July 2004 Archives

From the window of my second story porch you can just barely make out the fireworks some evenings from Six Flags of San Antonio. Consequently, I took particular interest in the following press release from our friends at the American Family Association:

September 18 is the 9th Annual Gay Day at Six Flags Over Texas. This event has taken place for the last 8 years in a row and this is the 9th year. This event is sponsored by a homosexual newspaper called “The Dallas Voice” and advertised as “Gay Day at Six Flags,” in established
homosexual publications like “Texas Triangle, QTexas” and many highly trafficked websites. Due directly to this form of advertising, thousands of homosexuals attend this event from all over Texas. “Gay Day at Six Flags” takes place one day prior to the Gay Pride Parade in Oak Lawn which itself brings in tens of thousands of people.

If you call Six Flags Over Texas and ask them if they are having Gay Day they will tell you “No, Six Flags does not sponsor a Gay Day,” knowing that they allow the homosexual community to advertise the event as “Gay Day at Six Flags.” They still will not tell you. Therefore, Six Flags Over Texas is willingly allowing families and children to be exposed to homosexual activities without giving them any warning.

If you would like to share you comments with Six Flags Over Texas, the contact information is below:

Six Flags Over Texas: Steve Calloway, General Manager: 2201 Road to Six Flags; Arlington, TX 76010; Phone: 817-530-6000: Email: scallowa@sftp.com Charles (Hank) Salemi, Sr. Vice-President, Marketing Email: csalemi@sftp.com

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 31, 2004 | Permalink

After thirty years of post-Roe v. Wade battle over abortion, most of the general public has been jaded to the meaning of abortion. They have heard the word so many times and have met so many people who have had one that, frankly, they have stopped thinking about just what it is the word “abortion” describes.  This is especially true for Christians.

This problem runs deep. 21st century Christians have a light view of anything that requires them to take a sober and realistic look at that which is unpleasant. They would rather not think too hard about things which are upsetting or convicting. This goes for sin. Most people don’t want to hear about sin. They certainly don’t want to be confronted with their own sin. Even those who confess to be sinners don’t really want to think too hard about just how bad sin really is.

It is because so many of us would prefer to live in a state of denial, blissfully ignorant of evil and its consequences, that God has given us His Word, and He has ordained preachers to expose the awful reality of evil. Though Jonathan Edwards’ classic sermon “Sinners in the Hands of an Angry God,” is considered too negative by modern Christians, we must remember that it was precisely this type of evil-exposing sermon that was used by God to usher in the Great Awakening. (On the 300th anniversary of Edwards I read the entire sermon to my congregation.)

Truth hurts, but only truth sets us free. This brings me back to abortion.

Abortion is the brutal vivisection of a baby. It involves cutting the baby with a knife into dozens of pieces while still alive, cracking open the skull and sucking out its brain with a vacuum cleaner, or burning the child alive. The body parts of this human being are then thrown into a garbage can or sold for parts. There is nothing outside the womb that can compare for brutality and cruelty to abortion. The fact that it is a crime against children who are utterly defenseless resting in God-given wombs meant for peace and growth only makes the crime all the more horrific.

How then should we view the politics of abortion. First, we must be honest. Honesty hurts, but only honesty will set us free and pave the way for victory. Politicians who campaign for known abortion advocates are not pro-life. Politicians who support federal subsidies for organizations that promote abortion are not pro-life. Politicians who believe that babies who are conceived in difficult circumstances (rape or incest) may legally have their brains sucked out are not pro-life.

Second, we must properly define our terms in the context of biblical law. According to the Bible, abortion for any reason whatsoever is murder.  Nor may parents claim a bogus “self-defense” theory to enable the mother to execute her child when a docter says the pregnancy is unhealthy for the mother. All abortion is murder. Period. To advocate the right of a mother to burn her child alive because it was the product of rape is to advocate murder.

Let’s put it plainly: Abortion is a crime in the eyes of God. Politicians who claim to be pro-life, but who advocate murdering some children have rejected God’s law for a Satanic alternative. At best, they are not “pro-life,” but “pro-abortion with exceptions.” Professing Christians serving as civil magistrates who clearly facilitate the executions of any babies, must be formally disciplined by the local church.

Now, whether or not you choose to vote for a politician who is pro-abortion with exceptions is a completely different subject. Whether your local church will do its job to hold accountable members who are public office holders is also another matter.

But my request is that we be honest with one another. Let’s not mislead the people of God and the people of this nation by claiming that certain politicians are pro-life, when in fact they are on record supporting the most bloody and horrific execution of some innocent children without due process of law.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 27, 2004 | Permalink

Next month, Vision Forum will be producing a new and updated series entitled “Biblical Principles for the Ballot Box,” a completely non-partisan look at the theology of voting and politics. It is our contention that (a) the Bible is sufficient to give us all we need for faith and practice, including ethical principles for voting; (b) that these principles do not point to perfection in candidates, only that the candidate at least meet non-optional minimum threshold requirements for office; (c) that the Christian’s response to the ballot box in a constitutional republic is rooted in his ministerial duty before the Lord to be God’s representative in the gates, and (d) believers are not to be driven by emotions or fear, but by a long-term perspective on the victory of Christ knowing that our God is sovereign.

Ultimately, the issue for Christians is not third party or second party voting practices, but biblical principles of voting. These are derived from Scripture. The temptations for pragmatic (and often emotional) reasoning is very high. I appreciate the following sentiments presented ten years ago at a conference dedicated to explicitly Christian politics. As to the subject of how Christians should approach voting in a constitutional republic (not a constitutional democracy) this author contends:

But what if Christians do not run in an election? Should we not use our vote to support the “best man”(or woman)? Let me respond by asking, Should we not withhold our vote from covenant-breaking pagans, no matter how “conservative” they are? Why, in a constitutional republic where you have some say in your government, would you use your “say” to say that you desire an unconverted rebel to rule over you? Others may object, But in a three-way race between a liberal Democrat, a conservative Republican, and a Bible-believing Christian, aren’t you splitting the vote by voting for the Christian, and thus assuring that the worst of the three, the liberal, will be elected? In some cases, yes, but I am not responsible to God for how other people vote, only for how I vote. I must do what is right no matter what the consequences, which are in the hands of God. — Source: Social Witness and Christian Voting: How Should Christians Use the Franchise?

It is precisely in times of tension and uncertainty that we need to follow the wisdom of God, more than the wisdom of men. For my part, I am far more concerned that Christians truly attempt to build their worldview on Scripture (rather than their own autonomous reasoning) than even how they vote in a particular election.  Christian men may differ on their understanding of facts regarding individual candidiates, but if Christians can not agree that the Bible alone is the standard for how we should vote, then our problem is far greater than who will or will not win the next election.

We are losing our children and an entire generation of Christians to the pragmatic and utilitarian philosophies of the world.  Pragmatism is fear-based. It is theologically rooted in a rejection of the sovereignty of God. It is the product of short-term thinking. Worst of all, it is conscience-searing. Given the significance of the integrity of the Christian community to the welfare and blessing of a nation, I can think of nothing so detrimental to America as the searing of the collective conscience of a Christian men and women driven by fear away from God’s Word and towards the very pragmatism which has incrementally sabatoged the spirit of this nation.

Apart from God’s law-word revelation as the only standard for human action there is chaos.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 27, 2004 | Permalink

After more than a year of studies in my local church on the life of David, we came this last weekend to the death of David. I preached for 90 minutes on I Kings 1,2 and 1 Chronicles 22, 23, 27 and 28, in a message titled: Farewell Beloved Patriarch: King David Goes Out in A Sullied, But Nonetheless in a Victorious Blaze of Glory. The following are some thoughts developed based on the study and the message: 

In the twilight of his life, with just weeks before his death, a bedridden and decrepit King David faced one of the greatest trials of his life: Treason.

At stake was David’s life mission and his dream. After forty years of reigning as king, everything came down to two issues: First, would he fulfill his duty to prepare a covenant keeping heir to the promises of God. This heir was destined to be both king of Israel and a progenitor in the line of the Messiah. Second, would David make provision for, prepare, and install the man as king who was chosen by God to complete the Holy Temple of Jerusalem. David, the man after God’s own heart, had been denied this blessing because he was a man of blood and war.

Everything was in place. The heir had been declared. Vision had been cast. Preparations had been made. But the very signal that David was ready to pass the torch — his rapid physiological decline unto death — was a sign to those unscrupulous within his inner circle to take advantage of the king’s decline to make a move for power.

David’s son, Adonijah, saw his father’s weakness as an opportunity to seize the crown. He called for and rallied other malcontents within David’s kingdom, hired a public relations team, blasted his own trumpet, and found some official looking people to declare himself king.

Strategic Differences or Wicked Rebellion

This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 2 Timothy 3:1

Traitors view their own treason as a mere strategic difference. “We are all reasonable men,” declares the traitor, “we just have strategic differences in how to advance the kingdom.”  Thus, “strategic differences,” or even “philosophical differences” become the justification for dishonor, rebellion, and subterfuge. Christians should be able to demonstrate charity one towards another even with respect to genuine strategic and philosophical differences which are within the camp of orthodoxy, but no quarter should be give to dishonor, rebellion and subterfuge.  These are sins of the heart that threaten to bring down Christian culture and community. They are not only perverse, they are strangely infectious, which is why they are so thoroughly excoriated in Scripture.

Patricide is the worst form of rebellion. Patricide is the opposite of patriarchy. Patriarchy is the biblical doctrine of multi-generational faithfulness. Patricide is the act of killing our fathers. Patricide takes many forms. It need not manifest itself in the actual physical execution of a father. If a son seeks to wipe out or usurp the legacy of his father, his actions are patricidal. Similarly, where men turn violently against their earthly fathers, spiritual fathers, or even those Founding Fathers who purchased the present generation’s freedom with the blood of the past, they are not only ungrateful, they are patricidal.

