How to Argue and Fight for Truth

“As you are likely to be engaged in controversy, and your love of truth is joined with a natural warmth of temper, my friendship makes me solicitous on your behalf. . . . I would have you more than a conqueror and to triumph not only over your adversary but over yourself. If you cannot be vanquished, you may be wounded. To preserve you from such wounds as might give you cause of weeping over your conquests, I would present you with some considerations . . . .

As to your opponent, I wish that before you set pen to paper against him, and during the whole time you are preparing your answer, you may commend him by earnest prayer to the Lord’s teaching and blessing. This practice will have a direct tendency to conciliate your heart to love and pity him, and such a disposition will have a good influence on every page you write.

If you account him a believer, though greatly mistaken in the subject of debate between you, the words of David to Joab concerning Absalom are very applicable: “Deal gently with him for my sake.” The Lord loves him and bears with him; therefore you must not despise him or treat him harshly. The Lord bears with you likewise, and expects that you should show tenderness to others from a sense of the much forgiveness you need yourself. In a little while you will meet in heaven. He will then be dearer to you than the nearest friend you have upon earth is to you now. Anticipate that period in your thoughts. And though you may find it necessary to oppose his errors, view him personally as a kindred soul, with whom you are to be happy in Christ forever.

But if you look upon him as an unconverted person, in a state of enmity against God and his grace (a supposition which, without good evidence, you should be very unwilling to admit), he is a more proper object of your compassion than of your anger. Alas! “He knows not what he does.” But if God, in his sovereign pleasure, had so appointed, you might have been as he is now, and he, instead of you, might have been set for the defense of the gospel. If you attend to this, you will not reproach or hate him, because the Lord has been pleased to open your eyes, not his.

Of all people who engage in controversy, we who are called Calvinists are most expressly bound by our own principles to the exercise of gentleness and moderation.”

John Newton, writing to a young minister, The Works of John Newton, I:268-270.

I grabbed this from The Gospel Coalition and Truth Matters.  Great insight!

So Much for Transparency with the Health Care Proposal

The idea behind President Obama releasing his Health Care Proposal days ahead of his bi-partisan meeting with Republicans was that there would be transparency.  Everyone could see it and see what he was suggesting.

Oh, well!  There is not even enough legislative language to allow the Congressional Budget Office to figure out how much his proposal would cost.  Of course, that wouldn’t be intentional, would it?  Because “transparency” is the word being used repeatedly–wait, that’s right, “transparency” for health care was the very same word he used as he campaigned for his presidency back in 2008.

To quote the CBO:

This morning the Obama Administration released a description of its health care proposal, and CBO has already received several requests to provide a cost estimate for that proposal. We had not previously received the proposal, and we have just begun the process of reviewing it—a process that will take some time, given the complexity of the issues involved. Although the proposal reflects many elements that were included in the health care bills passed by the House and the Senate last year, it modifies many of those elements and also includes new ones. Moreover, preparing a cost estimate requires very detailed specifications of numerous provisions, and the materials that were released this morning do not provide sufficient detail on all of the provisions. Therefore, CBO cannot provide a cost estimate for the proposal without additional detail, and, even if such detail were provided, analyzing the proposal would be a time-consuming process that could not be completed this week. [bold mine]

AFA Calls Off Pepsi Boycott

In the early months of 2009 the American Family Association informed Pepsi it was starting a boycott against Pepsi.  This was after repeated attempts asking Pepsi to stop its support of homosexual activist organizations.

The AFA encouraged all its members to boycott Pepsi.  Over 500,000 signed the boycott pledge.  Since the boycott began, the AFA has monitored Pepsi’s activities and donations.  The substantial amounts of money given in 2008 to various homosexual activist groups by Pepsi did not occur in 2009.  Because of this the AFA has suspended its boycott.

See original story here.

Professor Phil Jones Not Sure About Global Warming

The BBC recently had an interview with Profess Phil Jones. He’s the director of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia and at the center of ClimateGate. He said three noteworthy things:

1) There has been no statistically significant global warming since 1995.

2) There was no statistical difference in global warming for the periods 1860-1880, 1910-1940, 1975-1998.

3) From January 2002 to the present, the temperature cooled.

This is all over the news, too. And because of this info and the recent ClimateGate, states are filing suits against federal government regulations on greenhouse emissions. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/16/AR2010021605709.html and http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN1661844120100216

FURTHER, in 1974 Time did an article on Global Cooling. That was the fad back then. Everyone was freaked out about another ice age. So which is it? Global Warming or Global Cooling? http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,944914-1,00.html

BBC Link http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8511670.stm