thestream--2020-05-16--Does Science Support Miracles? New Study Documents a Blind Woman’s Healing

She once was blind , but now she sees – a peer-reviewed medical journal has published the extraordinary case study of a woman whose eyesight was spontaneously restored after prayer for healing .
It ’ s the latest example of how researchers are increasingly using scientific methods to investigate claims of miracles .
The study details the medical history of a woman who was blind for more than a dozen years from juvenile macular degeneration , an incurable condition .
She had attended a school for the blind , used a white cane for mobility , and read braille .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ a Baptist pastor , got on his knees to pray .
He put a hand on her shoulder as she laid on the bed .
They were both crying as he prayed : “ Oh , God !
You can restore … eyesight tonight , Lord .
I know you can do it !
And I pray you will do it tonight.
” With that , she opened her eyes and saw her husband kneeling in front of her .
“ I was blind when my husband prayed for me , ” she @ @ @ @ @ @ @ – in a moment , after years of darkness I could see perfectly .
It was miraculous !
… Within seconds , my life had drastically changed .
I could see , I could see !
” The woman ’ s eyesight has remained intact for 47 years since the “ proximal intercessory prayer ” ( PIP ) – that is , Christian prayer for healing with accompanying touch .
Four researchers published the case study – the first of its kind in medical literature – in the medical journal Explore .
They @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , which focuses on investigating claims of healing after prayer .
Last year this group published another incredible case study in the peer-reviewed Complementary Therapies in Medicine .
In that case , a man suffered from gastroparesis and relied on two feeding tubes for 16 years .
When he experienced hands-on prayer at a church , he said he felt an electric shock starting from his shoulder and going through his stomach .
He had been instantly healed .
His feeding tubes were removed – and seven years later he is still free @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was the first published case of such a spontaneous healing of this incurable condition .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
In my book The Case for Miracles , now in paperback , I report on several compelling studies that support claims of miraculous healings after prayer with physical touch .
For example , Indiana University professor Candy Gunther Brown ( PhD , Harvard ) , led a team that went to villages in Mozambique to study @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , or who suffered from severe visual or hearing impairment .
First , her team used standard tests and technical equipment to precisely determine each person ’ s level of hearing or vision .
Then they were each prayed for individually in the name of Jesus with accompanying touch .
Immediately after that , they were tested again .
The results ?
“ We saw improvement in almost every single subject we tested , ” Dr. Brown told me .
“ Some of the results were quite dramatic.
” Indeed , the average @ @ @ @ @ @ @ tenfold .
Martine , a resident of the Namuno village , couldn ’ t hear the equivalent of a jackhammer next to her when the researchers first tested her .
After prayer for healing , she was able to make out conversations .
Brown and her team then did a replication study in Brazil to see if they would get similar results – and they did .
This Mozambique experiment was a rigorous scientific study accepted for publication in the secular , peer-reviewed scientific Southern Medical Journal .
What ’ s Dr. Brown @ @ @ @ @ @ @ shows that something is going on with Pentecostal and charismatic proximal intercessory prayer , ” she told me .
“ This is more than just wishful thinking .
It ’ s not fakery ; it ’ s not fraud .
It ’ s not some televangelist trying to get widows to send in their money .
It ’ s not a highly charged atmosphere that plays on people ’ s emotions .
Something is going on , and it surely warrants further investigation.
” Personally , I would venture to say that something @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with Dr. Brown – more such research is needed .
But in the meantime , several scientific studies are pointing in the direction of divine intervention in people ’ s lives .
Originally , I was skeptical about miracles .
As a committed atheist , I hoped I could disprove the existence of a miracle-working God .
But the mounting evidence for the miraculous resurrection of Jesus proved to be too persuasive .
After nearly two years of researched I realized it would take more faith to maintain my atheism than become a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ resurrection is among dozens of topics that we cover in our new online courses at Colorado Christian University .
For information , visit Strobelcenter.com , where you also can also see a video of my talk on the case for miracles — during which you ’ ll actually witness a healing taking place .
New York Times best-selling author Lee Strobel is founding director of the Lee Strobel Center for Evangelism and Applied Apologetics at Colorado Christian University ( StrobelCenter.com ) .

She once was blind, but now she sees — a peer-reviewed medical journal has published the extraordinary case study of a woman whose eyesight was spontaneously restored after prayer for healing. It’s the latest example of how researchers are increasingly using scientific methods to investigate claims of miracles.
The study details the medical history of a woman who was blind for more than a dozen years from juvenile macular degeneration, an incurable condition. She had attended a school for the blind, used a white cane for mobility, and read braille.
One night at bedtime her husband, a Baptist pastor, got on his knees to pray. He put a hand on her shoulder as she laid on the bed. They were both crying as he prayed: “Oh, God! You can restore … eyesight tonight, Lord. I know you can do it! And I pray you will do it tonight.”
With that, she opened her eyes and saw her husband kneeling in front of her. “I was blind when my husband prayed for me,” she said. “Then just like this — in a moment, after years of darkness I could see perfectly. It was miraculous! … Within seconds, my life had drastically changed. I could see, I could see!”
The woman’s eyesight has remained intact for 47 years since the “proximal intercessory prayer” (PIP) — that is, Christian prayer for healing with accompanying touch.
Four researchers published the case study — the first of its kind in medical literature — in the medical journal Explore. They are part of Global Medical Research Institute, which focuses on investigating claims of healing after prayer.
Sixteen Years of Feeding Tubes — Healed
Last year this group published another incredible case study in the peer-reviewed Complementary Therapies in Medicine. In that case, a man suffered from gastroparesis and relied on two feeding tubes for 16 years. When he experienced hands-on prayer at a church, he said he felt an electric shock starting from his shoulder and going through his stomach.
He had been instantly healed. His feeding tubes were removed — and seven years later he is still free from any symptoms. Again, this was the first published case of such a spontaneous healing of this incurable condition.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
In my book The Case for Miracles, now in paperback, I report on several compelling studies that support claims of miraculous healings after prayer with physical touch. For example, Indiana University professor Candy Gunther Brown (PhD, Harvard), led a team that went to villages in Mozambique to study 24 people who were blind or deaf, or who suffered from severe visual or hearing impairment.
First, her team used standard tests and technical equipment to precisely determine each person’s level of hearing or vision. Then they were each prayed for individually in the name of Jesus with accompanying touch. Immediately after that, they were tested again. The results?
“We saw improvement in almost every single subject we tested,” Dr. Brown told me. “Some of the results were quite dramatic.”
Deafness — Healed
Indeed, the average improvement in visual acuity was more than tenfold. Martine, a resident of the Namuno village, couldn’t hear the equivalent of a jackhammer next to her when the researchers first tested her. After prayer for healing, she was able to make out conversations. Brown and her team then did a replication study in Brazil to see if they would get similar results — and they did.
This Mozambique experiment was a rigorous scientific study accepted for publication in the secular, peer-reviewed scientific Southern Medical Journal. What’s Dr. Brown’s conclusion?
“Our study shows that something is going on with Pentecostal and charismatic proximal intercessory prayer,” she told me. “This is more than just wishful thinking. It’s not fakery; it’s not fraud. It’s not some televangelist trying to get widows to send in their money. It’s not a highly charged atmosphere that plays on people’s emotions. Something is going on, and it surely warrants further investigation.”
Personally, I would venture to say that something miraculous is occurring. And I agree with Dr. Brown — more such research is needed. But in the meantime, several scientific studies are pointing in the direction of divine intervention in people’s lives.
Research Shows Prayer Working
Originally, I was skeptical about miracles. As a committed atheist, I hoped I could disprove the existence of a miracle-working God. But the mounting evidence for the miraculous resurrection of Jesus proved to be too persuasive. After nearly two years of researched I realized it would take more faith to maintain my atheism than become a Christian.
The historical evidence for the resurrection is among dozens of topics that we cover in our new online courses at Colorado Christian University. For information, visit Strobelcenter.com, where you also can also see a video of my talk on the case for miracles — during which you’ll actually witness a healing taking place.
New York Times best-selling author Lee Strobel is founding director of the Lee Strobel Center for Evangelism and Applied Apologetics at Colorado Christian University (StrobelCenter.com).


thestream--2020-05-16--The Lockdown’s Reichstag Firefighters Are Fascist … in the NEGATIVE Sense

