High Caliber Guns

BEFORE

DURING

AFTER

SOD REMOVAL — CALEB

SOD REMOVAL — JOSHUA

MUCH MORE TO COME…

An article in the Summer 2008 issue of Cigar Magazine entitled, Secondhand Smoke and Global Warming More Connected Than You Think?, by James M. Taylor speaks to the similarities in scare tactics, biased reporting, and bad science found in the battles against secondhand smoke, and our carbon footprint. Taylor points out that as a whole, Antarctica is actually getting colder not warmer. The ice melt on Kilimanjaro is not related to global warming, and that the glacier atop the mountain has been retreating since the 1800s. A Gulf Stream shutdown is not going to happen. Droughts are actually occurring less frequently. And there is no scientific consensus concerning global warming despite what the media is telling us.

Among the most interesting tidbits included in the article are the fact that Al Gore’s, Inconvenient Truth, “contained so many misrepresentations of scientific fact that the British government could no longer allow it to be part of the public school curriculum unless they government first provided teachers with a list of the movie’s numerous scientific errors”, and that there is a petition found at the Web site of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine that has been signed by no less than 19,000 scientists that do not believe the erroneous information the world is being fed about global warming.

Unfortunately, I have not been able to locate the entire article online. However, I have contacted the author and perhaps he will provide me with such a link. In addition, I remarked how nicely the issue of firearms ownership would have fit into his article if he had wanted to make it a hat trick. You can find much of the same information in similar articles written by Taylor at the Web site for the Heartland Institute.

My wife and I stimulated the economy today with the purchase of a Troy-Bilt Bronco CRT Garden Tiller–garden to follow.

An article in today’s USA Today entitled, Pressur Mounts For Pharmacies To Put Out Smokes would have been more aptly titled, Pressur Mounts For America To Become Socialist. The article, written by Wendy Koch, is another glimpse into the growing ignorance of what a free market can and should do, and a corresponding ignorance of what socialism can not and should not do.

This month, San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proposed an unprecedented city ban on drugstores selling tobacco products, including cigars, pipes and smokeless tobacco. “This will be the beginning of a national movement,” Newson predicts…

Others are on the same track. Bills are pending in New Hampshire, Illinois and Tennessee to bar pharmacies with walk-in clinics from selling tobacco, and a bill in New York would apply to all pharmacies, including those in big stores such as Wal-Mart. “Pharmacies are places we go to get healthy,” says Assemblyman Sam Hoyt, author of the New York proposal. “It just seems inappropriate that on the other hand, they sell something that kills.”

Thank you for your insight Mr. Hoyt, but America is where people go to be free. It just seems inappropriate that on the other hand, you should take that freedom away.

“But if a robust Christian faith could handle non-Christian learning without compromising, it was all too easy for Greek and Roman thought forms to creep into the cracks and chinks of a faith which was less and less founded on the Bible and more and more resting on the authority of church pronouncements.” — Francis A. Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live?

Schaeffer is speaking here about the changes taking place during the Middle Ages in which human reason began to be as important to the church as revelation. You can trace much of the destructive influence of this situation by doing even a cursory study on the history of the Catholic church. However, note the first sentence. The inference is that if we approach human reason (philosophy, science, etc.) while standing on the firm foundation of what Schaeffer calls a “robust” Christian faith we gain something. This begs the question , “What does a robust Christian faith look like?” (It also begs the question, “What is non-Christian learning?”, but we will defer that to another time.)

Paul gives us pictures of this robust faith throughout the New Testament. The robust faith is one in which the glory of God is the ultimate goal. The robust faith is concerned not with blind obedience to a set of rules (can you say Pharisee?), but with a transformation of the self as Paul speaks of in Romans, and again, this transformation is not for our ultimate good, but for the glory of God.

Indeed, if we take Paul’s example it could be said that the robust faith must embrace non-Christian learning in order to follow the directive that we are to always be “ready to give a defense”. Of course, by embrace we do not necessarily mean agreement. Paul was familiar with the non-Christian philosophy of the first century, and it could be argued that it is even more critical for the Christian apologist (that is all of us right?) today to have a clear understanding of the non-Christian philosophy surrounding us in order to combat ideas that are simply false. However, it is also important to remember that all truth is God’s truth, and God has not chosen to give a comprehensive revelation in the Scriptures. For instance, the Bible does not teach us the science of mathematics, yet we know that two plus two does indeed equal four.

In the end we we must constantly ask ourselves two questions as we interact with non-Christian ideas: “Is my faith a robust transformational faith with the glory of God as its highest goal?”, and “Is the non-Christian philosophy I am studying, and the way I am interacting with it helping to fulfill that goal?”