Giant Robots!!

Only in Japan a 1 to1 18 meter tall Gundam robot has been completed.

The geek is strong in me today.

Technorati tags: Giant Robots, Japan, Geek, Gundam, Cool things on the internet

All Obama post

And putting me no doubt on the watch list so here we go:

Well June has been declared for the month for Lesbians, Gays, Transgender, and Bisexuals.  I’m old enough to remember when it used to be for brides.  But its not to late I say we petition the White House to declare September for heterosexual marriage.  After all President Obama supports it.

Lou Pritchet former VP of Proctor and Gamble tried to get a letter published in the NY Times about how he felt about Obama but the Grey Lady wasn’t haven’t any anti-Obama letters so they wouldn’t publish it.  But once it hit the internet millions of people read it.  You can too here it is:  You Scare me

And under the its a work of art but why again did you have to remind me what happened in January Legoland recreates Obama’s inauguration:

Oy in the Middle East in the Arab World it is considered an insult to show the bottom of your soles to someone so a picture of President Obama talking to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was interpreted by some as an insult to Israel.  What the real insult was when Netanyahu was told Tuesday by an “American official” in Jerusalem that, “We are going to change the world. Please, don’t interfere.” The report said Netanyahu’s aides interpreted this as a “threat.”  What the White House really needs is a good protocol droid.

Technorati tags: Politicss\, President Obama

All things are better in koine

And this one goes out to Dan Phillips

Who loves ya baby?

HT Patrick Chan

Technorati tags: Dan J. Phillips, Koine Greek, Humor, Patrick Chan, Who loves ya baby?

How to silence a Calvinist

ht:  Kevin Rhyne

Passing it on…

HT:  Frank Turk

Sensus Literalis

Miguel De La Torre  is the Associate Professor of Social Ethics for the Iliff School of theology in Denver.  He is the author of numerous books and the only reason I knew anything about him is a blog post about his “pop quiz on reading the bible literally”  Fred Butler really takes Professor De La Torre to task regarding this opinion article that he has written for the Associated Baptist Press.  And well he should Professor De La Torre erects a straw man regarding what is meant by the Protestant literal interpretation of the bible.  And Fred points out the obvious flaws in De La Torre’s argument including the presuppositions present. 

But this is really no surprise when it comes to Professor De La Torre in an article Pridesource a Michigan gay and lesbian magazine he said:

"he got saved" from fundamentalism when he left a successful business in Miami, where he was also active in supporting the political campaigns of social conservatives, to pursue a Divinity degree from Southern Baptist Theological Seminary.

Though he went to the university "with the idea of merging my far-right ideology with my religious faith," he encountered something he hadn’t been expecting. "When I left Miami and went to Louisville the only job I could get was that of a janitor. So the racism radicalized me to begin to seriously study and consider studies of oppression, which led me to what I am now, a liberation theologian.  Miguel De La Torre: The new face of gay-allied activism By Dawn Wolfe Gutterman”

Further in the article Professor De La Torre is quoted saying:

De La Torre said, "The first thing that I notice is that in the whole Hebrew bible it never mentions women having sex with each other. Which therefore, if I want to be literal, that means that lesbianism is okay….A few verses before that it says that if teenagers are disobedient you are to put them to death. As a father of two teenagers, that’s very tempting, but I’m not actually going to do that."

"So I mean if I want to be literal, my response is to kill the homosexual, to kill disobedient children, to kill anybody who works on the Sabbath, and to kill anybody who uses the name of the Lord in vain. That’s what those passages in Leviticus say," he added.

So what do we mean when we say we read the bible literally?  Well here is a definition of what we mean from R.C. Sproul: 

“To interpret the Bible literally is to interpret it as literature.  That is, the natural meaning of a passage is to be interpreted according to the normal rules of grammar, speech, syntax, and context.

The Bible may be a very special book, being uniquely inspired by the Holy Ghost, but that inspiration does not transform the letters or the words or the sentences of the passages into magical phrases.  Under inspiration a noun remains a noun and a verb remains a verb.  Questions do not become exclamations, and historical narratives do not become allegories.  Luther’s principle was anything but magical or simplistic.  The principle of literal interpretation is a principle that calls for the closest kind of literary scrutiny of the text. R.C. Sproul Knowing Scripture pp 48-49 “

So does Professor De La Torre really know what reading the bible literally mean?  It seems to me that Professor De La Torre really doesn’t know what it means and that it is easier to build a straw  man and call it “reading the bible literally”.  

