I acknowledge the inherent risks in being a man and posting a link to this article, as it might leave the impression that I do so out of some satisfaction from its conclusions. As the husband of a wife, father of a daughter and hopefully someday the father-in-law to a daughter-in-law, that is not the case at all. Instead, I found it contained some refreshingly honest criticisms of “feminism” from inside its camp by some of its members and spokespersons…(I used that word as I assume “spokeswomen” might be taken with offensein our age of gender neutrality, thanks in part to feminism.)
The link above is to an interesting article by Albert Mohler that reflects on several newspaper and magazine essays and a book about feminism. On one hand, I am surprised by what has been revealed in these finding, and then again, I’m not. Having worked for many years in the corporate world, with many women professionals, the downsides to the women’s revolution were played out right before my eyes.
This whole matter can be filed in the “you need to be careful for what you ask for, because you just might get it, and then some” category.
That dreaded ”date-to-be-determined” we had been anticipating since we received the preliminary diagnosis in late January and confirmed in early February, finally arrived today. Actually, we decided last night, but the moment of truth was this afternoon. It was finally time to say adios to our (my?) sweet black Labrador retriever Halle, aka “the perfect dog,” so named, not by me, but others in our family who knew her.
We were able to celebrate life, with her, one last time this afternoon, doing the thing she probably loved more than anything…swimming. We went to the Medina River at Deer Creek Camp, one of her favorite places on earth, and a place where she spent a lot of time both as a puppy and as a young dog during summer camps.
When we arrived there today, she trotted right into the water and swam about without any real place to go, just enjoying the experience. Lacking the kind of vitality that characterized her nature before her cancer, she was only willing to retrieve a stick twice before she decided she had has enough. This same level of exhaustion had been evident in playing ball for the last several weeks, helping us to know that the time had come.
A sad day to be sure, but we met the inevitable with a mix of sadness in loss with a joy at having had her in our lives for 8 years and 4 months. And a hope that we will be reunited with Halle in the life to come. So, in saying ”adios” we not only said good-bye, but we also uttered the prayer implied by the parts of the word “a dios,” literally, TO GOD!
We gave Halle back to God today, with the hope that Jesus will take care of her until we see her again.
“All Dogs Go To Heaven” is the franchise brand for a couple of animated movies and a short-lived television series, none of them having much to do with heaven, and more to do with dead dogs that come back to life. In the case of the first movie, the main character returns to earth to exact revenge on his killer. The second movie and television series were weak sequels although they had big name actors “playing” the voices of the characters. But the title raises an interesting question for me. Do all dogs go to heaven?
Sure, it is comforting to think that our beloved, well mannered, obedient pets go to heaven. But ALL dogs? How about the berserk dog that, with little or no provocation, attacks and mauls a child. How about domesticated dogs that run in packs that look like the animal kingdom’s equivalent of Westsiders, Bloods and Cris, killing livestock for what appears to be the sport of it. Do these dogs go to heaven? Can anyone describe the regenerative process of these “bad boy” dogs? Is there any scriptural basis for the belief that all dogs go to heaven? Is there a scriptural basis to believe that ANY dog goes to heaven? I’ve looked around, but scripture generally deals unfavorably with dogs since they were not regarded as lovable house mates 2,000 + + years ago, like they are today. And since pets don’t seem to be too common in Bible accounts, what are we to make of our sensitivities to our four-legged or feathered, or gilled friends. What do we make of the silence of scripture with regard to the fate of our departed pets?
The theology surrounding the eternal state of deceased dogs is an area that I have not given a lot of thought to. Sure, we have had family pets that have died, but the impending loss of the family pet that everyone generally regards, and even calls “my” dog, has made this a much more relevant issue.
Two weeks ago we discovered a fairly large growth on the gum of my little black Labrador, Halle. The next day the vet shared her suspicion that it was melanoma. The day following, a biopsy was taken and by early last week, it was confirmed that it was not only melanoma, but a malignant form. Bummer!