Sorry , I couldn ’ t resist .
“ Fascist … in the negative sense ” is a line I used to drop on my way out of campus coffee shops .
At my wits ’ end — after hours of overhearing progressives ’ oversharing , as they yawped moralistic jargon at full Yankee volume — I ’ d settle the check and get to the door with my friends .
Then speak my line both casually and loudly , apropos of nothing .
And I ’ d head for the hills , listening for the sound of heads exploding @ @ @ @ @ @ @ know that it did any good .
But it helped me keep my dignity .
It was only while doing research for my book on the anti-Nazi hero Wilhelm Röpke that I learned the ugly truth .
My line had a real application .
There really was a time when some U.S. progressives saw fascism as an option .
Architects of the New Deal cited Mussolini ’ s “ progress ” in Italy , and Franklin Roosevelt asked to meet “ that admirable Italian gentleman.
” Elites were entranced by Il Duce ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ of power in the hands of appointed “ experts.
” They would “ coordinate ” and “ rationalize ” the “ anarchic ” forces of the market economy .
Then enact a “ scientific ” plan that would trump the free decisions of millions of citizens .
Elites Want to Plan Our Lives for Us In other words , they ’ d offer all the “ benefits ” of full-on socialism , while keeping the fig leaf of private ownership of property .
That ’ s why in many senses it ’ s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , just a few notches shy of Communism .
Over on the right ?
You wouldn ’ t see “ National Socialists , ” but traditional societies with comparatively weak states .
For instance , medieval monarchies and aristocratic republics , like the one our founders launched in 1776 .
In the 1920s and 30s , elites got deeply intoxicated with the illusion that they could regiment human beings like machines on a factory floor .
( See Charlie Chaplin ’ s Modern Times , and Fritz Lang ’ s Metropolis , for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Collectivists didn ’ t realize that the price system organizes human cooperation with infinitely less waste and more robust information .
It builds wealth and keeps us free without treating human beings — the image of God — like scurrying termites .
Or cringing slaves .
Our elites today trust the common man even less than their forebears did in the 1930s .
They ’ ve spent the past three years trying to overturn our votes for Donald Trump , via Deep State coup .
And now when we look to blue states @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to strip our liberties .
This time their pretext is far more dangerous .
It ’ s one thing when people try to close your business or silence you because of some “ social justice ” blather .
You can argue against that and sometimes win .
Your fellow voters , at least in America , know that the economy doesn ’ t amount to squabbling over slices of a fixed pie baked by the government .
Much more sinister is the new excuse used by the Reichstag Firefighters who have suspended our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and reawakens pre-civilized instincts of scapegoating and contagion .
Those who employ it virtually erase the human personhood of citizens , and treat us with even less dignity than worker bees in a hive .
More like mindless cells in some animal organ .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
I ’ m talking about Public Health Totalitarianism .
I first became aware of this while reading a book on the Second Amendment .
If you haven @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
The title is First They Came for the Gunowners .
The author , Mark Smith , points out that leftists who detest American individualism and distrust constitutional freedoms like to play bait and switch .
They ’ ll take a social problem caused by free human beings affected by original sin , and pretend that it ’ s a disease , like those caused by microbes .
Then they ’ ll use the logic of quarantines , disease prevention , and medical precaution , to trample any questions about justice , freedom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ crimes go through this filter and get transformed into “ gun violence.
” ( And the numbers get inflated , to include suicides , and legitimate self-defense or police shootings . )
Instead of gun ownership as a basic constitutional right , to be protected within sane limits , these think-tanks want us to see them as viruses .
And gun rights advocates as Typhoid Marys , callously spreading a mindless and deadly illness through the population .
Look at the abuse Dana Loesch took at CNN ’ s absurdly stacked , Soviet-courtroom @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Parkland shootings .
( She endured death and rape threats for many weeks , which drove her from her home . )
Dehumanize the enemy , treat him as a virus , and all bets are off .
Now the left is using that same rhetorical trick to dehumanize everyone who worries about crashing our economy and starving the Developing World .
It worked pretty well for guns .
Why not take it out for a test-drive , see if it can destroy capitalism too ?
And Trump of course .
Orange Man @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Health replaces liberty and the common good as the government ’ s focus ?
The individual dignity of every human being .
Then a Left hungry for power goads panic among the population .
Credentialed “ experts ” gain the power to censor their professional rivals , perhaps by getting their videos banned from virtually every medium .
Politicians drunk with their newfound rule by decree scapegoat their critics .
Pretty soon , those who dissent find themselves getting treated not just as virus-spreaders , but in fact as viruses themselves , instead @ @ @ @ @ @ @ way Hitler compared Jews to plague bacilli .
John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream , and author or co-author of ten books , including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism .

Sorry, I couldn’t resist. “Fascist … in the negative sense” is a line I used to drop on my way out of campus coffee shops. At my wits’ end — after hours of overhearing progressives’ oversharing, as they yawped moralistic jargon at full Yankee volume — I’d settle the check and get to the door with my friends. Then speak my line both casually and loudly, apropos of nothing. And I’d head for the hills, listening for the sound of heads exploding behind me.
I don’t know that it did any good. But it helped me keep my dignity. It was only while doing research for my book on the anti-Nazi hero Wilhelm Röpke that I learned the ugly truth. My line had a real application. There really was a time when some U.S. progressives saw fascism as an option. Architects of the New Deal cited Mussolini’s “progress” in Italy, and Franklin Roosevelt asked to meet “that admirable Italian gentleman.”
This new excuse used by the Reichstag Firefighters who have suspended our Constitution taps primal fears, and reawakens pre-civilized instincts of scapegoating and contagion.
Elites were entranced by Il Duce’s robust control over business and centralization of power in the hands of appointed “experts.” They would “coordinate” and “rationalize” the “anarchic” forces of the market economy. Then enact a “scientific” plan that would trump the free decisions of millions of citizens.
Elites Want to Plan Our Lives for Us
In other words, they’d offer all the “benefits” of full-on socialism, while keeping the fig leaf of private ownership of property. That’s why in many senses it’s wiser to situate fascism on the left, just a few notches shy of Communism. Over on the right? You wouldn’t see “National Socialists,” but traditional societies with comparatively weak states. For instance, medieval monarchies and aristocratic republics, like the one our founders launched in 1776.
In the 1920s and 30s, elites got deeply intoxicated with the illusion that they could regiment human beings like machines on a factory floor. (See Charlie Chaplin’s Modern Times, and Fritz Lang’s Metropolis, for satiric critiques of that vision.) Collectivists didn’t realize that the price system organizes human cooperation with infinitely less waste and more robust information. It builds wealth and keeps us free without treating human beings — the image of God — like scurrying termites. Or cringing slaves.
Rule by Decree
Our elites today trust the common man even less than their forebears did in the 1930s. They’ve spent the past three years trying to overturn our votes for Donald Trump, via Deep State coup.
And now when we look to blue states, we see how eager they are to strip our liberties. This time their pretext is far more dangerous. It’s one thing when people try to close your business or silence you because of some “social justice” blather. You can argue against that and sometimes win. Your fellow voters, at least in America, know that the economy doesn’t amount to squabbling over slices of a fixed pie baked by the government.
Dissidents Are Like Viruses
Much more sinister is the new excuse used by the Reichstag Firefighters who have suspended our Constitution. It taps primal fears, and reawakens pre-civilized instincts of scapegoating and contagion. Those who employ it virtually erase the human personhood of citizens, and treat us with even less dignity than worker bees in a hive. More like mindless cells in some animal organ.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
I’m talking about Public Health Totalitarianism. I first became aware of this while reading a book on the Second Amendment. If you haven’t seen it you need to.
Public Health Instead of Freedom
The title is First They Came for the Gunowners. The author, Mark Smith, points out that leftists who detest American individualism and distrust constitutional freedoms like to play bait and switch. They’ll take a social problem caused by free human beings affected by original sin, and pretend that it’s a disease, like those caused by microbes.
Then they’ll use the logic of quarantines, disease prevention, and medical precaution, to trample any questions about justice, freedom, or fundamental rights. So gun crimes go through this filter and get transformed into “gun violence.” (And the numbers get inflated, to include suicides, and legitimate self-defense or police shootings.)
Instead of gun ownership as a basic constitutional right, to be protected within sane limits, these think-tanks want us to see them as viruses. And gun rights advocates as Typhoid Marys, callously spreading a mindless and deadly illness through the population. Look at the abuse Dana Loesch took at CNN’s absurdly stacked, Soviet-courtroom style “Town Hall” after the Parkland shootings. (She endured death and rape threats for many weeks, which drove her from her home.) Dehumanize the enemy, treat him as a virus, and all bets are off.
Be Silent and Comply
Now the left is using that same rhetorical trick to dehumanize everyone who worries about crashing our economy and starving the Developing World. It worked pretty well for guns. Why not take it out for a test-drive, see if it can destroy capitalism too? And Trump of course. Orange Man Bad.
What gets lost when Public Health replaces liberty and the common good as the government’s focus? The individual dignity of every human being. Then a Left hungry for power goads panic among the population. Credentialed “experts” gain the power to censor their professional rivals, perhaps by getting their videos banned from virtually every medium. Politicians drunk with their newfound rule by decree scapegoat their critics. Pretty soon, those who dissent find themselves getting treated not just as virus-spreaders, but in fact as viruses themselves, instead of people.
You know, the way Hitler compared Jews to plague bacilli.
John Zmirak is a senior editor at The Stream, and author or co-author of ten books, including The Politically Incorrect Guide to Immigration and The Politically Incorrect Guide to Catholicism.


thestream--2020-05-16--Atheist Disproves (?!) Immaterial God by Assuming Materialism