Adonijah was not only traitorous, he was patricidal. His actions would have the net effect of wiping out his father’s authority, legacy and dream. Oh, he would be ever so slick in his approach of course. Adonijah was a master at invoking his father’s name when it was convenient (“...look at me, the true heir to David’s throne.”), but distancing himself from his father’s authority when it was not.

Adonijah could offer numerous plausible justifications for treason against his own father: After all, he was the elder brother, not Solomon. By right the throne should go to the elder. David’s favoritism for Solomon should not be taken that seriously. David was old and not in a position to make the best judgment for the kingdom. Also typical of traitors, Adonijah had a form of godliness. He was handsome and winsome, and he knew it. People naturally gravitated to him. Perhaps he was a better communicator than Solomon. All of this combined meant he would have the heart of the people and could thus usher in a season of victorious peace. In sum, Adonijah had effectively persuaded himself and others that he was the rightful, natural, and appropriate successor to the crown.

Treason Hurts

Treason is always painful, especially when it comes from someone you loved, cherished, and nurtured. But rather than becoming bitter at traitors, the servant of God must recognize that God will not leave them unpunished. More importantly, the Christian must realize that he has no right to be spared what God did not spare to his only begotten Son — the presence of traitors.

I am grateful that God spared David the horror of seeing a fourth son (after Amnon, Chileab and Absalom)  go down to the grave. I am equally grateful for both the wisdom and restraint of Solomon (who was less than 20 years old) at this time. Solomon was merciful to Adonijah during the life of his father. 

After being anointed king, Solomon called for his half-brother Adonijah and granted him a conditional amnesty: If Adonijah would return to his house, and if no more rebellion be found in his heart, he would not die. This was more than generous. It was also wise. It demonstrated concern for the tender heart of his father David, and it gave Adonijah a second chance to prove himself honorable or traitorous.

Like all unrepentant traitors, Adonijah could not deny his true nature. After the death of King David, Adonijah again used subtlety to disgrace his father and possibly to launch yet another plot to seize power. Using Bathsheba as bait, Adonijah requested that King David’s latest concubine/wife be given to him to wed, an action specifically forbidden as incest under the laws of Leviticus, and sanctioned with the death penalty. Like his older brother Absalom, who disgraced himself with his father’s wives, Adonijah wanted to place himself on par with the former king. Solomon’s response was decisive and appropriate — Adonijah was executed.

Treason in 21st Century Christians

At the beginning of the 21st century several key national ministries experienced Adonijah-like treason. In each case, a man or woman who had been given opportunity and mentored by the organizations’ founder, turned on their spiritual fathers in an attempt to seize power. In each case, the results were spiritual bloodshed, broken hearts, and confusion.

I have thought of King David often as I have watched a spirit of dishonor and treason spread throughout our culture: Children seek to destroy their parents; Servants turning on masters for personal gain. Men no longer comprehend the concept of treason, because they have never been taught honor, loyalty, fidelity.

On incident in particular comes to mind: I was attending the funeral of a beloved Christian leader. Like King David, this leader would spent the last weeks of his life grieving in bed because a man he had mentored and treated as a son was taking advantage of his weakness by staging a coup d’etat, to wrest the leadership of the ministry from the appointed heir. The justification — you guessed it: “strategic differences.” As with Adonijah’s revolt, this coup d’etat failed and the rightful heir was installed. Like Adonijah, mercy was shown to the usurper, but also like Adonijah, the usurper would continue to reveal himself after the death of the leader. (In this case, he first did so by declaring the death of the Temple building work his spiritual mentor had created. Next, he was self-appointed heir to the new-improved temple building process.) As one might expect, the bankrupt morality which led to treason also lead to a bankrupt theology. A man’s morality often dictates his theology.

Do Traitors Prosper?

From man’s perspective treason unopposed is remarkably discouraging. There are times that we do see haughty and high-minded traitors prosper, redefine the issues and re-write the history books to cover their sins and switch the terms of debate. Sir John Harrington (1561-1612) explained the phenomenon this way: “Treason doth never prosper, what’s the reason? For if it prosper, none dare call it treason.”

The lesson of Scripture is this: While there is pleasure in sin for a season, be sure your sins will find you out. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword, and those who ascend to power through treason, will meet their own end the same way. Few sins are as odious as a servant seizing his master’s kingdom, or a son violating his father, or a people who turn against the spiritual fathers whose blood bought them freedom. God will not be mocked.

How Not to Be a Traitor
 
In light of the above, I would like to take the liberty to offer some very practical thoughts on “how not to be a traitor.”

First, genuinely honor those who have invested in your life or who are in a position of authority over you. To honor them means that you reverence them deeply in your heart, and that your actions are a reflection of this reverence.

Second, let your heart be full of gratitude for those imperfect, but God appointed authorities whom the Lord God has given to you. It is impossible to be truly grateful and treasonable at the same time.

Third, always seek the best interests of those in positions of authority over you, especially fathers and mothers. Through your words, deeds, and actions, seek to make them successful.

Fourth, it is better to waive your rights and walk away from opportunity than to act against the lawful and jurisdictional interests of an authority. God knows your needs and desires. He will provide.

Fifth, work through chain of command. This shows respect and honor. Never, ever adopt an “ends justifies the means” mentality. Equate pragmatic thinking with infidelity, because the two are one and the same.

Sixth, when you are troubled by an authority, be upfront, honest and make appeals. Approach fathers and other leaders with a spirit of humility and charity.

Seventh, study the lives and consequences of famous traitors in the Bible and history. This will serve as an ever present warning against the temptation in your own heart.

Eight, don’t hang around or associate with other traitors. They will corrupt your thinking, your resolve, and in the end, you will be half the man you are now.

Nine, in matters of succession, opportunity, and finances,  keep in mind that the issue is never how much you know, what a better job you would do for the business/family/local church/kingdom than the individual appointed by those in authority — the issue is submitting to the will of God and His choice.

Tenth, never justify a rebellious and self-serving attitude as a “strategic difference.”

Finally, if you have committed treason, repent.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 24, 2004 | Permalink

Below is a link to a recent Washington Post article dealing with the ever growing issue of fertility treatments, parenthood, and the fallen-mans quest to act as God. The article deals with the issue of multiple-pregnancies as a result of using fertility drugs and the “selection process” that takes place as couples choose the babies that they keep and “cancel” the pregnancies they do not want — or more appropriately stated: as they murder the children that God has given them. In this grievous article we see doctors matter-of-factly justifying the selective birth process by making states like: “It’s a selective abortion, really,” “…but it makes the chances of having a healthy baby far greater.”

As the body of Christ we should not be shocked by such statements. It should grieve us and bring us to repentance. With the wide acceptance of over-the-counter contraceptives by many that claim to uphold the name of Jesus Christ, and the perverse use of technology in our medical system, the church must cry out for repentance for condoning the unbiblical mindset that man has the right to control the womb and not The Creator who has given us life. By accepting contraceptives and unnatural fertility procedures, we have conceded the premise that God in control of the womb, and we have replaced it with a perverse view of life that ultimately results in selective abortion and the complete devaluing of life. As faithful Christians, We must train our children to know they are loved and that this love comes because they are blessings sent from God, and not merely some doctors’ selection from under a microscope. As the world continues on the path of destruction, we must hold to the fundamental truths set forth in scripture and never forget that from the moment we were conceived to the time that we pass from this Earth, we are under the subjection and love of an almighty Creator.

I encourage you to read the Washington post article by clicking here:
How Many is Too Many?

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 23, 2004 | Permalink

He who defines wins. Cultures are subverted through language. Christians who believe that Christ must be Lord of our language, our manners and our culture, must strive to be epistemologically self-conscious of the customs and verbiage they embrace. No Christian woman, for example, should describe herself with the anti-patriarchal and feminist term “Ms.”

Nor should Christians turn to Christian culture subverters like Miss Manners for standards of ettiquette. An example of her influence in the subversion of family life in America is evidenced in her July 21 syndicated column, an excerpt of which is featured below:

DEAR Miss Manners: Now that same-sex marriages are upon us, how does one address an invitation to a same-sex couple? Is it “Mr. and Mrs.”? “Mr. and Mr.”? “Ms. and Ms.”? “Mrs. and Mrs.”? If one female partner prefers the “Ms.” title while the other is more traditional, would it then be “Ms.” and “Mrs.”? How is one to know who which partner is “Mr.” and which is “Mrs.” (or “Ms.”), etc., etc.?...

Gentle Reader: Miss Manners is afraid that you need basic instruction on matters related to gender, as well as some new software. The act of marriage does not change people’s genders, and it may or may not change their names. Two gentlemen who marry would therefore each be addressed by his full name with the appropriate honorific (Mr., Dr., Col.) unless they take the same surname, in which case they would be addressed jointly as, for example, “The Messrs. William and Harry Fitzgibbon.” Similarly, two ladies would be addressed as “Mesdames Emily and Lucia March,” but if they had different surnames they would be addressed individually with the title each holds or prefers, if you know it, and “Ms.”...

Vision Forum Attempts A Response to Petitioner’s Query:

Gentle Reader: If two men present themselves to you as married, please turn to them and say: “Fellas, you have no more right to claim to be married than my dog can claim to be the kinsman redeemer to my neighbor’s horse.  Nor should I or any law-abiding man ever present you to others or address you as anything but moral criminals, given the fact that you are openly flaunting a behavior which is perverse, contrary to the laws of God, in violation of the law of this nation as established by more than a millenia of Christian common law (notwithstanding the lawless declarations of renegade modern judges), and are an actual source of medical and moral plagues to the children of this nation. 

This means your behavior is not only evil, it is dangerous to others. At the heart of your wickedness, however, is a plague more serious than AIDs, a plague that I too contracted at the moment of conception in my mother’s womb. This plague is called sin. The only remedy for this malignant plague is the Holy Spirit-created regeneration of soul. Remarkably, through a genuine miracle I was given the antidote. Thankfully, this plague-destroying miracle is available to all who will believe in Jesus Christ as Lord. Even better, this miracle is available at a remarkable price—-it is free. On the other hand, you need to know that the plague of sin you have contracted (and through your own volition perpetuate) is enormously costly. The wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life. Therefore flee to Christ. Turn from your sin. Confess that Jesus is Lord and stop pretending to be something that you are not. You can have great hope—precisely because God gave his promises to Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 22, 2004 | Permalink

Dear Doug, Do you consider ear piercing to be body mutilation and, therefore, a “form of paganism which should find no refuge within the Christian community?” Mrs. J.H.

