New Blog

FYI...i have changed blogs: New one can be found here.

Thank you history!

Can Spurrier continue to maintain the Gamecock's exquisite record yet another season before realizing he is no better than Lou Holtz? I say...absolutely. Let's check their past few seasons:

1998: Brad Scott takes the Gamecocks to a stellar 1-10 season, showing Ball State just how it's done in their sole victory.

1999: 1988's National Coach of the Year and National Championship coach Lou Holtz takes the reins to bring glory back(?) to Williams-Brice. Gamecocks finish 0-11, but almost had a win against Vanderbilt, losing 10-11.

2000: With one of the biggest turnarounds in college football history, Holtz leads the Cocks to an 8-4 season, defeating now football power Ohio State in the Outback Bowl. Holtz gets SEC coach of the year.

2001: What's this...the Gamecocks are 9-3, and (finally) defeated cross-state superior, Clemson.

2002, 2003: The Glory of 2000-2001 was short lived, for the Gamecocks finished 5-7 in both years. The Gamecocks were also taken to the woodshed in their home match vs. Clemson in 2003, losing 63-17. Holtz said it was the longest day of his life.

2004: 6-5 Lou's last year, leaving the sidelines after a brawl with Clemson, rendering both teams ineligible to play in a bowl game.

2005: Enter Steve Spurrier. Like Holtz, Cocks bring in a former National Championship coach. Gamecocks go 7-5, with notable wins over Tennessee and Florida. Spurrier is named SEC coach of the year (sound familiar? (See year 2000 above))

2006: Gamecocks pull their best record since 2001 (the year after Holtz is named SEC coach of the year). Cocks go 8-5, and defeat Clemson at Death Valley due to coaching errors on behalf of the Tigers. NOTE: This season is very similar to the 2001 season. The Cocks not only had their best season in a few years right after their National Championship coach is listed as SEC Coach of the year in the previous year, but they defeated Clemson as well. And just like the 2001 season, what happens next? (See below)

2007: Cocks hit .500 for the season, finishing 6-6.


Based on college football history (which is more reliable than many think), here is my prediction for South Carolina football in the near future. I won't be so specific as to predicting each game, but let me say this: If you compare the Spurrier era with the Holtz era, some striking similarities arise. They stink....then an excellent old school coach comes in....win's SEC coach of the year....has their best season the next year and also defeats Clemson in that year....then the "magic" begins to fade. In Lou's case...it's 3 years and out after defeating Clemson in his best season (2001). 2008 is Spurrier's year two after his best season, and defeating Clemson in 2006. Sooo....based on history, the Cocks pull a mediocre, losing or 500 season (see 2002-2003), and like 2003 are absolutely plowed by Clemson, thus leading Gamecock nation to turn on Steve as they did Lou. 2009 is Spurrier's last year, before he retires and serves as an analyst for ESPN when he is not cashing in on his free pass to the Augusta Links.

Go Tigers!

Get Pumped!

Preach the Word!

As i have been studying the book of Acts preparing for a series for my youth group, i have read and noticed some excellent things about the book. I would also like to recommend a book that should be on every expositor's shelf. The book is The Message of the New Testament by Mark Dever. The book is a series of sermons that Dever has preached at Capitol Hill Baptist in Washington D.C. The cool thing is that each sermon overviews an entire book of the New Testament. Although the highly-specific details of each passage are not and cannot all be elaborated, Dever does a wonderful job of giving one preparing to preach some very helpful insights, allowing them to clearly see the big picture of each book of the Bible before they study the small parts...and shouldn't this be our goal as Believers...showing the big picture before the small details? None of us were converted by studying the biblical details on the millennium, were we? And i know nobody who's life was transformed by performing a character study on Paul. We were saved by the Gospel...THE big picture of the Bible. It is God reaching out to us through His son Jesus. This IS the major doctrine of the Bible, for there is no other name under heaven in which we may be saved.

And speaking of the Gospel is what i found so fascinating. Dever mentions that in his sermon at Pentecost, Peter does not have to argue for the truth of the death and resurrection of Jesus. He states it as if it was known by all the non-believers in Jerusalem at that time. Peter says: "this Jesus, delivered up according to the definite plan and foreknowledge of God, you crucified and killed by the hands of lawless men. God raised him up, loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for Him to be held by it..." (2:23-24). Notice that Peter does not argue for the resurrection of the dead, as Paul had to in Athens and other places. It was taken as a fact! Dever says that the people there had either seen or heard from someone who had seen Christ risen, and therefore had no trouble listening to and believing what Peter was saying in his sermon.

Today, we do not have this freedom. In our pluralistic, authority and intention-questioning culture, we cannot proclaim the Gospel like Peter did because so many have no clue who Jesus is...or if they think they do, many are mistaken, making Jesus be who they want Him to be in their own minds. We must prove the Gospel by letting it speak for itself through the proclamation of the Word of God, then allow the Holy Spirit to draw those who hear to repentance (2 Tim. 2:25). We must not be silent...for this is exactly what Satan wants. He wants his preaching to be the only preaching heard in the world. No wonder Christ rebuked him with the Truth! May we do the same to those who teach lies, yet with gentleness and respect.

Screamin' Eagle Outfitters

Well, baptist history is finished for me, and Keri and I are off at camp with our wonderful new youth group having a blast and learning about Jesus. Check out our new blog in the sites of note section under CRYG.

Baptism- Part Deux

After some study on the subject of who can administer baptism, i have come to a few conclusions. After studying the biblical passages that refer to baptism, i have noticed that the Bible does not concern itself with the specific details of who did the baptizing as much as it did to relate the heart change of those who were baptized.

One could make the case that deacons are the ones who are supposed to baptize others. We see in Acts that Phillip was chosen as a deacon for the purpose of serving the saints in Jerusalem. But Phillip also baptized others as well as served the church, as seen in Acts 8:38. So maybe deacons are supposed to baptize others. But in 1 Timothy 3, (the most direct description of a deacon in the Bible), there is no mention of the task of baptizing other believers.
The same can be said for elders/overseers. There is no mandate for baptizing in Paul's descriptions of this office in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

Since these passages offer no help on our study, our efforts must be directed toward the commands in scripture to baptize. The one that comes to my mind is the Great Commission in Matthew 28:19. Jesus' command is as follows: "Go therefore (on the basis of the authority that the Father had given Him) and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit..." As i was discussing this with Barley today, he brought to my attention the priesthood of believers. According to 1 Peter 2:9, Peter tells his scattered flock: "But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light."

Isn't this what we as believers are called and challenged to do in the Great Commission? Yes! For Gospel proclamation is made up partly of how God has saved us, and then sent us (c/f Acts 22). We must note that the Great Commission was addressed to the 1 1 disciples, but we take it as a mandate for all Christians. I have never heard a sermon where the speaker said that the Great Commission was for the disciples or pastors only. Therefore, we must conclude that the command to baptize found in the same verse as the great commission applies to all true Believers...and i would hold as well that this applies to only those believers who are rightly baptized by immersion after they have professed faith in Christ. Questions? Comments? Cries of outrage?

Who want's a turn?

Soo...to start, sorry for the delay between posts. Who would have thought that summer classes, although short and to the point, would come with hours upon hours of extra reading and work?? Anyway, i have recently been pondering the subject of baptism for believers. And although i will dogmatically affirm based upon the Bible that baptism is for regenerate believers only, i do have a question on who it is that can administer the act of baptism. Is it reserved for ministers only, or can any baptized Believer biblically baptize another? Your thoughts and findings please...

The Hill

Okay, so Barley did a piece on the greatest college football entrances, and left out one of great importance. I have included it below. Not to mention it comes from one of the loudest known college football stadiums in the nation. In fact, ESPN deems Clemson's entrance into Death Valley "the most emotional entrance in college football." Enjoy:

Heavenly Treasure

Matthew 6:19-21 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

I was able to see this principle applied the other day during a conversation with my friend...um, we'll call him Jake. Jake is around 70 years old, and is still working a good part-time job, where he travels often for his company. It is important to note here that Jake does not work out of necessity.

Jake was telling me the other day that he could not find anything in the Bible about retirement. I affirmed his conclusion, reminding him that our rest will come in heaven (of course that will not even be close to all that we as believers do in Glory). I told Jake if he ever retired, he should go on the mission field, to which he replied that he felt that the Lord constantly used him to give to fund missions. He did not know it, but giving was one of Jake's spiritual gifts and Romans 12:8 shows that giving to the body or the Lord is in fact a spiritual gift. Jake then told me that it was his goal to give 50% of his income to the Lord! Although he was not there yet, i know that he is close. This was a great blessing to me, because although I have taught this for many years, i have never actually met anybody who practiced this principle of giving.

This experience blessed me because everything that Jake is doing flies in the face of what the rest of our country would tell him to do. Some may say:

1. "you need to use that to increase your life insurance since you are old so you can leave your family a fortune."
2. "You need to invest that money!"
3. "You should travel"
4. "You should retire fully and play golf"

But regardless, all say would say to Jake; "you are a fool." To which I would hope that Jake would reply in the words of Dr. Don Wilton, "I'm a fool for God...who's fool are you!?" For Jake's treasure is in heaven, not on earth.