Questions are a legitimate way to get people to think .
But if questions subtly create confusion , fallacy , or error , they only serve to conceal the truth rather than reveal the truth .
Atheist Forum provides three questions designed to raise doubt about the existence of God .
But , to get the answers they want , they rely on an incoherent question ( strike one ) , circular reasoning ( strike two ) , and a confused complaint ( strike three ) .
Incoherent questions , circular reasoning , confused complaints—this tweet has them all .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ today we ’ re applying some Red Pen Logic to a tweet from Atheist Forum .
Class is in session .
This is Red Pen Logic with Mr. B , where we try to assess bad thinking by using good thinking .
Plus , we try to have some fun in the process .
In today ’ s example , Atheist Forum offers a series of questions to get you to doubt the existence of God .
Questions are a legitimate way to get people to think , but if questions subtly create @ @ @ @ @ @ @ they only serve to conceal truth rather than reveal truth .
Atheist Forum provides three questions to challenge the existence of God .
First , “ If God is immaterial , what is he made of ?
” Second , “ If he isn ’ t material then does he exist ?
” Third , “ How do so many people believe he exists but can ’ t describe what he ’ s made of ?
” Atheist Forum closes with a classy “ Lmao , ” laughing my—well , you get the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is laughable because any thoughtful person following this atheist line of reasoning should see how foolishly funny it is to believe in an immaterial God .
All right , it ’ s time to pull out the red pen and take this from the top .
Atheist Forum ’ s first question sounds strange because it contains a fundamental flaw .
It ’ s an incoherent question .
That means it doesn ’ t make any sense .
An immaterial being , by definition , is not made of material .
I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ am I ?
God is not made of anything .
God is spirit .
He has no mass , no form , no pieces that need to be put together .
He ’ s not extended in space .
He ’ s not made of God particles or spaghetti .
Yeah , I ’ m talking to you , Pastafarians .
The question “ If God is immaterial , what is He made of ?
” is like asking , “ If a bachelor is unmarried , who is he married to ?
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ is not married to anyone .
So the first question seems to be based on a confusion about God , who is , by definition , immaterial and not assembled out of anything .
Next , Atheist Forum asks , “ If God isn ’ t made of material , then does he exist ?
” Here , we go from confused reasoning to circular reasoning .
Out of the frying pan and into the fire .
Stay with me on this .
Imagine I said to you , “ Ryan always tells @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , “ How do you know Ryan always tells the truth ?
” And I reply , “ Because he said so , and if he always tells the truth , then he wouldn ’ t be lying.
” See the problem here ?
The answer to your question presumes what needs to be proved .
The only way Atheist Forum gets the answer it wants is if it subtly starts with the answer it wants .
Only material things exist .
Of course they ’ re gon na say that God doesn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ already dictates that He can ’ t exist .
But that ’ s presuming what needs to be proved .
That ’ s called circular reasoning .
Incidentally , philosophers ( and atheists , by the way ) routinely speak of real things that are not made of material like reasoning , and arguments , and logical fallacies .
Finally , Atheist Forum asks , “ How do so many people believe that he exists but can ’ t describe what he ’ s made of ?
” This is a confused complaint @ @ @ @ @ @ @ don ’ t need to know what something is made of to know that it exists .
We know that gravity exists even if we don ’ t know what it is .
So what have we learned ?
First , Christianity holds that God is not made of anything .
Instead , He is an immaterial spirit .
Therefore , asking , “ What is God made of ?
” is an incoherent question .
It ’ s kind of like saying the number four is immaterial and then asking , “ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ” Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
Second , if God is , by definition , immaterial , and you start by assuming that only material things exist , of course you ’ re gon na conclude that there is no God .
But that ’ s because your starting place disqualifies God from the beginning .
This is circular reasoning , not careful thinking .
This mistake is not surprising .
Christian philosopher William Lane Craig @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in materialism that we find it difficult to free ourselves from its assumption.
” He ’ s right , and that ’ s what ’ s going on here .
Third , we don ’ t need to know what something is made of to know that it is real .
Ironically , science works in the opposite direction .
First it discovers that something is real , like gravity , and then it tries to describe what that thing is like .
So Atheist Forum provides three questions designed to raise doubts @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to get the answers they want , they rely on [ an ] incoherent question ( strike one ) , circular reasoning ( strike two ) , and a confused complaint ( strike three ) .
But the game ’ s not over .
Ditch materialism .
Madonna was wrong .
We aren ’ t just living in a material world .
We ’ re living in a material and immaterial world .
And those immaterial things , like God , are no less real .

Questions are a legitimate way to get people to think. But if questions subtly create confusion, fallacy, or error, they only serve to conceal the truth rather than reveal the truth.
Atheist Forum provides three questions designed to raise doubt about the existence of God. But, to get the answers they want, they rely on an incoherent question (strike one), circular reasoning (strike two), and a confused complaint (strike three).
Video Transcript:
Incoherent questions, circular reasoning, confused complaints—this tweet has them all.
I’m Tim Barnett, and today we’re applying some Red Pen Logic to a tweet from Atheist Forum. Class is in session.
This is Red Pen Logic with Mr. B, where we try to assess bad thinking by using good thinking. Plus, we try to have some fun in the process. In today’s example, Atheist Forum offers a series of questions to get you to doubt the existence of God. Questions are a legitimate way to get people to think, but if questions subtly create confusion, fallacy, and error, they only serve to conceal truth rather than reveal truth.
Fundamental Flaw
Atheist Forum provides three questions to challenge the existence of God. First, “If God is immaterial, what is he made of?” Second, “If he isn’t material then does he exist?” Third, “How do so many people believe he exists but can’t describe what he’s made of?” Atheist Forum closes with a classy “Lmao,” laughing my—well, you get the idea. Presumably, belief in God is laughable because any thoughtful person following this atheist line of reasoning should see how foolishly funny it is to believe in an immaterial God. All right, it’s time to pull out the red pen and take this from the top.
Atheist Forum’s first question sounds strange because it contains a fundamental flaw. It’s an incoherent question. That means it doesn’t make any sense. An immaterial being, by definition, is not made of material. I’m not going too quickly here, am I? God is not made of anything. God is spirit. He has no mass, no form, no pieces that need to be put together. He’s not extended in space. He’s not made of God particles or spaghetti. Yeah, I’m talking to you, Pastafarians.
The question “If God is immaterial, what is He made of?” is like asking, “If a bachelor is unmarried, who is he married to?” A bachelor, by definition, is not married to anyone. So the first question seems to be based on a confusion about God, who is, by definition, immaterial and not assembled out of anything.
Confused Complaint
Next, Atheist Forum asks, “If God isn’t made of material, then does he exist?” Here, we go from confused reasoning to circular reasoning. Out of the frying pan and into the fire. Stay with me on this. Imagine I said to you, “Ryan always tells the truth,” and you ask, “How do you know Ryan always tells the truth?” And I reply, “Because he said so, and if he always tells the truth, then he wouldn’t be lying.” See the problem here? The answer to your question presumes what needs to be proved.
The only way Atheist Forum gets the answer it wants is if it subtly starts with the answer it wants. Only material things exist. Of course they’re gonna say that God doesn’t exist, because their materialism already dictates that He can’t exist. But that’s presuming what needs to be proved. That’s called circular reasoning. Incidentally, philosophers (and atheists, by the way) routinely speak of real things that are not made of material like reasoning, and arguments, and logical fallacies.
Incoherent Ask
Finally, Atheist Forum asks, “How do so many people believe that he exists but can’t describe what he’s made of?” This is a confused complaint. Here’s why: You don’t need to know what something is made of to know that it exists. We know that gravity exists even if we don’t know what it is.
So what have we learned? First, Christianity holds that God is not made of anything. Instead, He is an immaterial spirit. Therefore, asking, “What is God made of?” is an incoherent question. It’s kind of like saying the number four is immaterial and then asking, “What’s it made of?”
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Second, if God is, by definition, immaterial, and you start by assuming that only material things exist, of course you’re gonna conclude that there is no God. But that’s because your starting place disqualifies God from the beginning. This is circular reasoning, not careful thinking. This mistake is not surprising. Christian philosopher William Lane Craig says, “We are so schooled in materialism that we find it difficult to free ourselves from its assumption.” He’s right, and that’s what’s going on here.
Third, we don’t need to know what something is made of to know that it is real. Ironically, science works in the opposite direction. First it discovers that something is real, like gravity, and then it tries to describe what that thing is like. So Atheist Forum provides three questions designed to raise doubts about the existence of God. But to get the answers they want, they rely on [an] incoherent question (strike one), circular reasoning (strike two), and a confused complaint (strike three).
Class Dismissed
But the game’s not over. Ditch materialism. Madonna was wrong. We aren’t just living in a material world. We’re living in a material and immaterial world. And those immaterial things, like God, are no less real.
Class dismissed.
Originally published at Stand to Reason. Used by Permission


thestream--2020-05-16--New Study Finds Two Trends That Led Americans to Be Less Religious. We Should Learn From Them

