June 2008 Archives

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 30, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 30, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 30, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 30, 2008 | Permalink

Like many of the pictures from Scotland, this can be viewed in a larger format by clicking on the image.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 29, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 29, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 28, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Scots, wha hae wi’ Wallace bled,
Scots, wham Bruce has aften led,
Welcome to your gory bed,
Or to victorie. Now’s the day, and now’s the hour;
See the front of battle lour;
See approach proud Edward’s power
Chains and slaverie!

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

It all began when my six-year-old decided he would go where no Phillips dared to go—into the culinary world of spiced “awful.” Not to be outdone by my brave young son I decided to join him for a dish of haggis. That was three days ago, and we have eaten haggis every day since then, including for various breakfasts, lunches, and dinners. Honestly, it taste great. The critical thing is that it is not best to think too hard about what you are eating, its presentation, or its smell.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

The Scots are unique for many things, not the least of which is that they have a national dish that every true Scotsman loves and makes a regular part of his diet. And not just any dish, but one which truly reflects the moxie of a people known for their ferociously independent spirit. The dish is haggis, and the recipe speaks for itself:

Set of sheep’s heart, lungs, and liver (cleaned by a butcher)
One beef bung
3 cups finely chopped suet
One cup medium ground oatmeal
Two medium onions, finely chopped
One cup beef stock
One teaspoon salt
½ teaspoon pepper
One teaspoon nutmeg
½ teaspoon mace

Method: Trim off any excess fat and sinew from the sheep’s intestine and, if present, discard the windpipe. Place in a large pan, cover with water and bring to the boil. Reduce the heat and simmer for an hour or possibly longer to ensure that they are all tender. Drain and cool.

Here is Robert Burns’s address to a haggis:

Fair fa’ your honest, sonsie face,
Great chieftain o the puddin’ race!
Aboon them a’ ye tak your place,
Painch, tripe, or thairm:
Weel are ye wordy of a grace
As lang’s my arm....

Ye Pow`rs, wha mak mankind your care,
And dish them out their bill o fare,
Auld Scotland wants nae skinking ware
That jaups in luggies:
But, If ye wish her gratefu prayer,
Gie her a Haggis!

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 27, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 26, 2008 | Permalink

...which consists of a kingdom made up of two well-loved dolls and a patient cat which actually endures being dragged by the tail.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Jim Zes by the Palace of Holyrood.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Honor sits by the window of John Knox in his home pretending to be the great reformer of Scotland.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Dr. Joe Morecraft walks where both Cromwell and Covenanters once laid siege.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

I shot this image of the original Thin Red Line which is kept in Edinburgh Castle. It is a highly evocative picture portraying the Scottish defense against the Russians during the 1850s.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 25, 2008 | Permalink

To the glorious drone of the bagpipes being expertly played by a master piper, one hundred pilgrims—home educators and special guests from across the United States—entered our banquet hall in Edinburgh, Scotland to inaugurate the 2008 Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour.

We are so grateful to the Lord for this special opportunity to study the lives of great Reformers, and to delve deeply into the rich the history of a country which, more than any other modern nation, was responsible for the theological foundations of American independence. The Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour has been years in the making. It was a much anticipated event limited to under one hundred guests, and which filled up in approximately 70 hours of the formal announcement of the details.

For our opening banquet, guests were treated to really superior service and Scottish cuisine provided by our gracious hosts. The international wait staff provided the finest service and customer care I can remember experiencing.

Each guest was presented with a songbook containing hymns and songs of Scotland to be sung throughout the trip. Noted Scottish and Celtic balladeer, Mr. Charlie Zahm, will be traveling with us to each location and leading us in the historic songs from Scotland’s past. Even after a long journey to Edinburgh, Charlie was in prime form for this evening’s opening banquet.

Many of our guests are from Scottish and Scotch-Irish descent, and some, like historian Bill Potter, are direct descendants of the martyrs who died for “Christ’s Crown and Covenant” during the killing times.

Honor and I especially enjoyed listening to Charlie sing the Vision Forum Ministries theme song “Be Thou My Vision.”

To fire the opening salvo of the 2008 Scotland Faith and Freedom Tour, I presented a message entitled “Christianity and Great Britain: A 2000 Year Perspective in One Hour.” The message covered the history of the Church in the British Isles beginning with the coming of the Roman Empire, through Columba, to the Scottish Reformation, to the Scottish Enlightenment and beyond.

We are deeply honored to be joined by Dr. Joe Morecraft and his wonderful wife Becky. Joe is one of America’s leading experts on Reformation Church history. This will be his second trip to Scotland in 35 years.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 24, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 24, 2008 | Permalink

We biked to this part of the Royal Mile which was once called “The End of the World” beacuse it marked the edge of the city.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 24, 2008 | Permalink

I shot this image earlier today. The view from the hill allows you to see a panoramic perspective on the ancient city of Edinburgh, from the Palace of Hollyrood—the home of Mary Queen of Scots, to the Royal Mile, to the Firth of Forth. And a careful examination of the many church steeples, buildings and roads reveals the architecture of various centuries side by side. One can see the influence of the Greeks and Romans in the enlightenment architecture, of the Roman Catholic church in the Gothic, as well as the unique style of the Reformation churches with their emphasis on worshiping God free of potential icons of mediatorial idolatry. Each style reflects the worldview priorities of the designers. In this sense, the diversity of architectural styles helps one to grasp the century long battles between various streams of theologies and philosophies which have blessed and sometimes plagued Scottish thinking. From the tremendous theological hope and precision of the Scottish Reformers like John Knox, to the chaos of enlightenment theorists like David Hume. The monuments and buildings of both are side by side in the Scottish capitol.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 23, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 23, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 23, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 23, 2008 | Permalink

...at least it was fun pretending.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

First rang on May 31, 1859.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Read about him here.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Faith and Providence on the steps of Westminster Abbey.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 21, 2008 | Permalink

Joshua preparing blogs from a London flat for www.Ballantynethebrave.com.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 20, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 20, 2008 | Permalink

Ramses II.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 20, 2008 | Permalink

When I was a boy I used to wonder a great deal about what grand mysteries of the ancient world might be available to us had the Library of Alexandria survived. Today my dreams were rekindled as my family and I visited the British Museum in London where we saw one of the most significant collections of antiquities from the ancient world available on Earth.

Each exhibit—each treasure trove-filled room—is better than the last. The very design of the museum has a gloriously 19th century feel to it. One expects Phineas Fogg to make an appearance at any moment. Everywhere you look there are seemingly never-ending shelves filled with treasure, thousands of well-known first edition books from centuries past, business ledgers of King Nebuchadnezzer, and so much more—glorious!

The biggest problem with a trip to the British Museum is the sense of frustration and genuine panic you feel after a half day of viewing stunning, one-of-a-kind antiquities, you realize that you have covered less than 3% of the museum.

Modern museums lean upon high-tech displays designed to amuse people into paying attention to history. But not at the British Museum. Here the one-of-a kind artifacts need no computer simulation games or fancy graphic displays. More is said with less. The raw enormity of many items in the collections grabs the attention, and one can not help wondering about the men who documented their own lives in stone and marble, and whose creations (ranging from business ledgers to the idolatrous rocks of worship) have long out-survived their nations.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 19, 2008 | Permalink

The British Museum is simply massive, and with construction presently underway, it is not possible to get a full panoramic view of this treasure trove of knowledge and history. I had to cover a lot of ground before I realized the enormity of the property and its contents. Even then, it was not until I began researching everything the museum has to offer that I grasped the sheer scope of the building which covers 13.5 acres of exhibition space, let alone the diverse antiquities collections it houses. Since its establishment in 1753 the British Museum has undergone numerous changes and face-lifts. Today, you can see a visually pleasing combination of England’s grand neo-classical style side by side with the modern Great Court which was completed in 2000 as the largest covered court in Europe. Each of the 1,656 glass panes is individually shaped.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 19, 2008 | Permalink

One of the beauties of the British Museum is the accessibility of the antiquities. Few of the big, impressive items of Assyria, Egypt, and Babylon are behind glass. Furthermore, they allow you to take non-flash photography which is how I was able to snap these images. Click on the image below to see a magnificently preserved relief of a lion hunt.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 19, 2008 | Permalink

The interesting likely origin of the word “bad” — “effeminate man.” From the Oxford English Dictionary (OE = Old English, ME = Middle English):

