Global warming? Did I say global warming? What I really meant to say was global freezing.

Will the public school children who were forced to watch An Inconvenient Truth be getting an apology from Al Gore and everyone else involved in that escapade?

It is bad news for the global warming / global climate change fraud perpetrators when parts of the mainstream media can’t ignore the truth any longer: Forget global warming – it’s Cycle 25 we need to worry about (and if NASA scientists are right the Thames will be freezing over again). But this is very good news for those who may be saved from the unprecedented money and power grab that is “global climate change.”

The supposed ‘consensus’ on man-made global warming is facing an inconvenient challenge after the release of new temperature data showing the planet has not warmed for the past 15 years.

The figures suggest that we could even be heading for a mini ice age to rival the 70-year temperature drop that saw frost fairs held on the Thames in the 17th Century.

Based on readings from more than 30,000 measuring stations, the data was issued last week without fanfare by the Met Office and the University of East Anglia Climatic Research Unit. It confirms that the rising trend in world temperatures ended in 1997.

I think we should take this advice: Scientists to Politicians: Let’s Put Climate Alarmism on Hold for 50 Years

It is very illuminating that the Darwin lobby is now branching out to support the climate change hoax.  The parallels are so similar: lack of evidence or even contrary evidence, threats to punish dissenters, deep desire to indoctrinate kids and not let them consider contrary views, etc.

Hat tip: John

It isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong

The Left reflexively plays the hate card when dealing with LGBTQ issues.  Sadly, too many  Bible-believing people fall prey to the trick and it silences them.  But it isn’t just about love and hate, but about truth and lies and right and wrong.

Consider these four possibilities:

1. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
2. You believe homosexual behavior is a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
3. You believe homosexual behavior is a not a sin and you share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.
4. You believe homosexual behavior is not a sin and you do not share what you think is the truth, as appropriate.

Before you can talk of love and hate, you’d need to understand right and wrong — or at least the perception of it by those in question.

Options 1 and 3 would be be acting in love (defined in the sense of having people’s long-term best interests at heart and not in the worldly sense of pampering people). Options 2 and 4 would be acting out of hate, or at least selfishness or indifference.

So it if you think homosexual behavior is a sin and don’t speak the truth, then you are acting hatefully — even if you were wrong in assessing the Bible (which you wouldn’t be).

The Bible couldn’t be more clear.  Even non-Christians and two out of the three types of pro-gay theologians can see these truths:

  • 100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.
  • 100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.
  • 100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).
  • 0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

So even in some bizarre hypothetical where the Bible actually supported homosexual behavior and Leviticus, Romans, all the verses on parenting and marriage, etc. stated the opposite of what they do, it wouldn’t be hateful to describe LGBTQ behavior as sinful. It would only be hate if someone “knew” the Bible said homosexual behavior was acceptable and taught otherwise.

In the same way, it is loving to remove false teachers from the church when they are advancing falsehoods with pro-gay theology.  It is a virtue to protect people.

And it would be un-loving to reject people just because they struggle with a sin that isn’t a temptation for you.  If people recognize that homosexual behavior is a sin and aren’t teaching the opposite, they should be welcomed in church. You should be willing to pray for them and be friends with them.

The hate card assumes motives and judges the hearts of others.  In some cases it is probably accurate to define people as haters, such as with Democrat Fred Phelps and his “church.”  But it is a cheap trick to use it against everyone you disagree with — and especially right after all your other arguments have been exposed as faulty.

The real haters are those that know what the Bible really says yet value their own popularity over the physical, emotional and spiritual health of others. They would rather be politically correct than tell you the truth. That’s love of self, not love of others.

The truth sounds like hate to those that hate the truth.

Also see Responding to Pro-Gay Theology.

Quick thoughts on the candidates

To state the obvious: all of these are much better than President Obama.  The Liberal entitlements and unfunded liabilities that began with Roosevelt have doomed the country (anyone who thinks we aren’t headed in the direction of Greece is mistaken), but Obama & Co. are destroying it much faster than it would have otherwise, and they have all the wrong positions on social issues.

Sarah Palin — would have been the best candidate, but sadly the liberal media destroyed the chances of that in 2008.

Rick Perry — wasn’t well prepared but had the right views on the size of government and would have been good on social issues.

Rick Santorum — unlikely to get elected, but the guy I’d vote for today.  The correct positions on social issues but unfortunately not a small government guy.  I’d like to see him as VP.

Paul — the “cool” choice of college kids with some interesting ideas, but overall not someone I’d want to be President and also not electable.

