MMA Question
Hey Doug this’ll be a quick one but what are your views on men fighting other men for sports entertainment, such as boxing and MMA ( mixed martial arts)? Is it a sin to watch two guys beat each other up because it’s fun to watch? Thanks.Tony
Tony, I have no problem with one-on-one tests of strength and skill, like wrestling or boxing or judo and, depending on the rules, with MMA stuff. I think the problems come in when the goal of the fight becomes damaging v. subduing your opponent. It would be exciting to watch a caged knife fight also, but then we are intruding into the gladiatorial space, which I think we should resist.
Election and Assurance
This isn’t with regards to any post, but I could use some advice.
My wife and I (married for 1 year) grew in really traditional Pentecostal, Arminian churches. I have for a few years now embraced Reformed theology, while she is having some struggles.
For instance, she sees that free will is a myth and man can not choose God for himself, unless God intervenes sovereignly through His Holy Spirit and gives the man a new heart.
There is some disconnect however when it comes to the doctrine of election. We have gone over the subject so many times together but it always results in the same hopeless feeling for her that God is simply not just. The discussions stopped being productive a long time ago about the same time they started to wear down on the relationship between us.
More so, it’s also affecting her relationship with the Lord, where she struggles to see him as gracious and good anymore.
What would you advise me at this point? How can I help her in this situation?
Thank you in advance for your brotherly counsel.MY
MY, my advice to you is that you sit down with her and suggest that you put the entire subject on the back burner for one year. This would apply to your discussions about it, and would also mean that she should resist any temptations to think about it. Concentrate on being newlyweds. The secret things belong to the Lord our God, but newlyweds have better things to think about (Dt. 29:29). Promise her that you will take up the subject again in a year. When you do, the thing to emphasize is that if God is unjust, there is no such thing as injustice. If there is such a thing as injustice, then God by definition cannot be unjust.
On Shooting Your Way Out
I thank God for you and your ministry. Your, and your children’s, teachings have been a tremendous blessing to my family. You’ve helped us understand a great many biblical passages and concepts that have otherwise been left unaddressed in the course of our relatively short Christian lives.
On the subject of the above article, I have found your observations about Socialism remarkably relevant to a history book (of sorts) that I am currently reading. I received functionally no education on world history (public school, ya know?), but since my family is currently living in Berlin, I thought reading a book or two on a history which we could see and visit in-person might help my understanding. There is so much recent history packed into such a small city; but talk about a history of violence! The book, “Beyond the Wall,” details a short history of Berlin, and the GDR, through the lens of both seemingly random individuals and larger events and government policies. And one thing that is apparent, even in the seemingly secular author’s work, is just how many bodies are rotting under the foundation of Socialism. All manner of people, from the highest government officials to the most unremarkable citizens, are arrested or killed for the most minor non-infractions imaginable. (The Stasi became an organization which didn’t simply root out political dissents, but tried to “predict” which people would catch these very anti-socialist ideas next.)
One thing I have noticed in the author’s description of many GDR government policies and propaganda pieces is that she uses a morally loaded term (that of “progress”) to describe these things. It was “progress” that the GDR brought many women into the workforce, indeed forced them into the workforce; it was “progress” that the GDR had such mandated government schooling and propagandized groups for children and youth. You get the idea. Would not “change” be a better word, a more morally neutral word than “progress” to describe such otherwise corrupt, often downright wicked government actions and implementations?
But this leads to an even broader point. How are Christians to study history? What I mean is, both for the historian and the reader, how are Christians to go about the study of human history? Suppose a Christian were a historian. In his task in compiling a historical work (a class textbook, let’s say), ought he to aim for a “neutral” and “unbiased” telling of history? That is, just telling the plain facts? Or is such a historian, who is also a Christian, supposed to do more, that is, to also teach such historical events and facts through a moral lens, that moral lens being the Christian worldview? In other words, should historians also be concerned with the morals that shape history, both in God-honoring and God-dishonoring ways? Is it the historian’s job to not simply say, “The United States Supreme Court enacted the ruling Roe v. Wade in the year 1973,” but to also add that, “This was a very wicked thing to do”? And we as Christians, who are ultimately students of an historical book, how can we and ought we study history to the glory of God? In other words, how do we study history rightly as Christians? How do we teach this human history we all share to our children in a faithful way
Your thoughts on this would be greatly appreciated. And any recommendations on history books written from explicitly Christian perspectives would also be greatly appreciated!
