From "Slacker" to DFL Representative?

Black Lives Matter St. Paul leader to challenge three-term representative for seat - Rashad Turner plans to challenge Rep. Rena Moran next year. 


The lead organizer for Black Lives Matter St. Paul plans to challenge the only black member of the Minnesota House for her seat in next year’s election. Rashad Turner, 30, said Saturday that not enough progress has been made in St. Paul’s communities of color after three terms of Rep. Rena Moran, DFL, representing District 65. “Organizing for Black Lives Matter, social justice is near and dear to my heart,” Turner said. “It’s something I felt Rena Moran hasn’t attempted to tackle in her three terms.” But Moran said Turner has ignored a record that includes sponsoring bills that directed funds to education initiatives aimed at targeting intergeneration poverty and directing state Department of Health funds toward efforts to reduce high tobacco and menthol use in Minnesota’s African-American communities. “I’m not coming into it fresh and wide-eyed with bright ideas. I’m coming with that experience and knowledge to move forward the agenda we need at this time,” Moran said. “I bring those connections. I bring a community of people with me who have done it who have continued to do it.”
Comment: Re "Slacker"? See earlier post. Rena Moran below.


On Christian "fanatics"

Christianity has had its fanatics. Still, the notion of fanaticism needs to be analyzed. Probably most people think that Christians can be placed on a spectrum between nominalism (Christians in name only) and fanaticism (Christians who are extremely intense about their beliefs and morals). On this scale, we might be most drawn to the middle of the scale, to the nice moderates. The problem is that the scale itself is mischievous. It assumes that Christianity itself is primarily about effort and moral improvement, so that the high-intensity end of the scale is peopled with self-righteous, over-confident, superior, condescending folk who are, at best, terribly off-putting. Yet that is not what Christianity is about. Where one sees that Christianity is being lived out in a fashion reasonably faithful to the Bible's emphasis on salvation by grace, on what God has done for us in Christ and not on what we have achieved, it ought to change everything.
Comment: D. A. Carson. God Who Is There, The: Finding Your Place in God's Story (p. 184). Kindle Edition. Image source

What does Atheism transcendentalize?

... it has also been shown by Alister McGrath in his book on atheism that if you do not have religion to transcendentalize things, you end up transcendentalizing something else. In other words, the act of making something out to be of transcendental importance is not exclusively a function of religion. It may be a function of human desire to control. In the twentieth century, the powerful movements of Nazism and Stalinism were not religiously driven. Some in the Nazi party laid claim to their reconstruction of Christianity, but the purpose was to domesticate Christianity and harness its energies. In reality, what drove the two movements-Nazism and Stalinism-were were distinct visions of reality: on the one hand, the transcendentalizing of ethnicity, a sense of intrinsic Aryan superiority, a hate-filled blaming of Jews and of the Treaty of Versailles; on the other hand, a transcendentalizing of the state grounded in Marxist social and economic theory. So it is not as if religion poisons everything while everything else is good. The century characterized by the greatest bloodshed, the twentieth century, generated most of its violence in movements that were distinctly anti-religious. The world did not lose one-third of the population of Cambodia because of Christianity but because of communism.
Comment: From D. A. Carson. God Who Is There, The: Finding Your Place in God's Story (pp. 183-184). Kindle Edition. I hypothesize that atheism primarily transcendentalizes science.


If your going to fight back ... best to have more than a banana!

Former CIA Director: ISIS Will Strike America

... if not significantly degraded, the ISIS threat to the Homeland will become a direct one—that is, an ISIS ability to plan and direct attacks on the Homeland from the group’s safe haven in Iraq and Syria— just like the group did in Paris last week.

Such attacks are deeply concerning because they carry the potential to be much more sophisticated and complex—and therefore more dangerous—than than homegrown attacks, again just like in Paris last week, or London in 2005, or even 9/11 itself. And, in something that should get everyone’s attention, ISIS has shown an interest in weapons of mass destruction.