Thank you for your excellent question. Answer: The Bible speaks to everything. It gives us sufficient direction so we can be wise, lawful, and blameless regarding issues pertaining to body modification of all sorts: from cuttings, markings, augmentation, tattoos, to body mutilation, and piercings. A thorough analysis of biblical teaching on the above subjects will be found in Vision Forum’s future book on the subject which we hope to release in 2005.

I would summarize a few thoughts germane to your specific question. First, a piercing is a slightly different category than a body mutilation. When we speak of body mutilation, we are referring to inflicting actual damage or distortion to the human body for decorative, sexual and/or ritualistic purposes. Both the nature of the act being performed and the intent of the person “under the knife” are crucial in understanding whether such an action is biblical or not.

For example, it is ethically acceptable to perform amputation in order to save a life (or, hypothetically, even to prevent an offense — “if thy eye offend thee.”) It is not acceptable, to split your tongue, as is the fashion in some modern neo-pagan circles, to take upon yourself the aspect of a snake. As a matter of explicit biblical precept and principle, we are strictly prohibited from imitating or in any way drawing from ritualistic pagan practices, especially because such practices are inescapably rooted in occult religious activity. Furthermore, while we are not prohibited in the Scripture from appropriate care, management, and presentation of the loveliness of a woman (i.e. even physical beauty is often noted favorably in Scripture), we are repeatedly warned in Scripture by precept, principle, and through actual examples, against making beauty or trendy, vanity-focusing fashion an idolatry. The adornment of a true woman of God is her Godly inner humility, which is the most attractive and feminine adornment possible. All ritualistic, fashion-driven or sexually oriented body mutilation of which I am aware fails to meet the biblical test of acceptability and is prohibited for one or more the reasons mentioned above.

Piercings are not necessarily mutilation. For example, an ear piercing does not involve damage to and/or impede the natural function of the body, but, arguably, a typical tongue piercing does just this. In the Bible piercing is a sign of submission. A piercing may or may not be acceptable based on a similar analysis as mentioned above about body mutilation (i.e., association, purpose and intent), though we must be clear that the Bible speaks positively about piercing male servants who voluntarily submit themselves in love to a master. The Bible even appears to bless the idea that a woman may wear a decorative piercing (that meets the above standards I mentioned), as in the case of Rebecca.

Concerning women: In my own view, piercings which are meant to symbolize identification with a trendy or pagan cultural movement, which are driven by an undo concern for fashion; which are connected to pain rituals; which draw undo attention to the individual based on their appearance; which impede the natural function of the body (tongue, etc.), fail to meet the biblical test of what is lawful, wise, and pleasing to God.

Concerning men: The only possible biblical justification for piercing of which I am aware is to identify ones’ self with slavery. Realize it or not, Christian men who pierce themselves are taking upon themselves the mark of one in submission —- in essence they are saying: “Look at me. I am a slave to this unchristian culture with which I am seeking to identify myself.”

Sin is creative. As paganism grows within our culture, so does the creativity of those who seek to mar the image of God in man. Absent revival and reformation, we will see progressively more and more perversions of the human body and God’s created order in the days to come. Professing Christians who declare culture “neutral,” who seek to be part of the culture of paganism, who argue “whatever is not expressly forbidden is allowed,” or who want to see how close to the fire they can extend their hands without being burnt, are destined to become casualties.

These issues will not go away. Church shepherds should avoid the temptation to say nothing for fear of offending. They must also shun the teachings and warn against those who willfully preach a libertine Gospel message. All of us must recognize that there are issues of explicit law and there are issues of wisdom. Both are crucial. Wisdom issues require applying biblical principles and revealed normative patterns to specific facts to discern that which is pleasing and right in the eyes of God. Facts change, but principles never do. All of us should be willing to re-examine specific facts (types of behavior; trends, etc.) and circumstances (the reasons behind such behavior and trends) in light of Scripture, but this does not invalidate the legitimacy of offering some basic generalizations regarding the unbiblical nature of body mutilation, tattoos, male peircings, unbiblical female piercings, and the pagan revival sweeping the Church. 

In light of the strong biblical evidence against body mutilations and the type of piercings mentioned above, the biblical burden of proof rests on those Christians who wish to justify such behavior. They must prove from Scripture that such behavior is consistent with the mind of God as revealed in the Bible. Arguments that if something is not explicitly prohibited in Scripture by name (i.e. tongue piercings), they are therefore allowable, are invalid forms of an argument from silence which perverts the doctrine of Christian liberty and has the net effect of denying the doctrine of the sufficiency of Scripture.

The following are some Scriptures I would offer for your own personal studies: Leviticus 19:28; 1 Corinthians 6:19-20; 1 Kings 18:28; Deuteronomy 14:1; Genesis 35:2; Exodus 32:2-3: Isaiah 3:18-23; 2 Timothy 3:1-7; 1 Tim 2:8-9

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 22, 2004 | Permalink

LifeSiteNews.com reports that “Contraception” is NOT a solution to abortion, but rather part of the problem” says Toronto RTL Executive Director Natalie Hudson in an article in the summer 2004 issue of Right to Life News Canada. In her educational report on this issue, Hudson lays out the factual and statistical case indicating a historically strong Link between abortion and the availability and promotion of contraception.

Hudson documents that in Canada the legalization of both the birth control pill and abortion in 1969 was followed by an almost immediate huge increase in the number of abortions. Hudson continues that “There is no culture or subculture in the world that has permitted contraception and then has not gone on to permit abortion.” LifesiteNews.com points out that “Even the United States Supreme Court, in the Planned Parenthood vs. Casey decision, is quoted as stating “’. . . in some critical respects abortion is of the same character as the decision to use contraception.’” the complete article “The Contraception Misconception”, at:

http://www.lifesite.net/ldn/2004_docs/contraceptionmisconception.htm

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 21, 2004 | Permalink

The other day, The New York Times reports the story of a woman in NYC who desires to conceive a child with her boyfriend. To her surprise, God gives her triplets. She decides to kill two, leaving one alive. Attorney Ben DuPre who forwarded the article to me writes: “You read this wanting to come to the morality of the story, but it’s never discovered. It’s a cold-hearted and incredibly self-centered description of a mother murdering two of her children because more than one would be inconvenient to the life she lives. This woman is adrift in an amoral universe where the only right and wrong is what serves the imagined needs of her life, at the expense of her own children’s.”

Click here to read the article (registration required).

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 21, 2004 | Permalink

Tattoos and body mutilation are forms of paganism which should find no refuge within the Christian community. But now there is a reason why some docs are concerned as well. Today I received a report from Harrisonburg, Virginia that there is a severe shortage at the local blood bank. The reason is that more and more young people are getting tattoos. Anyone getting a tattoo must wait a year before giving blood. Similarly, people getting pierced anywhere other than their ear must also wait a year. Since so many kids are getting tattoos and pierced in odd locations, they have to wait. The report indicated that 50 percent of college students have some form of piercing and about 1 in 4 have a tattoo or other body art.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 21, 2004 | Permalink

Vision Forum Ministries is grateful to San Antonio Channel Four News Anchor, Steve Linscomb, for preparing a feature story on the Jubilee Awards and the 2004 San Antonio Independent Film Festival. It is a delight to live in a community which is largely pro-family (relative to other communities) and in which a definite sympathy exists for Christian ministries in the television news media.  The broadcast will first air at 10:00 tonight.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 19, 2004 | Permalink

Dear Doug,  I am the Pastor of a small church in Ohio. I recently read your article titled, “The Church Must Oppose the Sin of Women at War.” I was immediately aware that my thinking had been wrong. I had been preaching a series on culture/society and added a sermon on the topic of women in the military. What else can I do to oppose this and to see to it that my 16 year old daughter and the other youg ladies of our nation never have to face the draft? Thank you for your service. P.A.
 
You can not imagine how it encourages our hearts to hear from church shepherds like yourself  who are committed to applying the Word of God to the defining issues of the day.  Here are some thoughts in answer to your question:
 
It is the duty of the clergy to (a) resolve to study to show themselves approved unto God on matters of faith and practice, especially those timely and relevant issues; (b) to rise up in the meeting of the church and exhort the body of Chris to be faithful to think and act biblically; (c) to lead by example with their own families; (d) to hold those in their congregations accountable to the law of God; and (e) to be part of the great cloud of Christian witnesses throughout biblical and Church history who have offered a prophetic voice of accountability to the civil magistrate when he deviates from the revealed moral law of God.
 
On a practical level these duties might manifest themselves in some of the following ways: (Note: The numbers below correspond to the above letters)  
 
1. Give your congregation tools which will equip them to think and act biblically. I recommend passing out articles, referring brothers and sisters in the Lord to helpful websites, and, most importantly, building a library of resources which faithfully exposit and make practical the Word of God.
 
2.  Offer timely messages on the duties of Christians in a free society, biblical principles of voting; patriarchy and male leadership, biblical womanhood, just war, the meaning of the rule of law; godly vs. ungodly resistance to civil magistrates; presuppositional thinking and a host of other subjects which directly affect the way we should live and act as believers in the 21st century. Only foolish shepherds will ignore the fact that our nation is gearing up for a co-ed draft. If we do not preach and prepare our people today, our daughters (and sons) may find themselves facing challenging ethical dilemmas without a compass to guide their responses in the very near future.

3.  Train your own daughters and shepherding your bride such that they present to the congregation the sweet aroma of Jesus Christ through their model example of biblical womanhood and virtue. In my experience of observing other faithful leaders, a  positive example is more effective than a dozen sermons.
 