Gingrich — brilliant guy but very flawed.  If you got the best of him it would be great, but that would be naive to expect.

Romney — not that much better than Obama, but I do see Ann Coulter’s points that he is strong against illegal immigration (assuming he’d actually do something about it).

Cain — could have been good.  Sin has consequences.

Bachmann — would like to see her somewhere in a Republican administration.

End of an era

We canceled our subscription to the Houston Chronicle (at least the daily portion; we may keep the Sunday paper). I have read the newspaper daily since I was 10. But I noticed that we were reading it less and less and some days I almost “precycled” it by putting it in the recycling bin without reading it.

I’ve been displeased with the Chronicle for years. The leftist mentality pervades everything, including the Lifestyle section. They have run multiple nostalgic fluff-pieces on things like Playboy magazine and the Deep Throat movie. Seriously.

But I get much more accurate news online via blogs and such.  Yes, the Internet has a lot of nonsense, but one of the beauties of it is that over time you can determine which sites are credible and then have a package of blogs and sites that you can trust.  The system works.  I stay well informed on both sides (you can’t escape the Leftist media).  Sadly, too many people only read the Liberal media and their stereotypes of conservatives.

And we’ll save a few bucks as well.

Quote of the day about the Planned Parenthood website

I’m pretty sure that’s where Satan lives.

Source: My favorite blogger

Seriously, some sites are so evil you can feel it.  Go check out their Teenwire site where they actively encourage teens to do whatever they like, without consulting parents or their religion.

Side note: I’ve yet to come across a single pro-Planned Parenthood “pastor” who wasn’t a false teacher.

Responding to a common pro-gay theology argument

My post asking if the Bible was unclear on homosexuality brought this somewhat predictable comment. It never made reference to the Bible, it just repeated all sorts of un-biblical fallacies.  Sadly, this is no straw man comment.  Lots of people claiming the name of Christ repeat these arguments.

quite a few of my friends are gay. I am not. But knowing them, i know with all my heart they were born – created – gay. It is not something they chose to be.

I’ve had a lot of gay friends as well.  I don’t get in their face about it any more than I do that with the sins of heterosexual friends.  But I also don’t teach that any sins of my friends are acceptable to God.

You “know” that with your “heart?”  Emotions are nice, but not a good way to make decisions.  Please consider Paul’s prayer in Philippians 1:9-11 —  And it is my prayer that your love may abound more and more, with knowledge and all discernment, so that you may approve what is excellent, and so be pure and blameless for the day of Christ, filled with the fruit of righteousness that comes through Jesus Christ, to the glory and praise of God.

Please note how he links love with knowledge and discernment.

I encourage you to read some research on the causes of homosexuality.  It is not genetic.

And even if they were “born that way,” it is a biblical concept that we are born with a sinful nature.  We don’t get an “ought” from an “is.”  Sadly, I’ve been really effective at coveting, pride and selfishness since I was little, but I don’t get a pass on those sins because I was “born that way.”

God is LOVE. God loves all of us. How could He not love people HE created gay?

I mean this in a most serious and kind way: How much of the Bible have you studied?  Do you not see how you could apply that to any sin?  Do you not see how seriously God treats sin?  My #1 recommendation to anyone debating any topic on Christianity is to read the Bible more.

God wants US to love one another. Treat one another with love and acceptance.

That argument assumes that homosexuality isn’t sinful, but it doesn’t explain why we should hold that view.  Can you show me in the Bible where we are taught to accept any sin?  How about 1 Corinthians 5?

I do not believe it is the right of any of us to judge any other person – only God.

But aren’t you judging me and others who hold the view that homosexual behavior is a sin (along with many other behaviors)?

I do not believe it’s about whether their behaviour is sinful or not. Who of us is without sin?

But it is about whether the behavior is sinful.  That’s the point of the discussion, and you’ve already claimed it isn’t sinful. But the burden of proof is on you to reason your case from the Bible.

The fact that we are all sinners doesn’t mean that we would encourage people to remain in sin.

The really Christian thing to do is love your neighbour. I love my gay friends, and they are beautiful and in some cases deeply Christian – more Christian than many so called Christians who have rejected them for their sexuality.

Your love for your friends isn’t the Biblical love of having their long-term best interests at heart.  If anyone teaches the opposite of the Bible then I don’t think it is correct to describe them as “deeply Christian.”

We don’t reject them for their sexuality, we love them enough to speak the truth.  I urge you to read the Bible thoroughly and reconsider your views.