Archive - Apologetics RSS Feed

A Small Apologetic For Iron Ink

April 17, 2012 in Apologetics with 3 Comments

“Bad Theology Hurts People.”

J. I. Packer

The greatest ill that someone can embrace is bad theology because such wrong thinking works itself out in a persons life in an assortment of unhealthy ways. Were I given my heart’s desire the one thing I would ask for is for people to think rightly about God. The fulfillment of such a request would glorify God, it would be health and life to those whose thinking about God is tarnished and unseemly, and it would be the opening act of the promised post-millennial Kingdom that would discover regenerated and epistemologically self-conscious thinkers ever increasingly going further in and farther up in thinking God’s thoughts after Him.

Now, some might contend that such a vision is extremely impracticable since I’m concerned only with matters of theology and doctrine but before such a thing is thought allow me to defend my heart’s desire for the flowering of right thinking about God among 6 billion people by noting that “as a man thinketh in his heart, so he is.” My desire for men to think rightly about God would release a torrent of right living since orthopraxy is always the inevitable consequence of orthodoxy. A man’s actions always follows his thinking.

When we raised our children, and they misbehaved I was seldom concerned about the action in comparison to my concern for the reason or the thinking that motivated the misbehavior. The necessity for a change of behavior from my children would take care of itself if only a change of thinking was embraced and a change of thinking would be embraced only if we got to the nub of how their misbehavior was a reflection of how they were thinking wrongly concerning God and His Word. Since, “As my children thought in their heart so they were,” my remedial work with them, when misbehavior arose, had to concentrate on their theology and doctrine.

Our Theology, as that is poured over who God made us in our varied human-ness, is everything. It is reflected in the fashions we embrace, the hobbies we take up, and the way we worship. Our Theology / doctrine accounts for our architecture, our cultural institutions and our social order. Our Theology / doctrine explains the way we structure family, the way we understand history, the way we educate. The Medievalists were correct when they insisted that, “Theology is the Queen of the Sciences.” The German General Von Moltke once mistakenly said, “war is simply the expression of politics by other means.” What General Von Moltke should have said is that war is simply the expression of theology by other means since politics is simply the expression of theology by other means.

Many are the Christians who say they desire Reformation. If Reformation is to be successfully pursued then the only means of doing it is by theological warfare. Neither individuals, nor cultures will be Evangelized and Reformed until their theology / doctrine is challenged. Evangelism in pursuit of Reformation, is merely theological / doctrinal warfare. Evangelism, or discipleship that doesn’t thoroughly challenge the ascendant theological paradigm of the person being evangelized or discipled is neither Evangelism or discipleship.

The implication of this, in a culture that is post-Christian, means that there are going to be flash-points of conflict between peoples who own differing theologies. It even means that there will be flash-points of conflict between professed Christian peoples who own differing theologies. This was exemplified by the fact that Luther and Zwingli couldn’t hash out there theological differences when it was in both their best interests to do so. They were both Christians but they each owned differing theologies.

So, Reformation can not be had apart from flash points of conflict between competing theological and doctrinal paradigms. When those flash points of conflict arise between people of different or varying faiths it is not because they are “hateful, mean, arrogant, know-it-alls,” who just want to be right. Rather, it might be because they are “loving, compassionate, meek, beggars” who know and understand that bad theology hurts people and so desire people, who are being hurt by their bad theology, to know Reformation.

When I critique bad theology, on Iron Ink, or in the teaching lectern, or in the pulpit, it is not because I think I am perfect or superior, or that because I think my theology is perfect, though I do think it is correct. If I didn’t think it was correct I wouldn’t hold it. When I critique bad theology it is not because I am a bully who just wants to show off how smart I am. When I critique bad theology I am doing Evangelism and / or discipleship. As a minister that is what I am called to do. When I critique bad theology, wherever or whoever that theology comes from, regardless of their clerical standing, I am merely desiring to rid people of the bad theology which is hurting them. To leave bad theology to gain root without critiquing it and trying to stamp it out would be the very definition of a lack of compassion.

It is often the case that the closer that one begins to approach the center of someone’s bad theology the louder they will scream and the more they will start hissing and insisting that the someone is not being nice. People don’t appreciate their worldview furniture being broken up and cast aside. However, it is often precisely at that moment that the cause has to be pursued out of love for the person doing the hissing and howling.

