 |
|
|
Issues In Perspective - November 27 & 28
November 27 & 28
|
|
Perspective One
|
THANKSGIVING: GRANDPARENTS
Thanksgiving is a family time. It is not only good food and relaxation; it is a time to be with family, especially grandparents. But that is no longer the reality. The Wall Street Journal ran a recent article (19 November 1999) which stated that never before have there been so many grandparents in America but that do not celebrate Thanksgiving with their children. The dislocations of World War II and the Cold War, accelerated by the interstate highway system and federal subsidies to colleges and universities, led to a situation today in which one of every three Americans live outside the state in which they were born. In 12 states, natives are a minority of the population–especially Nevada where 80% of the population was born elsewhere. At the opposite end is Pennsylvania where 4/5ths of the population is homegrown. What then is the reality?
- Most families are not able to get together for Thanksgiving. Therefore, children are growing up without grandparents on a regular basis. Is this good? Probably not. The Scriptures make it clear that the older are to teach and model before the younger. In this highly mobile society, that is not happening. The church needs to compensate and provide surrogate grandparents. There is value in the young mixing with the old.
- Needless to say, we have so much to be thankful for. During this holiday weekend, please take time to thank God for your blessings. Wherever you are and whatever you do vocationally, you are blessed! God is good!
- Pray for our country and our leaders. 1 Timothy 2 makes this obligation very clear. Please recommit yourself to this this year. Our leaders at all levels need your prayers. Please pray for them.
- Thanksgiving is a time to reflect on and give thanks for God's grace and blessings over the last year. We are privileged to live in a country where this is still a viable option.
Back to top
|
|
Perspective Two
|
|
THANKSGIVING: LIFE BY DESIGN
Science can never answer the question: Why is there something rather than nothing? The universe is a massive fact we cannot ignore. Further, we cannot ignore the fact of its appearance of being designed. As one staunchly atheistic 20th century astronomer put it: "A common sense interpretation of the data suggests that a super-intellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology." How do we get around such a "common sense' interpretation? Darwin supplied the answer: Any "design" in nature is only apparent, the work of blind mechanisms. All you need to produce life is random variations directed by natural selection–and a lot of time. Human DNA contains more organized information than the Encyclopedia Britannica. If the full text of the Encyclopedia were to arrive in computer code from outer space, most people would regard this as proof of extraterrestrial intelligence. But when seen in nature, it is explained as the workings of random forces!!
That is why there is a resurgent commitment to intelligent design within science. The irreducible complexity of the human cell begs for intelligent design. But one physicist, Steven Weinberg, is so displeased with this talk that he proposes another alternative in astronomy: He posits that there have been multiple big bangs and only one actually produced the universe we now live in–theory but not fact. In fact, there is not one shred of evidence to support this. Weinberg, like so many others, is embracing philosophy in the name of science. Such a postulate is just that–theory, not scientific fact.
A materialistic theory of evolution does not prove that God does not exist, because it is impossible to prove a negative. What it does aim to prove is that matter and natural law can do the creating without requiring any assistance from God. People have every right to question whether the available evidence supports broad claims for the power of natural selection, and they can't help noticing Darwinist authorities like E.O. Wilson promote scientific materialism as the foundation of all knowledge. This is not science; it is philosophy. The universe begs for intelligent design and the intelligent designer is God.
See Wall Street Journal, 15 October 1999, p. W17.
Back to top
|
|
Perspective Three
|
|
THANKSGIVING: A SMALL VICTORY FOR LIFE
Following a rash of unfavorable federal court decisions on state laws that ban partial-birth abortions, the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, in late October, handed down a decision that upheld the constitutionality of laws passed in Illinois and Wisconsin. How should we think about this?
- This procedure, as you might remember, involves stabbing a child in the base of her skull, shoving in a catheter and sucking out her brains. Thirty states have passed bans on partial-birth abortions. In 20 of these states, federal courts have delayed implementation or struck down bans that have been passed by state lawmakers.
- The New York Times on its front page described as one upholding a ban on a "type of late abortion." The Times has persistently refused to call the gruesome procedure partial-birth abortion. It has editorially adopted the language of diminished responsibility.
- The justification of this procedure begins with this line of argumentation: The right of the woman to choose is absolute. Anything that burdens or qualifies that right is presumably suspect, wrong and unconstitutional. From the standpoint of the fetus, it makes no difference whether, when the skull is crushed, the fetus is entirely within the uterus or its feet are outside the uterus. How abominable! How legally does the law distinguish between a fetus, a fetus partially outside the womb or totally outside the womb? Apparently most of the law does not grant total protection of law but to the latter. Even if the baby is partially outside the womb, it is not protected by law. This is morally and ethically wrong. God will simply not approve nor look with favor upon such a gruesome form of murder! God help us if we maintain this insanity!
Back to top
|
|
|