Monday this week, we took Halle to a veterinary specialist who advised that he could remove part of her jaw bone and do chemotherapy to try to prolong quantity and quality of life. The price tag was breath taking. Before making a decision to consent to any such radical and expensive surgery, I asked that an X-ray be done to see if there were any metastases in her lymph system or lungs. Unfortunately, there were several mets in her lungs, meaning that this growth on her gum, found only two weeks ago, is a fast-spreading fatal menace. Short of a miraculous intervention by God Himself, Halle will be gone way too soon. Much sooner that I could have ever imagined for an otherwise healthy dog. I don’t like it. I can confirm that I am treading water in the midst of the first two of Elisabeth Kubler-Ross’ “Stages of Grief”…denial, shock, isolation and anger. I am pissed!
So, do all dogs go to heaven? I readily concede the attractiveness of what might be a false comfort in pop-theology, which might suggest that if our beloved pets gave us joy in this life, why would a loving God withhold that joy from us in heaven? But, is there any real Biblical evidence to believe this is true? I am not being snarky, or cynical here. I REALLY hope it IS true. The reality that Halle is going to be gone soon, is painful. Really painful. And I would love to be able to attach some confident hope for the future to ease the present pain of her passing. I would love to know that my little Lab will be hanging out in paradise with her creator until I get there. I would love to know that I will get to see her again when I get to heaven myself.
Isaiah 11: 6-9 uses prophetic imagery to describe a state that is most unlike the one we live in today. Isaiah tells of fierce predatory animals living peaceably with what would normally be their prey. Some scholars view this as symbolic of the reconciliation of national and ethnic enemies who will no longer war under the reign of Jesus in HIS kingdom. Others use this view as support for the idea that the transformation of the earth will extend to the animals and the natural order we know now, will be suspended. In either case, it appears that animals are a part of either the earth under the millennial reign of Christ, or perhaps the new heaven and new earth, or maybe both. But this passage stops well short of suggesting that a pet who dies in 2009, will be present in eternity.
Perhaps a more relevant question would be, “will I even care about a former pet when I am in the actual presence of the one true God, the creator of the universe and His son, my savior?” When I am finally liberated from the distractions and affections of this world, will it even remotely cross my mind that I once had a dog named Halle? If the immensely significant one-flesh union I have with Leigh, and the love I have for her, ordained by God for this present life, is no longer in-force in heaven, is there any reason to think that the love I have for a dog on earth will matter after the consummation?
This is a challenge to several of my readers who are now, or who are in training to be pastors. Help me sort this out! I’m serious. It would be a huge help to me.
Barry Obama spoke earlier today at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington DC. The video below is long, and doesn’t even represent the entire speech. However, there is a particular line that I recommend everyone listen to. IN HIS OWN WORDS Barry declares ”…there isno God who condones taking the life of an innocent human being, this much we know…“
How does he square this “knowledge” with his endorsement of the murder of unborn (innocent) human beings who are still in the womb? Is there any possible explanation?
So as to spare you the utter waste of time listening to the entire speech, you can find Barry’s troublesome and contradictory statement starting at approximately the 4:00 mark in the video.
While I did finally get around to reading The Shack last summer, my current sense is that it is HIGHLY unlikely that I will read any of the hot 4-book series twilight(the movie for the first novel is just now hitting the market with lots of television ad support). Still, I know that I have several readers who have children or grandchildren of the age for which the book has been targeted. For that reason, I offer this link to a review of the book written by blogger Tim Challies. As usual, he does a marvelous job of reading and reviewing with a special discernment that might be helpful to parents/grandparents as they consider allowing their young people to be a part of this book series or the movies adapted from them.
To assert that an entire generation universally holds to some standard set of ideologies is preposterous. If I look at my own generational peers, (reaching adulthood in the 1970’s) absolutely every political persuasion known to man would be represented. This same magnitude of diversity could be said for just about any other measure of our intellectual pursuits, our interests, and our personal values. I challenge anyone to prove otherwise as relates to my generation, or any other for that matter.