Best,Will
Will, try starting with A Theological Interpretation of American History by Singer. With regard to your broader question, I don’t believe that any historian is ever neutral. It is possible to be fair-minded and honest, but never objective, if objectivity means neutrality.
Just a Little Joke
What does Blog and Mablog mean? It satires something but I don’t get it.Seth
Seth, thanks for the question. It is supposed to be a little riff on Gog and Magog from Eze. 38:2 and Rev. 20:8.
Not a Prediction
I’m afraid your idea for Trump to carry all 50 states it’s a bit optimistic. I feel like the day my home state of Washington votes for Trump will be the day after the Olympics features ice-skating in hell, where it’s heading.JD
JD, please note that carrying all 50 was not a prediction. More of a stretch goal.
Be Prepared
General question about being consistent:
I’m having trouble squaring this thought in my head. Imagine a scenario where there is a man (Man 1) going around the country chopping children’s heads off with the approbation of their mothers. This is a horrifying scenario, I know. Let’s say some other man (Man 2) knew where Man 1 was going to murder the next child. Would anyone object to Man 2 stopping Man 1 from committing such a murder by any means, including taking the life of Man 1, if it is necessary to save the child?
If it is so that we would permit and even laud Man 2 for putting a stop to the murderer of the child even if he killed Man 1 in the process, what would be different if Man 1 was an abortionist and the child was still in her mother’s womb?
I realize that merely asking this question makes me sound like a loon who needs a visit from the FBI, but I really am just trying to think through this thing consistently. Plus you don’t seem to mind inviting visits from the FBI, so I thought maybe you’d be willing to answer such a question.Mike
Mike, yes. I have thought through this. In your scenario, you say “would anyone object.” The answer to that, when it comes to abortion is that yes, half the country would object. Intervening in the way you mention would therefore be tantamount to a declaration of war. It would not be an isolated action. Now I happen to believe that a war to outlaw abortion would be morally justified in general, but there are other considerations. “Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand?” (Luke 14:31). In other words, don’t start something you can’t finish.
Ortlund & Basham
Thank you for your faithful work and fight for truth and righteousness. I disagree with you on several finer points of non-essential doctrine, but your faithfulness to the Word is evident and your work has blessed me greatly.
That said, I do take issue with your characterization of the Ortlund-Basham brouhaha in your August Book of the Month review. This seems to me like Mr. Ortlund got unjustifiably caught up in some otherwise good and needed journalism. Ortlund has unfortunately been duped into taking the establishment view of global warming, and wrongly made it an issue where Christians can love their neighbor. However, I found myself impressed with Ortlund’s response video and thoroughly unimpressed with Timon Cline’s Twitter “evidence” of Gavin being a crypto-globalist. Cline painted Ortlund as being obsessed with the issue in his strange Twitter thread, having made a single video on the issue years ago out of hundreds of videos on Christian topics. Cline goes on to tell us what Gavin’s “real” secret message is, despite the clear words he actually uses: “What’s the message? You’re a tinfoil hat wearing idiot if you don’t believe in climate change. You’re politically motivated, derelict in your duty to environmental stewardship, & probably contributing to polarization. Gavin doesn’t say any of that literally but that’s the message.” I wasn’t aware mind-reading was a spiritual gift. In his response video, Ortlund made it clear his message was anything but and that there can be disagreement and discussion of the issue. Ortlund also did well in showing how the otherwise heroic and solid Basham mischaracterized what he has said publicly on the issue.
I agree with you that the book is otherwise badly needed and I trust you that the bulk of it is well done. However, I think the section on Ortlund was misguided. Ortlund has been a faithful voice for the Reformation and biblical Christianity for years. I believe this is an instance where we need to apply the “one-bite rule,” have grace with Gavin, and not assume everyone bad on an issue is our enemy.
I think we can agree the best thing is for Ortlund and Basham to discuss this matter and handle any necessary business privately regarding apologies or revisions. I think Gavin would be the only “target” in the book actually willing to talk in good faith to Basham, which is not a coincidence.
