A federal judge in Florida has ruled Obamacare unconstitutional. His opinion is based on the individual mandate, the requirement that everyone buy health insurance or pay a penalty. The government will appeal. Showdown to follow in the Supreme Court.

I received this email today and found it less than convincing:

For your security, we have limited access to your online banking account because a few of your information with us are incorrect or incomplete.

"a few of your information with us are incorrect"? Really. If you are going to con me, at least learn my language.

sheesh.

The Gross Domestic Productio (GDP) of the State of Texas is equal to that of Russia. The GDP of Mississippi is equal to that of Bangladesh.

It's funny to see CNN's internet page at the moment, giving equal weight to a story that Keith Olbermann is leaving his talk show with the funeral of Sargent Shriver, first head of the Peace Corps.

I guess it reflects current American values. A television celebrity is as important as a long time public servant. I guess it is a good thing no one from Jersey Shore got arrested, or Shriver may have passed unnoticed.

MOST STUPID THING I HEARD TODAY

The most stupid thing I heard today came from Norman Geisler, who said: "These people [Calvinists] teach that Christ only loved the elect and only died for the elect. And I think that's some kind of theological racism."

If Geisler really thinks that, he needs to retire. Almost everyone who has read the Bible and a theology book other than Geisler's knows Calvinists believe election is based on God's foreknowledge and choice. For example, Paul said "For he chose us in him before the creation of the world to be holy and blamelss in his sight. In love he predestined us to be adopted as his sons through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will in accordance with his pleasure and will-to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves. In him we have redemption thorugh his blood..." Ephesians 1.

Paul addressed the Ephesians letter to the saints. The saints are those who believe in Christ and receive eternal life. Paul identified himself as one of the saints by using the word "us". So, he says God chose the saints before the creation of the world to be holy and just. He did not choose the non-believers. He took those he chose and through his grace provided his Son to die and pay the penalty for their sins. They will therefore be holy and blameless in his sight.

Further, he predestined (chose beforehand) the saints to be adopted as his sons. Why did he do this? It was not because he was a theological rascist. We know that because he chose people from all races. We do not know, however, why he chose them. All we know is what Paul told us here in Ephesians: It is because it was his pleasure and will to do so. And because it was, we, the saints, have redemption through his blood. Non-believers do not have redemption through his blood. They do not have the benefit of Christ's payment for our sins. Or, as the Calvinist would say, Christ did not die for them and did not atone for their sins.

Geisler is entitled to believe whatever he wants and he is entitled to argue for it. I think it is even a healthy way to flesh out your theology. However, this kind of name calling is sleazy. It is the kind of thing you see in politics. Every time you want to smear someone, you say he is a rascist, or his actions are rascist, whether or not it is true, for it takes the focus of the audience off of the real issue and distracts them to hatred or disdain based on the made up charge of rascism.

Ironically, the call in the political world after the Arizona shootings is for less incendiary rhetoric and more reasoned debate. Maybe theologians of Geisler's ilk should take the same pledge.

I would also caution Geisler about applying the theological rascism critique too far. The original election was racial. The Hebrews, and only the Hebrews, were God's chosen (elect) people.

And just one other thing to ponder. When the priests made sacrifices of atonement, whose sins were atoned? Only the sins of Israel, the Hebrews, were atoned. The sins of the Amorites, the Egyptians, the Babylonians, the Chinese, the Indians, the Euopeans, the South American Indians and all other Gentile races, were not atoned.

Now that's limited atonement.

A thought on justice

The Bible tells us that we not only inherited a sinful nature from Adam, we have all sinned. Romans 5:12 says that sin entered the world through one man (Adam). Romans 3:23 says all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. The punishment for sin is spiritual death, eternal separation from God.

So God is just; he punishes all for sin.

He then extends mercy to some. If all receive what is justly due to them, they cannot complain. He may give mercy to whom he will. For example, a rich man must pay all his employees their just wage. If he does that he is just. If he decides to give a gift to someone else, he is free to do that. It is his money. It is God’s mercy to extend to whom he will. He himself expressed that as far back as with Moses in Exodus 33 when he said he will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. At that time he extended mercy to Israel. All of the rest of the world received justice.

Romans 1:18 et seq says the wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all godlessness…since what may be known about God is plain to them because God has made it plain to them. Then, in Romans 9:16, he says it does not depend on man’s desire or effort but on God’s mercy. Verse 18 then quotes then alludes to the Exodus passage. He even goes on to say God has the sovereign right to choose to show his wrath and make his power known in order to reveal his glory to the objects of his mercy.

We are entitled to justice. We who believe have received mercy. We rejoice and worship because we received mercy and relief from justice. Those who think they are entitled to mercy (which of course would make it not mercy but justice) to not experience joy and worship in salvation, because they wrongfully feel entitled to it.

In response to the common feeling that Christianity is hopelessly out of date, we need to re-state our fundamental Christian conviction that God continues to speak through what he has spoken. His Word is not a prehistoric fossil, to be exhibited under glass, but a living message for the contemporary world. It belongs to the market place, not the museum. Through his ancient Word God addresses the modern world, for, as Dr J. I. Packer has said, 'the Bible is God preaching'. Even granted the historical particularities of the Bible, and the immense complexities of the modern world, there is still a fundamental correspondence between them, and God's Word remains a lamp to our feet and a light for our path.

--From "The Contemporary Christian" (Leicester and Downers Grove: IVP, 1992), p. 11.

Professor Mike Adams makes a nice mention of Fort Worth in his Townhall article. Read it here.
He also makes a good point that while Christians are griping about the government, many of our problems come from the neglect of Christians to do what Christ told them to do.