The Sin of Hezekiah

Nov 11, 14 The Sin of Hezekiah

Posted by in Culture, Feature, Opinion

by Shawn Meyer With a few exceptions, the record of the kings of Israel and Judah is a biblical Who’s Who of powerful evil. One of those refreshing exceptions is King Hezekiah. He knew his place, obeyed God, and showed humility before Him. Unlike the kings who preceded him, he displayed a passionate hatred of idolatry. 2 Kings 18:5-6 eulogizes, “Hezekiah trusted in the LORD, the God of Israel. There was no one like him among all the kings of Judah, either before him or after him. He held fast to the LORD and did not cease to follow him.” (NIV). Despite all that counts in his favor, there are at least two blemishes on Hezekiah’s legacy. One was a profoundly foolish decision; the other was an appallingly sinful attitude. Both are recorded in 2 Kings, chapter 20. All eyes were on Assyria. Judah’s brothers to the north had recently fallen to King Shalmaneser. Though God had just delivered Judah from the Assyrians, their brutal campaigns and continued world dominance offered cover for a quietly rising power in the east. Word had reached Babylon that King Hezekiah had fallen ill. In an apparent goodwill gesture, the king of Babylon sent emissaries with gifts. By the time they arrived, God had healed Hezekiah, who was feeling well enough to give them the grand tour, foolishly showing off all the treasures of the palace. Unbeknownst to Hezekiah, they took mental inventory before returning to Babylon. Enter Isaiah the prophet. He rebuked Hezekiah’s indiscretion, saying, “Hear the word of the LORD: The time will surely come when everything in your palace, and all that your fathers have stored up until this day, will be carried off to Babylon. . . And some of your descendants, your own flesh and blood, that will be born to you, will be taken away, and they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.” Instead of the desperate weeping and calling out to God for which Hezekiah was...

read more

Choices and Approved Choices!

Sep 15, 12 Choices and Approved Choices!

Posted by in Abortion, Liberals

by Charles Gruenwald One of the few comments that I reuse on Facebook, is a request for someone to flow chart the logic used by some folks on the left. Many of these requests are the result of videos taken at political ‘rallies’ – for lack of a better word. The Democrats’ National Convention and the protests in Madison, Wisconsin are two places which have proven to be fertile ground. KQTH talk show host, James T. Harris has posted several enlightening videos which illustrate why my requested flow chart cannot be drawn without random forks, loops, and dead ends. One of his most recent postings, courtesy of Reason TV involves how attendees of the DNC define choice. There is no secret that the Democrat party’s platform includes the supposed fight to protect a woman’s right to choose who comes out of her body – and how, but it appears that this is the limit of free choice. In the video,’ How Pro-Choice are Democrats,’ several folks were asked about the obvious right-to-choose, versus some subjects that lie in the very gray areas of Progressive ethics, such as right-to-work, buying “bladder buster-sized beverages” at 7-11, and the use of incandescent light bulbs. In the end, I’d finally realized that there are choices, and then there are approved choices. All of the people who were interviewed in the video did a predictable job of expressing their joy when asked about their support of a woman’s right to choose. However, when asked if that right to choose extended beyond the uterus, their attitudes shifted toward a certain preachiness that people on the left usually project onto the average pro-lifer. Needless to say, their defense of opposing choice when it comes to sixty-four ounce Pepsis, incandescent light bulbs, and union representation was sloppy, but only in their holier-than-thou , environmentally-centered world does such preachiness override the obvious contradictions. The most revered institutions on the left – advanced education, and unions, depend on compulsory membership. The left’s big celebrity...

read more

Choices and Approved Choices

by Charles Gruenwald One of the few comments that I reuse on Facebook, is a request for someone to flow chart the logic used by some folks on the left. Many of these requests are the result of videos taken at political ‘rallies’ – for lack of a better word. The Democrats’ National Convention and the protests in Madison, Wisconsin are two places which have proven to be fertile ground. KQTH talk show host, James T. Harris has posted several enlightening videos which illustrate why my requested flow chart cannot be drawn without random forks, loops, and dead ends. One of his most recent postings, courtesy of ReasonTV involves how attendees of the DNC define choice. There is no secret that the Democrat party’s platform includes the supposed fight to protect a woman’s right to choose who comes out of her body – and how, but it appears that this is the limit of free choice. In the video,’ How Pro-Choice are Democrats,’ several folks were asked about the obvious right-to-choose, versus some subjects that lie in the very gray areas of Progressive ethics, such as right-to-work, buying “bladder buster-sized beverages” at 7-11, and the use of incandescent light bulbs. In the end, I’d finally realized that there are choices, and then there are approved choices. All of the people who were interviewed in the video did a predictable job of expressing their joy when asked about their support of a woman’s right to choose. However, when asked if that right to choose extended beyond the uterus, their attitudes shifted toward a certain preachiness that people on the left usually project onto the average pro-lifer. Needless to say, their defense of opposing choice when it comes to sixty-four ounce Pepsis, incandescent light bulbs, and union representation was sloppy, but only in their holier-than-thou , environmentally-centered world does such preachiness override the obvious contradictions. The most revered institutions on the left – advanced education, and unions, depend on compulsory membership. The left’s big celebrity cause...