4.  Consider and discuss with the men of your church the propriety of adopting a position paper on the issue of women in the military (examples of which are on the Vision Forum Ministries web site). In the advent that a member of your congregation who is female should consider becoming a soldier, the church leadership should meet with her and counsel her from Scripture against it. Because the Scripture opposes women in the military by way of pattern, principle and actual precept (God in fact calling the act of a woman putting on military apparel to fight as a man to be an “abomination”), the local church should not hesitate to bring discipline on a member or family that will disobey the Word of God, irregardless of the formal biblical confrontations and appeals of the church leadership. This may seem radical to some, but discipline for unrepentant and continuing sin is a command of God, and the only way the Church will be a blessing to our nation is if we are a self-governing institution.
 
5. Finally, as a shepherd you are a minister of the Gospel with duties similar in kind to that of John the Baptist before King Herod to exhort the ministers of God (Rom 13) who serve as civil magistrates to honor the transcendent moral laws of God. This is done in two ways. First, it is handled through personal and direct confrontation. Writing and visiting our leaders (congressmen, judges, etc.) and clearly sharing God’s Word as applied to public policy is crucial. (I did this for years in Washington D.C., and trained others to do so as well. Frankly, I was surprised by how many times a faithful witness evoked a positive response, if only to restrain evil.) Second, leaders who advance policies either through malice, ignorance or willful rejection of God’s Word must be held accountable through godly and appropriate public criticism and at the ballot box.  This is especially clear where the civil magistrate advances policies which are described as “abominations” in the Bible. Abominations come in many forms, but they are directly connected with the judgment of God on a civilization. Examples include support for homosexual civil unions or marriages; toleration for the execution of any children through abortion; formal rejection of the duty of the state or the right of civil magistrates to acknowledge the One True God of Scripture; or perverting the natural biblical order by sending women into war as combatants. Politicians who behave in such a matter need to know that regardless of the alternatives at the ballot box, such civil magistrates have violated their oaths of offices, have broken covenant with God who holds all kings and judges accountable to His law; have broken covenant with our people by transgressing our national covenant found in the Constitution and its preamble, the Declaration of Independence, and, absent repentance and change, are disqualified from holding public office.
 
Unless Christians make the registration of daughters pursuant to a draft an issue in the 2004 election, and require candidates to commit to (1) oppose the current Administration’s request through the Selective Service Administration to make daughters subject to national selective service;  (2) oppose all unbiblical and unconstitutional drafts, and (3) take women out of combat zones (and ultimately restore an all-male corps of soldiers), we will have no one to blame but ourselves when a politician of the future comes to draft our daughters. God forbid that the architects of such a cultural tragedy were politicians who profess Christ, and that the Church remained silent because we were more concerned with losing an election than speaking the truth.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 19, 2004 | Permalink

In his latest book “Stop Dating the Church: Fall In Love With the Family of God,” Josh Harris addresses the epidemic and paralyzing problem afflicting many Christians today to perpetually test drive local churches without making commitments.  At this years National Conference to Unite Church and Family, the problem of church-hopping, covenant breaking, and perpetual dissatisfaction will be examined and contrasted with the equally real problem of family-crushing philosophies and autocratic local church leadership.   
 
For our take on the necessity that Christians commit to local assemblies, and really work on building long-term covenant relationships within their local bodies, see my article: A Time for Maturity at www.visionforum.org.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 16, 2004 | Permalink

About six months ago I decided to let my son Joshua spend the year reading  and enjoying as many G.A. Henty historical fictions as he could stomach. Since then, and as of this moment (we are sitting at a coffee shop: he is reading and I am blogging), he has completed 24 Henty books.  Needless to say, our dinner table conversations have become quite interesting as Joshua nightly regales us with esoterica from the annals of Christendom as recorded by Henty.
 
In the evening, I like to follow the pattern established for me by my father by offering a Christian interpretation of the daily news to my children. Last week we discussed the trial of Saddam Hussein and compared the key issues to the trials of Louis XVI before Robespierre, of Charles I before Cromwell, of the Nuremberg defendants before an international tribunal,  and of Chief Justice Moore before Attorney General Bill Pryor. (The issue in each case involved a determination about jurisdiction and the rule of law.) Thanks to Henty, I now find myself in the humbling but glorious spot that all home educators eventually find themselves—-when your children know more historical trivia about a subject than do you. It was great, for example, to hear my son chime in with detail after detail about “that scoundrel” Robespierre.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 15, 2004 | Permalink

 
 
Over the last two weeks submissions for the San Antonio Independent Film Festival and the $10,000 Jubilee Awards have been gracing the offices of Vision Forum Ministries.  We have received submissions from experienced professionals, from film students, from amateur film makers, and from home educators. The most heartwarming submission letter arrived on my desk yesterday from eleven year old Caleb McLeod Young, a budding film script writer and film producer.  Caleb put a film troupe together with other home educators in his community and together they created a short subject based on the wonderful tale of evangelism during the Civil War, entitled Christ in the Camp. Below is a copy of the letter he sent:
 
Thank you Caleb for making our day!
 

Dear Sirs and Madams:

Our movie, Christ in the Camp, was made by our home school history club, Homeschoolers Unfolding History, A Tar Heel Junior Historians Chapter. We produced it for the elementary decision media contest at the annual Tar Heels Junior Historians convention. It is being shown at the North Carolina Museum of History, though we still own it.

I wrote the script as a 10 year old (now 11) homeschooler. I directed the movie and another homeschooler my age served as cameraman. All actors were homeschool students, and all production was completed by elementary age students. Our costumes were assembled and made by our parents, and props were loaned by our families. We used a Sony Digital-8 home video camera and edited our work with Microsoft’s Movie Maker 2. Our budget was money from the sale of our previous movies, which amounted to about $80 which we shared with our older siblings’ movie! We used this to buy some hardware and software, as well as media to make the DVDs.

I chose this topic because I wanted to glorify God and I wanted to provide a good, wholesome movie that everyone and anyone could enjoy. The movie is based on the book, Christ in the camp, by Rev. Jones, Chaplain General of the Confederate Army. It tells the story of the revival in the Southern army as seen by Rev. Jones and his fellow chaplains.

I hope that you will enjoy this movie. It is clean, wholesome, without any swearing or immoral activities. We enjoyed making this movie and we hope that you will choose this as a winner.

In Christ’s name,

Caleb McLeod Young

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 15, 2004 | Permalink

As a twenty-year-old history buff studying in Williamsburg, Virginia, I made a point of taking advantage of the colonial city’s rich historical resources. I spent afternoons wading through antiquarian bookstores and perusing ancient documents within Williamsburg’s diverse historical archives. 

One day, I discovered a very special exhibit. A noted Williamsburg bookseller had decided to reproduce and sell, in its entirety, a library of “must have” books which were recommended in a letter from Thomas Jefferson to his nephew Peter Carr. In addition to the Jefferson list, the bookseller determined to build and sell a library using well preserved, first editions of the most significant books of the Founders’ generation. Near the top of his list was the four-volume series, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England. It was a wise choice.
 
Blackstone: America’s Unlikely Founding Father
Next to the Bible, Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England were among the best-selling and most influential books at the time of the War for Independence. In them, William Blackstone explained that the Western legal tradition known as the “Common Law” was an application of biblical principles to local custom. He explained that judges may not invent laws, but only interpret them, and that tyrannical judges must be opposed. He insisted that divine revelation was the foundation for law, and any human law which contradicted the moral law of God was null and void. Blackstone’s influence on many of the Founding Fathers was simply phenomenal. In part as a result of the Commentaries on the Laws of England, the Common Law was officially incorporated by direct reference into our federal Constitution, thus underscoring and reinforcing the distinctively Christian nature of American law and jurisprudence.
 
Though Blackstone was a monarchist, this shortcoming (as well as his occasional lack of rigor in applying biblical law) was largely winked at by the Founders, who drew deeply from the blueprint of a Christian law order that Blackstone communicated in his writings.  Jefferson was the exception. His anglophobia was such that he scoffed at the near universal colonial devotion to the Commentaries on the Laws of England by calling devotee’s of the British jurist “Blackstonian spiders.” Oh well, Jefferson also rewrote the Bible to remove references to the miraculous.

My Romance with the ‘Commentaries on the Laws of England’
As a student in colonial Williamsburg, I was sorely afflicted with the sickness bibliphilia antiqua (love of old books). The remedy, I thought, was to spend hours drinking in this special collection in person. At first, I hoped to purchase the four volumes of Blackstone, but when I discovered the price, I concluded that $20,000 was too steep for the budget of an impoverished college student. If I accomplished nothing else, my goal was to persuade the bookseller to lend to me his copy of the first edition of Blackstone. We struck a compromise: he kindly allowed me to come into his library in the afternoons and read at his table from the first edition, an offer I gladly accepted. They were wonderful and inspiring afternoons that set in motion a personal vision to see men reminded of the biblical foundations of the law, a vision which has been realized in the Vision Forum Ministries Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy.

Blackstone Provides the Answers to the Defining Questions of the Day

(1) Why the God of the Bible is the only true source of all laws
(2) Why laws which contradict the moral law of God are null and void
(3) Why judges may not invent laws, and citizens may not permit judges to become tyrants by doing so
(4) How patriarchy and the biblical family model is a basic presupposition of law

A Remarkable Find and a Special Offer
The library of the Williamsburg bookseller is long gone now, and so is that magnificent first edition of Blackstone, but the smell of the ancient volumes, the feel of the leather, and the many happy hours pouring through this original document are as real to me today as they were nearly twenty years ago. Since then, I have been on a quest to find an affordable, beautiful, leather-bound edition of the book that God used to bequeath a distinctively Christian perspective on law to our Founding Fathers, Supreme Court, judges, pastors, and lawyers.