The church needs more believers like Jake. We need to realize that it is God who gives us the ability to gain wealth (Deuteronomy 8:18), not to build up our own kingdom, but to further His.

Pimp My....Life?

Xzibit would be proud. Not only has he helped to spur on the nationwide car-customization craze that started on the west coast with his TV show Pimp My Ride, this theme is starting to leak into churches as well. A church from South Carolina has recently began a sermon series entitled "Pimy My Life." Its goal is simple. To transform a person's marriage, mind, body, mouth, and relationships to be more Christ-like. Sounds pretty good, right? My prayer everyday is nearly the same (minus the pimp part), for I want all of these things to be transformed daily by the renewing of my mind. Furthermore, I'm sure that Paul meant all of these things plus some more when he stated "for me, to live is Christ" in Philippians 1:21.

So what's the problem? The problem is one of over-contextualization. Now, contextualization is basically the process of making something meaningful to a specific culture. For example, if I were preaching the Gospel in India, i would be sure to make it as relevant as possible to those in that culture, yet WITHOUT weakening the Gospel message. In America today, many churches are striving to reach a postmodern generation, and sadly, many are severely lessening the Gospel of Christ because they think the Gospel will offend those "seekers" who enter their doors. I have known churches in the past who have told their members to not bring their Bibles, for that would make the "seekers" feel out of place. I have also known the same church's worship band to play secular songs about getting drunk and hanging with the rough crowd in the service before they enter into their time of worship. Obviously, this pastor has never read Romans 3, for if he had, he would understand that no one seeks but God!

Back to my point. I understand what this church is trying to do, and I'm sure that their pastor probably has a few good points and insights to teach if he sticks to what Scripture says on each of these topics. But his methodology of life change is all wrong here. Does he know what pimp means? Let us ask the dictionary:

pimp (pimp)
noun
a man who is an agent for a prostitute or prostitutes and lives off their earnings; procurer.

pimp Synonyms
procurer, whoremonger, pander, white-slaver, runner, hustler*, flesh-peddler*; see also criminal.

Xzibit's TV show shows old, beat up cars being transformed into flashy, used-to-be old beat up cars with TVs, stereo systems, custom paint, wheels, and etc. But the old car's body and frame is still underneath. There is just a whitewashing, if you will, of the outside. Contrary to this theme, Christ does not take our old self and add new stuff to it...he destroys our old self! Paul says in Galatians 2:20 that he is "crucified with Christ." Believers are no different. Our old self is destroyed, and our new self is being constantly perfected and made holy day by day. This is sanctification...and it is glorious because of the heinousness of our sin, God would not accept our old selves with new "parts" or thoughts, language, marriage practices, etc. Sin must be destroyed and atoned for, and the only way that this happens is when Christ saves His sheep, destroys their flesh-life, and imparts His righteousness on them! This is true life transformation, and is signified by our baptism, which demonstrates that believers were buried with Jesus in death, and then raised up to walk in newness of life! To God be the glory, great things He has done!

The Question that Darwin Could't Answer

It is a little known fact that some of Charles Darwin's strongest initial objectors to his theory of natural evolution were palaeontologists. They claimed that if macro evolution were a fact, there would have to be millions of fossils of the intermediate varieties of species. Tons of species constantly evolving, should be tons of their leftover fossils, correct?

No. According to Zoologist Mark Ridley: "The fossil record of evolutionary change within single evolutionary lineages is very poor. If evolution is true, species originate through changes of ancestral species: one might expect to be able to see this in the fossil record. In fact it can rarely be seen. In 1859 Darwin could not cite a single example"(1).

But Darwin's time was years ago...so certainly today we would have better record of this happening, right? Palaeontologist David Raup of the Field Museum of Natural History said: "We are now 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species, but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time" (2, Italics mine).

For me, this serves as striking proof that we need be more diligent to test the claims of natural evolution, especially when we draw them out, such as with the fossil record of supposed intermediate species.

______________________________________________

(1) The Problems of Evolution, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1985, p.11.

(2) Conflicts Between Darwin and Palaeontology, Field Museum of Natural History Bulletin, January 1979, p.25.

Quote for the Day

A thought for the natural evolutionist:

by: Voddie Baucham Jr.