But alas, take heart. Things are changing. Take a look at OUR future! These are the folks that say they are going to be running the world in 8 years.
An interesting video, well written, edited for great impact and dramatically performed. I say “performed” because aside from maybe a half dozen or so of the people who appeared, none, in my judgment, would have been able to string together these thoughts without the assistance of someone, perhaps Eric Greenberg himself.
So, where to begin with dissecting this propaganda? Perhaps with the shameless indoctrination of children. According to the script, all of the so-called Generation We’s will be of voting age in 8 years, meaning that everyone in this video must have been at least 10 years of age. Some appeared to me to be more like 6 or 7 years old. The production method for a video such as this is to have each person read the entire script, so that once the editing process begins, the producers can select the most impactful recitation of each point made. Meaning that even the youngest were reading all of the assertions that were made in the video. Even if this wasn’t indoctrination, it was at least exploitation.
Or maybe a place to start would be the outrageous generalizations (We’s are more globally oriented, (what is the evidence); technologically adept (because you are comfortable with and can use a computer or play a video game?); less politically partisan (oh, so some of those 10, 11, and 12 year olds are already practicing non-partisanship?).
And how about that hopeful statement that the We’s are going to inherit a nation in decline. Huh? They say this as if it is fait accompli. How was that decided? Are the We’s also clairvoyant? Sure we have problems that must be dealt with, but what exactly is it about our nation that allows for so certain a conclusion that it is in decline? And then there are the contradictions. Such as, they are the best educated generation, but the education systems are failing. News break to the We’s…every generation in this country, has been better educated that the one preceding it. You guys are not unique in this regard! And your children, as a generation, will be better educated that YOU are. Don’t be so fast to pat yourselves on the back. But more to the point, is knowledge the same thing as wisdom? I think it is NOT.
Or maybe I should start with the outright fabrications (the “We’s” will have a lower life span than their parents…how can they possibly know that? If it is true, I suspect it will be the first time it has ever happened since some of the accounts in the Old Testament). And then there is Eric Greenberg’s extraordinary ability to look into the future and discern with such certainty, that there will be this homogeneous value system that will be embraced by Generation We. Perhaps there is a greater likelihood that the values he assigns to Generation We, are representative of his own.
No doubt Greenberg raises some interesting points and areas that frankly are concerns shared by more than just Generation We. However, to assert that these matters will define the mission of this generation is absurd. I have the privilege of interacting with a number of Millennials, a new bunch every year, and I can assure you that the issues raised in this video are not the heartbeat of the young people I am around. And frankly, the ones I know seem much more hopeful, and far less despondent. And they also seem to lack the animus for their parents’ generation that is reflected in the video by the intonations of the people reading the script when they mention the expression ”Baby Boomers.” It just seems to drip with disdain.
Maybe I woke up on the wrong side of the bed, but this video strikes me as a product of unseasoned idealism, or maybe just plain old arrogance. But in reflection, that is the mark of each generation as they reach their 20’s. After all, they have this vast institutional knowledge, coupled with an unrecognized dearth of life-experience on which to rely. And in their cockiness, they are primed and ready to solve ALL of the problems of the world. How do I know? Because I am certain I was right there doing the same thing 30-something years ago.
But, you know what? This sort of thing has been going on since the beginning of human history. And the first examples were a young(ish) couple, in a garden, a long time ago, half a world away from where most of my readers sit, thinking they had a better plan than their father.
By the way, did anyone happen to hear any mention of faith in this oh, so wonderful future world? Nope, I didn’t catch it either. Shall we assume then, that Generation We will be post-theonomous?
Proposition 8 is the ballot item in California, which if passed November 4th, will amend the California constitution to permanently define marriage as between one man and one woman. This would effectively reverse-the-reversal made by the California Supreme Court earlier this year when it struck down a voter approved measure to so define marriage in its traditional terms.