“ Religiosity is declining in America .
The share of Americans who are religious is declining according to every metric , just as the social and legal position of religion is deteriorating as well.
” Perhaps that ’ s not news , but why and how that has happened probably is news .
And it is vital news for any — pastor , bishop , lay leader — who wants to do something to slow and eventually reverse that decline .
The American Enterprise Institute ( AEI ) has just published “ Promise and Peril : The History of American @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a report by Lyman Stone , adjunct fellow at AIE and research fellow at the Institute for Family Studies .
To my surprise , Stone reports that 1960 was the high water mark of American religiosity .
From there in America and in all the other developed nations he surveys , there has been rapid decline in the three primary measures of religiosity : identification , membership , and practice .
The number of American adults who self-identified with any religion was 95 % from the end of World War II until 1960 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ 75 % with 25 % of the population identifying with no religions .
Such nonreligious people are , of course , nothing new .
Stone points out that in 1770 Ezra Styles , president of Yale , estimated that 11 % of New Englanders were “ nothingarians , ” or what we today would call “ nones.
” What is new is the dramatic increase in “ nones ” since 1960 .
Regarding membership in church , synagogue , mosque or other identifiable religious body , in 1960 75 % of Americans claimed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to 62 % .
And it ’ s an open question as to whether that percentage will continue its downward trend or whether we have already “ bottomed out.
” My guess is that we ’ re nowhere near the bottom .
After all , around the time of our War for Independence , church membership was less than 30 % of the population .
Finally , he presents the gold standard of religiosity : behavior .
In a typical week in 1960 , 50 % of adults attended a religious service .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ % .
That number is not a dismal as it first appears .
In 1724 , Stone notes , only 25-45 % attended church at least once a month .
And in 1780 , Cotton Mather lamented “ that ‘ not one-in-six ’ people in Boston attended any church on a given Sunday.
” The difference , however , is that in the eighteenth century with the exception of the nothingarians , nearly everyone identified as Christian , had been baptized or dedicated , and believed the basic doctrines of the Christian faith @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in the 1700s .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
Stone notes , “ Such evidence as exists suggests that in both the 17th century and the 20th century , declines in religious attendance began before declines in religious membership and that declines in membership began before declines in affiliation , a striking finding that suggests the roots of secularization go back much earlier than conventionally assumed , to the 1930s or 1940s rather than the 1960s @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , suggests Stone , in the social and legal position of religion .
Regarding public discourse , the decades before the Civil War seem to be the most rich in religious language .
“ But after the Civil War , ” he writes , “ the public position of religion declined sharply.
” Religion also fell out of literature , fewer and fewer children received religious names , and religion was granted less and less constitutional support .
After defining the downward trends , Stone suggests reasons for those trends — which can @ @ @ @ @ @ @ solutions .
Secular Education and the Decline in Marriage The two biggest religiosity killers are secular education and the decline in marriage .
Religiosity , writes Stone , is determined in childhood and , “ Childhood religiosity was heavily a affected by government spending on education .
… Thus , while more educated people were not less religious , societies that spent more public money on education were less religious .
It is not educational attainment per se that reduces religiosity , but government control of education.
” Along with “ readin ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ rithmatic ” our schools inculcate a secular worldview .
Religiosity declines most , Stone found , between the ages of 12 and 18 making high school “ a season of secularization ” with college completing the job .
And while marriage increases religiosity , as the percentage of married adults declines , religiosity among adults and their children declines as well .
This , he writes , is tied to education : “ In the first place , increasingly secularized education serves to directly reduce religiosity as schools provide a different set of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Secondly , as educational enrollment represents an ever-expanding share of young American ’ s lives , marriage is increasingly postponed .
As a result of postponed marriages , more young adults form nonreligious habits , and fewer attend church.
” Virtually all moms and dads have been forced to experiment with homeschooling during these COVID days .
Many would be well-advised to homeschool permanently or find a Christian alternative to education that secularizes our children .
And the ongoing battle for marriage and family really is worth all our efforts .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ religious leaders face a crossroad.
” By studying Stone ’ s report we can be better equipped face that crossroad calmly , thoughtfully , creatively and prayerfully .
Dr. James Tonkowich , a senior contributor to The Stream , is a freelance writer , speaker and commentator on spirituality , religion and public life .
He is the author of The Liberty Threat : The Attack on Religious Freedom in America Today and Pears , Grapes , and Dates : A Good Life After Mid-Life .
Jim serves as Director of Distance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ host of the college ’ s weekly podcast , “ The After Dinner Scholar .
”

“Religiosity is declining in America. The share of Americans who are religious is declining according to every metric, just as the social and legal position of religion is deteriorating as well.”
Perhaps that’s not news, but why and how that has happened probably is news. And it is vital news for any — pastor, bishop, lay leader — who wants to do something to slow and eventually reverse that decline.
The American Enterprise Institute (AEI) has just published “Promise and Peril: The History of American Religiosity and Its Recent Decline,” a report by Lyman Stone, adjunct fellow at AIE and research fellow at the Institute for Family Studies.
To my surprise, Stone reports that 1960 was the high water mark of American religiosity. From there in America and in all the other developed nations he surveys, there has been rapid decline in the three primary measures of religiosity: identification, membership, and practice.
The number of American adults who self-identified with any religion was 95% from the end of World War II until 1960. Today that number has dropped to 75% with 25% of the population identifying with no religions. Such nonreligious people are, of course, nothing new. Stone points out that in 1770 Ezra Styles, president of Yale, estimated that 11% of New Englanders were “nothingarians,” or what we today would call “nones.” What is new is the dramatic increase in “nones” since 1960.
Regarding membership in church, synagogue, mosque or other identifiable religious body, in 1960 75% of Americans claimed membership. Today the number is down to 62%. And it’s an open question as to whether that percentage will continue its downward trend or whether we have already “bottomed out.” My guess is that we’re nowhere near the bottom. After all, around the time of our War for Independence, church membership was less than 30% of the population.
From 50% Service Attendance to 35%
Finally, he presents the gold standard of religiosity: behavior. In a typical week in 1960, 50% of adults attended a religious service. Today it’s down to 35%.
That number is not a dismal as it first appears. In 1724, Stone notes, only 25-45% attended church at least once a month. And in 1780, Cotton Mather lamented “that ‘not one-in-six’ people in Boston attended any church on a given Sunday.”
The difference, however, is that in the eighteenth century with the exception of the nothingarians, nearly everyone identified as Christian, had been baptized or dedicated, and believed the basic doctrines of the Christian faith. Though that too was eroding even in the 1700s.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Stone notes, “Such evidence as exists suggests that in both the 17th century and the 20th century, declines in religious attendance began before declines in religious membership and that declines in membership began before declines in affiliation, a striking finding that suggests the roots of secularization go back much earlier than conventionally assumed, to the 1930s or 1940s rather than the 1960s or 1970s.”
This can be seen, suggests Stone, in the social and legal position of religion. Regarding public discourse, the decades before the Civil War seem to be the most rich in religious language. “But after the Civil War,” he writes, “the public position of religion declined sharply.” Religion also fell out of literature, fewer and fewer children received religious names, and religion was granted less and less constitutional support.
After defining the downward trends, Stone suggests reasons for those trends — which can also, let me add, suggest solutions.
Secular Education and the Decline in Marriage
The two biggest religiosity killers are secular education and the decline in marriage.
Religiosity, writes Stone, is determined in childhood and, “Childhood religiosity was heavily a affected by government spending on education. … Thus, while more educated people were not less religious, societies that spent more public money on education were less religious. It is not educational attainment per se that reduces religiosity, but government control of education.”
Along with “readin’, ’ritin’, and ’rithmatic” our schools inculcate a secular worldview. Religiosity declines most, Stone found, between the ages of 12 and 18 making high school “a season of secularization” with college completing the job.
And while marriage increases religiosity, as the percentage of married adults declines, religiosity among adults and their children declines as well. This, he writes, is tied to education: “In the first place, increasingly secularized education serves to directly reduce religiosity as schools provide a different set of values and life orientations than parents might. Secondly, as educational enrollment represents an ever-expanding share of young American’s lives, marriage is increasingly postponed. As a result of postponed marriages, more young adults form nonreligious habits, and fewer attend church.”
Virtually all moms and dads have been forced to experiment with homeschooling during these COVID days. Many would be well-advised to homeschool permanently or find a Christian alternative to education that secularizes our children. And the ongoing battle for marriage and family really is worth all our efforts.
“Today,” writes Lyman Stone, “religious leaders face a crossroad.” By studying Stone’s report we can be better equipped face that crossroad calmly, thoughtfully, creatively and prayerfully.
Dr. James Tonkowich, a senior contributor to The Stream, is a freelance writer, speaker and commentator on spirituality, religion and public life. He is the author of The Liberty Threat: The Attack on Religious Freedom in America Today and Pears, Grapes, and Dates: A Good Life After Mid-Life. Jim serves as Director of Distance Learning at Wyoming Catholic College and is host of the college’s weekly podcast, “The After Dinner Scholar.”


thestream--2020-05-16--Tax Amazon (More)? Time for a New Tea Party!

A few days ago I drove the streets of downtown Seattle to see what the city looked like , with some hundred thousand employees of Amazon , Google , and other companies working from home .
I fell behind a slow-moving car with a cardboard sign in its back window reading “ Tax Amazon !
” Horns were honking , and I found myself caught in a sparsely-attended demonstration of about three cars and one shouting woman on the corner .
This is the Northwest , where the sun brings out protestors like tulips .
I turned right on Fourth @ @ @ @ @ @ @ many ways ) and escaped that mini micro-aggression of a traffic jam .
Eleven years ago , as it happens , a more vigorous Tea Party demonstration took place further right down 4th Avenue .
The small-government Tea Party movement began , by some accounts , in the heart of a city now fought over like street gangs by socialists , environmental activists , and woke capitalists .
The two largest demonstrations I have witnessed here both involved conservative Americans concerned about the state of their country .
The other was a demonstration @ @ @ @ @ @ @ campus during the Carter era when I was a sophomore .
“ Tax Amazon ” brought Nancy Pelosi to mind .
She has lately appeared on TV in a mask , looking like a bank robber as she demands three trillion dollars from our children and grandchildren for a new spending bill .
She wants to use that wealth — $ 9,000 from your pocket , $ 36,000 if you are a family of four — to pay her party ’ s constituents , including public employees of states who have been promised @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s in addition to the $ 300,000 that ’ s already my family ’ s portion of the national debt .
Can Amazon pay for all the goodies that Nancy Pelosi promises ?
In fact , Amazon pays about a billion dollars a year in taxes .
They keep the bill low by investing hundreds of billions of dollars .
I have no objection to making tech billionaires paying more than they are .
But you could snag every penny of Jeff Bezos ’ money , and still only offset about six @ @ @ @ @ @ @ spending alone .
In doing so , you would destroy what may be America ’ s most dynamic and creative private company , which now employs a million people .
Harvest those golden eggs , by all means .
But don ’ t cook the geese that laid them in a fit of genocidal or suicidal passion .
Reckless spenders like Nancy Pelosi are bankrupting America at a rate that would make the fall of ancient Rome look sedate .
“ But the world is in crisis !
” you object .
“ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ !
The government needs to take on extra responsibilities at a time like this !
” I understand .
My family has taken a blow , too .
We will no doubt need to compromise with the bandits , and engage in more deficit spending over the next year or two .
But even before this crisis , in good times , “ the best times ever !
” , the federal government was plowing a trillion more dollars a year into the sod than it took in as revenue .
What our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was mounting with each passing day .
We were already the grasshopper who played all summer long and laughed at the industrious ant .
Winter would never come , we blithely assumed .
The Democratic Party planned to spend much more .
Their presidential candidates promised to spend up to fifty trillion dollars ( $ 150,000 per person ) beyond our present astronomical liabilities .
In their debates , hosted by the left-leaning media , hardly a peep was heard about federal debt .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Moral Issues of Our Day .
One has to ask : Is it a coincidence that the party of Michigan Governor Whitmer , who banned gardening but kept abortion mills running because killing the unborn is “ life-sustaining , ” as she put it , is also the party that wants to bill newborns who survive for their endless , unfunded spending ?
“ Tax Amazon !
” Sure , but where will that money go ?
Will it pay down the debt , or buy more Chinese surveillance drones and hire more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the private sector even further ?
Short-term spending may be necessary , but it is time we demand that our “ leaders ” make long-term plans to pay down this sinful and cruel debt .
Getting our house in order will be hard : it will require cuts in entitlements and , yes , raising some taxes .
There are no easy solutions , because we have spent ourselves into a hole .
But it is grossly immoral to continue spending our children ’ s money , and it will destroy our country @ @ @ @ @ @ @ another party .
A party for cheap-skates .
A party for responsible adults who love their country and want to see it thrive .
I prefer the word “ party ” over “ protest.
” After all , America is a country “ of the people , by the people , and for the people , ” as Abraham Lincoln put it .
Party connotes a celebration of the grace which God has shed on America .
You invite all kinds of people to a party .
The point isn ’ t to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ seek the good of our beloved nation .
No doubt some will call us racists .
( That ’ s how the Democratic Party gets votes , these days — pathetic , I know . )
They will paint protestors as gun-crazed , pot-bellied , glaze-eyed , suspenders-wearing , cult-like extras from The Handmaid ’ s Tale .
They may even sick the FBI on us , like Barack Obama did .
We need to be smarter than our opponents , because we are fighting for a great land .
We need to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ class-inclusive , positive but stubborn , well-spoken but passionate — to return our country to a sound fiscal and moral basis .
This generation of Americans face four great challenges .
We are only part-way through a deadly pandemic .
Tens of millions of Americans are out of work .
The rise of an ambitious , self-righteous , and sometimes ruthless China has charged the geopolitical landscape with danger .
Then when we open our collective purse to deal with these challenges , instead of funds laid away for a rainy day , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
Yet our heedless , officious , bread-and-circus promising robber baron politicians deign to spend trillions more , while activists attack the companies that create wealth .
Time to throw those tea leaves overboard , and recover who we are .