In Christ,John
John, thanks for the feedback.
Just a few comments on Ortlund.
Two important caveats. I really like Ortlund, so there’s that bias. I also want to acknowledge out the gate that he should not have tried to use his own example of being misunderstood by Basham to discredit the rest of the book. Even taking the worst case scenario, where Basham slandered Ortlund, that doesn’t really negate the thesis of the rest of the book.
As I looked at the videos, this seems to be what Gavin and Megan have done.
Gavin said that conservatives can sometimes have a reactive irresponsible posture to climate change, that is rooted in political affiliations and conspiracy tendencies.
Megan characterized him as saying that the ONLY reason conservatives reject climate change is because of a reactive posture motivated by politics and conspiracy theories.
I think that Basham more misunderstood Ortlund than was willfully sloppy, since there is a definite tendency among liberals to scream at their opponents as conspiracy theorists who just deny the science. But Basham should admit that Ortlund had a much more reasonable position. She also could have spared the weird comments about Gavin’s tone. That stuff turns me off. And I want to like Basham, but I really resonated with Gavin’s claim that he makes hundreds of videos and it’s only the one on climate change that gets dinged with no attention to his work on Protestantism, apologetics, etc.
I read through Timon Cline’s twitter thread and while I appreciated that Cline said that Basham was not just calling Gavin a “shepherd for sale” but was rather using him as an example of being “steered,” he didn’t really dispute the claims that Megan and Gavin made.Brian
Brian, thanks. It also seems to me that too many people interpret any disagreement as slander. Listening to that chapter, I didn’t think Megan misrepresented him at all. I also think that Gavin doesn’t understand where on the battlefield he is standing. When he issued his protest, look at all the forces that rallied behind him. Megan’s basic thesis is cinched down tight, on all four corners, and a lot of people were discredited by it. Gavin’s protest, even if there was something to it, which I don’t think, but even if there was something to it, was treated by them as a godsend.
Eschatological Books?
The amount of content that y’all push out in Moscow is impressive. Do y’all ever take a break? You push out so much writing, so much content on multiple platforms, constantly working on things, and while I realize you have many employees that’s still a lot you’re personally attending to! Do you ever get a vacation?
On another note, some of my favorite preaching by y’all is your stuff on postmillennialism, and to be honest, I think that’s a lot of what my generation (Generation Z) needs right now. We’re hope starved and meaning starved thanks to all the nauseating, devilish secularism. What are some hopeful, postmillennial works of yours I could read? Something I could maybe use in talking to the more secular oriented acquaintances of mine?
Sincerely,Kenneth
Kenneth, thanks. My two books on eschatology are Heaven Misplaced and When the Man Comes Around.
Just Sayin’
The crack that got socialism into the American government was safety laws. Read up on the Triangle Shirtwaiste Fire. About a hundred years ago, there was a sweatshop in NYC that employed immigrant women who were locked into the shop. The building caught fire. A bunch of these young women jumped to their deaths from a high story to avoid burning to death. From the news coverage of that, FDR, New York’s governor got some safety laws passed which passed court scrutiny and that was his foot in the door.Zeph
Zeph, thanks.
Mode of Baptism
I have a question about baptism. I was baptised four years ago in an Anglican church. I left that church because of they myriad problems in the Church of England. I managed to find a very good, conservative reformed Baptist church in my area. I spoke with the pastor about what steps I would need to take to become a church member and one of them was baptism. He knows that I have been baptised already as an adult. His reasoning was twofold. First, Baptists baptise properly with a full plunge. Secondly, it would be showing my commitment to the church. What are your views on this? Shouldn’t baptism show a commitment to Jesus rather than a particular church? Also, are there any theological problems with the way the Church of England baptises people?John
John, I am afraid I think you should just attend this church without joining it. There is no problem with your baptism. Baptism does not say anything, one way or the other, about commitment to a particular congregation. It is lawful to move across the country, for example. And as far as mode goes, this is an area where baptists tend to believe their case is a slam dunk when it is not at all. The disciples were baptized in the Holy Spirit by means of pouring (Acts 10:45). And why did the Ethiopian eunuch bring up baptism? What section of Isaiah were they reading? “So shall he sprinkle many nations; The kings shall shut their mouths at him . . .” (Isaiah 52:15).