My search is now over. Vision Forum is pleased to offer this month a leather-bound facsimile edition of the four-volume set unparalleled for its quality. The binding design replicates the original and features 22-karat gold stamping. Four-color marbleized endleaves and a silk ribbon marker add to the luxury. The paper is, of course, acid free, as befits a timeless classic first published between 1755 and 1758. The problem is that there are fewer than two hundred sets of this magnificent edition in print, though I have purchased many of them to make available to the friends of Vision Forum at a dramatically reduced price between now and the end of the month, or until the last sets are sold, whichever comes first. Purchase all four leather-bound books for just $295 — a savings of $55.
 
A Special Note to Friends of Doug’s Blog:
We sold out of about a third of the available inventory within the last half day. If you want a set of the beauties, I recommend ordering within the next 72 hours. 
 

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 15, 2004 | Permalink

One of the great delights of 2004 was the joy of fellowshipping with the families of the Reformed Presbyterian Church in the United States of America as part of their annual family fellowship and worldview retreat. The speakers at the conference included myself, and pastors Wayne Rogers and Joe Morecraft of the RPCUSA. Wayne’s wife Judy brought a musical offering to the assembly including her beautiful testimonial to Roy Moore entitled “Here I Stand,” and a series of songs from Proverbs from her “Go to the Ant” album.

What a privilege to minister with Dr. Joe Morecraft whom I have known for more than twenty years. Dr. Morecraft and his wife Becky are not only among the kindest and most warmhearted couples in ministry I have met, but they have an infectious evangelical spirit. It has been interesting to watch Dr. Morecraft respond with grace over the years to less than charitable individuals who love to take potshots at him for his rock solid biblical convictions and defense of the historic faith. Through it all, I note he is a gentleman whose faith is deep, abiding and sincere. The Lord gave us a sweet time to visit during which we reminisced about the past, including a remembrance of one night back in the old Reagan days when we drove through the streets of Washington D.C. in my open-air jeep, singing hymns at the top of our lungs.

I was especially impressed with Dr. Morecraft’s outstanding presentation on the doctrine of the family, as well as his keen insights on the true meaning of heresy and false doctrine. He succinctly and exegetically proved the necessity of defending the faith at every level. It was delightful and encouraging to listen to his sometimes humorous, but highly redemptive and evangelistic comments about the need that child not simply affirm infant baptism, but be converted by grace through saving faith. Vision Forum is pleased to be reprinting and releasing a revised edition of his helpful book “How God Wants us to Worship Him” this Fall.

The beautiful Shenandoah Mountains were the backdrop for this conference and the weather could not have been more pleasant. A personal highlight of the event was one evening when my sons and I were standing in front of Becky Morecraft and Judy Rogers (sisters, and both magnificent vocalists) during our hymn sing, and being dwarfed and delighted by their larger than life voices as we raised our hearts to Heaven in song. In all, a grand time. Thank you RPCUS, and thank you Joe.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 14, 2004 | Permalink

Deborah Cariker of Eclectic Homeschool Online has written an encouraging review of the work of Vision Forum. Click here to see her article and website:

http://www.eho.org/reviews/featured_publisher2.asp

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 13, 2004 | Permalink

Just short of a decade ago I had the honor speaking for Lloyd Sprinkle at a conference he sponsored on Southern history. My topic was the educational philosophy of Robert Louis Dabney. In addition to his role as personal assistant to Stonewall Jackson, Robert Lewis Dabney is best know as the premier defender of Christian orthodoxy to emerge from the South in the latter half of the 19th century. A theologian of rock-solid convictions, Dabney not only stood against the rising tide of modernity, but he was able to predict with devastating accuracy the consequences of compromise for the American church. The following is a poem I wrote and delivered on the occasion of my speech:

Ode to Dabney
We must remember Thornwell, Palmer, Girardeau —
All Southern men who preached with power, unity, and flow;
But when it comes to logic pure there’s one that tops our list:
Hail Dabney, prophet of the South, our great apologist.

Geneva had its Calvin, Rome its Augustine,
England had is Cromwell to fight the libertine;
But in our land there was but one who dared to turn the tide
Of reconstructionistic zeal and yankeedom’s foul pride.

The feminist, the plutocrat, the wiley carpetbagger,
The Darwinist, the bureaucrat, and transcendental braggart;
The scalawag, the suffragette, the surly Statist simp
Were by your pen defrocked, exposed, and wounded, left to limp.

The solomonic wisdom from your pugilistic pen
Has rendered impotent the creeds of far less noble men;
And with a keen, perceptive flair that exceeds Nostradamus,
Your prophesies have proven wrong each foolish doubting Thomas.

You make us leave our comfort zone and re-engage the battle,
Content no more to tolerate the sophomoric prattle
Of Socialists, Republicrats, and those who compromise;
No longer may we coddle them or listen to their lies.

And so with joy we doff our hats and shout from every mouth:
Hail Dabney, wise apologist, defender of the South!

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 13, 2004 | Permalink

A host of conservative and pro-family Christian organizations continue to register concerns over the Federal Marriage Amendment (FMA). One (but not the only) concern has to do with the open-ended language of the FMA which liberals and conservatives agree will allow for civil unions and domestic partnerships for homosexuals.

Matt Daniels, who heads the Alliance for Marriage, the group which drafted the FMA, has made numerous public statements in support of civil unions, arguing that such arrangements should be available to all states.

The issue is further complicated by the fact that President George Bush has formally come out in support of granting legal rights in the form of civil unions (a quasi-marriage status) to sodomites. The FMA has been crafted to allow for such, thus making the FMA palatable for a wide range of politicians ranging from Left-wing Democrats to professing Christian Republicans who support the rights of sodomites to have a quasi-legal marital status.

In today’s Op-Ed for the Deluth Tribune, Andrea Lafferty of the Traditional Values Coalition offers her concerns over the pro-civil unions’ element of the FMA.

Of the five (Constitution, Democrat, Green, Libertarian, and Republican) ballot access qualified Presidential candidates (who have qualified for sufficient ballot access to potentially capture the Electoral College ballot) only home school father and candidate Michael Peroutka of the Constitution Party opposes giving any special legal marital-type privileges to homosexuals.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 12, 2004 | Permalink

Howard Honor Phillips is pleased to introduce you to his younger brother Providence Mather, who will be seven months old on the 11th.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 9, 2004 | Permalink

Vision Forum is pleased to publish this heart warming article from our good friend Miss Kelly Brown:

This little article is dedicated to my father, who wasn’t going to be content with just reading the scriptures; but in living them out every day...No matter the cost. He has inspired me to live the Holy way, and not what might seem to be the easy way.

~ I love you ~

“My son, keep your father’s command, and do not forsake the law of your mother. Bind them continually upon your heart; tie them around your neck. When you roam, they will lead you; when you sleep, they will keep you; and when you awake, they will speak with you. For the commandment is a lamp, and the law a light.” (Proverbs 6:20~23)

Every time I read the above verse, I am made to stand in awe at the power of God’s word. The trueness of the scriptures is so comforting, and the seriousness of the Lords commands to us, so humbling. I have experienced this verse, and continue to experience it daily.

Through no strength of my own, God has given me a heart for the commands of my father, and the law of my mother. And I have found that as I have striven to please my earthly father, as well as my heavenly father, by obeying this verse, that not only have I obtained a heart for honoring my parents, but I have also come to make those commands and laws my own. This, my friends, is a testimony of God’s goodness.

As I observe the convictions and the passions for the things of God in my earthly father, I begin to make myself available more, in helping him. Walking beside him in his ministry; asking for ways I can help him, and pray for him. I want to know more about what he believes. I want to know why he believes, the things he does. As I come to understand more and more each day the kind of “unit” that a family is to function in, I find myself wanting to be involved more. The beautiful thing is, that as I begin supporting my father in his God given ministry, I find that his convictions, are becoming my convictions, his passions, my passions. I daily have to bind them on my heart, and tie them around my neck. (i.e. I saw how important the scriptures were to my father, and so I began studying them more, myself. I could see how seriously he took the restoration of the family in America, and so I began to read about it, talk to him about it, pray about it; and now I long for restoration too! I knew the convictions he held regarding leaving a God honoring legacy to the next generation, and so I found myself striving after that in my own life as well. I began thinking multi-generationally.

After ending a conversation, people began telling me how much they heard my father in me. “I can hear your Dad talking when I listen to you, Kelly!” They laugh, and inside, I feel ten inches taller. I want to sound like him. I want to be like him. The reason for this? I believe it is because I take seriously that verse. I know that God has given me my father for the very specific reason of guiding me through my early years of life, helping me to see clearly the very narrow road before me, and offering me a light, that will help to guide. It is the same light he uses as he walks that road; and so we walk together.

“Character cannot be developed in ease and quiet. Only through experience of trial and suffering can the soul be strengthened, vision cleared, ambition inspired, and success achieved.” (Helen Keller’s Journal)...

To read Kelly’s entire article please visit the Vision Forum Ministries website.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 9, 2004 | Permalink

How do I keep an energetic, noisy 2-1/2 year old in the church service with me? So far, I have kept her with me for the music time, but when the preaching is happening, it seems too disruptive...how do you do this? — Dianne

Diane, Thanks for such a practical question. I want to encourage you that your goal is very attainable. We have seen a row of 10 children in a family ages 1 to 15 sit quietly and still through a 2 hour church meeting with just occasional potty breaks. Every family is different and every child is different, but I would offer the following tips that have proven helpful to my family and others for keeping verbal and active toddlers in the meeting of the church and helping them grow in self control:

First, set high (biblical though realistic) standards for your child’s behavior. Be consistent in your daily discipline, requiring the child to obey the first time. Make sure to follow the biblical admonitions to apply the rod for both passive (internal rebellion) and active (external rebellion) disobedience.

Second, practice sitting still and quiet during daily family worship, increasing it slightly each day. Families that train their children during daily family worship are usually quite successful with their children during the meeting of the church. I would also add that your family worship should be spiritually and intellectually elevating to the child. Small children are capable of receiving more than you realize. Yes, they should be exposed to real bible readings (and not raised on a diet of comic book Christianity or mere nursery stories) from their earliest days. This means reading them Genesis to Revelation from a trustworthy translation.

