Excellent insights on having more children

And how would you feel if almost everyone you ran into asked, “Why don’t you have more children?”

And what does it imply of God’s created design? That He forgot the cut off switch? That He just expected that we would *know* only 2 children are normal and after that if we don’t take destructive, body-altering drugs, known to have all sorts of side effects, then we deserve the comments meant to imply our apparent ignorance?

Why is natural so en vogue in almost every other area, but is virtually insane as it applies to reproduction? Do we even notice that we have let cultural expectations dictate what we call “normal”? It’s normal to have the babies God gives you…

In a normal marriage, and if God has opened the womb, babies will show up unless you deliberately prevent them…

Do you know what Rebekah’s marriage blessing was? “May you be the mother of thousands and ten thousands, and let your children possess the gates of those who hate them.” Is that the way we talk to young newlyweds? (Most often I think it goes something like, “Don’t get pregnant too soon.”)

God spoke of children–not just the first two–as wealth and prosperity, blessing and inheritance. The modern church ignores a lot of what the Bible says, but perhaps nothing as much as what is has to say about children. It makes me scratch my head a lot, I guess because I’m sort of a “catch all” for the opinions of others about fertility. It makes me sad. Not me personally, not because of how much rudeness or misunderstanding I have to endure, but because of the impotence of the church as a result of our misguided beliefs about children.

Quote source

Crawford, K. (2014). It’s Normal to Have Babies. (That’s Why I Look at You Weird When You Ask Me If I’m “Done.”). Generation Cedar. Available http://www.generationcedar.com/main/2014/01/its-normal-to-have-babies-thats-why-i-look-at-you-weird-when-you-ask-me-if-im-done.html. Last accessed 19th Jul 2014.

Corporate welfare is an unbiblical, repeated failure

The shock announcement that Ford is set to close its Australian manufacturing facilities in 2016 with 1,200 job losses is further proof that short-term, stop-gap government assistance for industry is an abject failure.

In January 2012, the Victorian and federal governments announced $34 million of assistance designed to secure the long-term future of Ford in Australia out to “at least the end of 2016″.

Six months after that, Ford cut 440 jobs in Australia. Not even 12 months after, Ford has now announced the complete closure of its manufacturing facilities.

Ford Australia President and CEO Bob Graziano said Ford will not return any of the $34 million taxpayer money.

The automotive manufacturing industry receives more than $1 billion in support per year from the Australian people to build cars in Australia.

Holden Australia announced in April that it alone has received $2.17 billion since 2000. Just one week after that, Holden announced 500 job cuts.

Quote source

Cowan, S. (2013). It’s time to put the brake on corporate welfare. The Drum. Available http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-23/cowan—ford/4709208. Last accessed 19th Jul 2014.

Fossils, stratigraphic disorder, and a global flood

Ed Morris stated that:

The layers we see in the geologic column not only contain fossils, the fossils they contain have an identifiable order to them. Generally speaking, certain types of fossils are found in certain layers. The arrangement is not random and haphazard as one would expect had all the layers been laid down by a single event. In extremely general terms, the simpler fossils are found in the lower layers, and the more complex fossils are found in the upper layers. Now this ought to be enough evidence to be considered insurmountable all in itself, but there have been some well-known YEC [young earth creationist] attempts to explain it away.

But this is an obviously biased way of interpreting any disagreement with the conventions of evolution and old-earth geology. The understanding of an “identifiable” order becomes a little too elastic to be “insurmountable all in itself”. A better consideration of geologic/fossil layers is by Henry Morris, who cited an academic article:

…and they [authors Cutler and Flessa] say this:

“Any sequence in which an older fossil occurs above a younger one is stratigraphically disordered. Scales of stratigraphic disorder may be from millimetres to many metres. Stratigraphic disorder is produced by the physical or biogenic mixing of fossiliferous sediments, and the reworking of older, previously described hardparts into younger sediments”

Well, that’s a way that maybe they can explain it, that they’re out of order, but they do say:

“Since these processes occur to an extent in virtually all sedimentary systems, stratigraphic disorder, at some scale, is probably a common feature of the fossil record.”

So it simply is not true that you find them [fossils] in the same order all over the world. And then down here a little further they say:

“The widespread occurrence of these anomalies, in dated sections suggest that disorder should be taken seriously by paleobiologists and stratigraphers working at these stratigraphic scales”.

