders, deacons, or bishops.  To elaborate, lets begin by looking at a passage that deals directly with membership in the body of Christ:  

Romans 12:3-8
For by the grace given me I say to every one of you: Do not think of yourself more highly than you ought, but rather think of yourself with sober judgment, in accordance with the measure of faith God has given you. Just as each of us has one body with many members, and these members do not all have the same function, so in Christ we who are many form one body, and each member belongs to all the others. We have different gifts, according to the grace given us. If a man's gift is prophesying, let him use it in proportion to his faith. If it is serving, let him serve; if it is teaching, let him teach; 8if it is encouraging, let him encourage; if it is contributing to the needs of others, let him give generously; if it is leadership, let him govern diligently; if it is showing mercy, let him do it cheerfully.

1Cor. 12:12-20
The body is a unit, though it is made up of many parts; and though all its parts are many, they form one body. So it is with Christ. For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body–whether Jews or Greeks, slave or free–and we were all given the one Spirit to drink. 
Now the body is not made up of one part but of many. If the foot should say, "Because I am not a hand, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. And if the ear should say, "Because I am not an eye, I do not belong to the body," it would not for that reason cease to be part of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the sense of hearing be? If the whole body were an ear, where would the sense of smell be? But in fact God has arranged the parts in the body, every one of them, just as he wanted them to be. If they were all one part, where would the body be? As it is, there are many parts, but one body.

Notice in these passages that a person’s membership in the church is likened to the various parts of a body’s “membership” in a body.  Paul is saying that, as Christians, we do not choose whether or not we are members of the church any more than your hand chooses whether it is a member of your body.  Thus, if someone is a Christian, he or she is a member of the body of Christ.  

What, then, are the implications of this unalterable reality as they relate to “formal” church membership?  How should this area work itself out in an individual’s walk with Christ?  Well, one way that this reality works itself out is through regular meeting with other believers. The writer of Hebrews 10:25 says “Let us not give up meeting together, as some are in the habit of doing, but let us encourage one another–and all the more as you see the Day approaching.”  The “meeting together” to which the author of this verse is referring would probably correlate fairly closely to a regular worship service at a local church.  So I think that the member of the body is therefore required to attend a particular church and to be with other members of the body of Christ.  I think also that it is important that in light of Romans 12 and 1Corinthians 12, it is important for the members of the body to allow his or her gifts to be worked out within a particular church.  This is not to say that believers are bound to worship with only one particular church, or that they must only serve one particular church, however, it is to say that they should have one local church as a central focus of their fellowship and of their ministry.  This is because it is not possible to integrated and serving in a church on a regular basis if you are a stranger. 

Where then does this requirement of regular attendance and regular service intersect with “formal” membership in the local church?  Well, looking again at the passages above, notice that some of the parts of the body are called to serve as leaders, or heads, of the body.  Notice also that not everyone is called to leadership, which means that some must be called as followers, and some are called to submit to being “diligently governed” (Rom. 12:8).  Hebrews 13:17 says “Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.”  This call to leadership and call to submitting to that leadership is where the rubber meets the road in regard to formal church membership.  Leaders in the church are called to govern and shepherd their specific flocks.  One of the ways that they often have determined how do delineate where their flock ends and where another shepherd’s flock begins is by formalizing church membership.  This is usually done by requesting a specific member of the universal church of Jesus Christ to formally place himself or herself under the formal authority of a particular local body.  Thus, the leaders of a church agree to “give an account” for a particular believer, and a particular believer agrees to submit to particular leaders in the church.  

Because the church is designed to function with leaders and followers, and because the leaders are going to have to give an account for their service, formal church membership is a good biblical solution to the problem of accounting for the sheep.  However, does this mean that formal church membership is mandated by Scripture?  Well, I do believe that it is mandated sometimes at least in cases where becoming a formal member of the church you are attending is required by the leadership of the church.  In most churches, however, it is not the case that the leadership requires all regular attendees to become formal members, and if this is the case at your church, then you are not required by scripture to formally join.  However, it is important that you recognize that even if you do not formally join a particular church, you are still under the authority of “your churches” elders.  The fact that this relationship has not been formalized does not mean that the relationship between sheep and shepherd does not exist.

Answer by Matthew Gross

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Johnny Cash sings a love song

February 24, 2010

Horatius Bonar, “the prince of Scot­tish hymn writers," writes in Open Intercourse With God,

It does not seem a strange thing that the creature and the Creator should meet face to face, and that they should hold intercourse without any obstructing medium.