Prof. Zupitza, with great probability, sees in bad-de (2 syll.) the ME. repr. of OE. bæddel ‘homo utriusque generis, hermaphrodita’ ... and the derivative bædling ‘effeminate fellow, womanish man ...’ applied contemptuously; assuming a later adjectival use, as in yrming, wrecca, and loss of final l as in mycel, muche, lytel, lyte, wencel, wench(e. This perfectly suits the ME. form and sense, and accounts satisfactorily for the want of early written examples. And it is free from the many historical and phonetic difficulties of the derivation proposed by Sarrazin [which ends up relating it to an OE. word meaning ‘forced, oppressed’] .... No other suggestion yet offered is of any importance; the Celtic words sometimes compared are out of the question.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 18, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 18, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 18, 2008 | Permalink

Jubilee returns from the Christian Home Educators of Colorado Conference.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 15, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 14, 2008 | Permalink

What a tremendous event to the glory of God! This year Christian Home Educators of Colorado brought one of the more encouraging and visionary home education conferences to date. From beginning to end, the messages focused on both the principled foundations of the home school mission, as well as the practical application. The event also included a one day track on entrepreneurship, and included groundbreaking announcements from CHEC concerning their work to create a database of opportunities for home educators interested in mentorship and apprenticeship-based approaches to higher education and vocational training. It was an honor to once again bring complementary messages with my good friends Dr. Voddie Baucham and Kevin Swanson, both of whom touched the hearts of the families in attendance with their courageous messages. Also pictured above are CHEC leaders Michael Cheney and Bill Roach, two of the notable men behind what has proven to be one of America’s larger and more successful home education events.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 14, 2008 | Permalink

...with the wonderful Swanson girls.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 14, 2008 | Permalink

“Approximately 65% of the wives in America work at least a 40 hour job outside the home. Their average take-home pay is $740 per month. After child care, transportation, work-related clothing and eating out, they net approximately $370. In net wages, they work for approximately $2.30 an hour.”

How To Manage Your Money, Larry Burkett, May 15, 1988 (Issue 126)

As quoted by Doug Phillips, in the message “Getting the Big Picture for Family Entrepreneurship,” CHEC Conference, June 12, 2008.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 13, 2008 | Permalink

Vision Forum is offering a really exceptional set of tapes from Dr. S.M. Davis for sale this week. The topics range from “The Influence of Older Children on Younger Children,” to “How to Keep Children from Becoming Bitter,” to “What to Expect From a Twelve-Year-Old.” Browse the entire set of S.M. Davis messages. Here are some experiences and thoughts from Beall on the subject:

One of the many benefits of spending the day with my children is helping them learn to work with all their siblings and iron out bumps along the way. Sometimes a big dose of perspective is needed.

Last week, we listened to a very special CD: The Influence of Older Children on Younger Children. Actually, we listened to it twice. The first time was in the car. We had over an hour’s drive, and I had a captive audience. When the CD ended, there was prolonged silence in the car. I looked in the rear view mirror. They weren’t asleep. They were sober and contemplative. A few days later, I collected all the children again, including those who had been out of town for the first listening. This time, we all sat in the living room with notepad and pen. Yep, they took notes this time. There were more serious faces as they wrote down the ten points outlined by Dr. S.M. Davis.

When it was over, we talked about the ten points, and then I asked the children to write down two questions and think and pray about them: 1. How might I have hurt my relationship with my younger brothers and sisters? 2. How can I repair those relationships using the principles outlined by Dr. Davis?

Frankly, these are basic biblical principles the children have been taught since they were little. But it’s easy to forget them in the rush and flurry of daily life. The simple, straightforward reminder from Dr. Davis to brothers and sisters to say “I love you” to each other, to look for opportunities to encourage, to teach, and to befriend has been a powerful shot in the arm. Maybe we will listen to it again next week.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 12, 2008 | Permalink

Dan Becker is one of the up-and-coming pro-life leaders in the nation. His work to battle for the life of the unborn as the president of the Georgia Right to Life, as a leader in the movement to restore biblical ethics to the pro-life cause, as a defender of the personhood of the unborn, and on the broader issues of biomedical ethics is noteworthy. Dan forwarded to me this article written by him on the importance of maintaining a 100% pro-life, anti-abortion position in all cases including rape, incest, and ectopic pregnancies. This is the formal position of Vision Forum, the Roman Catholic Church, and numerous leaders and organizations within the pro-life community. We all stand for the proposition that self-conscious, intentional abortion is never justified, and that both parents and the medical community must respect and honor the personhood of both the mother and the child. Intent is everything. We must never intend to abort the child. (Arguments which justify intentional abortion based on situation ethics and appeal to emotions are specious and contrary to Scripture—see A Declaration of Life.)

This means that Christians in crisis must look to the various options other than direct, willful killing of a baby as a solution to crisis. These might include good faith efforts to transplant the baby (notwithstanding the unlikelihood of success based on present technologies). These may also involve other actions which reflect a good faith effort to save the life of both the mother and child and recognizing the personhood of both, but where such good faith efforts may have an unintended, secondary consequence of the death of the child. Dan’s excellent article makes these points clearly. Professing Christians who have absorbed the emotional fear-mongering tactics of Planned Parenthood, with its appeal to misinformation, hatred, and utilitarian ethics to defend some abortions, even while professing to reject the larger objectives and goals of Planned Parenthood, will not like Dan’s conclusions. But, in my personal opinion, the problem is with their ethics, not Dan’s argument.

Is Innocent Human Life Ever Negotiable? by Dan Becker, President, Georgia Right to Life

As we enter the 21st century, Georgia Right to Life finds itself in the middle of a raging debate regarding the future of the pro-life movement. As we face new and emerging medical technologies, many tough questions are raised. “Should we in the pro-life movement, accept that some classes of human life are expendable? For instance, should children conceived during the treatment of infertility, placed in a frozen state, and subsequently abandoned by their parents . . . be protected by law? Should we allow rape and incest exceptions that make it lawful to kill a child based on its manner of conception? What about a woman facing a life threatening ectopic pregnanc . . . what concerns, if any, should she address before seeking medical help?

IMAGO DEI and the Pro-life Message in the 21st Century

Genesis 1:27 says, “So God created man in His own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (ESV). This verse is the foundation of human dignity throughout Western history. “Imago Dei” is Latin for the “image of God.” To be created imago Dei means being endowed with an immortal spirit, a capacity to know and be known by God, a measure of autonomy and free will in the areas of thought and action, each of which separate us from the rest of creation.

Because we bear the image of God, all mankind, and by extension, each and every human life, has a “specialness” and worth that demands respect. Each human life, from its earliest stage of development, is a unique Person which bears God’s likeness, and should have the same protection of law that is afforded other “persons” in our society. For this reason, all human life should be respected in law. This respect is due regardless of the manner of conception, whether through the marital act, fertilized “in vitro” (IVF), or through the “ex utero” process of Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer (SCNT, otherwise know as cloning) .

Our United States Constitution limits its protection to “born” persons. This limitation implicitly violates the doctrine of imago Dei, and has resulted in a branch of the pro-life movement now focusing its educational and legislative efforts on promoting “Personhood” as the answer to the emerging biotech issues facing us in the 21st century.

IMAGO DEI: Hard Cases Make Bad Law
“You shall not murder” (Exodus 20:13). This biblical command seems very straightforward in its application. However, when applied to pro-life legislation, we are told that we must make exceptions to this command in order to be effective in the legislature. We respectfully disagree.

A significant number of pro-life laws have been passed in Georgia since 1998, yet in NO case has a “rape and incest” exception been introduced into the law! Since 2000, we have consistently labored to refute this flawed logic by denying our endorsement to any politician who believes otherwise. By God’s grace, Georgia is currently ranked as the 14th most pro-life state in the nation. If we are successful in passing a “juridical personhood” bill (a bill that would protect human life conceived in vitro or ex utero) in 2009, we will advance into the top 5. We went from a 3% pro-life legislure in 2002 to a 53% legislature by 2006. Our insistence on the principle of protecting all human life has resulted in a consistent pro-life standard and message and has produced very pragmatic ends.

We are told by many within the pro-life movement that we must do whatever is necessary “to save as many babies as we can” and on the surface this would appear prudent. The problem is that it requires that we materially participate with legislators who demand that we negotiate and permit the compromise of some human life. Their argument is that it assures that we achieve the highest level of justice that this culture will afford. We allege that if you “aim at nothing, you are sure to hit it!” Pope Benedict XVI has wisely said, “It is necessary to bear concrete witness to the fact that respect for life is the first form of justice that must be applied.” Our aim is to provide a concrete foundation in promoting justice for ALL innocent human life. We have refused to materially participate with any legislator or support his or her legislation if it calls for the destruction of innocent human life in any case other than to save the life of the mother.