When I was a boy I was afflicted with a childhood disease that required the sores covering my body to be scrubbed till they bled and then treated with a medicinal ointment. Such treatment was always a family affair in my home. My siblings would hold my shoulders down. My father would hold my legs down and my Mother would scrub the sores as required and then place the ointment on my wounds. As a child I did not believe that they were treating me very lovingly. It would have been easy to accuse them of being cruel, mean, arrogant, know-it-alls. Of course, in retrospect, that wasn’t what was happening at all. The thing that I remember the clearest is that my Mother was always weeping while she scrubbed my wounds and applied the ointment.

People often see me scrubbing theological wounds on the internet. What they often miss is that I am doing so out of love and compassion for those who are wounded by the bad theology they have owned. What they can’t see, because they are sitting at some monitor reading my words, are the tears I am weeping for the person I am trying to scrub clean. What they can’t see is the weight of the burden I carry for the souls of those who have embraced bad theology. For me, what goes on at Iron Ink is not a warfare over “who is right,” but a contest for “what is right.” If I am in error being shown that error is the best thing that could ever happen to me.

I remain a sinner saved by grace alone. I have yet to scrub clean all the bad theology out of my own life. However, my sanctification will only go forward as I think God’s thoughts after him, and the best way I know to do evangelism is by continuing to critique the bad theology that people have embraced that hurts them so badly.

The love of God compels me.

The Bayly Brothers Are Indeed Out Of Their Minds

February 16, 2012 in Apologetics, Government, Politics with 4 Comments

Tim Bayly,

Ron Paul is to national politics what R2K is to the salt and light of the Church. Both Paulites and R2Kites have never seen a battle they want to fight. So instead they come up with sophisticated reasons why Little Round Top is the wrong hill to defend and Colonel Chamberlain’s bayonet charge was over the top. The wrong man led the wrong troops in the wrong charge using the wrong weapons at the wrong time and the wrong location.

This has to be the most asinine thing I’ve read in a very long time. Bayly has found the Nirvana of perfect stupidity where sheer, utter lunacy is of such a high grade and refined variety that one can only weep at the site of purity of perfection. With the paragraph above the Baylys have gone from the stupidity inhabited by mere, though great demigods and have found lodging in the Inn of the sixth ignorance where demigods in stupidity are canonized as Sainted demigods in Stupidity.

But, these days that Inn is adding new wings daily because business is booming.

Ron Paul and Paulites have never seen a battle they want to fight?

Is Bayly unaware of Paul’s constant fight against the Federal Reserve? Has Tim never viewed the clips of Paul arguing with Ben Bernake or Alan Greenspan? What corner of the universe is Tim troglodyting in that he is unaware of Paul’s book, “End The Fed?”

Not only has Paul been fighting a epic battle he is fighting THE EPIC battle. Anybody who pretends to understand politics knows that money is the mother’s milk of politics. Because of the FED all of life and society has become political because it is all driven by large interests groups who are kept afloat, directly or indirectly by the FED. By Paul fighting the Money Interests he is fighting at the root all those battles that the Baylys are fighting at the periphery. Winning the fight against the FED would change EVERYTHING in this country from Abortion to the Homosexual Agenda to Mega-Churches. But the St. Baylys are too stupid to get this and so, in keeping with their approaching sainthood in Stupidity they hurl stupid charges at Paul and the Paulites that they don’t fight against anything.

Ron Paul and Paulites have never seen a battle they want to fight?

What about the Battle against Empire that all those who love Freedom fight? Ron Paul has his faults, to be sure, and I have chronicled them more than once on this site, but to suggest that his ongoing Battle against the Leviathan State has not been a battle just leaves the mundanely moronic with their jaws agape over the perfection of the moronic now dwelling in their midst. The Federal Government is a Behemoth that Paul and the Paulites want to slay and they are fighting to do so. The Federal Government continues to seek to accrue more and more power and sovereignty and Ron Paul has been fighting against that non-Constitutional and non-Biblical idea for decades.

St. Bayly continues with his tryst with irrationality,

In fact, watch these men closely and you find the only battle they’re willing to fight is the battle opposing battles. But of course, I use the words ‘battle’ and ‘fight’ quite loosely because both require courage. I don’t write this to demean them, but so readers will see the connection between their techniques, commitments, and character.

