Welcome to Varied Expressions of Worship

Welcome to Varied Expressions of Worship

This blog will be written from an orthodox Christian point of view. There may be some topic that is out of bounds, but at present I don't know what it will be. Politics is a part of life. Theology and philosophy are disciplines that we all participate in even if we don't think so. The Bible has a lot to say about economics. How about self defense? Is war ethical? Think of all the things that someone tells you we should not touch and let's give it a try. Everything that is a part of life should be an expression of worship.

Keep it courteous and be kind to those less blessed than you, but by all means don't worry about agreeing. We learn more when we get backed into a corner.

Monday, February 9, 2015

Opus 2015-35: In the Name of Obama, Part 1 of 3

The headline on Drudge was a come-on:  “Terrible Deeds in Name of Christ.”

Most of the article was about the National Prayer Breakfast.  This used to be a meeting of Christians praying for the country.  Now it is more of a PR event for the multi-cultural agenda.  It has become a supeficially Christian event which has been secularized and lost it purpose, much like the YMCA and YWCA.  The headline came from a tired old canard that the president used.  I have read multiple references to this in different articles but, just in case you missed it, let me quote it for you one more time.  
" ‘Unless we get on our high horse and think that this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ," Obama said. "In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.”
This is simply another chance for the President to express moral equivalence between apples and oranges and show how much he hates Christianity.  I say hates but I could use words implying ignorance and naivety.  Take your pick.

If someone claimed to have done something with the president’s authorization, does that mean the president is guilty?  If someone else claims the perpetrators did it in the name of Obama, does that make the president an accessory to the crime?  Obviously not.  Guilt would be based on the actual words and deeds of the president.

That is probably why the president and attorney general have been blocking access to e-mails and other documents.  They don’t want you to know what the record actually shows.

Fortunately we do have the documents that tell us what religious leaders have taught.  I want to look at two hot buttons that we keep hearing explained as moral equivalence:  Violence and revenge.

To be continued...

homo unius libri

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are welcome. Feel free to agree or disagree but keep it clean, courteous and short. I heard some shorthand on a podcast: TLDR, Too long, didn't read.