Is material participation immoral? We believe it is when it is unbiblical, freely accepts bad side effects, and establishes bad precedents. Mr. Clarke Forsyth, President, Americans United for Life says, “The first principle of morality is to pursue the good and avoid evil. We are to individually turn from evil and do good. This includes an injunction against calculating to do evil in order that good may come. We must also avoid participating in the evil actions of others . . . material cooperation can be morally wrong, just as it can be wrong freely to accept bad side effects. If material cooperation would be unfair or give bad example, or if one has a responsibility to testify to the truth by avoiding even this much association with evil then one should not cooperate materially.” We couldn’t agree more!

Deuteronomy 24:16 states that “nor shall children be put to death for their parents; only for their own crimes may persons be put to death” (NRSV). If we posit that unborn children are “persons” then we can clearly see that God’s word forbids abortion in the cases of rape and incest. To allow our pro-life organizations and pro-life legislators to promote a compromise of this nature damages the very core argument of imago Dei and removes the very sure foundation that all innocent human life should be protected from fertilization until natural death. This is not only a bad example, but it materially cooperates with evil. We have rejected this compromise in Georgia since 2000 and have successfully promoted a culture of life that has been reflected in our laws. In 2006, our Board voted to focus all of our legislative energies on incrementally promoting Personhood (www.personhood.net) as opposed to seeking incremental gains that simply regulate abortion.

IMAGO DEI: The Life of the Mother Exception We admit that a serious medical condition exists whenever a woman is diagnosed with an ectopic pregnancy. In very rare cases, ectopic pregnancy has resulted in a live birth. Some respected publications put the odds at 60 million to 1. It is always life threatening whenever the embryo attaches to the fallopian tube. There is no medical record of a live birth of an ectopic tubal pregnancy. This diagnosis requires medical intervention in an attempt to successfully treat TWO patients . . . the mother AND the child, otherwise both will perish. To date our medical knowledge and technology is inadequate to save the child. It is estimated that we are just a few years away from the development of an ectogenic womb that may permit the successful treatment of this tragic case.

Does this mean that all approaches to the treatment of an ectopic tubal pregnancy are in keeping with the biblical doctrine of imago Dei? Sadly, no. Many physicians administer the abortifacient drug called methotrexate to patients with early tubal ectopic pregnancies. The object is to avoid the more serious complications that can come from the invasive surgery which removes a section of the fallopian tube containing the dead or dying child and renders the associated ovary sterile. A problem exists when there are multiple fertilized embryos which have successfully implanted in the uterus and would be aborted in the attempt to promote spontaneous regression of the dead fetus. This is a well documented medical scenario. This would entail material participation in the death of innocent human life. The official position statement of the Association of Pro-life Physicians says this, “It is only ethical to remove the tubal pregnancy if spontaneous resolution does not occur after watchful waiting and if the physician is 100% certain that there are no twins. At this point, the embryo in the fallopian tube is likely to be dead and, even if not, the death is unavoidable and unintentional, and the procedure is necessary to save the life of the mother. **In conclusion, there are no occasions in which the intentional killing of the pre-born child is justified.”

Divine law supports the scientific fact that life and personhood begin at fertilization or its equivalent. The 21st century challenges this fact in a host of new battlefields centered in emerging technologies and bio-tech science. If we are unsuccessful in combating the attack on the doctrine of imago Dei, then I fear that we will be inundated with a frankenscience straight from the pages of Huxley’s Brave New World. In the 20th century it was enough that we were pro-life, but in the words of evangelical bioethicist Nigel Cameron, “In the 21st century we must also be pro-human.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 12, 2008 | Permalink

At Vision Forum, we are passionate about life. That means being passionate about babies. We believe that the Bible should be taken seriously when it reminds us that children are a “reward” from God. We reject as unbiblical the spirit of selfishness which has contributed to government-subsidized, legalized abortion, and the contraceptive mentality, which often leads to non-clinical abortions from abortifacient contraceptives like the Pill. And to the extent that the Church has participated in either, we must acknowledge that we have blood on our hands. The consequences are far reaching.

One such consequence is our population crisis. And yes there is a big one. But its not an overpopulation crisis we are facing, but precisely the opposite. A growing number of think tanks are beginning to present the data of the demographic nightmare we are bequeathing to our children. Hoover is one such think tank. The February/March 2005 edition of their publication Policy Review, reveals the following:

Global fertility rates have fallen by half since 1972. For a modern nation to replace its population, experts explain, the average woman needs to have 2.1 children over the course of her lifetime. Not a single industrialized nation today has a fertility rate of 2.1, and most are well below replacement level.

In Ben Franklin’s day, by contrast, America averaged eight births per woman. American birth rates today are the highest in the industrialized world — yet even those are nonetheless just below the replacement level of 2.1. Moreover, that figure is relatively high only because of America’s substantial immigrant population. Fertility rates among native born American women are now far below what they were even in the 1930s, when the Great Depression forced a sharp reduction in family size.

Population decline is by no means restricted to the industrial world. Remarkably, the sharp rise in American fertility rates at the height of the baby boom — 3.8 children per woman — was substantially above Third World fertility rates today. From East Asia to the Middle East to Mexico, countries once fabled for their high fertility rates are now falling swiftly toward or below replacement levels. In 1970, a typical woman in the developing world bore six children. Today, that figure is about 2.7. In scale and rapidity, that sort of fertility decline is historically unprecedented. By 2002, fertility rates in 20 developing countries had fallen below replacement levels. 2002 also witnessed a dramatic reversal by demographic experts at the United Nations, who for the first time said that world population was ultimately headed down, not up. These decreases in human fertility cover nearly every region of the world, crossing all cultures, religions, and forms of government.

Declining birth rates mean that societies everywhere will soon be aging to an unprecedented degree. Increasing life expectancy is also contributing to the aging of the world’s population. In 1900, American life expectancy at birth was 47 years. Today it is 76. By 2050, one out of five Americans will be over age 65, making the U.S. population as a whole markedly older than Florida’s population today. Striking as that demographic graying may be, it pales before projections for countries like Italy and Japan. The United Nations estimates that by 2050, 42 percent of all people in Italy and Japan will be aged 60 or older.

In short, the West is beginning to experience significant demographic changes, with substantial cultural consequences. Historically, the aged have made up only a small portion of society, and the rearing of children has been the chief concern. Now children will become a small minority, and society’s central problem will be caring for the elderly. Yet even this assumes that societies consisting of elderly citizens at levels of 20, 30, even 40 or more percent can sustain themselves at all. That is not obvious.

Population decline is also set to ramify geometrically. As population falls, the pool of potential mothers in each succeeding generation shrinks. So even if, well into the process, there comes a generation of women with a higher fertility rate than their mothers’, the momentum of population decline could still be locked in. Population decline may also be cemented into place by economics. To support the ever-growing numbers of elderly, governments may raise taxes on younger workers. That would make children even less affordable than they are today, decreasing the size of future generations still further.

If worldwide fertility rates reach levels now common in the developing world (and that is where they seem headed), within a few centuries, the world’s population could shrink below the level of America’s today. Of course, it’s unlikely that mankind will simply cease to exist for failure to reproduce. But the critical point is that we cannot reverse that course unless something happens to substantially increase fertility rates. And whatever might raise fertility rates above replacement level will almost certainly require fundamental cultural change.

Why does modern social life translate into the lower birth rates that spark all those wider implications? Urbanization is one major factor. In a traditional agricultural society, children are put to work early. They also inherit family land, using its fruits to care for aging parents. In a modern urban economy, on the other hand, children represent a tremendous expense, and one increasingly unlikely to be returned to parents in the form of wealth or care. With the growth of a consumer economy, potential parents are increasingly presented with a zero-sum choice between children and more consumer goods and services for themselves.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 12, 2008 | Permalink

They came from nearly fifty states—four thousand men, women, and children. They came to celebrate the providential origins of our nation on the 400th birthday of the founding of Jamestown. They came to give America a birthday party dedicated to the glory of God. And from the opening ceremonies which involved the reenactment of the “First Landing” on Monday, June 11th, to the glorious closing fireworks on the evening of Saturday, June 16th, the Christian families in attendance prayed, played, feasted, and rejoiced. By God’s grace. the event was blessed from beginning to end, and the Lord alone recived the glory, honor, and praise.