Quote sources

  1. Morris, E. (2005). A Nonexpert Review of the Book “Refuting Compromise” by Jonathan Sarfati. Available http://www.noble-minded.org/sarfati_review.html. Last accessed 19th Jul 2014.
  2. Morris, H. (1991). The Genesis Flood – Part 3 http://segment. Institute for Creation Research. Available http://static-www.icr.org/i/radio/mp3/sss-110219.mp3. Last accessed 19th Jul 2014.

The childless hiding behind carbon footprints

“To breed or not to breed, this was the question,” pondered one married woman writing for The Seattle Times. Her article, “ Why I Am Not Having Kids ,” offered many reasons for her decision, including: “Not having a child is the most important thing I could do to reduce my carbon footprint.” I might add, another way is to stop writing for newspapers printed on murdered trees.

Quote source

Driscoll, M. (2013). Who’s Afraid of Pregnant Women? OnFaith. Available http://www.faithstreet.com/onfaith/2013/12/03/whos-afraid-of-pregnant-women/30032. Last accessed 19th Jul 2014.

A Royal fetus? No, a Royal Baby

But, as Christian writer Eric Metaxas pointed out during [Kate] Middleton’s pregnancy, the world finally, for once, settled on the fact that a baby before birth is a human baby. While abortion activists normally call a child in the womb anything but a baby or a child, this was one rare occasion where “Royal Baby” won out over “Royal Fetus”….

The Brits are clearly—and rightly—treating the royal baby not as a clump of cells to be disposed of for any reason but as fully human, as a person. Yes, friends, the language we use matters. Is the life in the womb a “product of conception” or a person, maybe even a prince in waiting?

Quote source

Ertelt, S. (2013). Royal Baby: For Once the Entire World Knows a Baby is a Baby. LifeNews. Available http://www.lifenews.com/2013/07/22/royal-baby-for-once-the-entire-world-knows-a-baby-is-a-baby/. Last accessed 12th Jul 2014.

Atheist assertions irrational; Christian beliefs rational

According to someone called T.B. from the United Kingdom:

… belief in God is irrational, …

To which Jonathan Sarfati responded

This presupposes that it is irrational to believe anything without proof. However, according to the fundamentals of basic logic, all belief systems start with axioms, which by definition are accepted to be true without proof. This applies to atheism, science, mathematics, and propositional logic itself. And there are also many other propositions in everyday life that people believe without mathematically rigorous proof, e.g. that the sun will rise tomorrow, that a mother loves her child, etc. Therefore it is perfectly logical for Christians to use the propositions of Scripture as axioms. This is our bottom line—although the above arguments for God’s existence can be helpful, we believe that the Scriptures are their own authority.

Quote source

Sarfati, J. (2007). Atheism is more rational? Creation Ministries International. Available http://creation.com/atheism-is-more-rational. Last accessed 12th Jul 2014.

Alfred the Great’s affirmation of Biblical law

About a fifth of the law code [issued by Alfred the Great, 9th century King of Wessex] is taken up by Alfred’s introduction, which includes translations into English of the Decalogue, a few chapters from the Book of Exodus, and the “Apostolic Letter” from Acts of the Apostles (15:23–29). The Introduction may best be understood as Alfred’s meditation upon the meaning of Christian law. It traces the continuity between God’s gift of Law to Moses to Alfred’s own issuance of law to the West Saxon people. By doing so, it links the holy past to the historical present and represents Alfred’s law-giving as a type of divine legislation.

This is the reason that Alfred divided his code into precisely 120 chapters: 120 was the age at which Moses died and, in the number-symbolism of early medieval biblical exegetes, 120 stood for law. The link between the Mosaic Law and Alfred’s code is the “Apostolic Letter,” which explained that Christ “had come not to shatter or annul the commandments but to fulfil them; and he taught mercy and meekness” (Intro, 49.1). The mercy that Christ infused into Mosaic Law underlies the injury tariffs that figure so prominently in barbarian law codes, since Christian synods “established, through that mercy which Christ taught, that for almost every misdeed at the first offence secular lords might with their permission receive without sin the monetary compensation, which they then fixed.”

Quote source

Wikimedia Foundation (2014). Alfred the Great. Available http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_the_Great. Last accessed 12th Jul 2014