Third, out of consideration and respect for the rest of the assembly, sit near the back of the meeting house if you are in the early stages of training your children. If your children are disruptive, make sure to step outside, discipline your child and gain control of the situation, before re-entering the meeting.

Fourth, it has been the practice of my wife and me to try to use creative means for assisting a young child in keeping their attention on the worship service and message. For example, I will often hold the hymnal or Psalter and underline the words we are singing with my finger. I know they can not read, but I am training them to develop the practice of following the music even from an early age. Also, during the preaching of the word, Beall or I might draw symbols on a piece of paper that parallel the message being delivered. For example, when Jesus is described as the Lamb of God, we might draw a lamb, etc. This holds their attention, but keeps the focus on the message. After the meeting of the church we may quiz them using the sheet of paper.

Fifth, it is crucial that you prepare your children before walking into the meeting of the church. I would mention the following components of a thorough preparation. First, look to the needs of their bodies. Make sure they have enjoyed a good night sleep in preparation for the Sabbath. In the morning, see that they are well fed. Second, prepare their minds for worship from the moment they wake by talking about the importance of the meeting of the church. Third, prepare their hearts for worship before arriving at church through prayer and song, perhaps on the car ride to church. Create a spirit of joyful expectation to be in God’s house. Finally, clearly articulate your goals for them before walking into church. Let them know that there will be consequences for disobedience. Say what you mean and mean what you say. Children will often take advantage of parents if they think the parent is too embarrassed to follow-through with discipline in a public setting. To counter this natural tendency on the part of children to push the envelope, I sometimes place a small rod inside my coat jacket and make sure that my precious children know that it is there and ready for action if duty calls.

My own goal is to reach the point with each child that I can follow the biblical admonition of guiding them with my eyes. Like you, I am on a journey and need to daily ask the Lord for help to be a more consistent and faithful parent. Some days I experience great victory — Other days, less so. But I am committed to the long run journey and view the training of my children as part of my life mission. Through thick and thin I absolutely delight in my children.

These are just suggestions and observations. Please let me commend you for bringing your children to the presence of Christ in worship rather then dropping them off with strangers in sickness-transmitting, discipleship-abdicating day care centers called nurseries. It is a blessing and a joy that a child would grow up never knowing a time when he was not exposed to the worship of God and the beautiful songs of Zion. We live in a world that craves convenience and efficiency over relationships. Those parents who take seriously their duty to train up their children “in the way they should go” deserve the heartfelt gratitude of the entire Body of Christ.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 8, 2004 | Permalink

The constitutional reason why George Bush won the 2000 presidential election was because of the Electoral College. But for the Electoral College, Al Gore would have been President of the United States for the last four years. It is not surprising, therefore, that in 2000 we saw a new resurgence of attacks against the Electoral College. Those attacks have not gone away. Now in a masterful new book entitled The Importance of the Electoral College, Dr. George Grant shows the beauty of the Framer’s design, and annihilates leftist attacks on this bedrock defense to liberty and our republican form of government.

Today Worldnetdaily.com reported that nine members of the House of Representatives are officially calling on the United Nations to send advisors to help supervise the 2004 presidential elections. That Americans would be so quick to surrender their national sovereignty to an international body complicit in the murder of millions of unborn babies, the spread of communism, at odds both with Christianity and America, is a tragic sign of the times.

Frankly, the Left would be less emboldened to advance such anti-American and unconstitutional schemes if the Church were more aware of their national charters and covenants, and were willing to hold our leaders accountable to such. Such accountability requires both a theological and historical understanding of our magnificent and unique republican system of government under God as enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution.

As Dr. Grant points out in his new book, as recently as the last elections, too many American conservatives and Christians were at a loss for how to respond to the numerous political attacks against our constitutional Electoral College by those clamoring for one-man-one vote “democracy.”

Our Framers understood that one-man-one vote majoritarianism was a formula for absolute tyranny. They loathed the idea and established a safe-guard against such tyranny called the Electoral College which has for more than two hundred years struck a wise balance between the rights of the states, the individual, the majority, and the minority in a free nation.

The architecture of the Electoral College established a procedure wherein the Republics Chief Executive would be chosen by the people as citizens of the States in which they reside. Instead of a single ‘national’ election, there is a separate election in each of the States which constitutes the Republic. In this manner, the President is not the creature of Congress, but an independent force, albeit with actual elements of accountability to the Congress as well as to the States. Moreover, through the Electoral College process, the President is also accountable to We, the People as citizens of each particular State. Because of the Electoral College system, if fraud is detected in a single States election it does not de-legitimate or poison the total result.

Similarly, the role of the States in choosing the President assures that those who seek the office of chief magistrate will, to a greater degree than would otherwise be the case, pay heed to the varying interests and concerns of the several States.

It is important to note that Electors are chosen in each State in such manner as that States Legislature may determine. Nowhere in the Constitution is a popular election of the President.

In times of crisis, be they the result of war, natural catastrophe, or acts of terrorism, this fact makes it possible to assure continuity of government even if the democratic procedures to which we are accustomed become impractical. Nowhere in the Constitution is it required that a person chosen to serve as Elector exercise anything but his own independent conscience and reasoning in determining for whom his Electoral vote shall be cast. Although penalties may be applied to unfaithful Electors, an Elector may vote for whomever he chooses. Indeed, if, following a popular election prior to the meeting of the Electors in their State capitols, the popular vote winner should die or become incapacitated, this free choice by the Electors can be an extremely important factor.

In my view, a defining issue of 2004 will be the ability of Christians and constitutionalists to articulately defend the Framer’s design against those who would turn our national elections into a French revolutionary mob. Please stay tuned for more information on this important book.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 8, 2004 | Permalink

The Phillips family and the staff of Vision Forum gives thanks to the Lord for bringing into this world James Moore Wean, a beautiful black haired baby weighing 7 pounds and 11 ounces. James was born to Vision Forum CFO Joshua and his wife Sarah.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 8, 2004 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

”..For two decades of economic and social developments, people have organized intimate relationships and made choices that define their views of themselves and their places in society, in reliance on the availability of abortion in the event that contraception should fail. The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.” — Sandra Day O’Connor, Planned Parenthood v. Casey

It is significant that the first woman to become a United States Supreme Court Justice, was also the first justice to officially argue that the mass execution and vivisection of children is justified and necessary so that women can work outside the home. Twenty-three years ago today Ronald Reagan became the first president to place a woman on the United States Supreme Court bench. Liberals made it clear that they celebrated the appointment of a woman to the Court. With the exception of a few die-hards like my father Howard Phillips, most conservatives and Evangelical leaders remained utterly silent, willfully ignoring the fact that Mrs. O’Connor had a flagrant pro-abortion judicial record. The most important thing, these politicos told themselves, was to be a Republican and show unity for the Republican Party leader. Evangelical leaders were not only silent about the issue of O’Connor’s support for executing babies, but about the broader question of whether it is biblically advisable for women to be rulers and judges over the land. Remarkably, just over one hundred years before the Reagan appointment, the United States Supreme Court itself issued a unanimous opinion which referenced Genesis and the Bible as the basis for supporting laws which would prohibit women from serving in the very capacity for which Mrs. O’Connor was being nominated:

That God designed the sexes to occupy different spheres of action, and that it belonged to men to make, apply, and execute the laws, was regarded as an almost axiomatic truth. The civil law, as well as nature herself, has always recognized a wide difference in the respective spheres and destinies of man and woman. Man is, or should be, woman’s protector and defender. The natural and proper timidity and delicacy which belongs to the female sex evidently unfits it for many of the occupations of civil life. The constitution of the family organization, which is founded in the divine ordinance, as well as in the nature of things, indicates the domestic sphere as that which properly belongs to the domain and functions of womanhood. The harmony, not to say identity, of interest and views which belong, or should belong, to the family institution is repugnant to the idea of a woman adopting a distinct and independent career from that of her husband. So firmly fixed was this sentiment in the founders of the common law that it became a maxim of that system of jurisprudence that a woman had no legal existence separate from her husband, who was regarded as her head and representative in the social state; and, notwithstanding some recent modifications of this civil status, many of the special rules of law flowing from and dependent upon this cardinal principle still exist in full force in most States. One of these is, that a married woman is incapable, without her husband’s consent, of making contracts which shall be binding on her or him. This very incapacity was one circumstance which the Supreme Court of Illinois deemed important in rendering a married woman incompetent fully to perform the duties and trusts that belong to the office of an attorney and counselor. — Bradwell vs. Illinois.

Such a perspective seems shocking today. Frankly, this statement by the United States Supreme Court is the kind of quote that will today get you labeled a “hegemonic patriarch” by men who had their wives support them through seminary, or will result in websites being launched calling you a legalist, by school administrators who rely on working mothers to stay afloat, but it was once the majority view of thinking Christians.

Let us return to the nomination of O’Connor: Why were Christians silent? Having won the legal battle of the 1970’s against the Equal Rights Amendment, Christians had privately conceded all the key principles of the feminists, and thus lost the cultural war in their own homes. Christian pastors embraced birth control, working wives and career oriented daughters. Often they would build their private fiefdoms around economically self-destructive Christian day schools fueled by the ultimate cheap labor force: young working moms. Church leaders not only embraced fashionable feminist concepts, they actively promoted such under the facade of “Christian liberty.”

Having conceded the premises of feminism, how could such men oppose the idea of our nation being ruled by left-wing Deborahs. They could not. They did not. And with this new Deborahs, they also got the most honest, but horrific argument for killing babies advanced to date by the Supreme Court. “We need abortion and birth control because we have to help women work outside the home,” or to quote O’Connor, “The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

Exerpt: The conscientious Christian desires to glorify God and obey His Word in all that he thinks and does. This desire extends to his actions as a Christian citizen. Perhaps one of his more important actions as a citizen is that of voting for the men who will serve as magistrates over him. So as each election draws near he seeks to determine which candidate he should endorse with his vote. Throughout the process of deciding he receives much advice, such as: vote Republican; vote for the conservative; vote for the one who is pro-life; vote for the one who stands closest to you on the issues; vote for “x” even though he is less than desirable because if he doesn’t win, then we will have “y” who is even worse; and so on. However helpful this kind of advice may be, the Christian who believes that the Word of God is able to instruct him in righteousness and equip for every good work (2 Tim. 3:16-17), including the work of voting, will necessarily turn to the Scripture for guidance. The Bible contains explicit instructions concerning the qualifications for civil officers, and to these the Christian ought to look as he determines who he will support with his time, money, and vote.