A few days ago I drove the streets of downtown Seattle to see what the city looked like, with some hundred thousand employees of Amazon, Google, and other companies working from home. I fell behind a slow-moving car with a cardboard sign in its back window reading “Tax Amazon!” Horns were honking, and I found myself caught in a sparsely-attended demonstration of about three cars and one shouting woman on the corner. This is the Northwest, where the sun brings out protestors like tulips. I turned right on Fourth Avenue (I prefer right turns in many ways) and escaped that mini micro-aggression of a traffic jam. Eleven years ago, as it happens, a more vigorous Tea Party demonstration took place further right down 4th Avenue. The small-government Tea Party movement began, by some accounts, in the heart of a city now fought over like street gangs by socialists, environmental activists, and woke capitalists. The two largest demonstrations I have witnessed here both involved conservative Americans concerned about the state of their country. The other was a demonstration against Iran on the University of Washington campus during the Carter era when I was a sophomore. “Tax Amazon” brought Nancy Pelosi to mind. She has lately appeared on TV in a mask, looking like a bank robber as she demands three trillion dollars from our children and grandchildren for a new spending bill. She wants to use that wealth — $9,000 from your pocket, $36,000 if you are a family of four — to pay her party’s constituents, including public employees of states who have been promised lavish benefits by their bosses. That’s in addition to the $300,000 that’s already my family’s portion of the national debt.
Bankruptcy Beyond Amazon’s Reach
Can Amazon pay for all the goodies that Nancy Pelosi promises? In fact, Amazon pays about a billion dollars a year in taxes. They keep the bill low by investing hundreds of billions of dollars. I have no objection to making tech billionaires pay more than they are. But you could snag every penny of Jeff Bezos’ money, and still only offset about six days of this year’s deficit spending alone. In doing so, you would destroy what may be America’s most dynamic and creative private company, which now employs a million people. Harvest those golden eggs, by all means. But don’t cook the geese that laid them in a fit of genocidal or suicidal passion.
Reckless spenders like Nancy Pelosi are bankrupting America at a rate that would make the fall of ancient Rome look sedate.
“But the world is in crisis!” you object. “People are out of work and hurting! The government needs to take on extra responsibilities at a time like this!”
I understand. My family has taken a blow, too. We will no doubt need to compromise with the bandits, and engage in more deficit spending over the next year or two.
Growing, Growing Debt
But even before this crisis, in good times, “the best times ever!”, the federal government was plowing a trillion more dollars a year into the sod than it took in as revenue. What our children owe the country’s lenders was mounting with each passing day. We were already the grasshopper who played all summer long and laughed at the industrious ant. Winter would never come, we blithely assumed.
The Democratic Party planned to spend much more. Their presidential candidates promised to spend up to fifty trillion dollars ($150,000 per person) beyond our present astronomical liabilities. In their debates, hosted by the left-leaning media, hardly a peep was heard about federal debt.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
One has to ask: Is it a coincidence that the party of Michigan Governor Whitmer, who banned gardening but kept abortion mills running because killing the unborn is “life-sustaining,” as she put it, is also the party that wants to bill newborns who survive for their endless, unfunded spending?
“Tax Amazon!” Sure, but where will that money go? Will it pay down the debt, or buy more Chinese surveillance drones and hire more Diversity Czars and Environmental Police to squeeze the private sector even further?
Short-term spending may be necessary, but it is time we demand that our “leaders” make long-term plans to pay down this sinful and cruel debt. Getting our house in order will be hard: it will require cuts in entitlements and, yes, raising some taxes. There are no easy solutions, because we have spent ourselves into a hole. But it is grossly immoral to continue spending our children’s money, and it will destroy our country.
Time to Throw a New Party
But first, let us throw another party. A party for cheap-skates. A party for responsible adults who love their country and want to see it thrive.
I prefer the word “party” over “protest.” After all, America is a country “of the people, by the people, and for the people,” as Abraham Lincoln put it. Party connotes a celebration of the grace which God has shed on America. You invite all kinds of people to a party. The point isn’t to exclude, but to come together to seek the good of our beloved nation.
No doubt some will call us racists. (That’s how the Democratic Party gets votes, these days — pathetic, I know.) They will paint protestors as gun-crazed, pot-bellied, glaze-eyed, suspenders-wearing, cult-like extras from The Handmaid’s Tale. They may even sic the FBI on us, like Barack Obama did.
We need to be smarter than our opponents, because we are fighting for a great land. We need to create a broad-based movement — multi-racial, class-inclusive, positive but stubborn, well-spoken but passionate — to return our country to a sound fiscal and moral basis.
This generation of Americans face four great challenges. We are only part-way through a deadly pandemic. Tens of millions of Americans are out of work. The rise of an ambitious, self-righteous, and sometimes ruthless China has charged the geopolitical landscape with danger. Then when we open our collective purse to deal with these challenges, instead of funds laid away for a rainy day, we find a series of huge IOUs. Yet our heedless, officious, bread-and-circus promising robber baron politicians deign to spend trillions more, while activists attack the companies that create wealth.
Time to throw those tea leaves overboard, and recover who we are.
Dr. David Marshall holds a B.A. in “the Russian and Chinese Languages and Marxism,” an M.A. in Chinese Religions, and a Ph.D. in Christian Thought and Chinese Tradition. His most recent book is Jesus is No Myth: The Fingerprints of God on the Gospels.


thestream--2020-05-16--Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged!

Judge Not, Lest Ye Be Judged!