We may not understand the mode of communication between the visible and the invisible, but we can see this, at least, that He who made us can communicate with us, by the ear or the eye or the touch. He can speak and we can hear; and, again, we can speak and He can hear. His being and ours can thus come together, to interchange thought and affection: He giving, we receiving; He rejoicing in us, and we rejoicing in Him: He loving us, and we loving Him. He can look on us, and we can look on Him; He "guiding us with His eye" (Ps. 32:8), and we fixing our eye on His, as children on the eye of a father, taking in all the love and tenderness which beam from His paternal look, and sending up to Him our responding look of filial confidence and love. Not that He has "eyes of flesh, or seeth as man seeth" (Job 10:4); but He can fix His gaze on us in ways of His own, and make us feel His gaze, as really as when the eyes of friends look into each other's depths. "He that formed the eye shall He not see" (Ps. 94:9). He who made the human eye to be "the light of the body" (Matthew 6:22), that organ through which light enters the body,–in order that He might pour into us the glory of His own sun and moon and stars,–can He not, through some inner eye which we know not, and for which we have no name, pour into us the radiance of His own infinite glory, though He be the "King invisible" (1 Tim. 1:17),–He "whom no man hath seen nor can see" (1 Tim. 6:16),–the "invisible God" (Col. 1:15). He can touch us; for in Him we live and move and have our being: 1 and we can lay hold of Him, for He is not far from any one of us; He is the nearest of all that is near, and the most palpable of all the palpable. It would seem, then, that open and free and near intercourse with the God who made us arose from His being what He is, and from our being what we are: as if it were a necessity both of His existence and of ours.

Excerpted from Reformed Perspectives, Volume 12, Number 08 (February 21 to February 27, 2010), a ministry of Third Millennium Ministries.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

Michele McGinty blogs at Reformed Chicks Blabbing. Her blog is a daily stop for me and many others. She's a wife, mom, Westminster Seminary student, blogger (of course) and in a battle against Ovarian cancer.

Her latest post today, I'm Still Alive!, gives an update. Keep this sister in your prayers…and some encouraging words would probably be appreciated! Feel free to re-Tweet this around.

Posted via email from Faith & Life

The NCAA Football Rules Committee agreed Wednesday to bar players from displaying words, numbers, logos and other symbols in the anti-glare “eye black” they underline their eyes with.

Though not mentioned in the decision, former college football star and outspoken Christian Tim Tebow has been credited by numerous media and bloggers as having had an influence on the move – dubbed by some already as “The Tebow Rule.”

Though hundreds of college players use their eye black to express themselves, Tebow’s use of the glare reducer had drawn notably attention over the past two years as it touted verses in the Bibles. It became especially prominent the college football season before last as he marched his team toward their second BCS championship in three years.

In the 2009 BCS championship game, Tebow donned the most popular Bible verse in America – John 3:16 – which went on to be googled by some 94 million people over two days. Other verses, the Florida Gators QB has sported include Mark 8:36, John 16:33, Ephesians 2:8-10, and James 1:24.

Well. Two things come to mind. 1) Interesting to me that the NCAA waited until Tebow finished his football career to make this decision. I’m guessing they didn’t want to tangle with Tebow. Bad PR you know.

2) I think this is a bad decision. Christianity usually gets the short end of the stick. If a very prominent Muslim player was displaying verses from the Koran in his “black notes” I guarantee the NCAA wouldn’t touch this with a 10 foot pole.

HT: The Aquila Report from The Christian Post

Posted via web from Faith & Life

In today's ESV Study Bible reading from Genesis 40,

Only remember me, when it is well with you, and please do me the kindness to mention me to Pharaoh, and so get me out of this house. 15 For I was indeed stolen out of the land of the Hebrews, and here also I have done nothing that they should put me into the pit.”

I find especially interesting the fact that Joseph wanted out! He was in prison, wrongly accused and unfairly imprisoned. Was he not to just find contentment and make the best of it? After all, the Apostle Paul wrote in 2 Cor. 12, "For the sake of Christ, then, I am content
with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities."

Was Paul saying that when we are in difficult circumstances that we should just be content with it and "joy" in being there? What if we long to be delivered from it? Paul himself in Philippians 1 expressed both sentiments when he said that he knew he was in prison to advance the gospel and yet a few verses later he writes that he knows that the Philippians' prayers and the help of the Spirit of Jesus Christ will turn out for his deliverance. Paul was content and knew God had him in prison for His purposes. He also didn't want to stay in prison. This is an important point.

Paul says similarly in Philemon (from prison), "At the same time, prepare a guest room for me, for  I am hoping that  through your prayers  I will be graciously given to you." 

Joseph says essentially the same thing. I think he understood at some level that God was doing something in and through him. Yet, he wanted out.

I find myself thinking this way, though not as faithfully as Joseph and Paul. I know God is always doing something in and through difficulties. But I want deliverance! I want someone to "remember me" and "get me out." Lord help!

Posted via email from Faith & Life

I saw this episode yesterday, again. Can we relate? And George…invoking Moses to the defense of "picking."

Posted via email from Faith & Life

The Sum of Saving Knowledge

February 12, 2010

I referenced the Sum of Saving Knowledge in the previous post on The Troubled Soul Sustained. Here is the "Sum:"

The Sum of Saving Knowledge is this:
  1. The woeful condition which all men are in by nature, through breaking of the covenant of works.
  2. The remedy provided for the elect in Jesus Christ by the covenant of grace.
  3. The means appointed to make them partakers of this covenant.
  4. The blessings which are effectually conveyed to the elect by these means.
The rest of this excellent work unfolds these points along with:

Posted via email from Faith & Life