True Reconciliation
To what extent is reconciliation possible if one party is unrepentant?Cindy
Cindy, true reconciliation is not possible without repentance. Things can be patched up, and made manageable, but you cannot have full restoration unless the sin is dealt with. But always budget for the possibility that the sin that is not being dealt with is your own (e.g. bitterness that refuses to believe the other person could be repentant). The illustration I use is that forgiveness is like a wrapped present. The other person doesn’t receive it until they actually unwrap it and receive it. But the person who must extend forgiveness must have the present wrapped and ready to go.
In True Reconciliation, Doug said: “True reconciliation is not possible without repentance. Things can be patched up, and made manageable, but you cannot have full restoration unless the sin is dealt with.” Doug, you do realize, don’t you, that you have just made the case for critical race theory and woke? For 400 years America had a race-based caste system that permeated everything, and it does not magically disappear simply because the laws have now changed. You cannot pretend that the people who were brutalized for 400 years are now hunky-dory just because you don’t want to talk about underlying… Read more »
“For 400 years America had a race-based caste system that permeated everything, and it does not magically disappear simply because the laws have now changed.” Kathleen “We greatly commending, and graciously accepting of, their desires for the furtherance of so noble a work, which may, by the providence of Almighty God, hereafter tend to the glory of his divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian religion to such people, as yet live in darkness and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God, and may in time bring the infidels and savages, living in those parts, to human civility,… Read more »
Is the existence of slavery revisionist? Or Jim Crow? Or the Ku Klux Klan? Or black codes? Or redlining? Or the systematic exclusion of blacks from entire occupations? Or, for that matter, evangelical complicity in all of that? Did none of that happen?
It happened. You did not say it is happening now, because you are smarter and more honest than to say that. What is it you are saying should happen now, and why.
Well, thanks to Governor DeSantis, Florida schools are currently using a textbook that makes the claim that black people benefitted from slavery because they learned useful skills: https://www.google.com/search?q=florida+textbook+black+people+benefitted+from+slavery&rlz=1C1CHZN_enUS935US935&oq=florida+textbook+black+people+benefitted+from+slavery&gs_lcrp=EgZjaHJvbWUyBggAEEUYOdIBCjEwMzk3ajBqMTWoAgiwAgE&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 So the past is not as much in the past as some would like to believe. But to answer your question, let me give a concrete example (there are plenty more): After World War II, Congress passed a law that provided government assistance to first time homebuyers, but that explicitly excluded non-whites. That law was changed in 1970 or thereabouts (don’t remember the exact year without looking it up), but for an… Read more »
I appreciate that you 1. cite a concrete example, and that 2. you qualify it: “And I don’t think it is entirely unreasonable” That’s a start. A non-starter is always going to be some version of “Black Americans, categorically, are owed a blank check, in perpetuity, for bad things done by long dead white people. That is entirely unreasonable. Anyway, the issue in question was repentance. Assuming repentance is something countries and governments do, what it would look like is, they would stop doing it. You cited examples of things that “they” whoever that includes, already stopped doing, or were… Read more »
John, I think a blank check in perpetuity to black Americans for bad things done by white people long dead would be terrible public policy, and candidly I’ve never heard woke proponents of CRT argue for that. I think that’s mostly a caricature put out by people who really don’t want reconciliation and are happy to let stuff fester. Which I absolutely do not think is you, but there are some for whom that’s an accurate description. But in between the two extremes of blank checks in perpetuity and doing nothing there is a middle ground. And I think the… Read more »
If we take US whites as the standard, US blacks are poorer, but If we take African blacks as the standard, they’re richer. So, come to think of it, reparations, if any, would be owed because of their white ancestors, not their black ones? (US, and church, have things to fix, but people innocent of a particular sin need not repent of it, and people who do repent can be forgiven, tho may owe compensation.) Does the richest per capita country in the world owe reparations to the rest? jdo rich people owe money to poorer people? Come to think… Read more »
Andrew, you’re going to have to explain your position to the Amalekites whom Saul was ordered to kill for what their ancestors did 300 years earlier. Or the Israelites who were killed because David ordered a census, or the Israelites who were killed when Aachen stole some cursed goods from Jericho.