Has anyone ever said to you : “ Don ’ t judge me !
” In Matthew 7:1 , Jesus famously says , “ Do not judge or you too will be judged .
For in the same way you judge others , you will be judged , and with the measure you use , it will be measured to you.
” That raises the question : What exactly does Jesus mean by “ judge ” ?
We know that He will be the final judge of all things ( Acts 17:31a ; Romans 2:16 ; 14:10c ) .
But @ @ @ @ @ @ @ judgment by those who profess Christ ?
There are three primary kinds of “ judging ” referred to in Holy Scripture : 1 ) Passing a final , condemning judgment over someone as being destined for Hell – a judgment that God alone is capable of rendering .
Such a sentence can only be rightfully adjudicated upon the death of a person , based upon evidence that can only be known by an omniscient God – who alone knows the thoughts and intents of a person ’ s heart , as well as @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , and you will not be judged .
Do not condemn , and you will not be condemned.
” ( Luke 6:37 ; see also James 5:9 ) 2 ) Judging what is in the heart of a person .
For example , presuming to know the thoughts , intentions and motivations for someone ’ s actions without revelation of such things from the person we are judging ( John 7:24 ; Galatians 2:6b ) .
Even then , the person might not know their own heart ( Matthew 13:14-15 ; Ephesians 4:17-19 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ confession inaccurate or incomplete .
Only God knows what is in the heart of a man ( 1 Corinthians 4:5b ) , so such a judgment on our part is both presumptuous and impossible ( Hebrews 4:12-13 ; 1 Peter 1:17 ; James 4:11-12 ) .
3 ) The judging of other believers by designated leaders in the Church – using known and corroborated evidence revealed by the defendant and/or by at least 2 or 3 witnesses ( Matthew 18:15-18 ; 1 Corinthians 6:1-8 ) .
This kind of judging is permitted for @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the flock .
When in conversation with someone about one kind of sin or another , the other person will often try to end the discussion by saying “ Who are you to judge me ?
” At that point , we need to check our hearts to see if there is any wrongly-based judgment on our part .
Are we condemning them ?
Are we presuming to know what is in their heart ?
Are we criticizing them for doing the very things that we do or have done ?
In some @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not judgments , but a witness to judgments that God has already made .
We may be genuinely concerned over their eternal fate .
Our motivation is love , not judgment .
In such cases , our response could be along these lines : I am not passing judgment on you .
I am merely trying to convey to you judgments that God has already made which have been revealed in His Word .
My concern is not to condemn , but to warn you of the consequence of things that He has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , your need for a Savior who will take your judgment upon Himself .
It truly matters to me what might happen to you when you are made to stand before Him to give an account for your life !
Often , this will expose the real problem – they don ’ t trust or believe that the Bible is God ’ s revelation .
If so , then the conversation really needs to begin there instead .
Having been forgiven for every sinful thing that we have done or will ever do @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evil ) , believers now have no right to judge anyone ( as opposed to bearing witness , as I have defined it here ) .
Since it is God who judges all things , ( even our hypocritical judgments of others ) , it is somewhat frightening that we pay so little attention to this matter ( 1 Peter 1:17 ; 2:23 ; 1 Corinthians 4:3-5 ) .
I am as guilty of this as anyone else .
We sometimes make the mistake made by the Apostle Peter .
Upon asking Jesus @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Jesus said to him , “ What is that to you ?
You must follow Me.
” ( John 21:22 ) Our mean-spirited judgments of those still trapped in sin — even serious sin — must stop .
We must become known for our love of sinner and saint , mimicking the same grace that has been displayed in us through Christ Jesus .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
A new commandment I give to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , even as I have loved you , that you also love one another .
By this all men will know that you are My disciples , if you have love for one another .
( John 13:34-35 ) Dear friends , since God so loved us , we also ought to love one another .
… If we love each other , God lives in us and His love is made complete in us .
( 1 John 4:11-12 ) Do you show contempt for the riches of His kindness , tolerance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s kindness leads you toward repentance ?
( Romans 2:4 ) How Then Shall We Judge ( and Judge Not ) ?
The Bible is clear that God alone will judge the secrets of men ’ s hearts through Christ Jesus ( Romans 2:16 ; 2 Timothy 4:1 , 8 ; Hebrews 10:30 ; 12:23 ; 13:4 ; James 4:12 ; 1 Peter 4:5 ) .
In the vast majority of cases , we are to leave all judgment to God Himself , who alone knows how to judge righteously ( Romans @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exception found in the Bible is when designated leaders of the Church weigh known evidence against a defendant and pass a Bible-based judgment on ( or exonerate ) the one being charged .
Once again , it is important to note that when someone says to you : “ Don ’ t judge me !
” they are often objecting to having the Scriptural judgments of God communicated to them and are mistaking them as your thoughts rather than God ’ s .
Gut if you are relaying decisions that God has already @ @ @ @ @ @ @ grace-filled attempt to enable them to see their need for a Savior , then you are only doing what the Apostles did , as led by the Holy Spirit .
So let the Holy Spirit lead you in these matters .
He is the only One who can actually bring in the result , so allow Him time to do so .
Best advice – show the love and grace of God .
Rather than focusing on their sin , talk about Jesus and His love and forgiveness for those who surrender their @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Foster is the author of Transformed Into His Image and Love Hunger and is the founder/director of Mastering Life Ministries ( http : //www.MasteringLife.org ) .
Read more of his take on sexual sin and brokenness in his newest book , The Sexual Healing Reference Edition , and listen to his twice-weekly podcast .

Has anyone ever said to you: “Don’t judge me!”
In Matthew 7:1, Jesus famously says, “Do not judge or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.”
That raises the question: What exactly does Jesus mean by “judge”? We know that He will be the final judge of all things (Acts 17:31a; Romans 2:16; 14:10c). But does that exclude other kinds of temporal judgment by those who profess Christ?
Kinds of Human Judgment Found in Scripture
There are three primary kinds of “judging” referred to in Holy Scripture:
1) Passing a final, condemning judgment over someone as being destined for Hell – a judgment that God alone is capable of rendering. Such a sentence can only be rightfully adjudicated upon the death of a person, based upon evidence that can only be known by an omniscient God – who alone knows the thoughts and intents of a person’s heart, as well as his/her deeds: “Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned.” (Luke 6:37; see also James 5:9)
2) Judging what is in the heart of a person. For example, presuming to know the thoughts, intentions and motivations for someone’s actions without revelation of such things from the person we are judging (John 7:24; Galatians 2:6b). Even then, the person might not know their own heart (Matthew 13:14-15; Ephesians 4:17-19; Hebrews 4:12), rendering their confession inaccurate or incomplete. Only God knows what is in the heart of a man (1 Corinthians 4:5b), so such a judgment on our part is both presumptuous and impossible (Hebrews 4:12-13; 1 Peter 1:17; James 4:11-12).
3) The judging of other believers by designated leaders in the Church – using known and corroborated evidence revealed by the defendant and/or by at least 2 or 3 witnesses (Matthew 18:15-18; 1 Corinthians 6:1-8). This kind of judging is permitted for designated church leaders for the protection of the flock.
Judging vs Bearing Witness to God’s Word
When in conversation with someone about one kind of sin or another, the other person will often try to end the discussion by saying “Who are you to judge me?”At that point, we need to check our hearts to see if there is any wrongly-based judgment on our part. Are we condemning them? Are we presuming to know what is in their heart? Are we criticizing them for doing the very things that we do or have done?
In some cases, however, our words are not judgments, but a witness to judgments that God has already made. We may be genuinely concerned over their eternal fate. Our motivation is love, not judgment. In such cases, our response could be along these lines:
I am not passing judgment on you. I am merely trying to convey to you judgments that God has already made which have been revealed in His Word. My concern is not to condemn, but to warn you of the consequence of things that He has already declared judgment upon, and thus, your need for a Savior who will take your judgment upon Himself. It truly matters to me what might happen to you when you are made to stand before Him to give an account for your life!
Often, this will expose the real problem – they don’t trust or believe that the Bible is God’s revelation. If so, then the conversation really needs to begin there instead.
Judging Fellow Believers
Having been forgiven for every sinful thing that we have done or will ever do, (no matter how horrendous or evil), believers now have no right to judge anyone (as opposed to bearing witness, as I have defined it here). Since it is God who judges all things, (even our hypocritical judgments of others), it is somewhat frightening that we pay so little attention to this matter (1 Peter 1:17; 2:23; 1 Corinthians 4:3-5). I am as guilty of this as anyone else.
We sometimes make the mistake made by the Apostle Peter. Upon asking Jesus about the fate of the Apostle John, Jesus said to him, “What is that to you? You must follow Me.” (John 21:22) Our mean-spirited judgments of those still trapped in sin — even serious sin — must stop. We must become known for our love of sinner and saint, mimicking the same grace that has been displayed in us through Christ Jesus.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another, even as I have loved you, that you also love one another. By this all men will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another. (John 13:34-35)
Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. … If we love each other, God lives in us and His love is made complete in us. (1 John 4:11-12)
Do you show contempt for the riches of His kindness, tolerance and patience, not realizing that God’s kindness leads you toward repentance? (Romans 2:4)
How Then Shall We Judge (and Judge Not)?
The Bible is clear that God alone will judge the secrets of men’s hearts through Christ Jesus (Romans 2:16; 2 Timothy 4:1, 8; Hebrews 10:30; 12:23; 13:4; James 4:12; 1 Peter 4:5).
In the vast majority of cases, we are to leave all judgment to God Himself, who alone knows how to judge righteously (Romans 14:13). Again – the only exception found in the Bible is when designated leaders of the Church weigh known evidence against a defendant and pass a Bible-based judgment on (or exonerate) the one being charged.
Once again, it is important to note that when someone says to you: “Don’t judge me!” they are often objecting to having the Scriptural judgments of God communicated to them and are mistaking them as your thoughts rather than God’s. Gut if you are relaying decisions that God has already made against sin in a loving, grace-filled attempt to enable them to see their need for a Savior, then you are only doing what the Apostles did, as led by the Holy Spirit.
So let the Holy Spirit lead you in these matters. He is the only One who can actually bring in the result, so allow Him time to do so. Best advice – show the love and grace of God. Rather than focusing on their sin, talk about Jesus and His love and forgiveness for those who surrender their lives to Him.
Dr. David Kyle Foster is the author of Transformed Into His Image and Love Hunger and is the founder/director of Mastering Life Ministries (http://www.MasteringLife.org). Read more of his take on sexual sin and brokenness in his newest book, The Sexual Healing Reference Edition, and listen to his twice-weekly podcast.