“Over time” may be shorter than many think. The attack in Paris was the first manifestation of an effort that ISIS made to put together an attack capability in Europe—an effort that they began less than a year ago. The head of the UK’s domestic security agency recently warned that ISIS is planning mass casualty attacks in Britain. His concerns are well founded. We will not be far behind.
D.C. police Chief Cathy Lanier urges public to ‘take down’ active gunman if they can

In a surprising comment, Metropolitan Police Chief Cathy L. Lanier is encouraging ordinary citizens to subdue or even kill active gunmen if they can as the “best option for saving lives before police can get there.”

During an interview Sunday on CBS’ “60 Minutes,” Chief Lanier was asked what should people do if they are in the vicinity of an active shooter like the ones who terrorized Paris on Nov. 13, The Washington Examiner reported. “Your options are run, hide, or fight,” the D.C. police chief said.

“If you’re in a position to try and take the gunman down, to take the gunman out, it’s the best option for saving lives before police can get there.”

The District for decades had outlawed handguns until the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the ban in 2008. Since then, city leaders have enacted restrictive laws that are still being challenged in court by gun owners and pro-gun activists.

Chief Lanier, who has enthusiastically supported the city’s efforts to limit handgun ownership, admitted that her suggestion for the public in the midst of an active gunman does not reflect the longstanding advice offered by many police officials around the country.

“That’s kind of counterintuitive to what cops always tell people, right? We always tell people, ‘Don’t … don’t take action. Call 911. Don’t intervene in the robbery’ … We’ve never told people, ‘Take action.’ It’s a different … scenario,” Chief Lanier said, according to the CBS preview of the interview, the Examiner reported.

Comments: Image source

The above links are current ... just from this week! Terrorists and evil shooters will go for the soft targets that have high impact and shock value.

It's a myth that the cops can protect us ... it can take them 7 minutes or more to arrive. By then much carnage can take place. There is a strong argument to be made for qualified and motivated individuals to have a concealed carry permit and have a weapon!


Judge Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr. : The "whiskey speech"

Judge Noah S. "Soggy" Sweat, Jr. : The "whiskey speech"


My friends, I had not intended to discuss this controversial subject at this particular time. However, I want you to know that I do not shun controversy. On the contrary, I will take a stand on any issue at any time, regardless of how fraught with controversy it might be. You have asked me how I feel about whiskey. All right, this is how I feel about whiskey: If when you say whiskey you mean the devil's brew, the poison scourge, the bloody monster, that defiles innocence, dethrones reason, destroys the home, creates misery and poverty, yea, literally takes the bread from the mouths of little children; if you mean the evil drink that topples the Christian man and woman from the pinnacle of righteous, gracious living into the bottomless pit of degradation, and despair, and shame and helplessness, and hopelessness, then certainly I am against it.

But, if when you say whiskey you mean the oil of conversation, the philosophic wine, the ale that is consumed when good fellows get together, that puts a song in their hearts and laughter on their lips, and the warm glow of contentment in their eyes; if you mean Christmas cheer; if you mean the stimulating drink that puts the spring in the old gentleman's step on a frosty, crispy morning; if you mean the drink which enables a man to magnify his joy, and his happiness, and to forget, if only for a little while, life's great tragedies, and heartaches, and sorrows; if you mean that drink, the sale of which pours into our treasuries untold millions of dollars, which are used to provide tender care for our little crippled children, our blind, our deaf, our dumb, our pitiful aged and infirm; to build highways and hospitals and schools, then certainly I am for it.

This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.
Comment: Link has an audio reprised by Mississippi state Rep. Ed Perry on 100th anniversary of opening of the Mississippi state Capitol, as broadcast on public radio. (Duration: 3 minutes 27 seconds). Image source. Note this is a humor piece! Enjoy it in that light!