The idea of corporate responsibility for corporate wrongdoing, even corporate wrongdoing in the distant past, is so thoroughly Biblical I’m surprised it needs articulating here.
Corporate punishment for corporate wrongdoing may be justice applied, but mercy might also be applied. While the United States paid for 240 years of slavery with the deaths of over 600,000, Great Britain ended slavery without bloodshed. When Israel is blessed, Egypt and Assyria will also belong to the Lord (Isaiah 19:19-25).
Followers of a leader share in the misadventures of their leader, unless they repent on their own, as Rahab did from Jericho and the Gibeonites from the general fate of Canaanites. We are not told that any Amalekites repented; and God, not Congress, told Saul to wipe them out. The emotional weight of Ta-Nahisi Coates’ essay calling for reparations was not what John C. Calhoun did; it was some elderly black people who had been redlined by some elderly LBJ bureaucrats, and sued and lost. Mr Coates plausibly claims they should have won; I haven’t searched the other side. You… Read more »
Were the Amalekites given the opportunity to repent? And at the time, God was the governing authority rather than Congress. But more to the point, true repentance involves making restitution. Your position reminds me of the joke about the farmer who went to confession. “Father, forgive me, for I have stolen a load of hay.” “When did you take it, my son?” “Actually, father, I only took half of it, but I’m going back tonight to get the other half so I thought I’d save a trip here by confessing the whole load now.” The fact that America is unwilling… Read more »
Also, I have not read Ta-Nahisi Coates’ essay and will add it to my reading list. One of the themes that consistently runs through these discussions is the contention by some that discrimination and prejudice are largely in the past. I don’t think they are; I think they are still very much with us, and one of the salutary purposes reparations would serve would be a very public repenting of them. And I would encourage you to read Caste by Isabel Wilkerson, in which she demolishes just that claim; that blacks have achieved equality of opportunity. She doesn’t discuss reparations… Read more »
Kathleen, you are caught up in the spin of today’s news. Did black slaves learn to work, to do things that they never would have learned otherwise, such as making substantial buildings instead of thatch or mud huts? Did they learn to husband animals large and small? Did they learn to use modern tools instead of shaped sticks? Did they learn how to blacksmith? Did they learn how to work and live year round instead of relying on nature to provide? Yes. All of those things were learned here in America while they were slaves. Those are skills they never… Read more »
Like I was saying earlier about the complete lack of repentance for the wrongs that were done to blacks. Dave’s comment is Exhibit A.
Right, slavery was good for blacks and I am Marie of Romania.
Hi Marie of Romania, you are missing the forest while looking at a flimsy sapling and ignoring the truth of the matter. Before being captured by other black Africans and sold into slavery in America: Were African blacks constructing substantial buildings of wood, with foundations, glass windows and doors? Were African blacks engaged in significant farming rather than substance farming? Were African blacks using plows with molding boards and iron points? Did African blacks have forges and were they making hinges, tools, fashioning wagon parts, horseshoes, cooking pots and other metal implements for farming or home? These are simple questions… Read more »
And I would also like to see something more closely resembling genuine repentance for the wrongs that were done. I live in the rural South. I hear what whites say when blacks aren’t around. A significant number are thoroughly un-repentant for the wrongs that were done to blacks and would happily do it again.
Five years ago a family from India opened a convenience store in rural Florida. Within a month it got torched. The Klan may be dead as an institution but its spirit lives on.
I would like to see that too.The genuine repentance you are talking about here is spiritual repentance. It can only happen if there is such a thing as “spiritual”, otherwise there is no point in wishing for it.
John, I have to respectfully disagree. I don’t believe in God, but a while back I remembered an injury I caused to someone a long time ago, and decided to go back and make it right, which included writing a fairly substantial check. It didn’t erase the past of course, but it did allow for a fresh start between us; by writing the check I demonstrated more than mere lip service to fixing what can be fixed and salvaging what can be salvaged. And all these years later we are, if not best friends, at least on good terms. So… Read more »
Repentance has to do with what happens on the inside and equally what we do or stop doing on the outside. That’s part of what I was getting at above. In practical terms we, as a nation, have repented of Jim Crow, and it is exasperating and unhelpful when anyone pretends we haven’t. I know you don’t do that, but there are some people who talk that way, and that too is part of what I was getting at. Of course no small number of people, and a swath of the country, “repented” kicking and screaming and, as you have… Read more »
But it is spiritual, in that God gave you a conscience to know right from wrong. Reason you went back to make right. “Come, let us reason together….”
