The One Thing Christians Should Stop Saying - By Scott Dannemiller

Found here. My comments in bold.

-------------------

There are things we say casually that become a part of our language as Christians. They are not theological treatises, nor are they intended to portray the entirety of every thought on the subject. They are innocent expressions of general thoughts.

The author objects to one of these, on the basis that the expression is misleading and incomplete. He makes it sound like a grave sin or heresy, but it isn't.
------------------------

7 Signs of Tyranny - Robert Reich

Found here. My comments in bold.

---------------------

Dr. Reich used to be interesting, then pedantic, and now he's finally ridiculous.

---------------------

Proposal for carbon dividends smart for economy - By John Noreika

Letter found here. This is the organization. Amazingly similar to the Citizens' Climate Lobby. My comments in bold.
-------------------------------

As a former member of President Reagan’s Republican Senatorial Committee, I am enthusiastic about getting this new “Carbon Dividends” proposal before Chronicle readers. (Sorry to nitpick, but I have to stop and note that this common grammatical mistake grates on me. Whenever one writes an introductory clause in a sentence, it must connect to or form a basis to help understand what's coming next in the sentence. 

However, in this case the author is providing a fact about himself that is not related to the remainder of the sentence. That he was a member of a senatorial committee is completely irrelevant to the topic of the sentence, and in fact is misleading. One might think that he has some sort of official capacity as a former committee member, or that he has some sort of approval or mandate from this past membership, or that it lends credence to his position. None of this is true, of course.)

A leftist changes his mind about the Department of Education - FB conversation

A FB friend posted this, and a leftist objected. But... the leftist actually changed his mind when confronted with the evidence. This is a rare event indeed.

-----------------------
Yup time to dismantle Dept of Ed. Let states do the job. Let PTA's influence school education.

Like Show more reactions CommentShare Comments

Kyle  Uh... well all the countries we are trying to catch up to have a centralized, national organization in charge of standards. They also have a separation between religious motivation and education so that their system can be more inclusive. It's been a model for success and EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU AND THIS IDIOT ARE PROPOSING! Have we fallen so far that we just ignore what has proven successful?

Like · Reply · February 16 at 1:47pm

Rich  Like Latvia and Slovenia?

Like · Reply · February 16 at 1:56pm

Rich  http://fairreporters.net/.../the-best-education-systems.../

The Best Education Systems In The World In 2015 | Fair Reporters

FAIRREPORTERS.NET

Like · Reply · February 16 at 1:57pm

Kyle  Thanks for the info Rich. But, my point is that these countries all have a centralized organization nationally that oversees standards. The proposal to remove the Department of Education would merely diminish children in low income and disadvantaged areas from receiving education while funneling more money to more privileged people. I'm sorry, but appointing someone that is completely unqualified does not then allow excuse to dismantle the DOE. That's like taking a functioning engine, although one that needs work, and smashing it to pieces and saying, "see I told you it was broken."

Like · Reply · February 16 at 2:42pm

Rich  Oh, you mean like "no child left behind?" Apparently you support that national standard?

The removal of the department of education would not diminish children in low income and disadvantaged areas.

Like · Reply · February 16 at 2:49pm

Kyle No child left behind was a terrible attempt to improve. That, also a republican plan, allowed for discrimination school to school and was used to excuse the institution of the voucher system and funneling of funds to predominantly white areas.

Like · Reply · February 16 at 2:58pm

Rich  I thought you said central control was always better?

Like · Reply · February 16 at 3:00pm

Kyle Oversight yes. The policy changes have been the problem. And worse yet, the politicians' changes are financially motivated for personal gain at a cost to the American people and especially the children. 

I would recommend looking into the scholastic material suppliers if you haven't already. It's a huge racket.

Like · Reply · February 16 at 3:52pm

Rich  Ok, so your walking back your claim that the end of central planning is bad? 

Oh, and by the way, here's the historical US ACT test performance. You'll note that scores were on the way down past 1980 (when the Department of Education was started), and have stayed down. In other words, there is no evidence that federal involvement has helped. Likewise, there is no evidence that discontinuing the department will hurt.

Like · Reply ·  February 16 at 4:00pm

Kyle  Well, I've thought about and I'm changing my position. You are right Rich and Bob. We should eliminate the Federal Department of Education. Fiscally I can support that. Rich you were right to point out that the racket that is the school supplies company might be better eliminated if the Federal funds were no longer being utilized. And, your info on the drop in test scores in correlation to the activities of the DOE was compelling.

Like · Reply · 17 hrs

Kyle  Plus, no more DeVos..

Unlike · Reply · 17 hrs

Lyle  ^^^ Kyle proving he has no facts to support any argument he has put forth.