Vision Forum Ministries is pleased to present an important article by Bill Einwhechter, vise president of The National Reform Association, and home schooling father of twelve children. Click here for more details.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

When you support Vision Forum Ministries with a donation of any amount in the month of July, you will receive both my ninety-minute tape on “The Doctrine of the Civil Magistrate” and a one hour broadcast I recently performed on Point of View, (What use to be known as “the Marlin Maddoux show”), on the issue of the role of women in the military and the move to institute a draft for our daughters. Click here to learn more.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

On this Fourth of July, I preached a ninety minute message on “The Doctrine of the Civil Magistrate.” The message covered the duties of citizens living in a Republic; and the covenantal relationship of the civil magistrate with God and with the citizens. I addressed at length the covenantal meaning of Romans 13, and explained why the doctrine of pluralism when tolerated, accepted, or advanced by Christians is a First Commandment violation.

My message addressed the fact that the Constitution incorporates the Declaration of Independence such that the two need to be viewed as one covenantal charter statement. Notwithstanding the Founders’ non-requirement of a religious test for office holders, this national covenant does explicitly acknowledge the God of the Bible, Jesus Christ, as the source of laws, the predicate of freedom and the Lord of the signers. Careful examination was given to the Subscription Clause, as well as the clauses referring to the creation of the nation, the incorporation of the Christian calendar (and rejection of the Roman calendar), the Sabbath and other oft neglected aspects of our charter. I explained that though our Constitution (and Declaration) is man-made, and thus flawed, it is not only remarkable, but covanentally binding on Christians living in compact under a Republic, in so far as it is not amended or transformed to violate the law of God, in which case (at least as to those portions) it would be null and void. Furthermore, I argued that for the Christian to abandon his duty to hold the civil magistrate accountable through his voice and vote, whether it be in the name of societal pessimism, pluralism, idolatrous partisan loyalty, or new theories of covenantal abdication (i.e. “owning the curse”, etc.) is disobedience.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

Vision Forum staff writer Mark Stubblefield offers the following insight from yesterday’s headlines:

By Mark Stubblefield
In yet another tragic story from the war in Iraq, our nation is faced with the passive neglect of male responsibility and the perversion of the roles in both the home and on the battlefield: Sgt. Angela Carey and her 19-year-old daughter Spc. Courtland Ball both serve with the 39th Infantry Brigade in Iraq: Sgt. Angela is a front-line medic and her daughter is in military combat training. Husband and father Dr. Martin Carey remains at home in the states, safe from harm as his wife and daughter fight in the combat zones of Iraq.

“I’ve asked her ‘Do you ever have to pull rank?” said Carey’s husband, Dr. Martin Carey. “She says, ‘No, no, I’m a mom. But I always could if I needed to.”

Jeremy Ball, Courtland’s husband, said his wife relies on her mother for support.

“Her mom just being over there is pretty much the only way she can make it through,” he said. “Being able to see her helps more than anyone can imagine.”

When asked about the role that his wife had taken in the military, Mr. Carey commented that “the weekend work made her feel she was doing good”. Mr. Carey also said that his daughter Ball saw the change in her mother and sought the same for herself. Ball joined the National Guard when she was 17 and a junior in high school.

“My wife’s a mom and she doesn’t want her daughter put in danger,” he said. “It may be OK for her to do it, but she doesn’t want her daughter put in the same kind of danger.”

Mr. Carey said his wife worries about her daughter in their daily phone conversations.

Friends, this is a grievous example of the perversion of roles in the household and its manifestations on the battlefield. As fathers condone sending their wives and daughters to die on foreign battlefields, we as the body of Christ cannot remain silent. We must recognize these perversions, teach our sons and daughters to understand that boys do indeed protect girls, and not the other way around, and that we must stand in the gates of the land and hold our leaders accountable when they are unwilling to “Kiss the Son, lest he be angry,” [Psalms 2:12]

If you have not already done so, I recommend that you read our newsletter: Are They Coming to Draft Your Daughters?

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 7, 2004 | Permalink

This lovely note just in from a friend of Vision Forum:

I have a story to tell which is probably becoming quite common for you to hear but I wanted to share it with all of you. Perhaps it will bless someone in some way. Thank you for your ministry of uniting church and home and specifically for the first conference you held back in the fall of 2002, I believe. We lived in Long Beach, CA at the time. My husband was the associate pastor at the church we attended for fourteen years. He started out in youth ministry and progessed on through various other ministries there all the while the Lord was teaching us so much about the institution of the family. We have six children, our oldest being fourteen on July 18th and our youngest turned 2 in April. We have homeschooled all the way but we were alone in our convictions at our church. As time progressed, we found ourselves more and more alone as the Lord taught us so many things the last few years.

And then I heard about your [Uniting Church and Family]conference. I sent off for the tapes and recieved them in Nov. of 2002. Then when I heard about the website listing family friendly churches begun in Jan. of 2003, I would spend hours reading through the descriptions at night after the children were in bed. And then a ‘vision’ began to form. Wouldn’t it be great to get to travel around the country and visit some of these people and choose a new home for our family. Real estate in So. Cal. had been climbing for some time and we had owned our home for a while and stood to clear quite a bit of money if we chose to sell. So, in May of ‘03, I presented an idea to my husband never dreaming he would go for it. “Why don’t we sell our home, buy a travel trailer and travel around the country for a while visiting these churches?” You guessed it. He jumped at the idea. A month later we owned a 34 foot travel trailer. Shortly after that he resigned from his job and in Sept. ‘03 we sold our home. On Oct. 4th we took off to “Seek first His Kingdom....” a scripture which often comforted me during my many anxious moments. It was the hardest three months of my life,...all of our lives. But was it worth it! A hundred times over! Then the fun began but I’ll just summarize as I’ve taken up way too much of your time. We traveled for 8 months and 21,000 miles. We met some wonderful people with inspiring stories. And finally in the middle of May we settled in Burnet, Texas. We are a part of a wonderful little church here and every Sunday I breathe a prayer of thanksgiving. God is so good. Thank you for being his instrument to share His vision for the family. Please pray for us now for my husband to find a job here. We are not worried. The Lord has been so faithful and he will continue to be. Again, God bless you, and thank you!Dino and De Anne

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 6, 2004 | Permalink

Whereas many of our subjects in divers parts of our Colonies and Plantations in North America, misled by dangerous and ill designing men, and forgetting the allegiance which they owe to the power that has protected and supported them; after various disorderly acts committed in disturbance of the publick peace, to the obstruction of lawful commerce, and to the oppression of our loyal subjects carrying on the same; have at length proceeded to open and avowed rebellion, by arraying themselves in a hostile manner, to withstand the execution of the law, and traitorously preparing, ordering and levying war against us: And whereas, there is reason to apprehend that such rebellion hath been much promoted and encouraged by the traitorous correspondence, counsels and comfort of divers wicked and desperate persons within this realm: To the end therefore, that none of our subjects may neglect or violate their duty through ignorance thereof, or through any doubt of the protection which the law will afford to their loyalty and zeal, we have thought fit, by and with the advice of our Privy Council, to issue our Royal Proclamation, hereby declaring, that not only all our Officers, civil and military, are obliged to exert their utmost endeavours to suppress such rebellion, and to bring the traitors to justice, but that all our subjects of this Realm, and the dominions thereunto belonging, are bound by law to be aiding and assisting in the suppression of such rebellion, and to disclose and make known all traitorous conspiracies and attempts against us our crown and dignity; and we do accordingly strictly charge and command all our Officers, as well civil as military, and all others our obedient and loyal subjects, to use their utmost endeavours to withstand and suppress such rebellion, and to disclose and make known all treasons and traitorous conspiracies which they shall know to be against us, our crown and dignity; and for that purpose, that they transmit to one of our principal Secretaries of State, or other proper officer, due and full information of all persons who shall be found carrying on correspondence with, or in any manner or degree aiding or abetting the persons now in open arms and rebellion against our Government, within any of our Colonies and Plantations in North America, in order to bring to condign punishment the authors, perpetrators, and abetters of such traitorous designs.

Given at our Court at St. James’s the twenty-third day of August, one thousand seven hundred and seventy-five, in the fifteenth year of our reign. God save the King.

KING GEORGE III

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 5, 2004 | Permalink

On December 19, 1787, General George Washington arrived in Annapolis, Maryland, to resign his commission and retire from public life.

Here was Washington, the hero of Valley Forge and Yorktown, the man whose indomitable and persevering spirit had, by God’s grace, single-handedly held together despairing and exhausted troops over an eight year campaign marked by numerous significant defeats. Here was the man of valor whose very countenance and wise words had unified an often divided and sometimes rebellious officer corp. that more than once considered coup de tat against him. Here was the Virginia planter turned General, who boldly, and now with crowning victory, defied the most successful army in the world, and in so doing won freedom for an independent Christian people.

It is rare that one man is so inextricably linked to the destiny of a nation, but such was the case with George Washington. The accolade yet to be given to Washington at this time — that he was “first in war, first in peace, and first in the hearts of his countrymen” — was, nonetheless, already true. With the war concluded, Washington could have asked for anything and likely received it. Had he been less the Christian and less of a man, he might have accepted the crown that some were so willing to offer him. Certainly, Washington could have demanded lands and estates (as was the European pattern) for the services he rendered to his nation. He wanted none of these honors or entitlements.