"You are an accident. You are a mistake. You are a glorified ape. You are the result of random evolutionary processes. That's it. No rhyme. No reason. No purpose. You are ultimately nothing. This is the pathetic reality when evolution runs its ideological course. If the idea is carried to its logical conclusion, man has no more value than a field mouse; and if the field mouse is an endangered species that happens to share the man's property--guess who has to move?" (1)

________________________________________________

(1) Voddie Baucham Jr. The Supremacy of Christ in a Postmodern World. (Gen. Eds. John Piper and Justin Taylor), p. 55, italics mine.

The Evolution of the Woodpecker

An observation about the long-tonged woodpecker. It is known that this woodpecker has four distinguishing features that allow it to survive. They are: 1)Sharp talons for holding onto a tree, 2) A long, pointed, strong beak for piercing wood and reaching insects inside the tree, 3) An extremely long tongue for reaching insects, and 4) A membrane around their brain that keeps it from splattering against their skull when they are repeatedly pecking at a tree.

So my question to those who believe in macro evolution is this: How did the woodpecker evolve? All of these traits are needed for its survival, and take any one of these away, and you take the bird away. I think this is an excellent example of intelligent design. Now, there are many websites dedicated to disproving the thought that a Creator formed the woodpecker for a purpose. Some claim that us creationists have got it wrong in the way we describe the exact anatomy of the woodpecker's tongue, and therefore there must be no creator since somebody did not do their proper research before writing an article (kind of a large jump in their conclusion if you ask me). Others state that not all woodpeckers, such as the Sapsucker, have extremely long tongues. But the sapsucker feeds off the sap that oozes out of the hole it just bore in a tree. Does it need an extremely long tongue? Heck no...because the sap comes to it once it bores a hole in the tree. Yet, because of this micro evolutionary trait in this species, many natural evolutionists say that there can be no Creator because the sapsucker does not have a long tongue as do many other woodpeckers. This also seems to implicitly state that a Creator would only create the exact same kind of every species and is not clever enough to create variations. (Ex. This train of thought would state that a Creator would always create an orange tiger with black and white stripes and nothing else, no Siberian tigers or anything like that, just orange ones with black and white stripes).

Yet, regardless of what type of woodpecker we consider, we must remember that these birds are still woodpeckers, designed with different physical characteristics that allow their survival. If it evolved from something like a hummingbird, which also has a long beak, how would it do so since the hummingbird is missing the other three essential traits that most woodpeckers need to survive?

Evolution....Fact or Fiction?

This past semester I have studied the topic of evolution more than I ever had in the past. I have: 1) Studied it in theology, 2) Seen Ben Stein's movie Expelled, 3) heard Dr. John C Lennox of The University of Oxford present an excellent series of lectures on atheism, and 4) been reading his book, God's Undertaker. Has Science Buried God? It is an excellent piece, and i would recommend it to ANYBODY, Christian or non, who would like a scientific look into the reality of a Creator.

Of all the things I have learned this semester concerning evolution, one thing stands out. Dr. Lennox describes a fictional setting where his aunt baked a cake and had it analyzed by the world's top scientists. He stated: "The nutrition scientists will tell us about the number of calories in the cake and its nutritional effect; the biochemists will inform us about the structure of the proteins, fats etc. in the cake; the chemists, about the elements involved and their bonding; the physicists will be able to analyze the cake in terms of fundamental particles; and the mathematicians will no doubt offer us a set of elegant equations to describe the behaviour of those particles (bolded mine)." (1)

It seems as if they have all the basics of the cake covered. Yet one thing remains. Nobody knows WHY his aunt made the cake!!! All of these scientists in their distinguished fields each covered the how questions, but none could answer the question of “why?” Lennox states: “the only way we shall ever get an answer (to why the cake was made) is if (his aunt) reveals it to us.” (2)

And it is the same way with the creation of the earth. Our sciences can answer many of the “how” questions, but none can touch the “why” question. That answer we will leave up to God in His Word. For Genesis 1:1 states, “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.” Now, many criticize the Bible for its lack of detail in these opening chapters. But the Bible was never meant to be a scientific account, for if it was, then it would have been of no use until about a century ago when scientific study was adequate enough to answer for some of the “how” answers. The story of creation was meant to answer the question of "who" and "why," and if you must insist on an answer to the question of "how," it says so as well. God created by His Word.

We are just beginning...more to come. And please....if you read this, make a comment of some sort. If you agree...say so. If you disagree...say so! More comments and interests will without a doubt equal more posts.

___________________________________________

(1) John C. Lennox. God's Undertaker. Has Science Buried God? p.40

(2) Ibid.

