Ligon Duncan on the Non-Negotiables of the Gospel

Christian Skepticism endorses:

monergism.com

This site contains some of the most valuable God-centered resources a Christian Skeptic could ever want. Whether you peruse the copious free items or purchase something from their excellent online store, your worldview will never be the same!

Start Here to become a Christian Skeptic

We wanted to highlight this compilation by Paul Manata - The Philosophy of the
Christian Religion
- an excellent online resource for the development of the
well-considered Christian worldview.

Skeptical Insights

Good Blogroll (from Pyromaniacs)

  • Colin Adams
  • Charlie Albright
  • Aletheuo
  • Scott Aniol
  • Tom Ascol
  • Derek Ashton (TheoParadox)
  • Zachary Bartels
  • Tim and David Bayly
  • Rick Beckman
  • Tyler Bennicke
  • Bible Geek
  • Big Orange Truck
  • Andy Bird
  • John Bird
  • Bob Bixby
  • Timmy Brister
  • Fred Butler
  • Calvin and Calvinism (Classic and moderate Calvinism)
  • Cal.vini.st
  • Bret Capranica
  • Nathan Casebolt
  • Lane Chaplin
  • Tim ("The World's Most Famous Christian Blogger"®) Challies
  • The Conservative Intelligencer
  • The Contemporary Calvinist
  • The Conventicle
  • Craig's Blog
  • Deliver Detroit
  • Daniel (Doulogos)
  • William Dicks
  • The Doulos' Den
  • Martin Downes
  • Connie Dugas
  • Doug Eaton
  • Nicholas Edinger
  • Brother Eugene
  • Eusebeia
  • Stefan Ewing
  • Eddie Exposito
  • Expository Thoughts
  • Faces Like Flint
  • Reid Ferguson
  • Peter Farrell
  • Bill Fickett
  • Fide-o
  • Foolish Things
  • Chris Freeland
  • Travis Gilbert
  • Ron Gleason
  • Go Share Your Faith!
  • God is My Constant
  • Phil Gons
  • Joel Griffith (Solameanie)
  • Matt Gumm
  • Gregg Hanke
  • Jacob Hantla
  • Chris Harwood
  • J. D. Hatfield
  • Michael Haykin
  • Tony Hayling (Agonizomai)
  • Steve Hays and the amazing "Triablogue" team
  • Scott Head
  • Patrick Heaviside (Paths of Old)
  • Marc Heinrich's Purgatorio
  • Sean Higgins
  • Illumination (Rich Barcellos and Sam Waldron)
  • Inverted Planet
  • Tim Jack
  • Jackhammer
  • Craig Johnson
  • Alex Jordan
  • The Journeymen
  • Justified
  • Lane Keister (Green Baggins)
  • John Killian
  • David Kjos
  • Ted Kluck
  • Patrick Lacson
  • A Little Leaven (Museum of Idolatry)
  • Janet Lee
  • Let My Lifesong Sing
  • Libbie, the English Muffin
  • Light and Heat
  • Greg Linscott
  • Bryan Maes
  • Brian McDaris
  • Doug McMasters
  • Allen Mickle
  • The incomparable Al Mohler
  • Jonathan Moorhead
  • Ryan Moran
  • Stephen Newell
  • Dean Olive
  • Dan Paden
  • Paleoevangelical
  • A Peculiar Pilgrim
  • Jim Pemberton
  • The Persecution Times
  • Bill Pershing
  • Kevin Pierpont
  • Matt Plett
  • Wes Porter
  • Postmortemism
  • The Red and Black Redneck
  • Reformata
  • Reformation 21
  • Reformation Theology (sponsored by Monergism.Com)
  • Reformed Evangelist
  • Remonstrans
  • Carla Rolfe
  • Tony Rose
  • Andrew Roycroft
  • Eric Rung
  • Said at Southern Seminary
  • Seeing Clearly
  • Sharper Iron
  • Kim Shay
  • Neil Shay
  • Brian Shealy
  • Ken Silva
  • Tom Slawson's "Tom in the Box"
  • Tom Slawson's other blog
  • Doug Smith
  • Richard Snoddy
  • Social Hazard
  • SolaFire
  • Rebecca Stark
  • Kevin Stilley
  • Cindy Swanson
  • Talking Out Of Turn
  • Justin Taylor's "Between Two Worlds"
  • Robert Tewart (StreetFishing)
  • TheoJunkie's Thoughts on Theology
  • Theology Bites
  • Through the Veil
  • Three Times a Mom
  • Voice of the Shepherd
  • Jared Wall
  • Adrian Warnock
  • David Wayne
  • Jeremy Weaver
  • Steve Weaver
  • Über-apologist James White's legendary "Pros Apologian" blog
  • Brad Williams
  • Doug Wilson
  • Writing and Living
  • Ryan Wood
  • Todd Young
  • Tuesday, December 09, 2008

    Vatican, U.N. Declaration on Sexual Rights

    "The fact that there are people who want to silence the Church is disturbing. If people want to disagree with the Church it's one thing, but when you start this kind of name-calling it is intended to have a chilling effect," said Susan Fani, a spokeswoman for the Catholic League.


