An excellent article by Chuck Baldwin on Romans Chapter 13 at Lew Rockwell.

Notice that civil government must not be a "terror to good works." It has no power or authority to terrorize good works or good people. God never gave it that authority. And any government that oversteps that divine boundary has no divine authority or protection.

Civil government is a "minister of God to thee for good." It is a not a minister of God for evil. Civil magistrates have a divine duty to "execute wrath upon him that doeth evil." They have no authority to execute wrath upon him that doeth good. None. Zilch. Zero. And anyone who says they do is lying. So, even in the midst of telling Christians to submit to civil authority, Romans Chapter 13 limits the power and reach of civil authority.

Did Moses violate God's principle of submission to authority when he killed the Egyptian taskmaster in defense of his fellow Hebrew? Did Elijah violate God's principle of submission to authority when he openly challenged Ahab and Jezebel? Did David violate God's principle of submission to authority when he refused to surrender to Saul's troops? Did Daniel violate God's principle of submission to authority when he disobeyed the king's law to not pray audibly to God? Did the three Hebrew children violate God's principle of submission to authority when they refused to bow to the image of the state? Did John the Baptist violate God's principle of submission to authority when he publicly scolded King Herod for his infidelity? Did Simon Peter and the other Apostles violate God's principle of submission to authority when they refused to stop preaching on the streets of Jerusalem? Did Paul violate God's principle of submission to authority when he refused to obey those authorities who demanded that he abandon his missionary work? In fact, Paul spent almost as much time in jail as he did out of jail.

In my opinion, Romans 13 has been deliberately misconstrued for ages (ages!) to excuse cowardice and sheer laziness.

Michele at Reformed Chicks Blabbing has written a very good article on the topic of Christianity, Politics and Blogging.   I've been trying to find a good "money quote" but the whole thing should be read to get the big picture.  Here's a good passage.

One final point about blogging. I think that visitors to this blog might want to look at it in a similar way to a Christian mommy blog or a Christian fishing blog, or Christian crafting blog, where the blogger shares their passion for their hobby or their vocation as well as their love of the Lord. Would you go to a mommy blog and complain that they aren't blogging enough about the kingdom of God if they are blogging about their children? Maybe not because motherhood is kingdom work, which leads me to my next point -- for the reformed all of life is about the kingdom. You can't really separate the kingdom from the believer. There is no such think as a secular anything for the Christian. It's all been sanctified by God and should be viewed from the perspective of his kingdom.

Or, we could add, a Christian gun blog.  Go read it if this kind of thing interests you.

Another Christian perspective on self defense and the Second Amendment.  Why They Hate the Second Amendment or What the Second Amendment Declares About Us at Reproach of Men:

Thus, even though men are evil, they also fear death. Moreover, they fear where they will go when they die. For this simple reason alone, the Second Amendment secures the rest of the rights that the LORD God gave us. It is only when men do not see any prospect of dying that they become bold in their wickedness, and their willingness to harm their fellow man. This is also the reason the death penalty is effective in deterring crime as well.

The problem today is that we in America are a society in which the vast majority of individuals believe that they are inherently good, and that only a few “bad apples” cause the problems we have. This kind of thinking is not scriptural, rather it comes straight out of humanist doctrine and teaching. In fact, the idea that man can become good by his own efforts is a central part of the philosophy of Communism and the striving to create the “new communist man.”

The outworking of this kind of thinking is the belief that we can somehow create a utopian society if only we can get rid of the implements of violence. Thus, the blame is laid upon “the gun” when guns are used in the commission of a crime, instead of upon the person who wilfully chose to commit the crime. (After all, that would be to tacitly admit that we are all inherently given to evil.) It is also the driving force behind the idea that individuals in government are somehow better than the “common man” and that they are more enlightened and would never oppress their fellow citizens. After all, aren’t they elevated above the rest of us?

Via The War On Guns.

Scholar Claims Key Error In Jesus Documentary:

The scholars who analyzed the Greek inscription on one of the ossuaries after its discovery read it as "Mariamene e Mara," meaning "Mary the teacher" or "Mary the master."

Before the movie was screened, Jacobovici said that particular inscription provided crucial support for his claim. The name Mariamene is rare, and in some early Christian texts it is believed to refer to Mary Magdalene.

But having analyzed the inscription, Pfann published a detailed article on his university's Web site asserting that it doesn't read "Mariamene" at all.

The inscription, Pfann said, is made up of two names inscribed by two different hands: the first, "Mariame," was inscribed in a formal Greek script, and later, when the bones of another woman were added to the box, another scribe using a different cursive script added the words "kai Mara," meaning "and Mara." Mara is a different form of the name Martha.

According to Pfann's reading, the ossuary did not house the bones of "Mary the teacher," but rather of two women, "Mary and Martha."

"In view of the above, there is no longer any reason to be tempted to link this ossuary ... to Mary Magdalene or any other person in biblical, non-biblical or church tradition," Pfann wrote.

In the interest of telling a good story, Pfann said, the documentary engaged in some "fudging" of the facts.

"James Cameron is a great guru of science fiction, and he's taking it to a new level with Simcha Jacobovici. You take a little bit of science, spin a good yarn out of it and you get another 'Terminator' or 'Life of Brian,"' said Pfann, who briefly appeared as an ossuary expert in the documentary.

In Israel on Tuesday for a screening of the film, the Toronto-based Jacobovici welcomed Pfann's criticism, saying "every inscription should be re-examined."

