Weekly roundup

The Doctrine of the Trinity: No Christianity Without It – a superb overview of the Trinity — read and enjoy!

This is great news: Congressional investigation of Planned Parenthood: What to expect

Abortion proponent “thrilled” by an abortion on “Grey’s Anatomy” – great analysis of the moral schizophrenia of the pro-abortion movement.

One of many problems abortion proponents have is sending mixed messages about getting one.  Whether to act glib and risk offending normal sensibilities, or to act serious and risk humanizing the baby, that is the question.

. . .

And then the abortion. It ends up only looking sick and pathetic for a father to go so far as to willingly watch the baby he loves and wants being killed, all to support that child’s mother. And why all the drama if it isn’t human children being killed by abortion?

Scott Klusendorf is one of the world’s best pro-life apologists.  He had a good analysis of Ray Comfort’s 180 movie (go watch it if you haven’t yet).  You can only put so much in a 30 minute movie, so here are some things to be aware of if people have questions about the movie.  (Scott had lots of good things to say as well.  I just included the critiques here.)

My concern: The film overlooked some important distinctions:

1) The distinction between people in the film (Venice Beach?) and the public at large—The sample used in the film is not only small; it’s not where most people are in terms of historical knowledge. . . .

2) The distinction between shouting a conclusion and establishing one–A sharp abortion-choicer could easily say, “Ya, I value human life. What Hitler did to Jews was wrong, but the unborn are not valuable human beings, so the comparison fails.” To succeed, pro-lifers must first establish that the unborn are indeed human (which the film does through images rather than scientific evidence), but then show that none of the differences between the embryos we once were and the adults we are today justify killing us at that earlier stage of development. Differences of size, level of development, environment, and degree of dependency, are not value giving in the way that abortion-advocates need them to be in order to make their case. In short, jumping from killing Jews for bad reasons to killing the unborn for those same reasons leaves out important premises in the pro-life argument.

3) The distinction between killing a “baby” and unjustly killing human beings—Perhaps I am nitpicking here, but I think Comfort asks the wrong question when he points to a 6-week fetus and says, “Doesn’t that look like a baby?” What if the critic says “no?” End of discussion. . . .

4) The distinction between voting for pro-life candidates and voting pro-life–Put simply, what does it really mean to vote pro-life? . . .

5) The distinction between intentional killing and killing that is merely foreseen–Is it always wrong to kill an innocent human being? What about ectopic pregnancy? . . .

Despite these concerns, the film is worth seeing and Comfort gets huge accolades for his courage in confronting abortion head-on. Say what you want, at least he’s doing something about it and for that I am immensely grateful. Before ripping him, his evangelical critics need to ask themselves what they are doing to stop the bloodshed. Are they taking this holocaust as seriously as Comfort does? I can only pray that one day they will.

The dealth penalty and deterrence: what the research shows – contrary to myths, the death penalty is a deterrent.  The question is whether it is appropriate as a deterrent (I think it is).  After all, capital punishment for speeding would be a deterrent, but perhaps over the top.

Random thought about evolution by Glenn — good stuff!  My favorite, which the Darwinists typically gloss over or ignore:

DNA can only be produced with the help of at least 20 different types of protiens.  But these proteins can only be produced at the direction of DNA.  Since each requires the other, a satisfactory explanation for the origin of one must also explain the origin of the other.  Apparently, this entire manufacturing system came into existence simultaneously.  This implies Creation. (Walter T. Brown, Jr., In the Beginning, p.6)

False teacher Chuck Currie named Associate Director of False Teacher (Westar) Institute

San Francisco Values: White ‘Master,’ Black ‘Slave’ Adorn Cover of Folsom Street Fair 2011 Program Guide – This goes on in Nancy Pelosi’s district.  The police do nothing to stop it.  The Left doesn’t protest it.

False ‘it gets better’ promise claims a victim

Homosexual activists Dan Savage and Lady Gaga should be brought up on charges of murder for issuing wholesale false promises and lies to young people confused about their sexuality.

2 thoughts on “Weekly roundup

  1. I notice that the doctrine of the trinity as stated on that site does not exclude the possibility that God can manifest himself in more than three ways, nor does it fully explain what is wrong with the ice-water-vapor analogy.

    I don’t officially have a position on the issue of the nature of the trinity and I certainly don’t claim to be an expert, but In recent years, I’ve been leaning towards the belief that the trinity doctrine is less, not more, important. I found the explanations of importance interesting, but not convincing. For example, belief in the trinity is neither a necessary nor sufficient condition for defeating either postmodernism or Islam. I believe in diversity AND unity while not being fully sold on the trinity, and some people I know that do believe in the trinity have little tolerance for diversity. That the condition of trinitarity (real word?) is neither necessary nor sufficient also goes for creation and relationships. I fail to see how the doctrine hurts or helps anybody in everyday life; it just doesn’t seem important. It’s just more divisive than anything else.

  2. Did anyone else notice that the (it gets better) incident can be used as evidence that we do in fact have an inner moral compass that will bother us when we do wrong and not all of the feelings of guilt surrounding homosexuality can be attributed to shaming by others? We do not believe homosexuality is wrong because we were taught that it is wrong; we believe homosexuality is wrong because we morally-sense it ourselves.

So, what do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s