    Catholic groups say the protests and editorials are part of a campaign to silence the Church on issues where it is considered politically incorrect.


    Quotes taken from Vatican Under Fire for Opposing U.N. Declaration on Sexual Rights

    Where's the TOLERANCE? Seems those who clamor for tolerance all the time are the very ones who display intolerance of those with different views. Believers need to take note of examples like this for while it's happening in isolated cases and on specific issues today, buying into the "tolerance" clamoring today can lead to increased cases of "intolerance' tomorrow.

    Those such as Evangelical Christians, Mormons, and Roman Catholics deserve public support in their public stand against homosexuality (/LGBT).

    On the issues themeselves, the Bible does not call for or authorize capital punishment for homosexuality; at the same time homosexuality is a sin and should not be embraced otherwise.

    13 comments:

    skeptimal said...

    "Journalists and activist groups are blasting the Vatican..."

    For several reasons, I'm skeptical of the accuracy of this story. First, this version is from the same network that manufactures a "war on Christmas" every year. Second, most legitimate journalists are going to report the story and not "blast" anyone. Only Fox would print the story as if journalists were a political force speaking out on any issue.

    I'm sure there are some groups speaking out against the Vatican, but I doubt it is anything that one of the most powerful and wealthy organizations on the planet is going to find intimidating.

    swordbearer said...

    In the article Fox provides these details: "An editorial in the Italian daily La Stampa called the Vatican's reasoning "grotesque," while La Repubblica said the Vatican's stance "leaves one dumbstruck." While the La Stampa (one of Italy's mainstream newspapers) is written in Italian so that I cannot verify this information, a quick google search shows Fox is not the only one to point this out.

    Regardless of whether the Vatican finds this intimidating or not, it's still a clear example of the "intolerance" those who often cry for "tolerance" have for the views of others.

    jazzycat said...

    skeptimal,
    Only Fox would print the story as if journalists were a political force speaking out on any issue.

    Hmmmm... If news manipulation is not effective, then a lot companies are wasting a lot of money on advertising.

    skeptimal said...

    "a quick google search shows Fox is not the only one to point this out."

    I understand, but that's one publication, and Fox characterized it as if "journalists" were attacking the church, as if journalists were a political bloc. As an isolated incident, this mischaracterization would not be worth mentioning, but Fox news reports are frequently and exceptionally misleading.


    "Regardless of whether the Vatican finds this intimidating or not, it's still a clear example of the "intolerance" those who often cry for "tolerance" have for the views of others."

    I'm not familiar enough with what is happening on that issue to say whether this has risen to the level of intimidation, harrassment, or violence. If it has, then you're right.

    skeptimal said...

    "Hmmmm... If news manipulation is not effective, then a lot companies are wasting a lot of money on advertising."

    I'm not sure I understand your point, JazzyCat. I'm not saying that journalists don't have opinions and that those opinions are not reflected in their work. Increasingly on Fox News, MSNBC, and talk radio, opinions are being confused with news. It is also leaking to other media that claim to be "fair and balanced." I don't think that's healthy.

    swordbearer said...

    The point is this... Is it not hypocritical for those who claim there should be "tolerance" for the views of others ... to then themselves in a press publication describe the not only the views but the reasoning of others as "grotesque"?

    They seem to want it 'one way' when it works to their advantage, but then deny it when it works against them. In effect, they really espouse tolerance for their own views, but intolerance for any views besides their own.

    (Note: While Christians acknowledge the right of each person to hold their views, we do not suggest all should be universally accepted/embraced.)

    skeptimal said...

    This is a Fox News editorial that includes some news content. Given Fox's history of distoring information, we just don't know what the story really is over there. The word "grotesque" was used in one editorial in an Italian publication none of us have ever read, and yet Fox says "journalists" are blasting the vatican.

    Regarding hypocrisy, even this opinion piece points out that gay people are being imprisoned, tortured, and killed just for being gay. Tolerance suggests that all people should be treated humanely. Where is the hypocrisy in saying these executions and torturings are wrong?

    The church is opposing gay marriage, and I understand that. The protestors, rightly or wrongly, are saying that the church refuses to speak out against these atrocities for fear that gays *might* someday gain marriage rights. If it were true, (and I hope the church's real position has been oversimplified) then that would probably qualify as grotesque.

    swordbearer said...