read more

WHY JOE SCHEIDLER TRUSTED A MAN WHO KILLED 75,000 BABIES

Feb 23, 11 WHY JOE SCHEIDLER TRUSTED A MAN WHO KILLED 75,000 BABIES

Posted by in Abortion, Christianity, Culture

from Joe Scheidler The pro-life movement lost a powerful voice in defense of unborn children in the recent death of former abortionist Dr. Bernard Nathanson. Along with Lawrence Lader he had founded NARAL (then called the National Association for the Repeal of Abortion Laws). He had performed abortions enthusiastically for many years, directed the largest abortion facility in the Western world, and by his own accounting was responsible for 75,000 deaths. As difficult as it is to say now, at the time of his pro-life conversion many years ago, I did not quite trust him. I was skeptical of his story that he didn’t realize abortion was the taking of a human life until he saw an ultrasound. Perhaps he just seemed too matter-of-fact about what he’d done, without the contrition that his role in the abortion business would warrant.   “Most pro-lifers accepted him with open arms, but when other stood and applauded at his presentations, I sat quietly.“Then one day in Indianapolis, I saw him in the lobby of the hotel where we were both staying, and he asked me if I would like to have a talk. We sat down together and I told him frankly of my misgivings. “For some time he sat in total silence. And then he said, “Joe, do you realize what I have to face some day—75,000 lives on my conscience? If I would admit outright the horror of what I was doing, I could not live with it. Someday I will face my judge with all those lives on my conscience. It’s almost too difficult to admit what I have done, so I have to approach my conversion in a way that will help me keep my sanity.” “I could see in his face that he was sincere—that his role as an abortionist and abortion promoter weighed on him more than he could express—and the only feeling I had for him was compassion. From that time on, we became good friends. “Shortly after that conversation,...

read more

Sticky: How Dads Can Avoid Billy Ray’s Regrets by Doug Giles

Feb 20, 11 Sticky: How Dads Can Avoid Billy Ray’s Regrets by Doug Giles

Posted by in Christianity, Culture, Hollyweird, Humor

I can’t imagine watching a video of my 18-year-old daughter on TV, high as a kite, sucking on a bong, speaking gibberish, posing for semi-nude photos and laying all over a bunch of tweenage horndogs attempting to imitate an episode of Skins while knowing that there’s pretty much nothing I can do about her bad behavior but talk to Jesus and weep. That sad and avoidable scenario I just painted has been Billy Ray Cyrus’ reality of late as he watches his famous daughter Miley follow Anna Nicole Smith’s path of doom (Billy Ray’s words, not mine). In next month’s , Cyrus the Senior states that he screwed up with Miley the Younger by allowing the dipsticks at Disney to hijack her soul and turn her into narcissistic cash calf who takes her cues from immoral and greedy SOBs instead of Christ and common sense. Not only did Billy lament the putrid path Miley’s “wholesome” Disney “handlers” took her down, but he was particularly POed at how they separated her from him and helped destroy his marriage just to make royalties off his little girl. “But at least Billy Ray is rich,” some of you are undoubtedly thinking. Yeah, money’s a cure for all ills, eh dork? Well, BRC doesn’t think so and went on to say that if he had it to do all over again that he would not have let Miley get into the industry and would rather have had a sane, sober and safe offspring at home rather than millions of dollars, a Disney show and a daughter who imitates Snookie. Now, I’m not here to beat up on Billy Ray, but Billy … what were you thinkin’, brother? You let hellish Hollywood run your life and your kid’s life. What did you think was going to happen? Those diphthongs in Tinsel Town don’t give two flips whether or not you and your kid live or die as long as their checks clear. Therefore, as you well know by now, they’ll...

read more