More Goodies....

Okay....so Washer got me fired up. Here's a few more shorter tid-bits that should be seen. Watch the Osteen one first!



No comments need be made about what Osteen has to say. I will let Piper speak for me.

Don't go through life not having heard this...

To the three of you that read this...sorry for the delay in a new post. I've been held up by some minor things such as exams, traveling to the Congo, accepting my Nobel Peace Prize, etc. Anyway, i thought i would post one of the greatest sermons that i have ever heard. In it, Paul Washer speaks boldly to the youth of America, but the sermon is definitely applicable to any believer, regardless of age. So do something for me. Take an hour (seriously...you can watch American Idol later...) and listen to something that is going to change your walk with the Lord. For my non-believing audience, it just might spark your interest in true Christianity...

LET THE CHILDREN COME TO ME...my thoughts on Luke 18:15-17

A question has come to me involving the meaning Jesus' words in this passage. Is this, as Calvin says, a promotion of infant baptism (1) or is Jesus simply using the children as a illustration in His teaching? There are many today who have taken this to mean that we should baptize children because they are safe in God's hands.

In his commentary on the Harmony of the Gospels, Calvin states; "Infants are renewed by the Spirit of God, according to the capacity of their age, till that power which was concealed within them grows by degrees, and becomes fully manifest at the proper time"(2). It seems, according to Calvin, that Christ is implying an underlying age of accountability where children are protected by God until they are able to comprehend such matters as sin, repentance, Christ's substitutionary death, etc... But is Calvin making too much out of this passage...I believe so.

Now, I do believe that children are saved until a certain age when God will hold them accountable, and as far as what that age is...i have no idea, and in fact, believe that nobody knows exactly what that age is except God Himself. This is a subject that the Bible is not extremely explicit on. To show my hand, I hold onto the teaching underlying the narrative of 2 Samuel 12:23 where David says that he will someday go to his son who had recently died. I believe that this subtly shows that children are in God's care until a certain age. Again...what is that age? Alvin Reid says "there is no set age of accountability", nor "there is no singular biblical passage that clearly elaborates this concept" (3).

So...what is Jesus talking about in Luke 18? I believe to answer this question, we must study the passage in the larger scope of the chapter. If we believe that scripture is truly divinely inspired (2 Tim. 3), then we must also believe that God had His hand in the placement of biblical books, chapters, and passages. Therefore, in studying the Word, we must be quick to not isolate a specific text for study. For example, many, many people do this with the Parable of the Lost Son, yet as Al Mohler remarkably demonstrated in a sermon on Luke 15, the Parable is not to be read on its own, but as a continual response of Christ to the Pharisees and their hardness of heart as seen in verses 1-3. In the same way, look at what our passage of study is surrounded by.

Luke 18:1-8 God's mercy shown to a poor widow

Luke 18:9-14 God's mercy shown to a repentant tax collector

Luke 18:15-17 (our passage) God's mercy shown to infants

Luke 18:18-30 God's mercy refused to one in great power/ wealth. (please don't read too much into this)

Do you see the similarities? The majority of this chapter shows that the mercy of our Lord is given to the low, the humble, and the utterly helpless! William Hendriksen agrees, stating; "The meaning is: the only possible way to enter the kingdom is by receiving it readily and trustfully as a chlld accepts a gift. A child is not too proud to accept a gift! (4). What a wonderful testimony to the Sovereignty of our Lord, who chooses not the proud, arrogant, or powerful, or super-religious, but the ones that are not designated as the "cream of the crop." A child, especially an infant, is totally, 100% dependant on their parents for everything. In means of salvation, we are likewise 100% dependant on our Heavenly Father, who gives grace to the humble.

In conclusion, it is my belief that this passage should not be used as a means infant baptism, for it is a very shallow one at that, but instead as Jesus' teaching through demonstration on His goodness and control of Salvation!

Footnotes:

(1) John Calvin. Calvin's Commentaries- Vol. XVI p. 390.
(2) Ibid.
(3) Alvin Reid. Introduction to Evangelism. p.245.
(4)William Hendriksen. New Testament Commentary- Luke. p.830.

I've been punked...

Sooo....i am usually pretty up on the April fool's jokes. One of my roommates at Clemson was a large prankster. And regardless of the occasion, whether it was April 1st or not, the rubber band used to find its way onto the kitchen sink sprayer more times than desired. A few years (and a few change of shirts later) i learned to pick up on a coming prank pretty quickly.