The Jameston Quadricentennial: A Celebration of Our Providential History was the most significant and far reaching event in the history of Vision Forum Ministries. Designed to be a distinctively Christian birthday party which took the best of the great traditions of centennial celebrations past, the event exceeded all of our expectations for its beauty and power as a testimony of the mighty hand of God in history. May the Lord Jesus Christ be praised for His lovingkindness and His mercies.

The Jamestown Quadricentennial included events (often running concurrently) in five cities—Hampton, Charles City, Williamsburg, Yorktown, and Jamestown. Nearly a thousand celebrants travelled in hot air balloons. More than five thousand people participated in thirty-five, two-hour Faith and Freedom Tours that featured some of the great teachers and preachers of our day. Fifteen hundred people travelled down the James River on boat tours that presented history from a providential perspective. Just under one thousand boys and girls of all ages marched in costume, with the flags of fifty states waving and fifes and drummers playing in a grand and glorious parade on Friday. A similar number marched again on Saturday.

Over the course of the week celebrants dedicated an historic monument, attended more than twenty-five lectures and reenactments. They watched “The Marriage of Pocahontas,” met the grandson of the tenth president of the United States, shook hands with President Theodore Roosevelt, and dialogued with Princess Pocahontas. Some of them searched for answers to an historic mystery, and one of those treasure hunting sleuths became the “Fifth Trustee” and heir to a cache of four hundred gold coins. Celebrants listened to the blast of the cannons, the sounds of fifes and drums, and they gathered under the evening sky for a simply spectacular fireworks display.

But more than anything else, the families in attendance were able to take a week of their lives to stop, rejoice, give thanks to the Lord, and praise the name of Jesus Christ for his many mercies in the life of our God-blessed nation.

The Children’s Parade marches through Fort Pocahontas.

Patriot girls at the Planting of the Cross and First Landing held at Archer’s Hope.

The Academy of the Arts presented a moving Gospel portrayal of the Jamestown story.

Lady Rebecca and her maidens en route to the Court of the King.

Celebrants test their skills with fencing practice.

A young soldier on a providential history boat tour.

Jonathan Falwell with Howard Phillips.

Mark Beliles tells the story of the Great Awakening on the streets of Williamsburg.

One of the answers to the Jamestown 400: Our National Treasure Hunt could be found in this building.

Becky Morecraft, the Poet Laureate of the Jamestown Quadricentennial, presents her thrilling masterpiece.

Families pray for God’s blessing on this nation.

Daniel Boone and Davy Crockett made more than one appearance.

Reenactors from the Fort Pocahontas encampment.

A scene from “The Marriage of Pocahontas.”

Super sleuths vie for position in the final physical hunt for the treasure of Elias Boudinot.

At the Governor’s Palace in Colonial Williamsburg.

Fathers and daughters enjoying sweet fellowship.

Boys and men gather to remember the fathers of Jamestown.

President Teddy Roosevelt returns from the 1907 Tercentenary to address the 2007 Quadricentennial.

Little ones listen to speakers under the 3500-person Jamestown Quadricentennial tent.

Click on the below images to see an enlarged version of each picture.

Princess Pocahontas helps to lead the Children’s Parade.

The parade took the marchers all around Fort Pocahontas.

The parade reaches the big tent.

Dr. Peter Lillback addresses Jamestown.

HSLDA Attorney Chris Klicka receives John Smith Award.

Huzzah! Huzzah! Huzzah!

Jamestown flooded with Christians.

Ezra Hill is a bold spokesman for the Gospel of Jesus Christ. He is also one of the Tuskegee Airmen of the Second World War, and a Congressional Gold Medal Winner. He addressed one of the gatherings at the Jamestown Quadricentennial, and is pictured above with historian Bill Potter and Leonard Holyfield.

Children charge Redoubt #10 on the battlefield of Yorktown.

About one thousand celebrants came in costume.

Captain John Smith addresses Jamestown Quadricentennial celebrants.

Dedicating to the Lord the Jamestown Children’s Memorial.

Boys gather for the children’s parade.

Sleuths at work on the Jamestown 400: Our National Treasure Hunt.

A fellowship of grateful Christians and Americans.

Celebrating the providence of God from the sky.

Thousands gather for evening performances and messages.

Reenactors demonstrate colonial firearms.

Gathering around the Jamestown Children’s Memorial.

Marshall Foster leads a Faith and Freedom Tour.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 11, 2008 | Permalink

It is hard to believe that a year has gone by.

The Jamestown Quadricentennial: A Celebration of America’s Providential History was not simply the largest event we have ever hosted, but was one of the happiest weeks of my life. What a joy to gather with 4,000 freedom loving Christians who simply wanted to rejoice and say thank you to the Lord!

Here at the Phillips home and the offices of Vision Forum we are feeling very nostalgic. Memories are precious to us, and this memory was simply glorious. Later this year we will have some big announcements to make about future events that will rival Jamestown, but for this week, we are just enjoying the blessing of all the fruit which came from last year’s victorious event.

Here is how you can help. Send me your favorite stories from last year’s celebration, or perhaps a testimony of God’s blessing from the study of His providential history. I will take my three favorite reports, post them on the blog, and send each person a $50 gift certificate. Keep ‘em to the point. Short and sweet wins the day.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 11, 2008 | Permalink

Earlier today news broke about GOP nominee John McCain turning down a meeting with Dr. Billy Graham. Apparently, Dr. Graham’s office never initiated this request in the first place. According to Newsmax.com who broke the original story:

On Monday, Larry Ross, a spokesman for Graham, issued a statement to the press confirming that Billy Graham was unaware of any communication between the McCain campaign and his office or his son’s.

“It would be highly unusual and out of character for Mr. Graham to initiate such a meeting, and there has been no contact between the McCain campaign and his office. In fact, Mr. Graham has not met or been in contact with any candidates during the current primary process.

“If he had, it has been his personal policy through the years to avoid partisanship by meeting with representatives from both parties to address spiritual concerns,” Ross stated.

Graham’s spokesman also noted that Jacobs’ offer for a meeting was made independent of Graham, as the initial Newsmax report made clear.

“Upon further inquiry I understand that two people unaffiliated with either Billy or Franklin Graham apparently independently, without any knowledge by the [Billy Graham Evangelistic Association], tried to broker a meeting between Mr. McCain and the evangelist. Apparently it was their indirect and unofficial involvement that was declined.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 9, 2008 | Permalink

During the 1980s I had the privilege of serving for a short time as the personal driver for Dr. Billy Graham. During that brief season I spent about twelve hours a day with Dr. Graham and drove him to meet many fascinating individuals including religious leaders, foreign dignitaries, and even heads of state.

One of the most memorable times I spent with Dr. Graham occurred about two days before the presidential inauguration when we were driving through Washington D.C. He would point to various buildings and tell me the stories of the great men with whom he had met at those locations over the last half of a century, including presidents and foreign leaders.

I was surprised to learn this week that Republican presidential candidate John McCain has formally declined to meet with Dr. Graham, thus making him (I believe) the first major Republican presidential candidate to do so in the last quarter of a century or more.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 9, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, worldview, and ethics. During our three-hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy this year requires the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including the question: May one support an unqualified candidate who advocates the shedding of innocent blood, if it appears possible that less innocent blood will be shed under that candidate than another?

You live in the land of Baal where your “dictators” are elected by the people. Two men are running in the major party system of your land for the office of Top Dictator, an office which vests him with the ability to make life and death decisions. The first has the name of Adolf H., and the second, Joseph S. The polls indicate that the race is neck and neck, and your vote will really matter. There are no other candidates running for the office. The first candidate promises that if he is elected he will pass a law that 50% of all three year old children in the country must be passed through the fires of Baal. The second, who describes himself as a “pro-life moderate,” says that he opposes passing three-year old children through the fires of Baal, unless the child was a victim of rape, or the economic health of the family was threatened by the burden of caring for the three-year-old, in which case he would allow the child to be placed through the fires of Baal. Studies indicate that 90% more children will die if the first candidate is elected, than the second. How will you vote?

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 9, 2008 | Permalink

January 22, 2008 marked the thirty-fifth anniversary of Roe v. Wade—the birth of our national holocaust against the unborn. It is important to remember that God still cares about babies. Of such is the kingdom of Heaven. Whether they be embryos fighting for their lives against the mad scientists which populate fertility clinics and genetic research labs, or newborns deemed “unworthy” because their little minds won’t develop the way yours and mine have developed, or even children viewed as disposable because their imperfect bodies cause a drain on the American insurance industry—God knows each precious life by name and loves them with an infinite love.