Let it first be said that I am not a resident of California (thank you, Lord), so I have no standing in the matter. However, that is not to say that I don’t have an opinion. Secondly, as I understand it, California already has some of the most progressive “partner rights” laws in the country, effectively granting same-sex partner privileges for such things as health care decision making and visitations and some of the other matters that the GLBT lobby has cried for as having been formerly denied to them because they lacked the legal status of a marriage. So, “marriage” really is a straw man for them. Insofar as “rights” and benefits are concerned, this is purely symbolic. Finally, this whole matter is, to say the least, divisive. There are militants on both sides of the issue, but they probably represent only a small percentage of Californians. Still, virtually everyone has an opinion on the subject and many of them will vote on Prop. 8. I have no idea how this may turn out at the polls. But if the results are similar to what they were several years ago when voters were asked to indicate their opinion, the measure will likely pass by a significant margin. That said, Barry Obama has indicated he is in favor of the defeat of Prop. 8, and he will draw lots of folks out to the polls, so who knows?
Irrespective of which side of this debate you are on, you must admit that it is amazing that major corporations would provide financial support to the groups seeking to defeat Prop. 8. Or more to the point, why support EITHER side? Why pick a side at all? It seems like they are risking their reputations and more importantly their businesses. I would love to have been able to listen in to the discussions (assuming there were any) as the decision makers weighed the cost of supporting such a divisive issue against the perceived benefits and risks. Is the consumer buying power that great among GLBT’s in California to make this a no-brainer for them? How about the buying power of the GLBT’s around the country? Will that be enough to offset the potential losses from people around California and the rest of the country who might find support for the defeat of Prop. 8 to be repugnant? How are these calculations made?
While consumers can certainly make their voices heard with the way they choose to do business with these companies, shareholders ought to really be outraged. As owners of these companies, their profits have been reduced by the amount contributed in support of a cause they may have no interest in supporting. A cause that, insofar as the core mission of these companies is concerned, there is NO correlation. And unless the contributions can be rationalized as a “marketing expense” that produces increases in business in excess of potential losses of business, these really were dumb moves.
Here is a partial list of corporations who have contributed money to support the defeat of Proposition 8 in California. These names were gathered from websites of major news sources, and groups, some in favor of, and some opposed to Proposition 8. If there are corrections that need to be made to this list, I will be happy to do so, if you can provide verifiable evidence of an error.
Apple
At&T
Comcast
Levi Strauss
MTV
Pacific Gas & Electric
Qualcomm
Time Warner Cable
Viacom
So, are you still thinking about that Mac for Christmas? I had sort of tossed around an iPod Touch for my holiday wish list. But now…not so much. And as for an iPhone at some point in the future. Gonna have to rethink that! Good news is that I already have satellite TV, so that’s a switch I won’t have to make.
When it comes to books, I am seldom ahead of the crowd in terms of getting them read before the masses. When Sinners Say “I Do” is not a new book. It was published last year (2007), and for some of my readers, this book may be old news. Still, after finally reading it, I am pleased to recommend it to any of my readers who have not already done so. And for those who already have, I would love to get your feedback on how the book impacted your understanding and if you are married, how it has changed your perspective on your marriage relationship.
Books on the subject of marriage must surely number in the thousands, maybe tens of thousands. And, I have read relatively few of them. In fact, the only ones I can distinctly remember reading are The Exemplary Husband and The Excellent Wife. Both provide very good instruction from a scriptural perspective about the individual roles of husband and wife. Not surprisingly, I enjoyed The Exemplary Husband more than its companion for women, but I read The Excellent Wife so that I could confidently recommend it to the young women I have contact with, who are looking forward to marriage, either imminently, or simply looking to the future.
In When Sinners Say “I Do”, author Dave Harvey goes beyond simply telling the reader what scripture says about the roles and responsibilities of men and women in the bonds of marriage, he diagnoses the root problem that is present in ALL marriages…both spouses are sinners! With wit, humor and wisdom he helps couples apply the truth of the Gospel to the marriage relationship. And in so doing, he helps married couples strengthen the bonds of marriage and to see their potential to glorify God in their covenantal relationship.