They’re the skinny boy in the corner of the schoolyard shouting “Nanny nanny boo-boo” at the real boys over on the baseball diamond trying to catch the ball, swing the bat, hit something, and run. Over in the corner of the playground with his back to the wall is R2K’s favorite cultural icon, Woody Allen, making jokes about how he refuses to play baseball because baseball is a stupid game with stupid rules played by stupid boys. But of course, he did try to play baseball once, and when the ball was flying toward his face, he misjudged where to put his mitt, he took his eye off the ball, and the ball hit him square in the face, and it really really hurt. He’s never forgotten it and now he makes fun of boys who play baseball.

All the boys who play baseball think he’s a coward, but he’s always surrounded by the other boys who got punched in the face with a baseball and decided never to play baseball again. They laugh at his jokes. Then there are the girls who never wanted to play baseball and don’t know a coward when they see one, and they think he’s kinda cute and sweet. They pity him for being an outcast and one day that pity will cause them to allow him to kiss them.

Here’s my modest proposal. Let the R2Kites go out and sidewalk counsel outside the abortuaries and write legislation against assisted suicide and lobby against the pornographers and run for appointment to the county planning commission and enlist in the Marines. You get the idea. Let’s see them do the good works they’re always arguing the church shouldn’t do because it’s not the right person at the right time in the right place with the right weapon. Then, when they’re awarded a Purple Heart for valor in battle, we may listen to them. But as long as they’re over in the corner of the playground making passive aggressive jokes and refusing to put a mitt on, let weaklings and girls pay attention to them.

Conceding that the squirrel Baylys do find a quality acorn occasionally here are two of the problems with the Baylys that explain how they can be right about bashing R2K but wrong about so much else.

1.) The Baylys are walking contradictions. On one hand they rightly rail against R2K but on the other hand they run theonomists and postmillennialists out of their congregations because the theonomists and postmillennialists take issue with amillennialism — the very foundation of the R2K they rail against. So, the Baylys are not systematic in their thinking and it shows (again) in articles like this one.

2.) The Baylys seemingly want the “ring of power.” I don’t want the damned thing. I want it cast into Mt. Doom. I want to see sphere sovereignty and subsidiarity re-established so that the power of the ring is no longer centralized. My issue with R2K is that R2K doesn’t believe that these different spheres can be Biblically governed and R2K believes that the Church, submitting to Scripture, should have no counsel in what these Biblically ordered spheres might look like. The Baylys issue with R2K seems to be that R2K is stopping them from grasping the ring of power. So while the Baylys and I might agree that R2K is horrendous theology, we are disagreeing with R2K for very different reasons. The fact that the Baylys can rail against Ron Paul and compare him to the Escondido boys is indicative of the Baylys discontent that Frodo Paul’s battle is to pull down Mordor on the Potomac. The Baylys don’t want to pull down Mordor on the Potomac, they just want to take it over and occupy it. The Baylys seem to think that all Mordor on the Potomac needs is just the right Captain to guide the ship of state.

Idiots.

The Baylys finish with a perfect pirouette of protracted puerility

Similarly, let Ron Paul stop running for national public office. That’s the wrong battle at the wrong time with the wrong weapons and the wrong man. The man who sits in the Oval Office needs to be a man who knows how to do and say something other than how very deeply he’s convinced that every battle is the wrong battle at the wrong place and wrong time fought by the wrong men with the wrong weapons holding those weapons in the wrong way. I mean, really! How can anyone not see what’s going on with this man?

He’s asked about things like sodomite marriage and murdering babies conceived through rape and the starvation of Terry Schiavo and all he can do is whine about how conflict is so very difficult and if we’d all learn to fight the way he does–ECPs and states rights and all that–the world would be a better place.

What can I say?

This is the kind of tripe you get from manly men who think Peggy Noonan is profound.

Paul’s position on abortion is wrong. Paul’s position on sodomites in the military is horrendous. Paul’s position on illegal immigration is disastrous but what people like the Baylys don’t get is that Paul’s intent to pull the foundations of Mordor on the Potomac down will change the whole landscape as it pertains to these issues. As we have had precious little success on these issues for 50 years with the current landscape it would seem that we would want to leave our insanity of doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results and vote for somebody who wants to give us a change of scenery.

Hat Tip to Darryl Hart for bringing my attention to this Bayly Babble.