Like · Reply · 45 mins

Rich  Lyle, in a respectful conversation with a polite exchange, Kyle examined the situation and determined that his position was not correct. Give him credit where credit is due, please.

Does prophecy have to be 100% correct?

Excepted from here.

-------------------

Tim Challies is reviewing a book by Sam Storms called "Practicing the Power." While it is a charitable review, considering Mr. Challies' opposition to the charismatic position, he makes the below point without any explanation:

His understanding of prophecy hangs on a fatally flawed interpretation of those key passages in Acts. It ignores all the Old Testament restrictions on prophecy and its requirement that prophets be without error. It makes no distinction between the necessity of prophecy before God revealed the Scriptures and after the biblical canon was closed.

So this is an opportunity to discuss the nature of NT prophecy and its differences from OT prophecy. Mr. Challies relies on De. 18:19-22 for his assertion:

Government requires separate, independent branches - By Matt Dodd

My comments in bold.

--------------------------

On Feb. 4, President Trump responded to Judge James Robart’s decision to block the travel ban by tweeting, “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!”

While the Gallatin County Bar Association, made up of lawyers from all political parties, respects the president’s right to disagree with (and even criticize) judicial decisions, it is wrong for any sitting president to personally attack a member of the judiciary. Judge Robart is not a “so called judge,” but a federal judge appointed by President George W. Bush and confirmed by a Senate vote of 99 to 0 in 2003. (The writer's outrage seems excessive. This judge attempted to legislate from the bench according to his political preferences, therefore is not acting as a judge, so calling him a "so-called judge" seems to be a legitimate criticism.

I'm guessing that the writer had no criticism to offer when Obama criticized the Supreme court when they supposedly "reversed a century of law." And Obama did this in a state of the union address with the Supreme court in attendance!)

I’m A Scientist. This Is What I’ll Fight For. - BY JONATHAN FOLEY

Found here. My comments in bold.
--------------------------------
With a fervor bordering on religious zealotry, the author defends the high morality and matchless majesty of SCIENCE. And he insists we all bow to his god, the source of all hope and purpose.

This man is not a scientist, he's a partisan wrapping himself in the trappings of science. Nothing in his article is an expression of science.
--------------------------------

The War on Science is more than a skirmish over funding, censorship and “alternative facts.” It’s a battle for the future, basic decency and the people we love. (We can state with confidence that it is a war over funding. It's a political war, not a war on science. It's an ideological war. It's a war about worldviews. It's a war about power. And the Left, beholden to extremists and activists and those who think that every solution is found in government, are on the warpath.) 

This post originally appeared at The Macroscope.

Make no mistake: There is a War on Science in America.

The White House not only denies obvious, empirical facts on a regular basis, but they have invented the Orwellian concept of “alternative facts.” In the past, we simply called them “lies,” but now they are used in the world’s most powerful office. And that should scare all of us. ("Alternative facts" is simply an alternate interpretation of information. And when this happens, and the Left is challenged on their narrative, they react with hysteria, shouting down heretics and unleashing barrages of invective and name-calling.)

This attack on science, and on knowledge itself, (Kellyann Conway used the phrase "alternative facts" in reference to the number of people attending Trump's inauguration. She was not attacking science or knowledge. She wasn't talking about science funding or global warming. She wasn't discussing pollution or nuclear waste.)

Ctrl+Left -by John C. Wright

Found here. A sobering article indeed.

----------------------------

In case any of my honest readers wonder why my tone is strident and militant of late, and why I speak of drawing the sword against the Ctrl+Left, allow me to proffer three points to explain my conclusion.

First Point:

The modern creature of the Ctrl+Left, sometimes called a Social Justice Warrior or Thought Policeman, Political Correctoid or Crybully, and sometimes called a Morlock, is a different animal from the allegedly Freethinking Liberals of older days.

Freethinking Liberals of yore, at least in this country, at least paid lip service to the idea of freedom of speech and conscience.

They were against violent revolution. They were poisonous, and eager to corrupt the youth (which they did with startling success, unopposed) but not eager for open violence.

They at least claimed to be open to dialog. They at least pretended to be open to reason.

The modern Ctrl+Leftist is a jihadist bent on forcing the world to adopt his pseudo-religious view. He is eager for blood. He dismissed any thought of negotiation.

In this view, White Male Straight Christians are the Devil, and all others are oppressed proletarians authorized to use any degree of violence needed to hurt the Devil.

The Devil is presumed guilty of imaginary interference with the birth of an imaginary utopia.

The imaginary utopia is promised to arrive once all Western institutions, from private property to rule of law to limited government to monotheism to monogamy, is dead and forgotten.

The imaginary utopia is promised to arrive once all the Devils are silenced, reprogrammed, broken, or dead.