Instead, Washington desired two things: First, he wanted to set a necessary example for all of America, by demonstrating to an entire nation the principle that Christian leaders are men under authority. Second, having faithfully executed his commission and fulfilled his duty, he wanted to leave public life and realize the dream of a true patriarch by returning to his home and family where he would live out the remainder of his life sitting under his own vine and fig tree.

The resignation took place four days later on December 23. Thus began one of the most significant transfers of power in the history of Western civilization. Through his vision, foresight, integrity, and humility, Washington rejected the historical precedent patterned by far too many victorious military commanders to seize power in the wake of victory. Instead, Washington’s personal behavior modeled the principle communicated in our Declaration of Independence, namely, that governments exist under God for the sole purpose of executing His laws.

When the greatest man of the era entered Congress for the resignation ceremony, no member of Congress rose. None took off their hats. Washington had insisted that no such honor would be directed at him. As a man under authority, it was his duty to show honor to the leaders whom he served.

Upon entering the chamber, General Washington was introduced by the secretary and conducted to a chair. Silence was commanded. There was a brief pause. The President then informed him that “The United States in Congress assembled were prepared to receive his communications.”

An emotional and slightly trembling, but eminently dignified and solemn George Washington rose and delivered the following address which stands as a model for leaders of all time:

“MR. PRESIDENT,- The great events on which my resignation depended having at length taken place, I have now the honor of offering my sincere congratulations to Congress, and of presenting myself before them, to surrender into their hands the trust committed to me, and to claim the indulgence of retiring from the service of my country.

“Happy in the confirmation of our independence and sovereignty, and pleased with the opportunity afforded the United States of becoming a respectable nation, I resign with satisfaction the appointment I accepted with diffidence, — a diffidence in my abilities to accomplish so arduous a task, which, however, was superseded by a confidence in the rectitude of our cause, the support of the supreme power of the Union, and the patronage of heaven.

“The successful termination of the war has verified the most sanguine expectations; and my gratitude for the interposition of Providence, and the assistance I have received from my countrymen, increases with every review of the momentous contest. While I repeat my obligations to the army in general, I should do injustice to my own feelings not to acknowledge in this place the peculiar services and distinguished merits of the gentlemen who have been attached to my person during the war. It was impossible the choice of confidential officers to compose my family should have been more fortunate. Permit me, sir, to recommend in particular those who have continued in the service to the present moment, as worthy of the favorable notice and patronage of Congress.

“I consider it as an indispensable duty to close this last act of my official life by commending the interests of our dearest country to the protection of Almighty God, and those who have the superintendence of them to His holy keeping.

“Having now finished the work assigned me, I retire from the great theatre of action, and, bidding an affectionate farewell to this august body, under whose orders I have so long acted, I here offer my commission, and take my leave of all the employments of public life.”

It took Washington three minutes to deliver his remarks which were kindly received by General Mifflin, the President of that body. Washington immediately exited the assemblage and rode directly to Mount Vernon. The greatest leader in the world had proven himself the most humble.

He was only forty-four years of age.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 4, 2004 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 3, 2004 | Permalink

This week’s Christian Booksellers Association in Atlanta

Our good friend and yokefellow in the cause of Christ, Gary Demar, president of American Vision, visited with us on Tuesday of this week. Gary’s Biblical Worldview magazine has the best articles of any publication currently in circulation of which I am aware on developing and applying a Christian worldview to current events. If you do not currently subscribe, you must. While so many in recent years have set aside the rich philosophical victories of the past for the new and theologically trendy, Gary continues to hold the line.

Also pictured in this image are Phil Lancaster of Patriarch Magazine, Wesley Strackbein of the Vision Forum and Steve McGarvey, a good friend, former student of mine and professional writer.

Last year the Phillips family had the honor of visiting the Honolulu Bible Church where I preached a message on the Fifth Commandment. Under the leadership of Pastor Bob and the elders of the assembly, the Honolulu Bible Church has raised an uncompromising standard for Christ, and has excelled at finding Christ-honoring creative means to reach the people of Oahu with the Faith. One of their most impressive ministries is a coffee and book shop they have created in the middle of town called Covenant Books and Coffee which offers magnificent coffee, gourmet sandwiches and uncompromising books and literature. Visitors to the shop get a free book if they can name all the images of the Reformers which hang on the wall. It was a blessing to see Kevin Condo, who helps to manage Covenant Books and Coffee, and who has a real passion for the Reformed faith.

I spent nearly two hours with film producers Rich and Dave Christianos as we discussed a biblical vision for film and culture, and the San Antonio Independent Christian Film Festival. (Rich is serving as a judge and will be bringing some workshops on the future of independent Christian film.) Rich is the director/producer of Timechangers, a crucial film on why morality can not be taught without Jesus Christ. Dave is the Director/Producer of Pamela’s Prayer, a film about a girl who remained physically pure, not even kissing until reaching the altar.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 3, 2004 | Permalink

In his landmark book The Mythology of Science, R.J. Rushdoony exposes the myth of the “objective scientist.” He offers numerous examples of the way in which so-called unbiased scientists are as driven by emotions and private agendas in their analysis and priorities as everyone else on the planet. Applying a basic thesis of his mentor Cornelious Van Til, Rushdoony explains that brute factuality does not exist. All facts must be interpreted. The ability of the scientist to interpret facts is conditioned by a host of unprovable pre-theoretical (and usually unspoken) assumptions about reality which he brings to the table. Ultimately these presuppositions are driven by religious assumptions about man, the universe, God and reality.

I was reminded of religious nature of scientists today when NASA presented its latest remarkable images from Saturn taken by the Cassini probe. The panel of “ring” scientists making the presentation were simply gushing in their description of their discoveries. One gal (the primary NASA spokesman) was not simply drooling over the images of Saturn, she seemed to describe it as a highlight of her life, and was so overflowing with superlatives that she appeared to be having a “religious experience.” To put it another way (and to borrow a line from South Pacific), she was simply “as corny as Kansas in Autumn.”

In fairness, however, the images are spectacular and worthy of high praise.

After becoming the first spacecraft to enter Saturn’s orbit, Cassini sent back this image of a portion of the planet’s rings. It shows the sunlit side of the rings

Nasa writes: “Saturn’s peaceful beauty invites the Cassini spacecraft for a closer look in this natural color view, taken during the spacecraft’s approach to the planet. By this point in the approach sequence, Saturn was large enough that two narrow angle camera images were required to capture an end-to-end view of the planet, its delicate rings and several of its icy moons. The composite is made entire from these two images.”

This is one of the first images taken by the Cassini spacecraft after it successfully entered Saturn’s orbit. It was taken by the spacecraft’s narrow angle camera.

This image shows a close-up view of a density wave in Saturn’s A ring. It was taken by the narrow angle camera on the Cassini spacecraft after successful entry into Saturn’s orbit. The view shows the dark, or unlit, side of the rings.

This image is of Saturn’s moon Pheobe.

Another angle on Phoebe

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 2, 2004 | Permalink

What a privilege to be featured on the national broadcast of Point of View this week. Marlin Maddoux, the founder and host or POV, went to be with the Lord earlier this year, but his spirit of truth lives on in his successors. For an hour I visited with Penna Dexter and call in guests to discuss not only the horrific implications of women at war, but also the more defining issue; the reason why such a strategy is prohibited biblically. We addressed the tragedy of Christians refusing to hold the current president accountable for his unbiblical policies regarding homosexuality and women at war, the farce of the combat vs. non-combat distinction, the effeminizing implication of women at war on the men of this nation, and the call for registering women alongside of men pursuant to a potential future draft.

Not surprisingly, today’s Washington Post featured an editorial written by former special assistant to President Richard Nixon, Noel Koch, calling for a mandatory draft. Also, not surprising, the UPI reported that Iraqi rebel leader Abu Musab Zarqawi’s network has been instructed to kidnap a female U.S. soldier. UPI reports that “Defense sources told the [Washington] Times, Zarqawi’s network wants to further shock the West by kidnapping servicewomen and displaying them on videotape. He also said the terrorists might be planning “payback” for a U.S. female soldier seen taking part in the abuse of Iraqi inmates at Abu Ghraib prison near Baghdad.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 1, 2004 | Permalink

I weekly receive letters from Christians who are looking for my perspective on various wars — past, present, and future. My simple answer is this: In the context of our nation, for a war to be legitimate, it must meet the biblical standard that a just war is a defensive war, and it must meet the Constitutional standard which requires a formal declaration of war by Congress. If we fail to meet either of these standards then we as a nation are acting like covenant breakers and should not presume on the good favor of the Lord over our efforts.

Not only must wars be biblical in their inception, but they must be fought biblically. War is not a justification for setting aside the moral laws of God. For example, we are not free to explicitly target non-combatants, to mutilate or torture opponents, (who like us are made in the image of God), or to use women in combat, (either because we have a shortage of men, or for reasons of political correctness.)

The two men who had the greatest negative influence overthrowing biblical principles of just war in American history, and whose behavior set the stage for 20th century Americans to set aside the doctrine of “women and children first,” were John Brown and General William Tecumseh Sherman. Both men introduced forms of terrorism to America, though one had an official government sanction. Brown terrorized and shot men, women, and children with whom he disagreed. He was subsidized and lionized for his murders by the Northern Unitarian media elite known as the Secret Six, who believed killing little children was a necessary cost to defeating slavery.

Sherman also waged wars on women and children, displacing tens of thousands, depriving them of food by burning their crops to the ground, pillaging the private property of the women in the many communities, and deliberately seeking to break their spirit by utterly laying waste to their ancestral homes, churches, and communities. His cruelties were epic and his strategies tantamount to cultural genocide. I was reminded of him while driving through Atlanta yesterday, one of the few major Eastern cities in America of which there is no surviving legacies from its pre-Civil War history (which in the case of Atlanta was nearly two centuries old). Sherman burnt to the ground everything, including the dozens and dozens of church buildings (except two being used by his troops) with the goal that the people would not even be able to worship their God.

Posted by Doug Phillips on July 1, 2004 | Permalink