Why don’t you leave?
Kathleen, the Bible teaches the sins of the fathers extend to the children to the third and fourth generation. That means, we are no longer responsible for slavery.
And you think the end of slavery is the bright dividing line? That nothing that happened after that makes a difference? I just gave an example of something that didn’t end until 50 years ago.
But that’s not even an ironclad rule. When God commanded Saul to wipe out the Amalekites because of what they did to Israel on its way out of Egypt, no Amalekite then living had had anything to do with it. That had happened centuries before, well earlier than the third and fourth generation. God still held them corporately accountable.
Hi Kathleen, you’re loaded for bear today…and I think I understand your point. However, In Pastor Wilson’s response (and somewhat in the original question even) the term ‘the person’ and ‘one party’ are used. Ultimately I take reconciliation as being between two people…or between a person and God (2nd Corinthians 5:17-19). You applied the response to collective groups and historical wrongs. Is reconciliation really the word you would use for what your advocating (improving systems, fixing injustices)? How would you apply Matthew 18:15-17 to any of the circumstances you brought forward as examples? And just for grins…I actually think a… Read more »
Hi JF, and thanks for the thoughtful response. I don’t think the analysis changes much since we are talking about groups; it’s the concept of federal headship that I absolutely should not have to explain to anyone here. I, personally, was not involved in slavery or Jim Crow, but the federal entity of which I am a part — the United States — did. So just as through Adam all men became sinners, even so through the acts of that corporate entity those who are part of it have responsibility. If I’m a shareholder in a company that gets hit… Read more »
Kathleen Liezinski: “You cannot pretend that the people who were brutalized for 400 years are now hunky-dory…”
No one’s been “brutalized” for 400 years. No one lives that long.
Ever thought about living in the now? Or is that against your dogmatic religious progressivism?
I thought young earth creationists thought people live hundreds of years?
And your poor reading of “the people” as “a person” is cute, and expected of a Wilson boot licker.
Chris…greetings. Since I used the inverted commas, I expect your last sentence and name calling is directed at me. To be clear, the original question above used the term ‘one party’ and in Pastor Wilson’s response – he replied using singular parties (your own, the other person, the person). I suggested that Kathleen had extrapolated that to also apply to a group, namely our nation. I think there’s some truth to what she suggests regarding national responsibility…but there is a limit. One could argue that the ultimate correction to Westward Expansion would be to give the land back. Taken far… Read more »
Holy cow that’s a lot of writing I won’t read, I hope you spend hours on it.
Ooooh, a playground-level insult based on someone’s name. Well, that matches the quality of the argument that follows.
Kathleen, How about this:
If the USA is a Christian nation, then it should repent of its biblically informed sins?
I’ve repeatedly heard the claim that the United States is a Christian nation. I’ve seen zero evidence of it. We look far more like Babylon under Nebuchadnezzar than we do like Israel under even Ahab and Jezebel.
If the USA is not a Christian nation, would you expect it to repent from anything?
As with many words, repentance has more than one meaning. You’re using it in the religious sense — a change of behavior based on a Divine command. I’m using it in the more generic sense of simply determining that a course of conduct or belief needs to be changed, which may happen for any number of reasons. But even under your definition of repent, I disagree with your unstated premise that America’s racist past and present are not biblically informed sins. Genesis 9:6 establishes the principle that badly treating one who is made in the image of God is to… Read more »
On the biblical side of national repentance I think only Ninevah avoided, for a time, divine destruction. Other nations in the prophets received from God the threatened consequences of the named sins. Who, however, on the secular side decides that a nation should or should not be destroyed? Who decides what repentance is sufficient and what it consists of? Secularly there is no agreement on this. You’re calling for this to be a cultural discussion but in the current culture individuals treating others better is not considered enough. So that means a need for statist action. And for how long?… Read more »
I think that MMA is a far safer sport than boxing. There is no ten count to collect yourself. If you can’t continue immediately, then the fight is over. A chokehold will win a fight. A regular fight is fifteen minutes, maximum. A title fight is twenty-five minutes. Those are standard rules.
The Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire lasted 18 minutes but killed 146 of its 500 employees. The top three floors of the building were known to be a fire trap but the two owners had refused to make any changes. Piles of flammable fabrics were stored on the factory floor alongside vats of flammable chemicals. The owners refused to intall sprinkler systems, to put lights in narrow stairwells, and to keep buckets of water on hand. Most the victims were young Jewish immigrant women between the ages of 14 and 23. (The owners were also Jewish.)The girls were locked in the… Read more »
I used to live not far from New London, Texas. In 1937, a natural gas leak in the school went undetected for a long time, building up a significant volume of gas in the crawlspace…until an errant spark exploded the gymnasium and surrounding buildings, where a school event was taking place. Of the 500 or more students in attendance, nearly 300 of them died. But, you say, can’t we smell natural gas? Not before 1937. But after the New London explosion, the Federal government mandated additives that give it that ripe skunk smell. Sometimes, I think “government meddling” can be… Read more »
Law of Moses called for walls around (flat, inhabited) roofs so people would be less likely to fall off. Reasonable safety requirements, maybe. Can go too far–anyone read the Justice Gorsuch/David French interview in the NY Times? Gorsuch has a book out, and tells of some bureaucrat making a magician with one rabbit write a 28-page disaster plan for taking care of the rabbit…Kathleen Z might be interested to read that Justice Gorsuch has a concern for honoring US Indian treaties, famously often broken.
I’m not surprised about the rabbit. For a movie or TV show to be allowed to put “No animals were harmed…” after the credits, the production must follow 130+ pages of animal health and safety regulations. Same with the two AFLAC ducks that are accompanied by trainers, handlers, and security wherever they go! It reminds me of the time I adopted a cat from a shelter and had to pass a home inspection–screens on windows, chemicals locked up, no poisonous plants, a smoke-free environment. As opposed to the hospital that just handed over my baby and wished me luck!
Zeph:
The Triangle Shirtwaist Fire was in 1911, FDR didn’t become Governor of New York until 1929.
I should have a word with my university American history teacher.
Will, a great book is The Biblical Philosophy of History, by Rushdoony. He also recorded a world history series, that we have used in high school with our homeschoolers.
More on immersion: Paul, I Cor 11, Israel baptized in Read Sea, Egyptians immersed. Peter, I Pet 3??: Noah baptized, world immersed. Take Pentecost, fire on heads, as baptism, Acts 2; Rev 21 or so, the damned immersed in lake of fire. Immersion signifies damnation–tho I suppose it does get water to fall on the head, tho there are easier ways. Baptism signifies grace from above. Philip and eunuch BOTH went down and BOTH came up; stepped down into the water so Philip could grab a handful. Buried with Christ by baptism into his DEATH, not into his burial; and… Read more »
https://rumble.com/v59zko5-why-im-skeptical-of-the-uk-race-riots.html
Well, thank you, Barnabas. I wouldn’t have had a clue what to think about the UK race riots without Nick–“Yeah, I mean, I want a family eventually but the problem is like I don’t think I’ll get the same joy out of a woman that I would with a monkey”–Fuentes’ incisive commentary.
If you were as circumspect maybe you wouldn’t be divorced.
You would be mistaken about that. I have many failings but infidelity is not one of them.
What are you implying about Jill?
Nick will never love you like he loves catboykami, but your continued stanning for him is cute.
MY, What is your concern? That she believe exactly as you do regarding reformed theology? Do you regard her as “saved” or are only reformed folks saved? Why are you so insecure? If election, as reformed theology teaches is true, what are you concerned about since in your belief system God is going to work His will, regardless of a persons beliefs. Are you not convinced yourself of your own belief system? Maybe reading Dougs book….”How To Exasperate Your Wife” would be a good start!
Mike, I recommend Gary North’s letters to Paul Hill: https://www.garynorth.com/freebooks/docs/pdf/lone_gunners_for_jesus.pdf.