Not a difficult read, and at 183 pages in length, not one that will take a great deal of time to tackle. Every married person should read this book, unless of course you are not a sinner.
For many years, my wife has taken short trips with her sorority pledge class sisters to fun destinations around the U.S. It has been a wonderful way for these ladies to stay connected. A core group of 5 or 6 have been consistent in making these get-aways happen for probably 25 plus years, on an almost annual basis.
I had my chance to take just such a trip over the Memorial Day weekend. I am just now posting about it, as pictures are just now coming to life. What a trip it was. Five of us, all college fraternity brothers, with other common linkages such as former roommates, and former swim team members, took off on an exciting white water rafting adventure on the Rio Grande River in northern New Mexico.
Our first night was spent in Taos, which is where we connected with our river guide. Early Saturday morning, be headed about 30 miles north of Taos to begin our trip on the river. We hiked down a steep canyon for about 40 minutes, through wind and a brief snow shower. Our rafts and other equipment were taken down on the backs of mules. Donning wetsuits and rain gear, we set off on a hair raising white water extravaganza.
We hit our first rapids within about 10 minutes of our launch. And the rest of day one was both exhilarating and exhausting as we fought the incredible power of the river to keep ourselves in the raft and the raft right side up. On this first day, one of our brothers was pitched from the raft in the midst of a horrific set of rapids known as Dead Texan Hole. Fortunately, the one to get thrown out was both a former collegiate swimmer and, perhaps more importantly, is from Oklahoma, while the rest of us ARE from Texas. Obviously, a catastrophe was narrowly avoided by this fortunate selection of who wound up in the water.
We spent Saturday night on the banks of the Rio Grande. After a wonderful dinner prepared by our guides, it was off to our tents and sleeping bags. It was a delightful night, but very cold. The only sounds piecing the still night were the faint sound of the last set of rapids we floated before eddying out for the night, and the gentle purring of at least two of my fraternity brothers whose snoring sounded a bit like an idling chain saw. Frost covered everything Sunday morning, but we warmed quickly under a spotless blue sky.
Day Two of these overnight raft trips is normally a quiet day, with many fewer rapids and a day to relax and enjoy the scenery. Not so this year, as the Rio Grande is running at levels not seen in many years. A bunch of river guides who usually head to the Grand Canyon this time of year for more water are staying put in New Mexico. Rapids that are usually rated 2’s and 3’s, are now 4+, with 5 being the highest rating that commercial river runners can legally navigate, according to New Mexico law. So, with this in mind, we approached our second day with lots of excitement but some apprehension.
As we neared the end of our trip, the most extreme set of rapids awaited us. You could hear the roar of the water several hundred yards up stream and you could see the churning waters and mist swirling above the tempest ahead. As we approached we could see an oar boat in front of us trying to figure out how to navigate what lay ahead. They obviously picked the wrong line, as they capsized right in the middle of Souse Hole. We were next! We hit it hard and wet, but a good line. Nevertheless, a deep hole followed by a sudden unexpected shift to the left as we emerged tossed yours truly from the raft, where I had an opportunity to demonstrate my collegiate swimming skills, albeit for a very brief time before being yanked back into the raft by my brothers. Here are just a few shots that do not even begin to approximate the sheer exhilaration of the 40 some-odd miles of Rio Grande that we floated.
Sunday evening, we enjoyed a relaxing dinner on the old plaza in downtown Taos. It was a great opportunity to debrief and to ponder our next adventure. Lord willing, there WILL be another!
Posted by Chuck 
Posted by Chuck 
That dreaded ”date-to-be-determined” we had been anticipating since we received the preliminary diagnosis in late January and 
When we arrived there today, she trotted right into the water and swam about without any real place to go, just enjoying the experience. Lacking the kind of vitality that characterized her nature before her cancer, she was only willing to retrieve a stick twice before she decided she had has enough. This same level of exhaustion had been evident in playing ball for the last several weeks, helping us to know that the time had come.
Posted by Chuck 