Qu'ran instructs Muslims to Read the Torah and the Gospels

Quran Surah 5:68


Say, "O People of the Scripture, you are [standing] on nothing until you uphold [the law of] the Torah, the Gospel, and what has been revealed to you from your Lord." And that which has been revealed to you from your Lord will surely increase many of them in transgression and disbelief. So do not grieve over the disbelieving people.
Comment: More: There are many passages in the Qur'an which point specifically to the New Testament writings. The Arabic word for gospel is Injeel and Muhammad lifts up its authority as well  and A Comprehensive Listing of References to Jesus ('Isa) in the Qur'an


Lessons from Abraham Sacrificing Isaac

Genesis 22:11-14
But the Angel of the Lord called to him from heaven and said, “Abraham, Abraham!”

So he said, “Here I am.”

And He said, “Do not lay your hand on the lad, or do anything to him; for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your son, your only son, from Me.”

Then Abraham lifted his eyes and looked, and there behind him was a ram caught in a thicket by its horns. So Abraham went and took the ram, and offered it up for a burnt offering instead of his son.

And Abraham called the name of the place, The-Lord-Will-Provide, as it is said to this day, “In the Mount of the Lord it shall be provided.”
Comment: Image source: Abraham Sacrificing Isaac (1650), Laurent de La Hyre (1606–1656)

Lessons: Here God teaches His people

  1. That there is no higher test of covenant loyalty than to give up one's beloved son for another (consider John 3:16-17)
  2. That God will preserve the seed of His promise so that it will certainly be fulfilled. 
  3. That a substitutionary offering is nevertheless necessary (Genesis 22:8)
  4. That God thus provides for His people in all of their needs, their greatest being the forgiveness of sins. Cf  Mark 2:8-10


The Intolerance of Tolerance - Fired for authoring book criticizing homosexual conduct as “perversion.”

Christian Belief Cost Kelvin Cochran His Job - Atlanta says it terminated its fire chief because he published a book without permission. The real reason is because of what’s in it.


.. a year ago, Mr. Cochran was suspended for 30 days without pay, pending an investigation into his behavior. On Jan. 6, at the end of the suspension, Mr. Reed sacked him. Mr. Cochran’s fireable offense, according to the city, was publishing a book in violation of the city’s ethics code and without permission from the mayor.

The reality, according to a lawsuit filed in response to the firing, is that Mr. Cochran no longer has his $172,000-a-year job because of what’s in the book. The suit accuses the city of firing Mr. Cochran for his religious beliefs.

It turns out that when he’s not fighting fires, Mr. Cochran spends a lot of time helping black men turn their lives around and stay out of trouble. He does this under the auspices of Atlanta’s Elizabeth Baptist Church, where he is a deacon and leads a men’s bible study. Mr. Cochran self-published a book in 2013, “Who Told You That You Were Naked?”

The book, written on his own time, is a compilation of lesson plans for his bible classes and explains how the teachings of Christ can help men fulfill their purpose as responsible husbands and fathers. What earned the ire of Atlanta officials is that the 162-page tome includes a few passages criticizing homosexual conduct as “perversion.”

In response to the lawsuit, the city has maintained that Mr. Cochran was terminated for violating protocol, not for his religious views—as if he would have been fired for publishing a cookbook. But comments from the mayor and other city officials at the time of the suspension suggest that the book’s content is what drove the decision.

“I want to be clear that the material in Chief Cochran’s book is not representative of my personal beliefs, and is inconsistent with the administration’s work to make Atlanta a more welcoming city for all of her citizens—regardless of their sexual orientation, gender, race and religious beliefs,” said Mr. Reed. Alex Wan, a member of the City Council who is openly gay, said “I respect each individual’s right to have their own thoughts, beliefs and opinions, but when you’re a city employee, and those thoughts, beliefs and opinions are different from the city’s, you have to check them at the door.”