thestream--2020-05-18--It’s Lockdown at Las Vegas

It’s Lockdown at Las Vegas

The glittering lights of fabulous Las Vegas have been darkened since the big lockdown , and is that such a bad thing ?
It ’ s a bad thing for the thousands of people who work in Las Vegas and the other gambling joints across America , but is gambling good for us , or is it yet another entertainment addiction we could do without ?
I was brought up in a conservative Christian home where we didn ’ t go to movies or dances and didn ’ t even use playing cards .
Gambling was one of those sinful @ @ @ @ @ @ @ were strictly forbidden .
As I grew older I moved away from the old family prohibitions .
Then one day when I was visiting Atlantic City , New Jersey , on a speaking engagement , my host Tony offered to take me to lunch .
“ Where do you want to eat ?
” he asked .
So we went to the casino .
On the drive over I said , “ Tony , I have a confession.
” “ I ’ m like Dorothy .
I ’ ve never been to Oz @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in a casino.
” “ Gospel truth .
I was brought up in the kind of home where we didn ’ t even have playing cards.
” When we got to the casino it was obvious that if I was Dorothy , Tony was the Wizard of Odds .
If I was a virgin , he was a veteran .
The car park attendant knew him , the gal in the bunny suit offered him a free drink .
Tony gave me the grand tour .
I learned how the games were played @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the house always wins .
Tony ’ s game was craps .
He bought some chips .
We rolled the dice .
We had fun .
We lost .
I could see that Tony could afford to lose .
He drove a nice car and I knew he owned a couple of successful businesses .
Over lunch he explained that he plays for fun , not to win .
“ Other guys ski , travel or have a boat .
That ’ s their hobby .
I gamble.
” How could I argue @ @ @ @ @ @ @ game isn ’ t it ?
Tony ’ s a good Christian .
He ’ s a family man , and a regular guy .
So he has an unusual hobby ?
I tried to put my homegrown puritanical streak on one side .
If Tony and his family are okay with it , I ’ m okay .
But there ’ s a problem .
Tony could afford to gamble and lose .
But from what I could see , most of the other folks at the casino weren ’ t in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ place was packed with poor people .
You could tell by the desperate look on their faces that the young African American guys were probably gambling away their rent money .
Old couples in cheap Wal-Mart clothes sat together losing not only their children ’ s inheritance , but the money they needed for assisted living .
The casinos feed like sharks on the desperation of the poor .
The fact that it ’ s dressed up as a glitzy game makes the whole charade even more wicked , sad and pitiful .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
Gambling has become a huge industry .
All across America , casinos are springing up wherever a legal loophole can be found .
Around the world , the gambling lobby is pushing for fewer rules and more licenses .
Gambling ’ s everywhere .
Online poker , horse racing , wagers on sports , and state lottos suck up money — while at a lower level , seemingly harmless raffles , games on cereal packs and Reader ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that you can get something for nothing .
What is the hole in the soul that pushes us to gamble ?
First , there is the childish belief that few of us can shake off — the belief in magic .
We believe there really is a good fairy out there called Lady Luck who will wave her wand and solve all our problems .
The English writer Hilaire Belloc said , “ Every argument is a theological argument.
” In other words , what you believe affects how you behave .
Beneath @ @ @ @ @ @ @ on you is a deeper problem of belief .
Lady Luck is actually a sinister false goddess .
She represents chance instead of providence .
Historians tell us in ancient Rome people were gambling addicts .
They would bet on anything .
They even rolled dice for the robes of their savior .
Why did they play the odds ?
Because those were their gods .
Without a belief in an all-powerful , all loving creator all you are left with is happenchance .
Therefore , is it any wonder that in our @ @ @ @ @ @ @ relativism , so many believe in chance rather than a divine plan ?
With an economic meltdown and record unemployment , more people than ever will be looking for the quick answer and the instant solution that gambling seems to offer .
Belief in a magic cure is bound to soar .
Epidemic level gambling is the economic outworking of that belief , and the outcomes are disastrous .
It doesn ’ t take much reasoning to see that such an economic system erodes the motivation for the hard work , enterprise and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ built .
When gambling takes root it gobbles up savings , destroys homes and leaves people destitute and reliant on state support .
Simply put , gambling rots society , rots economies and , worst of all , rots the soul .
I had fun visiting the casino with my friend Tony , but I ’ m thinking maybe those old prohibitions on gambling were not such a bad idea .
Dwight Longenecker is a Catholic priest working in South Carolina .
Check out his new book Immortal Combat : Confronting the Heart @ @ @

The glittering lights of fabulous Las Vegas have been darkened since the big lockdown, and is that such a bad thing? It’s a bad thing for the thousands of people who work in Las Vegas and the other gambling joints across America, but is gambling good for us, or is it yet another entertainment addiction we could do without?
I was brought up in a conservative Christian home where we didn’t go to movies or dances and didn’t even use playing cards. Gambling was one of those sinful activities along with drinking and smoking that were strictly forbidden.
As I grew older I moved away from the old family prohibitions. Then one day when I was visiting Atlantic City, New Jersey, on a speaking engagement, my host Tony offered to take me to lunch. “Where do you want to eat?” he asked.
“Someplace local.”
So we went to the casino. On the drive over I said, “Tony, I have a confession.”
“What’s that?”
“I’m a casino virgin.”
“You’re What?”
“I’m like Dorothy. I’ve never been to Oz. I’ve never set foot in a casino.”
Tony stared at me, “You’re kidding me.”
“Gospel truth. I was brought up in the kind of home where we didn’t even have playing cards.”
The Wizard of Odds
When we got to the casino it was obvious that if I was Dorothy, Tony was the Wizard of Odds. If I was a virgin, he was a veteran. The car park attendant knew him, the gal in the bunny suit offered him a free drink. Tony gave me the grand tour. I learned how the games were played, what the odds were and how the house always wins. Tony’s game was craps. He bought some chips. We rolled the dice. We had fun. We lost.
I could see that Tony could afford to lose. He drove a nice car and I knew he owned a couple of successful businesses. Over lunch he explained that he plays for fun, not to win.
“Other guys ski, travel or have a boat. That’s their hobby. I gamble.”
How could I argue? It’s just a harmless game isn’t it? Tony’s a good Christian. He’s a family man, and a regular guy. So he has an unusual hobby? I tried to put my homegrown puritanical streak on one side. If Tony and his family are okay with it, I’m okay.
Lady Luck or Lady Loser?
But there’s a problem. Tony could afford to gamble and lose. But from what I could see, most of the other folks at the casino weren’t in Tony’s income bracket. The place was packed with poor people. You could tell by the desperate look on their faces that the young African American guys were probably gambling away their rent money. Old couples in cheap Wal-Mart clothes sat together losing not only their children’s inheritance, but the money they needed for assisted living. The casinos feed like sharks on the desperation of the poor. The fact that it’s dressed up as a glitzy game makes the whole charade even more wicked, sad and pitiful.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
Gambling has become a huge industry. All across America, casinos are springing up wherever a legal loophole can be found. Around the world, the gambling lobby is pushing for fewer rules and more licenses. Gambling’s everywhere. Online poker, horse racing, wagers on sports, and state lottos suck up money — while at a lower level, seemingly harmless raffles, games on cereal packs and Reader’s Digest Sweepstakes fuel the frenzied illusion that you can get something for nothing.
A Hole in the Soul
What is the hole in the soul that pushes us to gamble? First, there is the childish belief that few of us can shake off — the belief in magic. We believe there really is a good fairy out there called Lady Luck who will wave her wand and solve all our problems.
The English writer Hilaire Belloc said, “Every argument is a theological argument.” In other words, what you believe affects how you behave. Beneath the false dream that luck will smile on you is a deeper problem of belief. Lady Luck is actually a sinister false goddess. She represents chance instead of providence.
Historians tell us in ancient Rome people were gambling addicts. They would bet on anything. They even rolled dice for the robes of their savior. Why did they play the odds? Because those were their gods. Without a belief in an all-powerful, all loving creator all you are left with is happenchance.
Casino Rot
Therefore, is it any wonder that in our society, worm eaten with evolutionism and relativism, so many believe in chance rather than a divine plan? With an economic meltdown and record unemployment, more people than ever will be looking for the quick answer and the instant solution that gambling seems to offer. Belief in a magic cure is bound to soar.
Epidemic level gambling is the economic outworking of that belief, and the outcomes are disastrous. It doesn’t take much reasoning to see that such an economic system erodes the motivation for the hard work, enterprise and personal responsibility from which real prosperity is built. When gambling takes root it gobbles up savings, destroys homes and leaves people destitute and reliant on state support.
Simply put, gambling rots society, rots economies and, worst of all, rots the soul. I had fun visiting the casino with my friend Tony, but I’m thinking maybe those old prohibitions on gambling were not such a bad idea.
Dwight Longenecker is a Catholic priest working in South Carolina. Check out his new book Immortal Combat: Confronting the Heart of Darkness.


thestream--2020-05-18--The Mainstream Media’s Great Trick: Ridiculing People Into Silence