That was until today. As i opened my email to check today's messages after class, i noticed that Google was introducing some new email tools, one of which was called Google Custom Time. To my suprise, this feature allowed you to post-date your emails, as if you wrote them a day or a few years ago. You could even select an option that placed the email in the recepients box having already "been read" by the recepient. They would think that they just glanced over your email, and that you did send it to them when you said you would.

This came with a variety of testimonials from users who had "cheated the system" by winning contests, getting out of missing an appointment, or etc...Not looking at the fine print too closely, i immediately began to lay out just how i was going to use this as a teachable moment with the 3 of you who read my blog. You would have learned just how this is related to the decline of morality in America, and the need for the truth of the Gospel to penetrate every aspect of our society once again as it did a few centuries ago.

Upon doing some more research for the Google-bashing blog post, i began to notice a few things. First, one of the main ingredients that allows Google to post date emails is what they call an e-flux capacitor. Now...this may slip past many of you, but not by someone who's favorite movie trilogy series is Back To The Future! The Flux Capacitor is what allowed the time machine to go back in time. It was somewhere around this point in my studies that i realized the excellent April fools prank that the entire staff at Google had just laid hard on me (and hopefully 1/2 of America as well).

All i can say is this: Well done, Google...well done.

Have We Lost Our Minds !?!?

Ecclesiastes 9:3b- "...the hearts of the children of men are full of evil, and madness is in their hearts while they live...

Recently, i heard a story of a teacher and his student. One day while allowing the student to take a make-up test, the teacher noticed the student working feverishly on her exam. Except something was out of place. Instead of making an effort to finish the exam in front of her, the student was working to transfer answers from one exam to another without being seen. Yes...it's the old friend's exam in the desk trick...happens all the time.

The teacher called the student out, discovered the borrowed test, and decided to discipline the student accordingly. This was done by giving the student a grade of "0" on the exam, and having the student call her mother to tell her what she had done.

Now it gets exciting...

The mother agreed wholeheartedly with the teacher that what happened was wrong, and that the student should be punished. But when the mother found out that the student was to get a "0" on the test, she became fanatic. "Why would YOU GIVE (note who's fault she is implying) my child a zero. She knows what she did was wrong...couldn't you give her a 50 instead! When the teacher responded "No," the blame shifting continued. "I pay so much money for a tutor to help my child out, and this is the thanks I get?"

The parent ended the conversation in a manner that was trying to blame the teacher and the tutor for their child's test score.

HAVE WE LOST OUR MINDS, AMERICA?? Notice what happened here. The mother blamed the school workers for HER and HER CHILD'S SIN!!! In the words of my great friend, Brian R. Mahon, "what the crap" is going on? Did she forget that her child was willingly cheating, something that most schools have awarded "0's" for or worse over many, many years. I am not that old, but still remember the days in elementary school when a good spanking with a ruler was an acceptable form of punishment. Now, a short 15 years later, schools are not supposed to punish cheating the way they have been for years because it's "too severe" a punishment!?

Ecclesiastes sheds a great light on this subject. Our hearts as humans are full of evil, madness even. And because of this, one thing we do is not want is to take the blame for our own mistakes and sinful behaviors. We want to shift the blame to someone else...and in this case, the mother blamed the tutor for her daughter's sin, basically saying that she wouldn't have had to cheat if the tutor would have done his job. The teacher was then blamed, saying that he was too strict for even considering punishing this girl. And if the mother DID succeed in her endeavor, what would she be doing? She would have taught her daughter that it is OK to sin...and it is possible to sometimes "get out of the consequences."

John Owen even wrote, "He that has slight thoughts about sin never had great thoughts about God." We will do well to realize that sin is a chronic condition, eating away at our very souls day by day. And its effects continue to grow until our sin is washed by the blood of Christ Jesus.

Brothers and sisters in Christ, may we be all the more diligent to seek for and allow Christ to destroy our old selves and the sin that clings to them. May we not be satisfied by living for ourselves here and there, but may we truly live the way we should having been already crucified with Christ.

And to those reading who do not have a saving faith in Jesus, please understand that if you find yourself siding with the mother in this story, please understand that when i say you are wrong, it is said in love. Realize that all people have sinned and fallen short of God's glory, and that sin=death. No one short of Christ has lived without sin. There is no denying it, and to see sin's effects, one need go any further than to turn on the TV or look out the window. If you are just now realizing that you live in a state apart from Christ, the beginning of life in Christ does not start with you getting your act together. It begins with repentance. Repent of your old, selfish ways that are full of the enemy, and trust in Christ, allowing Him and His Word's to mold your act for you. Confess Him as the Lord who He really is, and allow Him to soften your heart of stone towards one bent on Him.