    Skeptimal stated: "Regarding hypocrisy, even this opinion piece points out that gay people are being imprisoned, tortured, and killed just for being gay. Tolerance suggests that all people should be treated humanely. Where is the hypocrisy in saying these executions and torturings are wrong?

    Response: If I remember right, they are calling for the RC church to take a stand (i.e., give their views and take a position) on the capital punishment and torturing of gays which the RC church has NOT done (at least in this context). IF they have NOT given their views, then how in the name of "tolerance" can they define their views as "grotesque"? (Their INTOLERANCE shows through in their actions)

    Granted, they have a right to call for their views and for them to take a stand, but the RC Church ALSO has the right to decide whether, when and in what way they will take stands and communicate their views. But the point is, those who oppose their position, demonstrate their "intolerance" of the reasoning/views of others when they define them as "grotesque".

    Note: While Christians acknowledge everyone's right to hold their own views, we do not suggest all views are to be equally embraced. :)

    skeptimal stated: The church is opposing gay marriage, and I understand that. The protestors, rightly or wrongly, are saying that the church refuses to speak out against these atrocities for fear that gays *might* someday gain marriage rights. If it were true, (and I hope the church's real position has been oversimplified) then that would probably qualify as grotesque.

    Response: Wisdom dictates both what one should speak to as well as when and how. Isn't interesting that "they" want the RC Church to take a stand on these issues at "THIS" time, which suggests "THEY" believe it will help with the advancement of their agenda on gay marriage.

    Those who have been involved in these "power struggles" realize that statements and positions (and especially those which seek to distinguish issues and speak to each) can and are often either misunderstood or misused. Often, it's found that rather than addressing issues which could be misconstrued or taken out of context, it's better to speak a strong message on the positive side of one's position, and then deal with the other issues at a later time. Wisdom dictates and circumstances and facts come into play.

    jazzycat said...

    Skeptimal,
    I guess your idea of fair and balanced would be more along the lines of Dan Rather and some of those stooges at CNN.

    skeptimal said...

    "I guess your idea of fair and balanced would be more along the lines of Dan Rather and some of those stooges at CNN."

    JC:

    I'm not sure what the solution is, here. I recognize the importance of free speech, but all of the media outlets (CNN included) are delivering more opinion than fact these days. The article referenced here is an example: it bills itself as a news report, but there are several statements that can only be characterized as opinion statements. I don't have a problem with people stating their opinions, but not in a news story. And it's happening all the time these days.

    jazzycat said...

    I don't have a problem with people stating their opinions, but not in a news story. And it's happening all the time these days.

    Exactly! Now we need to discern the propaganda from the news. Fox News, that you berate, does the best job of giving all the news. The rest selectively report the news that fits their bias and ignores news that contridicts this bias. Therefore, Fox stands out as different.

    The war on Christmas is the perfect example. This is undeniable and yet only on Fox is it being reported. Why? Because the others are in lock step with the anti-Christian view in America. Thus, they are quick to report news that makes Christianity look bad.

    Check it out............

    skeptimal said...

    "The war on Christmas is the perfect example. This is undeniable and yet only on Fox is it being reported."

    JazzyCat, if there *were* a conspiracy to do away with Christmas, I'd know about it. I'm probably on the mailing lists of all the groups you'd accuse of coordinating the heresy.

    Fox has tapped into the old Moral Majority urban legend that non-Christians are trying in some way to suppress Christmas. It's a cynical attempt by Fox to manipulate conservatives and Christians, and it apparently works.

    The truth is that no one is trying to have the Christmas Holiday declared illegal, and if they did, it wouldn't matter because so many businesses would close any way.

    The term "Happy Holidays" has been around since the seventies and is not intended to be a slam on Christmas. What do you say to a group of people this time of year if that groups includes Jewish people and Christians? Happy Holidays. What do you say when you want to wish someone Happy Thanksgiving, Merry Christmas, and Happy New Year without saying all three? Happy Holidays.

    I know Fox comes up with anecdotal outrages, but when you look at them more closely, most of them are admitted mistakes or are blown completely out of proportion.

    jazzycat said...

    Skeptimal,
    What do you say to a group of people this time of year if that groups includes Jewish people and Christians?

    It is Christmas regardless of what one’s religion or opinion may be, so I would say Merry Christmas! Just because someone may be offended or not be a Christian, we are told by the PC crowd that Christmas must not be spoken about. You have just confirmed the war on Christmas. We are told that it is acceptable to mention and talk about Muslim and Jewish religious holidays, but heaven forbid we mention Christmas because there may be some Jewish or Muslim person that gets offended.

    If you want to live in Kooksville where Christmas must be hidden and not spoken of in public, then that is your business. However, I prefer and will call it Christmas just like I have my whole life. If anyone gets offended, that is just tough because I get offended by liberal lunacy every single day of my life.