Read more here at www.visionforum.org.

Also read these articles in defense of life: CLICK HERE

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 9, 2008 | Permalink

In the public debate for the biblical institution of marriage, the right to life, biomedical ethics, or any of the “life and death” policy issues which confront the freedom of this nation and the peace of the church—we must make arguments from principle! It is the tactic of the enemies of Christianity to appeal to emotions, intimidation, misrepresentations, pragmatism, utilitarianism, and relativistic ethics when undermining the influence of the moral law of God as applied to the state.

Now comes Colorado State Senate Bill 200—one of the worst pieces of legislation to be enacted by a state in years. It was sponsored by the only openly lesbian member of the Colorado Senate. It establishes the equivalent of a star chamber proceeding that could be a source of great persecution to any business or group that opposes homosexuality. The radical measures adopted by Colorado are justified on the grounds that they are necessary for “the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, and safety.”

The bill states:

SECTION 8. 24-34-701. Publishing of discriminative matter forbidden. No person, being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent, or employee of any place of public accommodation... shall publish, issue, circulate, send, distribute, give away, or display in any way, manner, or shape or by any means or method, except as provided in this section, any communication, paper, poster, folder, manuscript, book, pamphlet, writing, print, letter, notice, or advertisement of any kind, nature, or description THAT is intended or calculated to discriminate or actually discriminates against... SEXUAL ORIENTATION, marital status... in the matter of furnishing or neglecting or refusing to furnish to them or any one of them any lodging, housing, schooling, or tuition or any accommodation, right [marriage], privilege [adoption], advantage, or convenience... on account of... SEXUAL ORIENTATION, marital status... [which] is unwelcome or objectionable or not acceptable, desired, or solicited.

Ross Kaminsky of Human Events explains:

To ensure that the most aggressive “gay rights” agenda is pursued, the law creates a seven member “Colorado civil rights commission” with “at least four members who are members of groups of people who have been or who might be discriminated against because of disability, race, creed, color, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, ancestry, or because of marital status, religion, or age.” These commissioners will “receive a per diem allowance and shall be reimbursed for actual and necessary expenses...” In other words, Colorado taxpayers will pay “victim group” activists, modern-day inquisitors, to scour the state for citizens and businesses to sue.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 9, 2008 | Permalink

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handiwork. Psalm 19:1

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 8, 2008 | Permalink

Before clicking through to the link below, it is important to realize that the message of Genesis is that God made completely distinct “kinds” of life, including humankind, and numerous “kinds” of animals. Kinds can not interbreed. Animals of one kind can not interbreed with animals of another kind. Of course, there can be great variation and interbreeding of species within a kind, but one kind can not reproduce with another kind. Animal kinds certainly can not interbreed with humans.

This means that it is contrary to God’s design, if not scientifically impossible, to actually create a hybrid of a human and an animal. The twain shall never meet genetically—at least there will never be a genetic hybrid which can be described as a new “kind.” Humans may integrate animal material into their bodies, but they remain fully of the human kind, and vice versa.

But down at Dr. Moreau’s little lab of horrors, otherwise known as the scientists of Newcastle University, the team is hard at work experimenting on creating genetic chimeras. As you read the story, note that the experimentation involves murdering children—the scientists are experimenting on living human embryos. Note also that the British law forbids the scientists from keeping the babies alive for more than fourteen days. Finally, note that the scientists have to defend their actions by minimizing the significance of the life of the small babies.

The Times Online reports: “We have created human-animal embryos already, say British team.”

“Embryos containing human and animal material have been created in Britain for the first time, a month before the House of Commons votes on new laws to regulate the research...

Admixed embryos are widely supported by scientists and patient groups as they provide an opportunity to produce powerful stem-cell models for investigating diseases such as Parkinson’s and diabetes, and for developing new drugs.

Their creation, however, has been opposed by some religious groups, particularly the Roman Catholic Church. Cardinal Keith O’Brien, the head of the Catholic Church in Scotland, described the work last month as “experiments of Frankenstein proportion”.

The admixed embryos created by the Newcastle group are of a kind known as cytoplasmic hybrids, or cybrids, which are made by placing the nucleus from a human cell into an animal egg that has had its nucleus removed. The genetic material in the resulting embryos is 99.9 per cent human...

It is already illegal to culture human-animal embryos for more than 14 days, or to implant them in the womb of a woman or animal, and these prohibitions will remain in the new legislation.

Using cow eggs reflects a short supply of human eggs. There are also ethical difficulties involved in collecting human eggs for research, as the donation process carries a small risk to women.

Professor John Burn, a member of the Newcastle team, told the BBC: “This is licensed work which has been carefully evaluated. This is a process in a dish, and we are dealing with a clump of cells which would never go on to develop. It’s a laboratory process and these embryos would never be implanted into anyone...”

Here is my thesis: To address the growing horrors of the Darwinian biomedical ethical landscape and the widespread impotence of the Church to address the issues of the day, “We Must Have Charitable, Irenic Debates on Biomedical Ethics in the 21st Century.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 7, 2008 | Permalink

While I differ with the author on some of his views concerning natural law theory, I appreciate the integrity and historical accuracy of the arguments presented by this cogent defender of life in his article “Hating Babies, Hating God,” published in Chronicles: A Magazine of American Culture.

The author, Aaron D. Wolf, addresses the reluctance of professing Christians to address the fundamental ethics of the question of abortion. Often this is because to do so, and to adopt a consistent life ethic, would inconvenience their lifestyles. One angle on this issue which the author addresses is the widespread use of abortifacient contraceptives by Christians, including the Pill and the Patch. The implications of this essay is that there is a distinct hypocrisy when Christians focus on certain “unacceptable” and particularly horrific forms of abortion like partial-birth abortion, but then remain silent on other forms of abortion—including abortafacient contraceptives.

Wolf also addresses the fact that the modern anti-child contraceptive ethic which is widespread in the Church, is a historical anomaly. Below are some of his comments:

”...Behind every pro-lifer who chooses to think, say, about baseball whenever he is told that The Pill kills children is the need to terminate the discussion about contraception in general. There is always the reactionary excuse to fall back on—while Catholics reject (or, at least, they are supposed to reject) contraception because their Pope tells them to, we Protestants listen only to the Bible. From 1517 to 1930, however, no Protestant denomination or group ever permitted the practice, and it was Protestant state legislatures across the country that made the trafficking of contraceptives illegal until the Supreme Court intruded in Griswold v. Connecticut, paving the way for Roe v. Wade...

...Last year, a courageous young Protestant couple, Sam and Bethany Torode, urged fellow evangelicals to forsake birth control in favor of an Open Embrace within marriage. Their work reflects the deep commitment in pockets of resistance all over the United States to the official line that contraception is only a Catholic concern. In a well-researched and poignant book, the Torodes argue that Protestant attempts to separate the pleasures of the marital bed from the spiritual blessing of openness to childbearing is gnostic. “By pitting spirit against matter, and companionship against procreation, contraception can become a means of exploiting the body and using one’s spouse—in spite of our good intentions.” They also argue that any attempt to separate the procreative, unitive, and sacramental aspects of marital union leads to all sorts of physical, emotional, and spiritual deformities...

...Too many Protestant leaders are simply unwilling to let go of the right to choose—in this case, the right to choose to reject God’s blessing of children. The issue, therefore, is simply not discussed. That life begins at the moment of conception is, thanks to the efforts of courageous pro-lifers, all but universally accepted among Bible-believing Protestant evangelicals. But the notion that the observable order of nature demonstrates God’s gracious design and intention for His Creation is ignored when it comes to so-called birth control...

The Anglican Church became the first Protestant body to sanction the use of contraception, although it took great pains to emphasize that contraception should only be used by married couples. Still, the 1930 Lambeth Conference’s declaration rejected natural law in favor of the law of “good intentions”: Contraception was deemed permissible “where there is a clearly-felt moral obligation to limit or avoid parenthood.” It is precisely married couples, however, who are least likely to have a legitimate reason to avoid parenthood, for having children is what they are commanded (or “blessed”) to do. And we know this not only from Scripture (the Creation mandate) but from the birds and the bees, whom God also made...