A Tribute to "The BamaMule"

The BamaMule

The BamaMule is no longer in the family. A sad day indeed. And since I was not around for our last few weeks together, and therefore, a goodbye wheelin' trip was out of the question, I thought an online tribute was the least i could do.

The Mule was my first vehicle, and was given to me by my parents as a suprise in 1997. I had desired a vehicle that had a larger engine and was a manual. Furthermore, i think everybody's first car should be a manual transmission (I know my children's first vehicles will be).

The Mule came with stock with a 4.3 litre V-6 with 160HP and 230 lb. of torque. Optional equipment was none...and the only thing power on the vehicle was the steering! A true teenage boy's vehicle of glory, the Mule sported vinyl seats, a rubber floor throughout, and (by far the best) four-wheel drive! Rest assured that this was made full use of.

Throughout high school, the BamaMule worked hard and played hard. It pulled a trailor full of lawn mowers daily for 3 full summers and falls, helping out with my lawn business. On the occasional weekend, we would hit various trails and mud holes, making it through to the other side far more than needing help getting out. It was also used to transport many rolls of toilet paper that would somehow find its way to various targets, er, people's yards.

After i graduated high school and entered college, my brother, Andrew took the reigns of the Mule for another two years, still hitting the mud. After he went to college, the Blazer became a spare vehicle for my family, being used for the dirtier jobs needed around the house.

During my senior year of college, the BamaMule saw new light, as i took him to Clemson. I also developed a fresh taste for trail riding over mudding (which took forever to clean) with a friend of mine from school. We embarked on numerous trips to western North Carolina, crawling over some trails that would make the faint of heart even more so.

After college and marriage, the BamaMule climbed back up to the #1 spot, becoming my daily driver while working in Easley for about a year. Being 13 years old, and having over 120,000 miles on the odometer, the vehicle never let me down, starting up everyday and doing what was requested of it.

For two years, the Mule moved to Columbia to serve Keri's father as another daily driver. Although a few old parts needed replacing, it took him about 60 miles a day back and forth to work, as well as put his boat in and out of the Lake Murray.

In late 2007, the BamaMule came back to Spartanburg, and after an extensive detailing job, was taken by my brother Andrew to Greenville to be used as a spare vehicle. In February of 2008, a buyer came along and purchased the BamaMule from us. His kids already love it!

In the 11 years that i had a share in the BamaMule, i saw it move from 77,000 to 165,000 miles on its odometer. By the time we sold it, it still started up everytime, never needed "warming up," and was just as capable off road as it ever was.

Ride on, BamaMule...Ride On

Simply Amazing!

For the 2 or 3 of you that have been anxiously waiting for an update, your day has come...and with a project to try out as well.

Here's the senario: You have locked your keys in your car and are miles away from civilization. You are carrying nothing but your cell phone. It's starting to get dark, and you are noticing wierd noises as well as scary people approaching you. And if this wasn't enough, you hear somewhere in the background a banjo softly begin to play the theme from Deliverance. The time has come to QUICKLY make a decision. What should you do? Your options are:

A) Call K.I.T.T on your remote watch to come and help you out.

B) Smash your window with a vengance, find your keys, start your car, and speed away just in time shouting, "I will survive!!"

C) Realize that your time has come, sit down, and cry like a little girl.

D) You call your wife, friend, parent, neighbor's cell phone who is miles away on your cell phone. You ask them to grab your spare car remote key fob, point it at their cell phone, and hit the unlock button. Your doors will unlock, and you will be home free!

Think i'm crazy...try it yourself!

Yes, an older topic, but one that encourages a call to stand...

Recently, a friend of mine journaled about the movie, The Golden Compass. He elaborated on some common views about how Christians should respond to the movie. Here is a excerpt from his thoughts:

I've had a close friend mention the movie to me recently and pledge his steadfast desire to tell all of his friends not to patronize the movie. I've also gotten a few group invitations to boycott the movie. I don't want to make it seem as if I feel more enlightened or to be derogatory when I say this, but I'll be blunt. Why wouldn't I go see the movie? Well to be honest, I'd rather go see American Gangster, but I'm lost on why I should boycott this movie. Is it because the author is an atheist? What is Peter Jackson's faith (the director of Lord of the Rings)? ..... Let's think this through and not jump on the baptist boycott bandwagon. If you take your kid to see this movie is he going to end up wanting to kill God? Seriously?....