So the mayor fired someone who disagreed with him in the name of inclusivity and tolerance. And Mr. Wan believes that government employees are entitled to their own views but not entitled to share them with anyone. If this is true, the Constitution’s protections of free speech and freedom of religion are meaningless in practice. David Cortman of Alliance Defending Freedom, the legal group representing Mr. Cochran, says the city is now using protocol arguments to cover its tracks after wrongly terminating someone for holding and expressing religious views that city officials didn’t like.

There is no official requirement to notify the mayor before you write a book, Mr. Cortman told me, and Mr. Cochran sought and received permission from the city’s ethics department to pursue the book project. “The ethics rule concerns moonlighting, other employment or outside work,” said Mr. Cortman. “It doesn’t apply to writing a book, religious or otherwise, on your own time at home. And if they had such a rule in place it would be unconstitutional. You don’t need the government’s permission to do that.” Despite the left’s efforts to paint Mr. Cochran as some kind of hateful bigot, the city’s own investigation of the former fire chief’s work history found no complaints of discrimination.
Comment: The book: Who Told You That You Were Naked? See The Intolerance of Tolerance


Five Different Ways the Bible Speaks of the Love of God

The God Who Is There: Finding Your Place in God's Story, DA Carson


  1. There is love of God-I don't know how else to say this-within the Godhead, within the Triune God. The Bible explicitly speaks of the love of the Father for his Son and the love of the Son for the Father. Two chapters back we noted that John's Gospel, the fourth book in the New Testament, says that the Father loves the Son and has placed everything into his hands (see John 3:35) and has determined that all should honor the Son even as they honor the Father (see John 5:23). Explicitly, then, the Bible says the Father loves the Son. It also tells us, equally explicitly, that the Son loves the Father and always does whatever pleases him (see John 14:31). Why Jesus goes to the cross is first of all because he loves his Father and does his Father's will. This love within the Godhead (what people call God's intratrinitarian love-if God can be referred to as the Trinity, then what we are thinking of is the love that flows among the members of the Godhead, of the Trinity) is a love that is perfect. Each person of the Trinity finds the others adoringly, perfectly lovable. It is not as if the Father says to the Son, "Frankly, you really are a hopeless case, but I love you anyway." The Son is perfectly lovely, and the Father is perfectly lovely, and they love each other perfectly. This is one way the Bible speaks of God's love.
  2. God's love can refer to his general care over his creation. God sends his sun and his rain upon the just and the unjust. That is to say, it is providential and nondiscriminating. It is an amoral love (not an immoral love). He sustains both the godly and the ungodly. In fact, in the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus can use God's providential love to draw out a moral lesson. He says, in effect, "If God sends his sun and his rain upon both the righteous and the unrighteous, then why should you be making all these terribly fine distinctions between who is your friend and who is your enemy, choosing to love only your friends while hating your enemies?" (see Matt. 5:44-47). So there is a sense in which God's love generously extends to friend and foe alike. Here is a second way in which the Bible speaks of God's love.
  3. Sometimes the Bible speaks of God's love in a kind of moral, inviting, commanding, yearning sense. So you find God addressing Israel in the Old Testament when the nation is particularly perverse, saying, in effect, "Turn, turn, why will you die? The Lord has no pleasure in the death of the wicked" (see Ezek. 18:23, 32; 33:11). He is that kind of God.
  4. Sometimes God's love is selective. It chooses one and not another. "I have loved Jacob, but Esau I have hated" (Mal. 1:2-3). This is very strong language. In remarkable passages in Deuteronomy 7 and 10, God raises the rhetorical question as to why he chose the nation of Israel. He ticks off the possibilities. Because they are more numerous? No. Because they are more mighty? No. Because they are more righteous? No. He set his affection on them because he loved them-that is, he loved them because he loved them. He did not love all the other nations just the same way. In the context, God sets his affection on Israel as opposed to the other nations because he loved Israel. It is his sovereign choice.
  5. Once God is in connection with his own people-usually this means he has entered into a covenant-based relationship with them-then his love is often presented as conditional. Consider, for example, the second-to-last book of the Bible, a little one-page book called Jude. Jude, a half-brother of Jesus, writes, "Keep yourselves in God's love" (Jude 21), which shows that you might not keep yourself in God's love. In such passages there is a moral conditionality to being loved by God. Indeed there are a lot of passages in both Testaments where God's love or Jesus's love for us is in some sense conditional ditional on our obedience. Even the Ten Commandments are partly shaped by conditionality: God shows his love, he says, "to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments" (Exod. 20:6). So there are contexts in the Bible where God's love is cast in conditional terms.
Do you see how subtle this necessarily becomes? Inevitably one starts asking ing how these different ways of talking about God's love fit together. It helps to think of human analogies. I could say with a straight face, "I love riding my motorcycle, I love woodwork, and I love my wife." But if I put all three together in the same sentence too often, my wife, quite understandably, will not be pleased. And they really have different weight. Or again, I can say, "I love my children unconditionally." I have a daughter in California who works with disadvantaged kids. If instead she became a hooker on the streets of LA, I think I'd love her anyway. She is my daughter. I love her unconditionally. I have a son who is a Marine, and if instead he started selling heroin on the streets of New York, I think I'd love him anyway. He is my son. I love him unconditionally. Yet in another context when they were just kids learning to drive, if I said to one of them, "Make sure you are home by midnight," and they weren't, they faced the wrath of Dad. In that sense my love was quite conditional on their obeying me and getting the car home on time. In other words, despite the fact that we are dealing with the same kids and the same dad, the different contexts change the use of the love language. It was not that my love for them, in one sense, became less unconditional, for there is a framework in which that love remains constant. But there can be another framework where agreements and family responsibilities prevail-or, in biblical terms, covenantal obligations-and here the dynamics change somewhat.
Comment: From chapter 9, The God Who Loves. See The Difficult Doctrine of the Love of God. Image Source