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word “ Anti-vaxxer ” ?
Do you conjure an image of a moron , so ignorant of science , that they are not worth arguing with ?
Well , guess what ?
That is precisely what that epithet is meant to do .
It is meant to derail and avoid an intelligent discussion before it even starts .
While a handful of people may actually be completely anti-vaccine , most of the people lumped in this category are not .
They are decent , reasonable people with @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with even the mildest questions about even a single vaccine an “ anti-vaxxer , ” the media ( and politicians ) get to avoid any and all discussions of the subject .
This is a very clever technique that shields , in this case , Big Pharma from challenge .
The liberal media and politicians engage in this strategy to silence opposing viewpoints .
Why ?
Questions might show just how thin the veneer of lies covering one ’ s overall agenda is .
Perhaps it might just reveal the flaws in an @ @ @ @ @ @ @ fixed .
Anti-vaxxers are not the only group to be abused with this technique .
A second group being targeted this way are climate change deniers .
The left informs us they are a group of numbskulls and ne ’ er-do-wells , to whom we should not listen .
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
To really drive home the point , the liberal media uses the line , “ All the science is in.
” I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ line ” ?
I meant “ lie.
” I ’ m not a scientist , but I know enough about science to know that it is never all in .
Science is never “ settled.
” We have theories which we haven ’ t been able to disprove yet , but debate and speculation are what science is all about .
The minute someone uses that phrase , you know they ’ re hiding something .
As if that were not enough , some prominent politicians and scientists have actually suggested that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ should have just made the tiny hairs on the back of your neck stand up and put you on full alert in much the same way as Freddy Kruger walking into your room would .
I ’ m pretty sure jailing dissenters is the polar opposite of what our Founding Fathers had in mind for this country .
And the Tea Party Too Finally , a third group of activists who have been so thoroughly vilified , no “ serious journalist ” would deign give them airtime is the Tea Party .
You @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to tar and feather a group of people quoting our Founding Fathers and the Constitution .
Yet , they proved to be the easiest of all to silence .
From the moment the mainstream media began to cover this group , they called them , “ Tea-baggers.
” Wham !
Done !
No need for debate .
This clever little nickname , with its obscene implications , was enough to undercut their credibility from the very beginning .
Bear in mind , this was not The Daily Show doing a comedy spoof .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ professional journalists on MSNBC .
I ’ ve got news for them , name calling is neither objective nor responsible journalism .
And now , it ’ s happening again .
After seven weeks of quarantine , Americans are starting to ask some pointed questions .
Questions that people like Dr. Fauci , Bill Gates , and governors Cuomo , Newsom and Whitmer don ’ t want to answer .
So , as the cry of revolt went up , the message went out : anyone who is against the quarantine is selfish @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ Don ’ t listen to the protesters .
They care more about money or a haircut than they do about human lives.
” We ’ re living a textbook example of disparaging a group for daring to not submit to the liberal dogma they are being force-fed .
Now that you know what to look for , don ’ t fall for it .
George Janek is a conservative thinker encamped in Northern California .
His previous article for The Stream was Mourning the Death of Healthy Debate .

What is the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the word “Anti-vaxxer”? Do you conjure an image of a moron, so ignorant of science, that they are not worth arguing with? Well, guess what? That is precisely what that epithet is meant to do. It is meant to derail and avoid an intelligent discussion before it even starts.
While a handful of people may actually be completely anti-vaccine, most of the people lumped in this category are not. They are decent, reasonable people with legitimate concerns. But by calling anyone with even the mildest questions about even a single vaccine an “anti-vaxxer,” the media (and politicians) get to avoid any and all discussions of the subject.
This is a very clever technique that shields, in this case, Big Pharma from challenge. The liberal media and politicians engage in this strategy to silence opposing viewpoints.
A Cheap Way to Avoid Challenge
Why? Questions might show just how thin the veneer of lies covering one’s overall agenda is. Perhaps it might just reveal the flaws in an otherwise legitimate system that need to be fixed.
Anti-vaxxers are not the only group to be abused with this technique. A second group being targeted this way are climate change deniers. The left informs us they are a group of numbskulls and ne’er-do-wells, to whom we should not listen.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
To really drive home the point, the liberal media uses the line, “All the science is in.” I’m sorry, did I say “line”? I meant “lie.” I’m not a scientist, but I know enough about science to know that it is never all in. Science is never “settled.” We have theories which we haven’t been able to disprove yet, but debate and speculation are what science is all about. The minute someone uses that phrase, you know they’re hiding something.
As if that were not enough, some prominent politicians and scientists have actually suggested that deniers be jailed! That last sentence should have just made the tiny hairs on the back of your neck stand up and put you on full alert in much the same way as Freddy Kruger walking into your room would. I’m pretty sure jailing dissenters is the polar opposite of what our Founding Fathers had in mind for this country.
And the Tea Party Too
Finally, a third group of activists who have been so thoroughly vilified, no “serious journalist” would deign give them airtime is the Tea Party. You’d think it would be difficult to tar and feather a group of people quoting our Founding Fathers and the Constitution. Yet, they proved to be the easiest of all to silence. From the moment the mainstream media began to cover this group, they called them, “Tea-baggers.” Wham! Done! No need for debate.
This clever little nickname, with its obscene implications, was enough to undercut their credibility from the very beginning. Bear in mind, this was not The Daily Show doing a comedy spoof. These were what passed for serious, professional journalists on MSNBC. I’ve got news for them, name calling is neither objective nor responsible journalism.
Vaxx Populi or Vox Pandemic
And now, it’s happening again. After seven weeks of quarantine, Americans are starting to ask some pointed questions. Questions that people like Dr. Fauci, Bill Gates, and governors Cuomo, Newsom and Whitmer don’t want to answer. So, as the cry of revolt went up, the message went out: anyone who is against the quarantine is selfish and/or greedy. In other words, “Don’t listen to the protesters. They care more about money or a haircut than they do about human lives.”
We’re living a textbook example of disparaging a group for daring to not submit to the liberal dogma they are being force-fed. Now that you know what to look for, don’t fall for it.
George Janek is a conservative thinker encamped in Northern California. His previous article for The Stream was Mourning the Death of Healthy Debate.


thestream--2020-05-18--Federal Judge Blocks North Carolina Governor’s Restrictions on Religious Services

Democratic North Carolina Gov .
Roy Cooper ’ s restrictions on indoor religious services show a distrust of those who are worshiping , according to a ruling from a federal judge .
U.S. District Judge James C. Dever III temporarily blocked Cooper ’ s restrictions on indoor services in a Saturday ruling , The News & Observer in Raleigh , North Carolina , reported .
Dever said that Cooper ’ s stay-at-home order presents a double standard by only allowing up to 10 people at a religious service while letting businesses accommodate up to 50 people at a time .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ , The News & Observer reported , and a hearing is scheduled for May 29 to decide whether the order is permanent .
“ The record , at this admittedly early stage of the case , reveals that the Governor appears to trust citizens to perform non-religious activities indoors ( such as shopping or working or selling merchandise ) but does not trust them to do the same when they worship together indoors , ” the judge ’ s ruling said .
Cooper ’ s spokesperson Ford Porter responded to the ruling in @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political , Economic and Moral Issues of Our Day .
“ We don ’ t want indoor meetings to become hotspots for the virus and our health experts continue to warn that large groups sitting together inside for long periods of time are much more likely to cause the spread of COVID-19 , ” Porter said .
“ While our office disagrees with the decision , we will not appeal , but instead urge houses of worship and their leaders to voluntarily follow public @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ” he added .
“ The court trusts worshipers and their leaders to look after one another and society while exercising their free exercise rights just as they and their fellow citizens ( whether religious or not ) do when engaged in non-religious activities , ” Dever ’ s order said .
The ruling comes after a minister , a Christian revival group and two Baptist churches sued Cooper through a federal lawsuit that sought to immediately block Cooper ’ s rules restricting religious services .
The lawsuit accused Cooper of violating @ @ @ @ @ @ @ according to The News & Observer .
“ Freedoms curbed eventually becomes no freedom at all , ” said Rev .
Ron Baity , one of the plaintiffs and the pastor of Berean Baptist Church in Winston-Salem , North Carolina , according to the Associated Press .
“ If there ’ s ever been a time our communities need the church , it is now , ” Baity said .
Cooper had previously said that he does not wish churches “ to become hot spots for this virus.
” The governor emphasized that @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the crisis , but said he hoped “ congregations across North Carolina will talk with their leaders and will make good decisions about what is right to look after each other.
” Cooper did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation .
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience .
For licensing opportunities of our original content , please contact licensing @ dailycallernewsfoundation.org .

Democratic North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper’s restrictions on indoor religious services show a distrust of those who are worshiping, according to a ruling from a federal judge.
U.S. District Judge James C. Dever III temporarily blocked Cooper’s restrictions on indoor services in a Saturday ruling, The News & Observer in Raleigh, North Carolina, reported.
Dever said that Cooper’s stay-at-home order presents a double standard by only allowing up to 10 people at a religious service while letting businesses accommodate up to 50 people at a time.
The governor will not appeal the ruling, The News & Observer reported, and a hearing is scheduled for May 29 to decide whether the order is permanent.
“The record, at this admittedly early stage of the case, reveals that the Governor appears to trust citizens to perform non-religious activities indoors (such as shopping or working or selling merchandise) but does not trust them to do the same when they worship together indoors,” the judge’s ruling said.
Cooper’s spokesperson Ford Porter responded to the ruling in a Saturday statement.
Please Support The Stream : Equipping Christians to Think Clearly About the Political, Economic, and Moral Issues of Our Day.
“We don’t want indoor meetings to become hotspots for the virus and our health experts continue to warn that large groups sitting together inside for long periods of time are much more likely to cause the spread of COVID-19,” Porter said.
“While our office disagrees with the decision, we will not appeal, but instead urge houses of worship and their leaders to voluntarily follow public health guidance to keep their members safe,” he added.
“The court trusts worshipers and their leaders to look after one another and society while exercising their free exercise rights just as they and their fellow citizens (whether religious or not) do when engaged in non-religious activities,” Dever’s order said.
The ruling comes after a minister, a Christian revival group and two Baptist churches sued Cooper through a federal lawsuit that sought to immediately block Cooper’s rules restricting religious services. The lawsuit accused Cooper of violating First Amendment rights to religious freedom, according to The News & Observer.
“Freedoms curbed eventually becomes no freedom at all,” said Rev. Ron Baity, one of the plaintiffs and the pastor of Berean Baptist Church in Winston-Salem, North Carolina, according to the Associated Press.
“If there’s ever been a time our communities need the church, it is now,” Baity said.
Cooper had previously said that he does not wish churches “to become hot spots for this virus.” The governor emphasized that he understands the importance of faith during the crisis, but said he hoped “congregations across North Carolina will talk with their leaders and will make good decisions about what is right to look after each other.”
Cooper did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Daily Caller News Foundation.
Copyright 2020 The Daily Caller News Foundation
Content created by The Daily Caller News Foundation is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a large audience. For licensing opportunities of our original content, please contact [email protected].