Hence the Ctrl+Left is very much in favor of violent revolution. (See the continual rioting since Trump’s election for details.)

This Ctrl+Left view has nothing to do with the freethinking Liberals who once supported, or claimed to support, the white men of the working class, farmers, factory hands, and small shop owners.

In many ways, freethinking Liberalism of older days is the direct opposite of such a view.

Second Point:

Taming the beast of high hospital costs - By Rep. Tom Wood

Found here. My comments in bold.
---------------------------

Tom Woods does what a lot of leftists do, he takes a rare scenario and magnifies it so as to justify his position. 
-------------------------

Battalogeo & a Heavenly Prayer Language - by Eric Davis

Found here. My comments in bold.

--------------------------------

In my continuing quest for a biblical argument for cessationism, I turn to Mr. Eric Davis to see if he is up to the challenge. Unfortunately, he is not.

It is interesting and telling that Mr. Davis doesn't quote a single Scripture regarding tongues, nor does he cite any of the many thoughtful biblical arguments in favor of tongues. He essentially constructs a series of straw men ("...some suppose...") as if these are the best pro-tongues arguments available.

It is somewhat concerning that these kinds of presentations are satisfying to cessationists, who supposedly value the Bible.

See our post on tongues and on the Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

--------------------------------

Our rotten world: New data shows 85% of humans live under a corrupt government - by Mike Hanlon

Found here. My comments in bold.
-----------------------------

The media are just discovering that governmental corruption is widespread, apparently. I suppose this is as a result of the Trump presidency, since I can't recall any such articles during the Obama regime.

It may come as a surprise to the Left, but all governments are corrupt, albeit by varying degrees. Thus their faith in the ability of government to effect change is at best misguided, and at worst down right dangerous. A government powerful enough to make changes you want is a government powerful enough to make changes you do not want.
-------------------------

LS Engine History

Found here.

LS heritage

The General Motors engine family commonly called the LS series debuted in the then-new 1997 model year C5 Corvette as the all aluminum LS1 V8. General Motors called it the Gen III small-block V8 and a year later (the 1998 model year), the LS1 replaced the LT1 small-block in Camaros and Firebirds, which was followed by the iron-block version of the Gen III V8 appearing in the full size trucks and SUVs. The LS1 displaced 5.7 liters, similar to the previous-generation small-block, but the cubic-inch measurement differed slightly: 346 for the LS1 vs. the traditional 350 cubes.

In 1999, the Gen III platform spawned the higher-performance LS6 that was standard in the Corvette Z06. In 2005, the Gen IV branch of the LS family was born, differing from the Gen III with cast-in provisions for fuel-saving cylinder deactivation, larger displacements and revised camshaft sensing. The performance versions of the Gen IV include the LS2, LS3, LS9 supercharged, LSA supercharged and the LS7.

GM has continued to refer its modern V-8 engine family as Gen III and Gen IV, but to the enthusiasts who quickly grasped the tremendous performance potential of the engines, every engine based on the platform has been nicknamed "LSX." The range of production engines from the LS platform is wide. On the truck side, iron-block engines have included 4.8L and 5.3L versions, as well as all-aluminum 6.0L and 6.2L premium engines. Car engines include 5.3L, 5.7L, 6.0L, 6.2L and 7.0L displacements - including some configured for front-wheel-drive.

13 Reasons I Never Joined the Contemporary Worship Movement - by Jonathan Aigner

Found here. My comments in bold.

--------------------------

While there is certainly much to complain about regarding some circles of contemporary worship, the author lumps it all into a single category and dismisses it all with a wave of the hand. 

If indeed there are problems in the Church today, perhaps it wouldn't be too much trouble for the author to actually cite examples, provide references, and otherwise document his claims.

Unfortunately, he does none of this.

-------------------------------

Rules for a constitutional crisis - Lessig

Found here. My comments in bold.

----------------------------
(...)

I believe that Trump is behaving as badly as any President ever—certainly worse than Nixon, and maybe even worse than Johnson (Andrew, not Lyndon). He has no understanding of his place in the constitutional order. (An odd claim. Let's see if the author cites any references. 

Especially odd since Obama bragged about his use of executive power, saying he had a "pen and a phone." Unfortunately for the Left, they themselves are responsible for the current situation, since they love government power. It is they who have expanded the scope and influence of government. It is they who love dictates, court orders, and executive orders.

Apparently they never considered the idea that such powers might end up in the hands of those they oppose. This arrogance, that they would always have that power and thus would always be able to advance their agenda, is exactly why the Right has always warned us about big government. Well, the Left has made their bed, and now they don't like the mattress so much any more.

And since when has the Left valued the constitutional order?)