 

HT:  Fred Butler

Technorati tags: Fred Butler, Literally reading the bible, Christianity, Gospel, Liberal worldviews.

Mission Accomplished a song of definite atonement

Shai Linne Song

This is the real thing! It’s a good dose of theological truth!

Verse 1

Here’s a controversial subject that tends to divide
For years it’s had Christians lining up on both sides
By God’s grace, I’ll address this without pride
The question concerns those for whom Christ died
Was He trying to save everybody worldwide?
Was He trying to make the entire world His Bride?
Does man’s unbelief keep the Savior’s hands tied?
Biblically, each of these must be denied
It’s true, Jesus gave up His life for His Bride
But His Bride is the elect, to whom His death is applied
If on judgment day, you see that you can’t hide
And because of your sin, God’s wrath on you abides
And hell is the place you eternally reside
That means your wrath from God hasn’t been satisfied
But we believe His mission was accomplished when He died
But how the cross relates to those in hell?
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried (8x)

Verse 2

Father, Son and Spirit: three and yet one
Working as a unit to get things done
Our salvation began in eternity past
God certainly has to bring all His purpose to pass
A triune, eternal bond no one could ever sever
When it comes to the church, peep how they work together
The Father foreknew first, the Son came to earth
To die- the Holy Spirit gives the new birth
The Father elects them, the Son pays their debt and protects them
The Spirit is the One who resurrects them
The Father chooses them, the Son gets bruised for them
The Spirit renews them and produces fruit in them
Everybody’s not elect, the Father decides
And it’s only the elect in whom the Spirit resides
The Father and the Spirit- completely unified
But when it comes to Christ and those in hell?
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried (8x)

Verse 3

My third and final verse- here’s the situation
Just a couple more things for your consideration
If saving everybody was why Christ came in history
With so many in hell, we’d have to say He failed miserably
So many think He only came to make it possible
Let’s follow this solution to a conclusion that’s logical
What about those who were already in the grave?
The Old Testament wicked- condemned as depraved
Did He die for them? C’mon, behave
But worst of all, you’re saying the cross by itself doesn’t save
That we must do something to give the cross its power
That means, at the end of the day, the glory’s ours
That man-centered thinking is not recommended
The cross will save all for whom it was intended
Because for the elect, God’s wrath was satisfied
But still, when it comes to those in hell
Well, they be saying:

Lord knows He tried (8x)

HT:  Eddie Eddings

John MacArthur: USA abandoned by God

ht:  John Hendrix

Follow up to Miss Uncongeniality

Steve Hayes of Triablogue fame points out the hypocrisy of  the disqualification of Miss California based upon her “wrong answer” :

If the organizers of the event were truly concerned with being all-inclusive, then contestants would include drag-queens, circus ladies, and dominatrices. Nothing is more elitist than a beauty pageant

You can read the entire pithy post here

ht: Steve Hayes

Miss Uncongeniality?

In 2000 Sandra Bullock played a FBI agent (Gracie Hart) who infiltrates a beauty pageant
 looking for a killer.  At one point she is asked a “pageant question”.

Stan Fields: What is the one most important thing our society needs?
Gracie Hart: That would be... harsher punishment for parole violators, Stan.
[crowd is silent]
Gracie Hart: And world peace!
[crowd cheers ecstatically]
Stan Fields: Isn't she lovely? Thank you, Gracie Lou.
Gracie Hart: And thank *you*, Stan.

Recently Miss California was asked a similar question by Perez Hilton a gay blogger:

Somehow I don’t think adding “And world peace” would have assuaged Perez Hilton’s wrath.

If you have a strong constitution you may see his video rant here: Perez Hilton’s rant.

Warning strong and insulting language is being used.

Now I wasn’t watching this, I learned about it on a RSS feed I subscribe to and saw a small amount of it on

a morning news show just before I went to work today.  However, what we are seeing here is what we should

expect since we are now living in a post-Christian society and as Dr. White says in the next video its going to get worse before better

if it does get better.

ht:  Dr. James White