A Conversation On Abortion & Cultural Disintegration with a Typical Representative of the Christian Left

January 3, 2012 in Apologetics, Culture with 1 Comment

This conversation was launched by this clip of Sen. Rick Santorum that reveals his pragmatism on abortion,

http://www.bing.com/videos/watch/video/santorum-would-support-exceptions-to-abortion-ban/64yw0hd?cpkey=cadcf0db-9bec-40c2-9905-e572a76678b4

Emily Dorr

As of YESTERDAY, Santorum admits that he’s not really ‘pro-life’ by any standard that pretends to be connected to the teaching of the Bible.

Pragmatism is sin when applied to Christianity. Sadly, when sitting in church yesterday, nobody told you that.

These evangelicals will sell us all to the devil.

Kerry Culligan

Santorum supported pro- abortion Arlen Spector in the primary some years ago as a good Pennsylvania Republican as well. Iowa evangelicals have tried to pretend that he regrets that now, and wouldn’t do so again. Mind you, he never apologized or pretended to repent for that endorsement. No, these evangelical leaders are intentionally fooling themselves.

Ann Gardner Dorr

How can a law guarantee there will no longer be any abortions? Rich women will always be able to go to their docs and have a “D and C”. Poor women will go to the back alley and be injured or die. Or is that OK with all of you for them committing such a grievous sin? And, is there ever room for redemption after an abortion, or are they condemned forever? Are the fathers who encorage sn abortion equally condemned or are there degrees of condemnation? We outlaw murder yet it still occurs. Or is this the church wanting the gov’t to do their work? It truly is a moral issue and it is rare where laws can successfully legislate morality.

Bret L. McAtee

Sen. Santorum’s support for Arlen Specter, who was pro-choice, over a putative pro-life electable Republican proved to me that Santorum is just another whore politician.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Isn’t that a bit too harsh?

Bret L. McAtee

Observing that somebody is a whore politician because he flaunted his pro-life credentials and then turned around and supported somebody who was pro-death is a whore politician is to harsh?

No … actually, I think it is far to kind.

Referring to your previous comments Ann I would say that it is better if a few poor women to die by pursuing the death of their children then to have a law that supports baby killing so that rich and poor women alike can legally kill their children. Those who die in pursuing illegal abortions are only getting justice. What is unfair is that the rich avoid death in pursuing what would be illegal abortions in a culture where abortion was illegal.

Yes … God can forgive all sins but that doesn’t mean that sins that God has listed as crimes (such as murder) should not be enforced as crimes with the penalty that comes with those crimes.

Since laws can’t legislate morality, according to you, what say you about legalizing mass murder?

Ann Gardner Door

I guess my question has to do more with the separation of church from state and what is state business and what is church business? As you are aware, not everyone believes in the God that you do, yet they live in this country and according to our laws they are entitled to do that (believe differently than you and me). Since they don’t agree with your harsh judgments toward this issue, must they also be condemned to death in the back alley? I really wish Jesus was still with us to speak directly to this issue.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann, it is not possible to separate religion from the State. All Governments, including the current one, is beholden to and derivative of some religion. Why should I be satisfied with the State religion of Humanism that you find so superior over Christianity?

I am not advocating a Ecclesiocracy where the Church rules. I am advocating overthrowing the current pagan government that is ruled by a pagan religion that sanctions the torture and murder of the unborn.

Say, according to your standard why shouldn’t we allow for the Hindu custom (Sati) where widowed wives are burned with their deceased husbands on a funeral pyre? Why should these people be allowed their customs? After all, they don’t agree with our harsh judgments against wife killing.

You don’t seem to understand that all law order is a reflection of some God. Your God that you want to see the country subservient to allows for baby murder mine doesn’t. Why should you be preferred?

Ann Gardner Dorr

I really wish Jesus was still with us to speak directly to this issue. Hell, half the prophets and leaders in the old testament where “whores” by your standards. They had slaves, multiple wives, slept with their hand-maidens and had children by multiple women. I’m just trying to see where the Christ-like view on this whole issue would be. I just can’t be as harsh toward my fellow humans as some express here. I was also taught that to “judge” was God’s job, not mine.

Bret L. McAtee

The OT is full of the record of sin. That doesn’t mean that God approved of it. That’s pretty basic Ann.

The Christ-like view on this subject is the one found in Scripture. Those found guilty of murder by the testimony of two witnesses are to be executed.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I just can’t be as harsh toward my fellow humans as some express here. I was also taught that to “judge” was God’s job, not mine. I also wonder if you view abortion on some kind of “sin plane” and that it ranks as a higher degree of sin than say, lying on your taxes, or stealing from your employer.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann you are one of the harshest people I know in your advocacy of murder. It is incredible (more than incredible) to me that you can accuse me of harshness when I am trying to reverse a policy that has led to the torture and murder of 50 million people and the untold suffering of countless number of women who suffer from post traumatic abortion syndrome?