But Jacobovici said scholars who researched the ossuary in the past agreed with the film's reading. "Anyone who looks at it can see that the script was written by the same hand," he added.

Jacobovici has faced criticism much tougher than Pfann's academic critique. The film has been termed "archaeo-porn," and Jacobovici has been accused of "pimping the Bible." Jacobovici attributes most of the criticism to scholars' discomfort with journalists "casting light into their ossuary monopoly."

"What we're doing is democratizing this knowledge, and this is driving some people crazy," he said.

I haven't said anything about this movie before because, honestly, it just doesn't matter to me.  I only mention it now because here we have another case of a professional propagandist filmmaker perhaps fudging the truth, but certainly not telling both sides of the debate because doing so would damage his agenda.

I especially like that last line about "democratizing this knowledge."  How dare we ignorant plebs insist on hearing both sides of an argument.  We should just take the words of our elite Hollywood betters for granted, and otherwise shut the **** up.

This post is somewhat related to religion, so if you're not interested, skip it.

The congregation where I attend worship service has someone who, for lack of anyone else, essentially became the full-time song leader. After we began attending there, there were two of us and I get the opportunity to lead singing quite often.

Last night I got a phone call that he was going to be stuck in Houston today, and wanted to know if I could cover for him.  I'm always glad to do so.  The only thing was, my wife had to work today and I didn't have anyone to keep an eye on the kids while I was occupied with my duties.  So I sat them right on the front row, said a little prayer, and took a chance on them not causing too much of a ruckus.  They sat quietly and even tried to follow along in the song book during the song service.  They made me really proud today, and I told them so.

Of course, when they got outside after services they were running around like a couple of psychotic squirrel monkeys, but I let them run.  They earned it.

SayUncle is wondering, "What’s the deal with the atheists who try to convert?...I understand why religious people try to convert atheists. They don’t want you to go to Hell and they want you to have eternal life instead of oblivion. But I see no motivation for converting a believer to non-belief."

There's a simple answer.  Some might not like it, so take it or leave it--that's your decision.

The answer is found in I Peter 5:8.  "Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour..." (KJV)

As tools of evil they seek to destroy those who are saved.  It really is that simple.

Lots of other bloggers are posting things in this vein, and maybe someone out there is wondering what I'm going to say on the topic, although it's more likely that no one gives a plug nickel what I think.  It may be hard to explain.

The church to which I have been added does not celebrate Christmas as the birth of Christ.  There are some members who do not celebrate anything at all on December 25 because they believe it sets a bad example.

We are not directed to celebrate the birth of Jesus, and we are not given the information as to the exact date of his birth.  So we don't celebrate December 25 as such.

Many of us do still have a day of fellowship with our scattered families, and that fellowship and goodwill includes the exchange of gifts and the sharing of food.

However, if people out there want to remember the birth of Christ on this day, I will not try to convince them that it's wrong or bad or anything.  I think any occasion that can turn one's thoughts to such a thing is good.

I once explained it like this:

When I was in college choir, did I refuse to sing carols at Christmastime that had religious subjects simply because I do not believe that December 25 is the actual birthday of Jesus?  No, of course not.  For he once said, "For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them."  So if some carolers are gathered together singing "O Little Town of Bethlehem," "Joy to the World," or "Hark, the Herald Angels Sing," who am I to say that he is not there in their midst?

So celebrate whatever meaning you want.

I may have said it before, but I'll say it again.  Iona does a version of "When I Survey the Wondrous Cross" that is just awesome.  The words are traditional, but they've composed their own music.

It's on the album Journey Into the Morn from 1995.

Christian readers of this blog might want to check them out.  Especially if you're like me and can't stomach Jesus-pop, or contemporary Christian, or whatever it's called.

Humor that isn't for everybody.  I thought it was funny, but then, your mileage may vary.

10.  The preacher announces the sermon is from Genesis and you check the table of contents.

9.  You think Abraham, Isaac and Jacob may have had a few hit songs during the '60s.

8.  You open to the Psalms and a WWII savings bond falls out.

7.  When asked, you say that your favorite Old Testament patriarch is Hercules.

6.  Your favorite Bible verse is "Cleanliness is next to godliness."

5.  You become frustrated because Charlton Heston isn't listed in either the concordance or the table of contents.

4.  Catching the kids reading the Song of Solomon, you demand:  "Who gave you this stuff?"

3.  You think the minor prophets worked in the quarries.

2.  You keep falling for it every time the preacher tells you to turn to First Hezekiah.

1.  The kids keep asking too many questions about your usual bedtime story:  "Jonah the Shepherd Boy and His Ark of Many Colors."

I was checking out some of the blogs that have recently joined the Screw the U.N. blogroll and therefore discovered Pedestrian Infidel.  A post on the main page pointed to an older series of posts (from January) that everyone should read.  Written by one of their members who calls himself Avenging Apostate, it is titled From a Jihadist to a Human.

The following post is my testimony on how I converted out of the death-cult of Islam into Christianity. It was a very long journey which I undertook just to find the truth and I am happy that finally I did. I wanted to share this testimony publicly because I want people to know what Islam’s true colors are and to show what it's like being born in a Moslem family in Saudi Arabia. I feel I have a duty to do so too. I want to show how the horrors of Islam change people’s lives, break relationships and destroy homes—these are the experiences that might not be fully understood in the west. I hope my testimony helps save lives both spiritually and physically and in the meantime I hope I don’t get caught in Islam’s deadly embrace. You will know why I say that once you read this.

Follow the link, read the whole series.