Go focus on your friendships with non-Christians and work on loving them instead of fighting against an innocuous movie. If you want to have intelligent conversation with a non-Christian about the movie, go see it. You're going to see about 10 other movies in the theater that year that are also directed by an atheist and have themes not in accordance with biblical living. So, why not go see a movie that would enlighten you to an opposing point of view and might be entertaining? I have a good friend who is studying the Koran. In detail, in order to better understand Islam. Is it because he's questioning his faith? Is it because he has a Muslim friend who he's targeted and befriended? No, it's because he wants to be educated. Are you afraid of the movie because it might educate you to a different point of view. Is it because the Church is afraid of a non-bible thumping point of view? Think about it! Anyways, long story short. I think this is a silly battle, and I hope we're more critically thinking as a body of Christ to fear a movie like this. It's a naive point of view to think we can defeat the work of Satan in people's lives by not going to see a movie. That's about as weak as the SBC's Disney boycott because of gayday. Don't tell me I can't go to the Magic Kingdom. I love Space Mountain.You know what? Call a non-Christian friend up, Buy him and yourself a ticket, then afterwards go out for a beer and have a talk about the movie and about God and salvation.

To begin, let's look at the details. The movie, The Golden Compass came out this past December as a movie geared towards children. Many Christians have been told simply that this movie is bad, and they should not see it or allow their children to see it. Based on this, it is my belief that many Christians today severely underestimate what this movie is about. It is NOT simply a children's movie based on a book written by an atheist author! The issue goes far deeper. Yet this is what many in my camp (including my friend) seem to believe. And many have boycotted the movie because of this very reason. What goes unnoticed is the deeper underlying motives of the book's author. Although Phillip Pullman has publicly denied allocations that the movie is trying to promote atheism, let's look at some statements Pullman gave a few years ago about the books that the movie is based on. The following comes from Christian Post. com.

Even though the British author has taken a more palatable approach in marketing his books as the movie date draws near, comments made in past interviews have been more indicative of his position.

In an interview with Third Way, a Christian newspaper in United Kingdom, Pullman said of the third book in his trilogy: “Of course, I don’t say, ‘There is no God.’ “I say: ‘There is a God, and here he is dying’ – and this is what I was particularly pleased with, as a result of an act of charity. And he goes ‘with a sigh of the most profound and exhausted relief.’”

When his books were released in Australia in 2003, Pullman told The Sydney Morning Herald that his “books are about killing God.”

So, is Pullman simply an atheist author trying to make a movie? Absolutely not!!! He is trying to destroy the Christian faith, starting with our children! Have we so easily forgotten how impressionable children are? Still, some simply want to make the argument that we should not "Baptist Boycott" this movie.

Now, whether those knew the underlying conditions of the movie or not is another story. But let's assume they did, and still wanted to view the movie because they want to have something to discuss with non-believers. Surely, this justifies purchasing a ticket and promoting the movie, doesn't it? Not at all! Again, let me remind you that the movie's underlying theme is the death of God! Can we not simply take that point and use it in discussion if we are so interested in "intelligent conversation?"

"But i need to see the movie in order to discuss it," some might say. Do you? Do you really need to see a movie about killing the Almighty Creator of the world and the Initiator of your salvation in order to have a conversation about God? I am reminded of how agents in the IRS determine if a check is a fake. They do not learn to distinguish between a real check and a fake one by studying the different types of fakes. They can easily spot the fakes because they have studied the true checks, and know what they are supposed to look like. In the same way, we as Believers must not conform to the patterns of this world(Rom. 12:1-2) in order to understand it. We must not even view theology as a trampoline in order to please man (or ourselves). Are we trying to please man or God?(Gal. 1:10)

So in conclusion, it is my belief that we should not see the movie because of the underlying motif of its author. Of course, there will be some who will want to argue, but instead let us draw near to Christ, knowing that His Word is profitable for reproof and training in righteousness. But don't take my word for it. If this topic interests you, check out Al Mohler's stance:

http://www.albertmohler.com/blog_read.php?id=1065

Welcome to the blog! But who am i welcoming? For all i know, there will probably be nobody that reads this...but for me that is okay. And if you are reading this, then congratulations...you are a forerunner here and deserve a prize. I have decided that there are many things that i should write about after discussing them in my classes, so here is my avenue. Surely there will also be other topics posted as well, most likely those that involve college football in some aspect. So hold onto your seatbelts, cause here we go.

Oh, you are probably wondering why the title of the blog is Held Together in Him. Well, it modeled after Colossians 1:17 that states: "And He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." All things in my life are because Christ is holding it together. Just read Colossians 1 in its entirety.