I’m Not Making This Up, You Know


The Weekly Standard has a piece up in which Nancy Pelosi is quoted, and she seems to be saying that she saying that she supports abortion because she’s a Catholic. (H/T, Evi L. Blogger Lady at Batshit Crazy News). I am not a Catholic, but from what I know of that church’s doctrine, I find this mind-bogglingly weird.

Pope Francis was unavailable for comment.

Slappy McWingnut’s Surprise


In December, 2011, I posted this brief article.

Christopher Hitchen’s Surprise

Allahpundit posts:

I ask this earnestly, not to troll: If Hitchens is getting a surprise, isn’t it necessarily a nasty surprise according to Christian doctrine?

Christopher Hitchens’ beliefs concerning God were nearly 180 degrees opposed to mine. Either he is in for a big surprise, or I’m not. Either he is meeting a Maker whose existence he denied, or I will pass on into nothingness when my life ends.

I greatly admired Mr. Hitchens’ talents as a writer and debater, but I believe that God is just and that, being just, God will honor the choice Mr. Hitchens took to be separated from Him.

* * *

After listening to some of the recent preaching by Slappy McWingnut (aka Elder William, The Lord of Satire) (No, I won’t link to it.), it seems that his view of God is nearly as far out of line from mine as was Mr. Hitchen’s, but in a different direction.

McWingnut preaches that his god is a “pissed-off” god who hates being interrupted by prayers. Another part of McWingnut’s schtick seems to be that one can keep this god from being angry by giving money to support his ministry. (OK, that’s a fair parody of a lot of “religious” scam artists.) McWingnut preaches his god’s hate.

The God I serve is loving, and because He is, He grants us the freewill to choose to love or not love Him in return. If we choose to enter into a loving relationship with Him, He is delighted. If we do not, He respects our choice.

If you check out the answers in the back of the book, you’ll see that God says that at some point He will gather those of us who choose to be His to live in his presence. You’ll also see that He says that He will honor the wishes of those who have chosen not to love Him.

My God loves everyone, including Slappy McWingnut.

UPDATE—I’ve had a question about describing God’s reaction to our love for Him as “delight.” In the opening section of Ephesians, Paul writes that God’s intention for us is

… εἰς υἱοθεσίαν διὰ Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς αὐτόν κατὰ τὴν εὐδοκίαν τοῦ θελήματος αὐτοῦ …

which can be translated as

… for adoption as children through Jesus Christ according to the delight of His will …

That word in boldface, εὐδοκίαν, literally means well-seeming or, idiomatically, delight. Most English translations render it as pleasure or good pleasure, but I believe that “delight” better reflects the joy that God says He finds in loving relationships with us.

Quote of the Day


Because the sentence against an evil deed is not executed quickly, therefore the hearts of the sons of men among them are given fully to do evil. Although a sinner does evil a hundred times and may lengthen his life, still I know that it will be well for those who fear God, who fear Him openly. But it will not be well for the evil man and he will not lengthen his days like a shadow, because he does not fear God.

—Ecclesiastes 8:11 … 13

Team Kimberlin Post of the Day


A some point several weeks ago, I remember reading a comment (I believe made by Bill Schmalfeldt) that expressed a disbelief in Hell but that assigned some particular person to a special spot in the Inferno because of some annoying behavior. This brings up an important difference between at least some of the members of Team Kimberlin and me.

You see, I believe in Hell. Bear with me for a few paragraphs while I explain.

First of all, I believe in God and that He is loving. One of the consequences of His love for us is His respect for our autonomy in the choices we make. In the end, we are left with choosing to be one of only two types of people. There are those of us who will say to God, “Thy will be done,” and there are those of us to whom God will say in sorrow, “Thy will be done.” That second group will have chosen to be apart from God, and He will not force them to draw near.

The Polish poet Czeslaw Milosz wrote an essay called “The Discrete Charms of Nihilism” in which he dealt with Marx’s idea that religion was the opiate of the masses.

A true opium of the people is a belief in nothingness after death—the huge solace of thinking that our betrayals, greed, cowardice, murders are not going to be judged … [but] all religions recognize that our deeds are imperishable.

In his fantasy, The Great Divorce, C. S. Lewis paints an allegorical picture of a mundane, boring Hell that may be far more accurate than Dante’s. Lewis notes that we are free to chose to move away from God but that freedom from God has a consequence.

Hell begins with a grumbling mood, always complaining, always blaming others … but you are still distinct from it. You may even criticize it in yourself and wish you could stop it. But there may come a day when you can no longer. Then there will be no you left to criticize the mood or even enjoy it, but just the grumble itself, going on forever like a machine. It is not a question of God “sending us” to hell. In each of us there is something growing, which will BE Hell unless it is nipped in the bud.

We choose our path. We can take the one offered by Satan in Genesis 3 or the one that leads us to draw nearer to God.

Here endeth the lesson.

A First Amendment Challenge to Gun Control


The Washington Times reports that a practicing Sikh, Gursant Singh Khalsa, in California is suing the state in federal court. He is asserting that his religious beliefs require that he be armed in order to “be at all time fully prepared to defend themselves and others against injustice.” The suit says that the Mr. Khalsa “fears arrest, criminal prosecution, incarceration, and fine if he were to possess loaded weapons with 11 or more round magazines within his home, within his vehicle on the streets, or within his temple. But his religious beliefs require no less.”

Read the whole thing.

Quote of the Day


Τὸ λοιπόν ἀδελφοί ὅσα ἐστὶν ἀληθῆ ὅσα σεμνά ὅσα δίκαια ὅσα ἁγνά ὅσα προσφιλῆ ὅσα εὔφημα εἴ τις ἀρετὴ καὶ εἴ τις ἔπαινος ταῦτα λογίζεσθε Finally, brethren, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is of good repute, if there is any excellence and if anything worthy of praise, let your mind dwell on these things.

—Paul the Apostle

A Blogger Briefing


Rick_SantorumOne of the blogger briefings I attended at CPAC today was with Rick Santorum. He’s an impressive fellow. Most of the conversation at the brief dealt with his views about how religious faith informs his conservative beliefs.

While Mr. Santorum and I disagree on some of the details about how to carry our beliefs out into the public sphere, it was refreshing to hear a politician unashamedly explaining the real why behind his politics.

Why Do the Heathen Rage?


An atheist hate group wanted to put up a provocative anti-religion sign as part of the Madison, Wisconsin, December holiday display. The mayor said, “No;” a federal district court said, “No;” and now a three-judge panel of the Sixth Circuit has said, “No.”

I suppose they could be mad as Hell, but they don’t believe in it.

So, other than an appeal further up the legal food chain, their best recourse may be the Airing of Grievances during Festivus.