I must say that it is you that is the harsh one here Ann. Your cruelness and unfeeling character is grotesque in a high degree.

And the funny thing is, is that you are so deadened to reality that you find your cruelty to be the very nard of tender mercy.

Scripture clearly tells us that we are to judge righteously

Judge not according to appearance, but judge righteous judgment. (John 7)

And yes … though all sin is worthy of punishment not all sin is equally grave. Torture and murder is definitely worse then not paying your taxes.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Trust me, I don’t advocate abortion.

Bret L. McAtee

Yes you do. Your advocating that it remain legal is a advocating for abortion. You can not advocate for its legality or accuse people who oppose it as being “harsh” and then soothe your conscience with some kind of “but I don’t like it” declaimer.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I am almost 60 and still confused by this issue. I will say, I lived before it was legal and there definitely were abortions. People were dying, lives of all sorts were being destroyed. My own father, Emily’s grandfather, on her Dad’s side, was not as adamant about the position of it being illegal. He talked about knowing young people who were deeply affected by choices they were forced to make before it was legal. I think he was troubled by it too. We talked about it at the time it became legal. Roe v Wade was ruled while I was in college. It was very controversial at that time and remains so today.

Bret L. McAtee

You don’t strike me as confused at all Ann. You strike me as very certain that torture and murder should be continued.

Nobody doubts that abortion happened before its legality. It’s always the case that whatever is illegal is transgressed by people even though it is illegal. That is why we have the word “crime.”

But the fact that it happened illegally Ann isn’t an argument that we should make it legal. If that were the case we would make all kinds of things legal only because some percentage of folks break laws.

The fact that some were aborted illegally, that some lives were ruined doesn’t mean we make it so millions more are aborted legally and that more lives are ruined.

What kind of reasoning is this on your part Ann?

Ann Gardner Dorr,

Sorry, Bret, that still seems self-righteous and harsh, to me. Just like you, I can go through my Bible and cherry pick verses to support my case of compassion over harsh judgement. And, by the way, you have no idea what I find superior as a form of gov’t. I was merely referring to our gov’t as it exists today. And, I am still curious. Does your religion view/belief put varying degrees on sin? And if so, is abortion the lowest, (or highest) level of sin, as you see it?

Bret L. McAtee

Self righteous? I want to see millions of people saved and you call me self righteous?

Do you realize how upside down your thought process is?

I challenge you to find any passage in Scripture that finds God supporting murder.

Abortion is not the highest sin. A higher sin would be people who advocate that abortion should remain legal. Their place in hell will be far deeper then a woman who had an abortion.

Mickey Bolwerk

Bret gets to the heart of the issue here, and I’m not sure there’s much more I can do than reiterate his points in my own words:

1) There is no area of neutrality. All law is religious in nature; it’s only a matter of whose religion is represented in the law code. Ann, whether you realized it or not, you are promoting the law code of humanism.

2) There is no basic dichotomy between the Old Testament and the New Testament. God is immutable, containing no contingency, no unexplored potentials. He is the same yesterday, today, and tomorrow. His standards of righteousness in the NT era are the same as those in the OT era.

By the way, John 7:53 – 8:11 is of highly questionable canonicity and, even if it was in the original text, your interpretation of it is not possible, by means of analogia scriptura (the analogy of Scripture; that is, that Scripture is internally consistent and any interpretation of Scripture leading to contradictions is incorrect). If we are to grant that it is Scriptural, then the only possible interpretations of this is that either:

1) Her accusers were themselves guilty of adultery, thus disqualifying them a witnesses, or
2) Christ refused to act in the role of the civil magistrate.

Either way, if the woman was guilty of adultery, she deserved to die. As do abortionists.

Ann Gardner Dorr

All I know, is that if Jesus came to earth with an attitude like yours we would all be Jews today. Your approach comes across as ego driven serving only to show your superiority to others and would make it difficult for someone who is struggling to understand or believe. I thank God every day that Jesus was NOTHING like you. You can’t even listen to my argument, you are so set in your superior ways. I never once said I advocated abortion. My argument is/was with the approach and procedures that anti-abortionists have employed over the years that have done nothing but to harden people against your position. I think your movement has done more to promote the use and choice of abortion, merely by the words and tactics you have employed. Talk about cruel and grotesque. . .