Muhammad discovers the Trinity

D. A. Carson. God Who Is There, The: Finding Your Place in God's Story (conclusion of chapter 7) 


It may bring things together if I conclude with a story I have told on a number of occasions. My first degree was in chemistry and mathematics at McGill University in Montreal. Somewhere along the line I befriended a wonderful Pakistani gentleman. He was twice as old as I was. He had come to McGill to do a PhD in Islamic studies. (McGill had, and still has, a very fine Islamic institute.) He had left his wife and two children behind in Pakistan, so he was lonely. Over time I befriended him. After a while it dawned on me that he was trying to convert me to Islam. I thought that I should return the favor, but I soon found myself out of my depth in debate, for he was a trained Muslim theologian while I was studying chemistry.

I remember walking with him one night down Mount Royal along University Avenue to Pine Avenue to catch a bus. He had agreed to come to church with me. He wanted to see what it was like. As we walked, he asked me, "Don, you study mathematics, yes?"


"If you have one cup and then you add another cup, how many cups do you have?"

Well, I was taking some mathematics courses, so I said, "Two."

"If you have two cups and you add another cup, how many cups do you have?"

I said, "Three."

"If you have three cups, and you take away one cup, how many cups do you have?"

I said, "Two." So far I was hitting on all cylinders.

So he said, "You believe that the Father is God?"

"Yes." Uh oh, I could see where this was going.

"You believe that Jesus is God?"


"You believe that the Holy Spirit is God?"


"So if you have one God plus one God plus one God, how many gods do you have?"

I was studying chemistry, not theology. How was I supposed to answer that? The best I could do was say, "Listen, if you are going to use a mathematical cal model, then let me choose the branch of mathematics. Let's talk about infinities. Infinity plus infinity plus infinity equals what? Infinity. I serve an infinite God."

He laughed good-naturedly. That was the level of our discussion and friendship.

About November it suddenly dawned on me that he had never read the Christian Bible. He did not own one; he had never held one in his hands. So I bought him a Bible. He asked, "Where do I start?" He did not know how it was put together. He did not know about the Old Testament and the New Testament; he did not know about the Gospels. And I did not know what to suggest to him.