..Conservative Protestants were horrified by Lambeth. T.S. Eliot said that it was an un-Christian experiment to remake society, and Lutheran Hour speaker Walter A. Maier called it “one of the most repugnant of modern aberrations, representing a 20th-century renewal of pagan bankruptcy.” The Missouri Synod pointed to St. Augustine’s warning that “Contraception makes a prostitute out of the wife and an adulterer out of the husband” and noted that so-called “Companionate marriage has been termed ‘licensed prostitution.’”...Nonetheless, one by one, Protestant denominations began to ignore the wisdom of their forebears...”

Read more here.

Also read the Declaration of Life, presented on www.visionforum.org. Our position is that while real and practical options exist for individuals who find themselves in diverse medical crises, primary cause abortions are not one of those options because they are inconsistent with the ethical standards of Scripture. We hold to a consistent, pro-life, no-abortions, no-exception position. This is the historic position of Protestant Christianity pre-20th century, and the present position of the Roman Catholic Church. This means that we oppose the use of any abortifacient contraceptive technology on the grounds that they could result in the murder of an unborn child.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 7, 2008 | Permalink

From our founding, Vision Forum Ministries has been dedicated to fighting for the Christian family, which includes the unborn, orphans, adopted children, the disabled, the elderly, and blessed motherhood. This battle has given us the privilege of standing with families in times of dire need with practical help—legal, financial, and spiritual. It has also meant appealing to the Body of Christ to reject the culture of death in favor of Christ’s vision of life. Below are a short assortment of articles and commentary on subjects related to life, babies, and biomedical ethics. These articles have won us precious friends, and bitter enemies who hate our message of life and the sufficiency of Scripture. We thank God for both! We also hope that the articles will reinforce your love of Christ and confidence that He—the Creator and sustainer of life—is the truly greatest defender of life, motherhood, and the Christian family!

• The Rise and Fall of Motherhood in America
• In Memory of a Woman Who Chose Life
• The Influence of Babies on Single Men
• A Cup of Water for Terri, Part I
• A Cup of Water for Terri, Part II
• Doctor Turns Baby William Over to CPS
• The War on the Weak
• Why Children?

Also of interest:

• The First One Hundred Ways to End Abortion.
• The Feminism of the Mothers is the Destruction of the Daughters
• You Don’t Know Feminism
• An Exegetical Defense of Women as Keepers At Home
• Roe. v. Wade and Biblical Patriarchy

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 6, 2008 | Permalink

Our culture is becoming increasingly more barbaric. We see it in the inhumane practice of murdering babies through abortion, abandoning the elderly, starving invalids and more. We see it in the way people relate to one another, the dark films they watch, the increasingly vicious entertainment to which they turn, and the coarse language of everyday life. It seems that there is no abyss too low for modern gossip mongers, and those individuals often unsatisfied with their own marriage and family life who hide behind computer screens and television cameras, trafficking in hatred of their fellow man. The viciousness and unrestrained coarse dialogue of talk radio, the Internet, and reality T.V. knows little restraint.

There is a reason why Vision Forum believes it its timely to call for a revival in the doctrine of “women and children first.” There is a reason why we believe that someone has to take a stand for the unlovely who are being abandoned, aborted, and treated with contempt. And there is certainly a reason why we are calling for Christians to tackle the tough issues with irenic discourse and charity. The reason is that as a culture, and more importantly, as the Church, we are losing to the growing barbarism of the present age.

Witness the story of one 78-year-old man who was struck by a hit-and-run driver, and left to die by his fellow man:

A 78-year-old man is tossed like a rag doll by a hit-and-run driver and lies motionless on a busy city street as car after car goes by. Pedestrians gawk but appear to do nothing. One driver stops briefly but then pulls back into traffic. A man on a scooter slowly circles the victim before zipping away.The chilling scene —captured on video by a streetlight surveillance camera — has touched off a round of soul-searching in Hartford, with the capital city’s biggest newspaper blaring “SO INHUMANE” on the front page and the police chief lamenting: “We no longer have a moral compass.”

This incredible story is related by the Associated Press in an article entitled “Hit-and-run victim left in street without help.”

Nine cars pass Torres as a few people stare from the sidewalk. Some approach Torres, but most stay put until a police cruiser responding to an unrelated call arrives on the scene after about a minute and a half.

“Like a dog they left him there,” said a disgusted Jose Cordero, 37, who was with friends Thursday not far from where Torres was struck. Robert Luna, who works at a store nearby, said: “Nobody did nothing.”

One witness, Bryant Hayre, told The Hartford Courant he didn’t feel comfortable helping Torres, who he said was bleeding and conscious.

The accident — and bystanders’ apparent callousness — dominated morning radio talk shows.

“It was one of the most despicable things I’ve seen by one human being to another,” the Rev. Henry Brown, a community activist, said in an interview. “I don’t understand the mind-set anymore. It’s kind of mind-boggling. We’re supposed to help each other. You see somebody fall, you want to offer a helping hand.”

The victim’s son, Angel Arce, begged the public for help in finding the driver. “My father is fighting for his life,” he said.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 6, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, worldview, and ethics. During our three-hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy this year requires the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including the question: What biblical principles apply when examining the needs of potentially life-saving research on the one hand, and the “bodies” of aborted babies on the other.

A legislator is asked to vote on a question of embryonic stem cell research. The scientific community indicates that the results of this research will save many lives. The congressman thinks of himself as pro-life and indicates that he will not allow research on human embryos, but he asks you as his personal advisor for your view on whether he should allow research on previously aborted embryos, so that their lives will not go to waste. What counsel would you give him?

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 6, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, worldview, and ethics. During our three-hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy, this year requires the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including the question: According to the Scripture what different duties do the state, the family, and the Church have to widows and orphans?

A widow of excellent reputation in her community suffers a tremendous calamity. Her house is burned to the ground and she is left destitute. Her congressman brings her plight to the other members of the United States House of Representatives. He submits legislation raising sufficient funds to pay for a new house. As a member, you are asked to speak before the House. What will you say and how will you vote?

For more on this subject, you might consider my message on the same subject entitled: “Defending the Fatherless.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 6, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, worldview, and ethics. During our three-hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy of 2005 requires the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including questions of the role of the state in defending the helpless, and its jurisdiction.

The year is 1870. Articles begin to appear in papers around the nation about the abusive use of children in factories and coal mines. The stories are horrific, including hundreds of accounts of children, ten and under, who are suffering as a result of the practices. As a member of the House of Representatives, you are asked to consider a bill entitled “The Child Labor Act,” which will prohibit children age sixteen and under from employment. How should you decide the issue and why?

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 6, 2008 | Permalink

Standards Are Inescapable. The Question Is — By What Standard?

A central theme of Vision Forum Ministries and our Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy is that God’s written revelation — the Bible — is sufficient for all of faith and practice. The Bible, not human emotions, pragmatism, natural law reasoning, or utilitarianism, is the basis for all ethical choices. The Bible is the only standard.

Not everyone agrees. Even within the community of professing Christians, replacement standards are touted — both explicitly and implicitly. We hear people attempting to solve ethical issues with significant life and death implications by appealing to human experience, autonomous reasoning, nature and feelings, but rarely do we hear people appealing to Scripture as the exclusive standard for ethical decision-making. Some will even argue that they believe that the Bible is the standard, but then go on to deny its applicability to practical issues. Such individuals often use harsh and condemning words to judge Christians who stand in the great tradition of the Reformers when they attempt to apply the Bible to real-world settings.

There are even those who rail against people for articulating biblical standards applied to life — as if to do such is unfair or unloving. There is a great hypocrisy here. Such individuals use their own private standards to condemn those with differing standards. The fact is that standards are inescapable. The only question is, “By What Standard?”

Of course, believing that the Bible is the only standard, on the one hand, and determining the implications of that standard on specific ethical issues, on the other hand, are two different things. The first is a non-negotiable presupposition. The second is an exercise in humility, study, and meditation. The simple truth is that we live in a complex world with complex issues. We need clarity from God’s Word (the only true source of clarity), and this requires the humility to go before the Lord and seek answers to the hard questions.

The Challenge of Biomedical Ethics

One of the most challenging and difficult areas of personal decision-making and public policy for 21st century Christians is biomedical ethics. The challenge of modern biomedical ethics is made more difficult by the fact that we live in a culture that hates God and has determined to be at war with life.

The Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy does not have the answers to all the difficult questions we face. But we do believe that we are right to assert the Bible as the only source book for ethical decision-making. Furthermore, we believe that now is the time to raise a generation of Christians that has been forced to wrestle with the complexities of Christian biomedical ethics theory long before they find themselves in a crisis. In fact, the worst time to wrestle with a biomedical issue is when you are emotionally embroiled in a crisis concerning that issue.

As a ministry that has fought vehemently for the life of the unloved (see our Life and Liberty Medical Fund) and has been engaged in rescuing babies deemed by bureaucrats or physicians to be unworthy of protecting, we have witnessed first-hand the pressures to compromise that are placed on families in times of distress. Too often personal emotions, intimidation from social workers (or even individuals within the medical establishment), and pragmatic peer pressure win the day. The results can be horrifying. In some cases emotional decision-making and peer pressure leads to the unnecessary deaths of the very individuals we should be protecting. In other cases, the consciences of Christians are seared because they are forced to live with the consequences of unwise choices. Too often, rather than acknowledging error, they justify their behavior and excoriate anyone who dares to ask what the Bible says about such an issue. I have seen this when Christians have aborted their babies because they were told they “had no other choice” in order to protect the health of the mother, and when they have terminated the life of disabled or sickly children or parents by withholding food or life support at the advice of physicians.

Should Christians Oppose All Abortions, Or Just Most of Them?
Is Starving a Disabled Dependent Always Wrong,
Or Is It Only Wrong in Some Cases?

There is not a local church or family in America that is not effected at some level by the challenge of biomedical ethics in the 21st century. But the only thing that seems certain is the inability of most churches to articulate a biblically defensible ethical standard.

Christians today are confronted with questions like these: Was it murder to pull the feeding tube on Terri Schiavo, or was it compassion? Is embryonic stem cell research valid? Is it improper to use contraceptive devices like “the pill” which have abortifacient potential? May couples use surrogates to carry their children to term? Is in vitro-fertilization using donor sperm a legitimate consideration? Is it adultery? Is it something else? Does “brain death” constitute death? May we consider the “quality of life” of an individual when deciding whether to continue feeding them? Frankly, these questions are hard, but there are much tougher ones coming down the road — questions destined to redefine our view of motherhood, compassion for the infirm, and care for the elderly.

Some Christians maintain a 100% pro-life, no abortion philosophy. Others believe that it is acceptable to abort a child in the case of rape, incest, or where the life of the mother is threatened. The latter is the position of the Orthodox Jews. And there are many additional questions presented to us by our “brave new world” that raise noodle-cookers of equal emotional challenge and philosophical complexity.

But the fact that questions are difficult does not mean that we can hide from them or brush them under the rug. It was precisely an unwillingness on the part of the Evangelical Christian community to identify and communicate a biblical ethic for tackling issues like feminism and eugenics in the early part of the 20th century, and on abortion in the years preceding Roe vs. Wade, that contributed to the widespread acceptance of birth control, abortion, and euthanasia within our culture — including within the Church itself. We are living with the consequences of a century of cultural retreat driven by antinomianism — an antinomianism which has fueled the deplorable silence of the Church in the wake of ethical chaos.

But here is the rub: It is not merely that we have failed to speak to the broader culture, but rather that we have failed to disciple the Church itself. We have failed to honor that portion of the Great Commission which obligates us to make disciples, teaching them “all things, whatsoever I have commanded.” And this is why there is precious little demographic difference between the professing Christian Church and the secular culture when it comes to the numerous life and death issues swirling around the current biomedical ethical maelstrom.

We Will Begin to Debate the Issues Now, Or Our Children
Will Drown in a Sea of Ethical Relativism

Whether it is always wrong to kill an unborn baby, or whether it is acceptable to kill some unborn babies that threaten the lives of their mothers is a legitimate ethical question. It is a question that can only be settled properly by appealing to Scripture. The same goes for decisions to pull the plug on grandma, to use sperm donors, or whether or not to harvest organs from “brain dead” patients in order to save the lives of others.

There are those who would shut down the very type of dialog presented by Vision Forum Ministries at academies like the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy. They would do so amidst a barrage of name calling and emotional furor. For such individuals it is sin to even ask the ethical questions, let alone reach conclusions that would differ with their personal experience. I disagree with them. In my view, it is precisely this haughty spirit that has led to the irrelevancy of Evangelical Christianity’s witness in our culture. It is this spirit that is causing the children of our present generation to drown in a sea of utilitarian ethics and moral relativism.

We will never be able to address these questions unless we agree to set aside hyperbole, name-calling, motive-judging, and hyper-emotionalism in our dialog. We expect such tactics from the world. For more than a century, feminists, eugenicists, and humanists have built their anti-life campaign on precisely these type of arguments. But it should not be so for the people of God. The mission of the Christian is not self-justification and emotional coddling. It is not personal convenience or self-empowerment. It is not some man-centered social agenda. Our mission is the advancement of the Kingdom of God by proclaiming the crown rights of Jesus Christ over all of life. Our mission is submission to Him. It is humbly acknowledging that we are the creature and He is the creator. This means that His law-word revelation trumps our feelings and opinions every time.

And that is why Witherspoon students are encouraged to reach their own conclusions on issues ranging from ectopic pregnancies to the Terri Schiavo case by breaking the issues down into their various component parts and distilling the most applicable biblical principles necessary for sound Christian ethical theory.

Come Let Us Reason Together — With Compassion

We need to reason together — through the Scriptures. And we need to do so with compassion. Compassion is needed for the tens of thousands of women who have been lied to by the state, by Hollywood, and the government school systems. Compassion is needed for a generation of men and women who have received little to no instruction from the pulpit on these issues, and who have been taught that the Bible is “silent” on matters of biomedical ethics.

But we must also have compassion for the unlovely — for the unborn, for the sick and infirm, and for those whose lives hang in the balance waiting for us to choose wisely. And dear friends, there is nothing compassionate about making selfish ethical decisions that place the lives of others in jeopardy.

My heart breaks for the untold thousands of parents who have found themselves navigating through such difficult ethical waters without the benefit of the Word of God. And even more so for those who have been required to consider these issues for the first time amidst intense pressure and emotions. And how can we have anything but profound compassion for those who have made wrong choices, only to realize their error after the fact?

But isn’t this true of all of us? Haven’t we all sinned and fallen short of God’s requirements — repeatedly! And isn’t this the message of the Cross — that there is forgiveness and hope for new beginnings at the feet of Jesus?

Sometimes the answer to our ethical inquiries will include repentance. But is repentance such a horrible thing? Must we always be about the business of blame-shifting and self-justification?

The Church as the Great Defender of Life

We live in a culture that possesses remarkable medical technological abilities. We have the technology, but we often lack the moral maturity to use it for the glory of God. We are like toddlers in the cockpit of a giant space ship headed for the stars. We have the ability to press buttons capable of moving engines and machines of remarkable power. The power is in our hands, but we are not quite sure what to do with it. This makes us very dangerous. Only by returning to Scripture can we hope to go from suckling babes to mature men and women capable of intelligent navigation.

The Church is the great defender of life. Of all the people on earth, we should be the most sensitive to the preciousness of life. But how will we be advocates for life if we refuse to thoroughly examine the biblical implications of the increasingly thorny questions our children will be forced to resolve? What ethical inheritance are we leaving to them — objective truth, or subjective opinions? We must return to the Bible — all of it — all sixty-six books. The answer to the ethical crisis therefore is neither denial nor neutrality. It certainly is not ethical silence. The answer is preparedness through prayerful study and humble willingness to reexamine the twisted ethical standards which our culture defends and we often embrace without question. Only then can we avoid being part of the problem itself. Only then can we be the defenders of life to which God has called us as His chosen people.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 5, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, world view and ethics. During our three-hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy requiries the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including the question: “According to Scripture, may we kill one individual to save another individual where both are innocent non-aggressors, and if so, may Christians use a ‘quality of life’ argument to determine who should live and who should die?”

A sonogram reveals the existence of Siamese twins who share a heart. Doctors indicate that both will likely eventually die unless they are separated sometime after birth. Separation means determining which one will keep the heart and which one will die. Using only the Bible as a guide for ethics, what is the correct ethical course of action. Are there additional facts one must determine to make a biblically solid, informed decision?

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 4, 2008 | Permalink

“Why is the social work establishment so eager to take children out of families? Because removal of children represents the means to gain control over everyone in that family! Parents will quite often agree to almost anything to be reunited with their children, and children will often say almost anything to get home — often being manipulated, confused and coerced into making false statements of abuse once they are separated from their parents. Seizing children is the ticket to control...the avenue to dictating to families what they must do, and the control to which they will submit, if they wish to reunite...”

“Many Christian parents submit to allowing social workers to both enter their homes and even interview their children, knowing that they have nothing to hide and believing that the truth of their innocence will set them free. Such parents are sadly mistaken. They don’t realize how vulnerable they make themselves when they put the interpretation of their home environment into the hands of a social worker who may be terribly biased against them. These biases enormously impact subsequent interviews with children, who are incredibly susceptible to false suggestions by those interviewing them. Studies in which interviewers have been given false information about an event which occurred in the life of a child have shown over and over that interviewer biases directly impact the results of interviews with children. Children quite often agree with interviewer understandings and beliefs which completely contradict their own experiences in such situations. Questions are often repeated until the expected answer is given. Misinformation is often given to the child by multiple interviewers, who use their emotional tone, peer pressure, and authoritative status, along with the enticement of returning home once the right answer is given, to plant false beliefs and often false memories in the mind of a child — memories and beliefs which will often haunt and confuse that child for life — and all this in the ‘best interest of the child.’ We must be vigilant to protect our children from such defilement.”

Don Hart, The Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy, May 31, 2008.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 4, 2008 | Permalink

CNN had this fascinating report on just how much stay at home mothers would make if they were to be compensated for their work:

If a stay-at-home mom could be compensated in dollars rather than personal satisfaction and unconditional love, she’d rake in a nifty sum of nearly $117,000 a year. That’s according to a pre-Mother’s Day study released in May by Salary.com, a Waltham, Massachusetts-based firm that studies workplace compensation.

The eighth annual survey calculated a mom’s market value by studying pay levels for 10 job titles with duties that a typical mom performs, ranging from housekeeper and day care center teacher to van driver, psychologist and chief executive officer.

This year, the annual salary for a stay-at-home mom would be $116,805, while a working mom who also juggles an outside job would get $68,405 for her motherly duties.

One stay-at-home mom said the six-figure salary sounds a little low.

“I think a lot of people think we sit and home and have a lot of fun and don’t do a lot of work,” said Samantha Russell, a Fremont, New Hampshire, mother who left her job as pastry chef to raise two boys, ages 2 and 4. “But they should try cleaning their house with little kids running around and messing it up right after them.”

Click hereto read the rest of the report

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 4, 2008 | Permalink

Its been a long journey for the little boy of six years. From his home in San Antonio, Texas, to the state home school convention of New Hampshire, to Memorial Day at the Brown homestead in North Carolina, to the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy in Fredricksburg, Virginia. But along the way this little boy brought joy and happiness to the heart of his father and the big brothers who accompanied him. After twelve days on the road he returns to the loving arms of his mother, to the little boys room where Pooh and Eyore still sit on the shelf, to armies of toy soldiers, to sisters that love him, and to a little brother who longs to have his “buddy” back.

Its a happy day, Honor has come home.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 3, 2008 | Permalink

Students at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy receive instructions in diverse subjects including apologetics, epistemology, world view and ethics. During our three hour ethics dialogue, students were placed in groups and assigned questions to examine, and where possible, to solve. Their mission was to break down the issues presented by each question into their various component parts, identify the critical available facts, search for applicable biblical laws and principles, and attempt to determine a policy result which is consistent with Scripture.

The following question (paraphrased) presented at the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy requiries the student to examine a host of foundational ethical issues, and the implications of their conclusions, including the question “If abortion is the murder of a human being, is it biblical to oppose all abortions?”

A mother conceives a child. The doctor tells the parents that they have a tubal pregnancy and that the baby has little to no chance of survival, but its continued life poses a threat to the life of the mother. What are the relevent biblical principles? What facts must be determined to make a biblical ethical decision? What medical options might be available. Is killing the baby through abortion defensible through Scripture? If so, defend your position? If not, defend your position? Are there other options?

Remarkably, later that day, the following news report hit the international news wires: “Mother Gives Birth After Nine Month Ectopic Pregnancy, No Abortion.”

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 3, 2008 | Permalink

I give them all an “F.”

From the Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy, May 30, 2008.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 3, 2008 | Permalink

To My Dear Readers:

I would like to make a special appeal on behalf of another ministry—one that is very dear to Vision Forum, and a ministry with whom we have had the pleasure of working very closely over the years. In my personal view, the ministry of the Geoff Botkin family and The Western Conservatory is one of the most important and innovative Gospel works in Christendom when it comes to communicating a vision of the biblical family and cultural renewal for Jesus Christ. The effectiveness of this ministry stems from the power of their personal example and the biblical potency of their message. We continue to receive stunning testimonies from many of the people whose lives have been transformed by the ministry of the Botkin family at Vision Forum events like the Father and Daughter Retreat, the Christian Filmmakers Academy, and the 200 Year Plan.

The Great Commission commands believers to make “disciples of nations,” and to teach them “all things whatsoever I have commanded.” The Botkins are serious about this Gospel mission. And they recognize the need to bring timely practical messages to the Church around the world in order to fulfill the discipleship component of the Great Commission. This is why I am excited about a great opportunity which the Lord has set before them to bring the discipleship message to Christian families and churches in Europe who are hungry for sound, practical teaching to help them recapture their families for Christ and disciple a generation which is grateful for the rich Reformation heritage of Scripture which once transformed countries like England and Scotland, but is now largely forgotten.

The Botkins have received just under a dozen important requests to speak at key locations in Scotland and England. Mr. Botkin is not a man to turn his back on such heartfelt requests and is making every effort to take his family to the UK this summer to address these deep moral needs, from dismal neighborhoods in Glasgow to the depressed areas around Southampton. I want to help him raise the 19,400 British pounds needed for a significant missionary journey that will illustrate the valuable lessons of biblical daughterhood, family discipleship, multigenerational faithfulness and visionary parenting.

Today I want you to consider supporting a very special missionary endeavor—one that involves an entire family with a critical message. The greatest demand for the Botkin family is the question-answer session, where the entire family interacts with British families on the recovery of family culture and lost orthopraxy. But they are going prepared to open the Scriptures on a great number of topics. In Glasgow they will explain the forgotten doctrines of marriage and the honoring of parents. In Birmingham they will reintroduce ideas of multigenerational family life to a nation that has forgotten its 2000 year Christian history. In Wales they will demonstrate how brothers and sisters can be best friends in a wide gospel mission. In Winchester young men will hear how they can face the greatest challenges of the 21st Century. In Devon there will be many lectures on the culture of the home and how that will build the recovery of Christian civilization.

If you want to help make it possible for the Botkin family to enlarge the Gospel mission of discipleship, then go to this link to contribute directly. In so doing you will be sending light into a dark corner of the world that was once the light of Christendom. Beall and I will personally be making a donation to this work, and I want to encourage you to consider doing the same.

Persevero, Doug Phillips

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 2, 2008 | Permalink

Thank you very much for the great Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy. The week was a great blessing to both my dad and I. We very much enjoyed the chance to learn about law and public policy from such Godly, high-caliber speakers. We also appreciated being able to spend several days with Godly men from across the nation and the chance to establish and reestablish relationships with many of them.God bless you and Vision Forum with the important work you are doing. Jason M., Age 16

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 2, 2008 | Permalink

In his well-received lecture on church autonomy, Bob Renaud presented conclusions from his law review article on the same subject:

The decision in Westbrook should be encouraging to Christians for many reasons. First, pastors should be encouraged that biblical church discipline can be carried out under the authority of church government, without fear of being overturned in civil court. Second, historians should be encouraged that there is a court which remembers the almost-forgotten historical meaning of “separation of church and state.” And third, Christian citizens should be encouraged that the court had the understanding to respect this historical principle of jurisdiction, a principle grounded ultimately in the Scriptures themselves.

Bob Renaud, The Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy, May 31, 2008.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 2, 2008 | Permalink

At the 2008 Witherspoon School of Law and Public Policy last week, my father was asked by an attendee to describe five key traits a man must possess to be a leader. After a moment of thought, Dad communicated the following (paraphrase):

First, a leader must be willing and ready to die.

Second, a leader must find strength in the blessing God brings from humbling difficulties.

Third, once a leader has determined the leadership role to which God has called him, then he must be determined to play that role properly.

Fourth, a leader must ever be learning.

Fifth, great leaders are men who abound in gratitude.

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 2, 2008 | Permalink

Posted by Doug Phillips on June 1, 2008 | Permalink