Bret L. McAtee

Ann … are you sober or are you drinking while your write this?

Look Ann … I am far more concerned for the millions who have been tortured and slaughtered then I am about your feelings. You get on your pious high horse self-righteously accusing me of being “superior” and “self-righteous,” and “ego-driven,” while you advocate that we should be sensitive to murder and murderers.

I can’t listen to your argument because you have no argument. Besides, I’ve listened long enough to refute it… thoroughly.

Me thinketh the lady doth protest too much.

Good night Ann.

Please reconsider your position.

Ann Gardner Dorr

I’m praying for your soul tonight Bret.

Bret L. McAtee

Don’t bother wasting your time Ann because there is no God at the address your sending your prayers to because your God is a myth of your own imagination.

Ann Gardner Dorr

‎”I thank God every day that Jesus was NOTHING like you.”

David Opperman

I wonder what Bible Ann has been reading? It seems to me like Jesus was pretty confrontational. The Jews didn’t want him crucified because he turned water to wine…

Misty Richards

Ann – You accuse others of self-righteousness while arguing in favor of murderers who will have their own children sucked piece by piece out of their womb?? Do you understand what abortion is?? Its murder, Ann, plain and simple and all murderers should face the death penalty.

Ann Gardner Dorr

Well, “good morning” all. This has been very eye opening. Once I get past the name calling and viciousness of all of your anger I will contemplate the base of your argument. It seems as though you all are so used to this fight you are blind. I don’t advocate abortion, rape, murder or anything else I’ve been accused of here. But I certainly understand now why this debate has shut down and I’m fairly certain the laws will never change. You scared the heck out of me with your vitriole and I am sure you have that effect on others when it comes to this subject. Ears shut off, hearts close down and the beat goes on. I’m certain that is not what any of you want but your efforts last night were very effective in revealing to me who and what you are all about.

Mark Chambers

What’s the matter Ann? So ashamed of your idiot arguments that you retreat from them?

Ann Gardner Dorr

Not at all, just realize it pointless to discuss this subject with the Christian Taliban pushing your form of Sharia Law. First the abortionists, then the gays, then the public schools, etc, etc until you’ve formed the perfect society accorording to your version of God’s desires for humankind. Now I see where the left came up with their notions about all of you. No wonder they have been so successful in their fight against this agenda. No wonder over 45% of Americans no longer hold any spiritual beliefs. There is very little that is appealing to me coming from you that would draw me to your side of the spiritual fence.

You don’t care to discuss and persuade. You want to bully me into agreeing with your view of everything, then we can be all lovey and friends. No middle ground here. It’s all or nothing. I’ll chose nothing.

Bret L. McAtee

Ann,

You talk about the left and how it came up with their notions of conservative but you seem not to realize that you are the left.

You complain about our form of Sharia but just look at all the sharia that you’re pushing on us. You are pushing a kinder gentler humanist sharia of abortion with hand wringing, of government schools, of homosexuality. In your putative benign acceptance of these things you now are pushing them down our throats dear Ann.

You find us odd and displeasing but we are only what America was before the success of the cultural Marxism that now flows through your veins.

I wish there was a kinder way to oppose torture and murder of the unborn. I genuinely would like for there to be a nicer way of contending that homosexuality is an abomination that has throughout history always been the final indicator of a culture that is in disintegration. I’ve prayed daily that I could find a softer way of telling people that government schools are poison to the souls of our children. But these truths do not allow a “smile in your face while I disembowel you” approach.

Imagine me weeping for you and for the countless numbers like you dear sweet Ann. My tears fall first because of your hostility towards the God of the Bible and His Lord Christ. My tears then fall because I know what your end is and it saddens me beyond naming. My tears fall for all the harm you are doing in your belief system to countless numbers of people. If my weeping would convince people of their hatred and vileness I would take my weeping public and weep before the world.

But it would do no good because people like you would still come back and hurl insults at me because of my desire to protect you, and other people, and you would hurl insults at my desire to see the end of the culture of death which your worldview supports.

Believe me Ann, when I tell you, that if I thought that I could be successful by changing anything in my approach or methodology I would change but having tried every which way, I know that it is not my methodology that turns people off but it is my insistence that the God of the Bible must be kissed lest he be angry and people like you perish in the way.

With deep affection for you but with even more for the Sovereign of the universe,