So I said, "Well, why don't you start with John's Gospel?" I showed him where it was, right after Matthew, Mark, and Luke. Coming, as he did, from Asia, he did not read books the way I would read a book. (How many pages can I get through tonight? The more the better!) No, he had a style of reading that proceeded slowly with many pauses for reflection, rereading, and wondering. And the passage he was beginning to think about was John's prologue.

That Christmas I brought him home to my parents' home, who at that point lived on the French side of our capital city, Ottawa, in a place called Hull. It transpired that my father had heart problems, and my mother and I spent most of our time in the hospital.

My dear friend Muhammad was largely left on his own. By the end of that Christmas break, Dad was recovering nicely, so I asked to borrow the car so I could take Muhammad to see some of the sights in the capital city. We went here and there, and we ended up at our Parliament buildings.

In those days there was much less security than there is now. We joined one of the guided tours-thirty of us being led around the buildings-to to the rotunda at the rear where the library is, to the Senate chambers, House of Commons, to the rogues gallery of Canadian prime ministers from Sir John A. McDonald down, and so forth.

We finally returned to the central foyer, which is circled by some large pillars. At the top of each pillar is a little fresco where there is a figure, and the guide explained, as he pointed from one figure to the next, "There is Aristotle, for government must be based on knowledge. There is Socrates, for government must be based on wisdom. There is Moses, for government must be based on law." He went all the way around.

Then he asked, "Any questions?"

My friend piped up, "Where is Jesus Christ?"

The guide did what guides do under such circumstances. They simply say, "I beg your pardon?"

So Muhammad did what foreigners do under such circumstances. They assume that they have been misunderstood because of their thick accent, so he articulated his question more clearly and more loudly: "Where is Jesus Christ?"

Now there were three groups in the foyer of the Canadian Parliament listening to a Pakistani Muslim ask where Jesus was. I was looking for a crack in the ground to fall into. I had no idea where this was coming from.

Finally the guide blurted out, "Why should Jesus be here?"

Muhammad looked shocked. Picking up a line from the Bible verses he had been reading, he said, "I read in the Christian Bible that the law was given through Moses but that grace and truth came through Jesus Christ. Where is Jesus Christ?"

The guide said, "I don't know anything about that."

And I muttered under my breath, "Preach it, brother."

Do you see how it looked to Muhammad? He was a Muslim. He understood about a God who has laws, who has standards, who brings terror, who sits in judgment over you, a God who is sovereign and holy and powerful. He understood stood all of that. But he had already been captured by Jesus, full of grace and truth, who displays his glory profoundly in the cross and becomes the meeting place between God and sinners because he dies the sinner's death.  
Comment: The Gospel of John is indeed a good place to start. 1st image source. 2nd image source.


Growing up in simpler times

Peggy Noonan: An old-fashioned childhood: Nobody killed us

Be sure to read Peggy's article above. She is 1 year younger than I. I was born August 19th, 1949.

One of the joys that I cherish is growing up and the fine youth I enjoyed. Today I briefly entertained my neighbor's 10 year old son. He is a bit frightened to come home to an empty house and so he comes to our house for less than an hour until his older brother comes home.

I remember 10, we moved from Fort Wayne to Cincinnati when I was eleven.

I'm in every photo above except the black and white one. That's my older sister (now 69) in my Mother's arms. I came home to that little trailer. In 1950 we moved into the little white house. Then in 1960 or 61 to the brick house in Cincinnati.

The last photo is my own family, on the porch of my current home in Plymouth. The occasion: Roger's return from USMC duty in Iraq.

Also above is a wedding photo from 1974.

How simple was growing up in the 50's?

  • I would ride that little red bike blocks and blocks (2 milesto a neighborhood park with a pool.
  • My sister and I would take a city bus (a 10¢ ride) downtown to see a movie: like House on Haunted Hill, The Fly, or Run Silent, Run Deep
  • Mailboxes were military green and stamps were 3¢!
  • I remember hearing that Superman had died. Shocked me!
  • A boy on a ice cream bike (a three-wheeled reverse tricycle with a dry ice freezer on the front) would cruise the neighborhood all Summer. This job was my earliest career goal!
  • Trick or treaters were unaccompanied by their parents - really it was that safe!
  • I walked to school (normally with my older sister)
  • We would go to Alto for at least a week every Summer
  • Likewise a week at Grandma's farm (she remarried after the untimely death of Grandad Christmas 1949)
  • There were no worries, no anxiety! Every need I has was met and I was loved by two parents
  • I was not afraid!
A peril of old age is the woe is us, the county has changed for the worse, and the good-old days are gone, not to be seen again.

Frankly there we some scary times:
  • Chief was polio. (image below). Kids got polio and I didn't want to. 
  • Second was the Korean war. I knew about MIGs and that the Reds projected power.
  • Third was Sputnik.  Adults seemed to project that something was amiss.

At the risk of sounding like an old codger:

  • America (the U.S.) has lost its greatness
  • We do not have an Eisenhower, we have an Obama
  • Morally, the U.S. has lost her way. Sure there was adultery, fornication, perverts, and murder then. But then it was considered wrong! Sin!
  • There was a Judeo-Christian worldview. It seemed everyone went to church (I did not know any Jews back then). Now there is a vacuum with an encroaching Islamization. By vacuum I mean a generation of children who are themselves unchurched and the children of unchurched. Several weeks ago I gave a contractor (at the house installing handicapped grab bars in my bathroom) a copy of the Gospel of John. He asked me, I'm serious!, if I wrote it! In the last several months of doctor visits, hospital stay, imaging, et cetera I have met perhaps half a hundred people formerly unknown to me. Three have been "Sarah's". And not one of those Sarah's had even an inkling of the Biblical Sarah! 
  • From time to time I rant and lament about the National Debt. Here's today's. Someday we will pay! I may not pay (dead and alive in heaven!), but a collective we will pay!
The simpler times are past. Pray for our country!

A Christian Response to Islam

  1. Muslims and Christians agree that the Bible is divinely inspired
  2. Muslims argue that the Bible has been mistranslated and distorted, and that God has corrected these distortions in the Qur’an
  3. But there are no historical basis for the claim that the Bible has been distorted in this way (think the Dead Sea Scrolls or the thousands of extant New Testament manuscripts!)
  4. Therefore differences between the Bible and the Qur’an must be resolved in the Bible’s favor (since the Bible precedes the Qur’an by centuries (New Testament) / more than a millennia (Old Testament)
  5. Islam compromises and grievously distorts the doctrine of God – specifically denying the Trinitarian, sovereign Creator God who redeemed his people from sin through the work of His Son
Comment: Notes from Apologetics: A Justification of Christian Belief , p 81.


Taco Bell Exec - Ben Not-so-Golden - fired after Uber attack

A Taco Bell executive has lost his job with the fast food company after being caught on video in a violent incident with an Uber driver in California, Taco Bell told CNBC.com.


Benjamin Golden, who led Taco Bell's mobile commerce and innovation initiatives, according to an online bio, lost his position at the company after a video posted by the Uber driver went viral. "Given the behavior of the individual, it is clear he can no longer work for us," Taco Bell said in a statement emailed to CNBC. "We have also offered and encouraged him to seek professional help." CNBC reached out via email and phone to the 32-year-old Golden, but received no response. His LinkedIn account was no longer available, and his Twitter link was blocked from public sight. According to his bio, Golden was a "seven-year veteran of Yum Brands," the parent company of Taco Bell. Golden was also described in the bio as "a southerner who enjoys mint juleps and horse racing."

Comment: Images: Bio link / screen capture from article.