March 25, 2014

B003D0TAM8.01._SX490_SCLZZZZZZZ_V190274968_The big news yesterday on the evangelical front was World Vision’s capitulation to gay mirage. Many articulate voices have expressed their criticisms. If you are interested, here are John Piper’s, Russell Moore’s, and Denny Burk’s opinions. All of them are pretty much spot on. If you only read one take on the issue, read Carl Trueman’s. No one, except for maybe Doug Wilson, says it better.

How do we handle a bad mood? I appreciate Tim Challies‘ encouragement.

Today oral arguments started before the Supreme Court in the government’s case against Hobby Lobby. We need to pray for this situation. Our religious liberties are at stake. Often slippery-slope arguments are fallacious. This case does represent a true erosion of religious liberty. If the government can force corporations to supply abortion-inducing drugs, it seems that it might force other actions that are contrary to one’s religious beliefs. What is next?

This kid is going to be good …


12 Responses to “Destinations”

  1. June Wemple Says:

    I appreciated all the pieces on World Vision. Comments that particularly stood out to me are: Piper: “World Vision has taken a step away from the cry of biblical love, which says, we care about all suffering, especially eternal suffering. Without care about eternal suffering, care about temporal suffering is a mirage… It looks like love, but the greatest gift is being withheld.”
    – – When choosing a Missions Project for money collected from QUEST kids, I have long preferred Samaritan’s Purse from the time I learned W.V. helps with physical needs but refrains from including anything of eternal value. – –
    Moore: “We empower darkness when we refuse to warn of judgment. We empower the darkness when we refuse to offer forgiveness through the blood of the cross… World Vision is a good thing to have, unless the world is all you can see.”
    Burk: “Following Christ is not a choose-your-own-adventure story.”

  2. I am delighted that World Vision has taken this moral stand. While you whine about gays, other people are caring for the poor. Yours is no gospel.

    • Mark Says:

      World Vision has every right to take an immoral stand. Since I am very interested in helping the poor, I will have to look for another ministry to support.

  3. pinkagendist Says:

    Freedom of religion anyone?
    Since when does anyone have to follow a particular interpretation of religion?
    Or do you mean Muslims should get to force your wife to live under a sheet?

  4. Mark Says:

    I’m in agreement with your point. This is what the Hobby Lobby thing is about. The owners merely want the right to apply their own faith to their own business.

    • pinkagendist Says:

      That’s not to ‘the self’, that’s making other people follow their religion. It would be like a Muslim business owner enforcing the use of the burqa, or Jewish business owners enforcing circumcision. It’s blatant interference with individual freedom of religion.

      • Mark Says:

        I don’t think I’d object to someone requiring burkas or circumcision. I think the employment lines at businesses with these requirements would be very short. But, this issue is different. Here the government is requiring private citizens to facilitate abortions through the use of abortifacients. The government is making people do things that their conscience won’t allow them to do. If someone desperately wants abortifacients, then they can work somewhere other than a place that is closed on Sundays and plays gospel hymns all day long. No one’s “individual freedom of religion” is compromised. That will only happen if the Supreme Court rules against Hobby Lobby.

      • pinkagendist Says:

        No. Entirely incorrect. No one is being forced to HAVE an abortion- that would certainly be interference.
        Conscience is a matter of following a religion, not imposing it on the next person. Your right to not have an abortion doesn’t trump the next person’s right to choose to have one.
        A Jehova’s Witness is free never to have a blood transfusion, the second they interfere in another person’s right to do so they’re interfering with another individual’s freedoms.
        The burqa and circumcision were very clear examples of how one person’s right to do something doesn’t translate to their right to oblige anyone else to do the same.
        You’re intentionally mixing the two thing in an attempt to impose your version religion.

  5. Mark Says:

    Hobby Lobby might be forced to fund abortions through medication. This does conflict with their morality. Right now any woman has the right have an abortion but that doesn’t mean that HL should have to pay for it. You shouldn’t be forced by government to do anything that you deem immoral so long as it doesn’t interfere with the lives of others. HL isn’t forcing women to not have abortions; they are only asking that they don’t have to be the responsible for the abortion by paying for it.

    For me the issue represents the government’s incursion into places in our lives where it doesn’t belong (e.g. seat belts, helmets, no smoking sections, etc.). It is a religious issue but it is just the tip of the slow oozing of government into our lives.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: