God Deleted From Worship, Replaced With Ricky Ricardo

By Joe Bob Briggs 01/15/2008

Professors at Dallas Theological Seminary published a position paper Tuesday eliminating the concept of “God” and/or “Lord” from Christian worship and replacing it with worship of the Bible only. The step had been anticipated for several years and was considered a formality within the actual “Bible only” movement, but there were a few theologians from an older generation who waxed nostalgic about the change.

“A lot of these young guys don’t go back this far,” said Willard “Flip” Rasmussen, head of the Department of Greek Hermeneutics and Computer Science, “but back in the late seventies, early eighties, I would frequently preach about God. I don’t mean the way we say it today—I mean, we’ll probably always say it—we would really talk about him like he was capitalized and everything. But around 1985 it all became Word of God, Truth of God, God’s Revelation—we pretty much narrowed it down to this little baby right here”—plunking a Scofield Reference Bible—“or, for your students, this monster over here”—picking up a Greek New Testament. “In some ways I miss those days. God was a rascal when we still had him around.”
The only churches to be immediately affected by the position paper are the evangelical “Bible churches,” most of them pastored by DTS graduates, but several other denominations are expected to follow suit, including the Southern Baptists, the Church of God, the other Church of God, the Church of God Universal, the Assembly of God, and the Church of God’s Assembly. Ironically, several denominations using “God” in their actual name have not worshipped the deity himself for at least twenty years, but so far none of them have suggested changing names to reflect the new reality.

“Sure, we could go Assembly of the Book or Church of the Word or something like that,” said Roger Flanders, official spokesperson for the Church of the Universal God of Gods in Dayton, Tennessee. “We’ve talked about it. We’ve had marketing meetings. But you can’t go against your brand. The logo is out there. People know what it means. Look at it this way. Frito-Lay hasn’t sold any Fritos for a long time now. It’s all Doritos, right? But would they change that Frito name? I don’t think so.”

Among other worshippers likely to welcome the change are the so-called megachurches, many of them named after the natural environment (Saddleback, Lakewood, etc.) in the manner of real estate subdivisions and pagan Canaanite cults. “To tell you the truth,” said Meg Strothers, leader of the women’s athletic leagues at Grove Mountain Cathedral in Glenwood Springs, Colorado, “I’ve never been that comfortable with the G-word. It’s not that we have anything against God, it’s just that you say that and everybody is like, ‘What the flip?’ Let’s be honest, it’s a vague concept. It confuses the children.”

Not all the reaction was positive. Some individual churches in parts of eastern North Dakota and rural Florida issued statements saying they were continuing to worship God, even at the expense of Biblical inerrancy, and that, if forced to choose between God and the Bible, they might be seeking affiliations with Nigerian archbishops. At Harvard Divinity School, there was a concern that the position paper didn’t go far enough. “We stopped teaching the worship of God in the 1950s,” said Dr. Hildegard Wittman-Brumley, “so in one sense this is a welcome development. However, to merely replace one form of dead Christendom with an equally senile brand of pentecostal literalism is, in our view, less than postmodern.”

Most of the denominations and churches involved will be working out the implications of the new policy at their various conventions and retreats throughout the year, but one source of possible sectarianism has already reared its ugly head: Which Bible is considered the Bible? At the press conference announcing the change, a DTS professor clumsily laid his King James on a chapel pew at the same moment that the seminary president was holding aloft a New International. In his haste not to cause offense, the professor grabbed for the text and knocked it onto the floor, which resulted in gasps from the audience and a later frenzied debate about whether the Bible now needs to be ritually burned. Meanwhile, in East Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania, a Bible-worshipper from the other side of the aisle, the Reverend William “Bill” McWilliam, publicly burned his New International on purpose as an act of protest while preaching from the Living Word Bible, resulting in a criminal citation from the fire marshall for lighting fires in close proximity to sleeping people.

The only other issue that still needs to be worked out theologically is how to preach the literal truth of the one Bible without mentioning either God, Yahweh, Jehovah, the Lord, etc. “But actually, wasn’t that always the problem?” said Rasmussen. “Too many names, too many concepts. We’re just telescoping all that stuff into one term. We’re re-branding. If you have to talk about a higher power, you just say Ricky Ricardo. It’s consumer-friendly, everybody knows Ricky Ricardo, everybody likes Ricky Ricardo, and it’s still in syndication in most markets so it’s hip without being ridiculously up-to-date.”

One worry at this early stage is that stay-at-home believers who get most of their Bible study from television won’t fully understand the implications of worshipping the book itself instead of a universal force who either wrote the book or spoke it into existence or otherwise caused its appearance. “That’s the same thing, though,,” said Paul Crouch of the Trinity Broadcasting Network when asked about it, “because the Bible is magic. It’s a magic book. The only difference now is we’re not making a big deal about where the magic came from. We’ve got research on this.”

That research, according to Barna Associates, was carried out in focus groups with Christians who had donated at least $10,000 to evangelists in a single fiscal year. Without being told the nature of the experiment, these donors were placed in a temperature-controlled room and shown three altars. On the first altar were various images of God, including a reproduction of the Sistine Chapel ceiling, George Burns in character, and a multi-media collage from a Soho gallery representing the creative spark. When these objects were hacked to smithereens with a four-foot pickax, there were expressions of only mild disapproval from the focus group.
On the second altar, researchers placed various Bibles, from plain miniature New Testaments to ornate hand-lettered Latin editions from the Middle Ages. When the Bibles were first ripped into pieces, then burned, there were cries of protest, wailing, tears, and loud accusations of blasphemy that only be quelled after several minutes. According to data analysts, the Bible burning registered a 64 on the destruction-of-cherished-belief-systems scale, compared to only an 8 for the God-demolishing.

As a control experiment, and mainly at the request of Benny Hinn Ministries, which financed most of the research, a third altar was decked out with various western currencies, including the dollar, the Euro, the pound sterling, and the Swiss franc. At a pre-determined signal, about $100,000 in bank notes were doused with kerosene and ignited, causing panic, hysteria, screams of agony, and a mad rush as several people tried to put out the fire with their own bodies. Barna reported a 98 on the belief-system scale and most of the focus group required subsequent counseling. All of the television ministries pronounced themselves pleased with the results, indicating that you could eliminate one focus of the Bible, but as long as you kept the other one in sharp relief, there was no danger of losing the attention of the main body of believers.

Funeral

I have conducted hundreds of funerals over my life. Today I had a most marvelous experience. I had opportunity to minister to a family mixed with democrats and republicans, jews and gentiles! The wonderful lady I memorialized was the founder of the abused womens shelter her in Newark, as well as many other wonderful accomplishments. Her last wish was to have someone conduct her service who would be inclusive of her entire family.

I did my best and was motivated by the fact that I really liked this lady! No I had never met her, but show me someones interests and I can show you the person!

I spoke from Isaiah chapter 1, where God told Judah that he was tired of their sacrifices and empty praises, and that by caring for the orphans and widows they would "though your sins be as scarlet be white as snow!"

What marvelous testimony of caring!! It is a shame that the Church is more concerned with their mansions then mercy and justice!

The family, Christian and Jewish were touched by the service! But no more than me!!

"Blessed are the peace makers ..."

ABC Presidential Debates

First off, let me say I loved this format!!! No, I really loved it!!!

Republicans: I think Huck hurt himself with his cynicism and sarcasm!! I was not impressed! He seemed to be trying to sound articulate, but failed miserably. He is a great speaker but it is obvious to someone who has been a public speaker for over 34 years when someone is talking about subjects they have no clue about!

Ron Paul. please! He is so far out it is pathetic.

McCain. His profane outbursts recorded on other blogs appear justified. He tried to cover his anger with the occasional smirk, but I am not buying it.

Rudy. His stock went up in my book. I liked his answers, and he appeared Presidential.

Romney. Wow! It seemed like everyone was ganging up on him, and quite frankly I liked his demeaner. Who is McCain to accuse him of flip flopping! Can anyone say immigration?

Thompson: Was much better tonight, but he is NO Ronald Reagan! Does anyone else think he looks like a blood hound? With the same energy?

Winners: Rudy and Romney

Democrats: I am sorry I am still laughing about Hillarys melt down. She really showed her nature. She is indeed a bitter women! But after Bill who can blame her.

Richardson: He is playing the king maker role. Not qualified!

Obamma: He flip flopped on many issues. I don't trust him!

Edwards: The clear winner!! Articulate on message and qualified. He is passionate and in my estimate the clear winner of the night!!

Total winner: Edwards

George Bush's Arrogance is beyond belief!!

White House OKs Mexican truck program

Pilot Program Allowing Mexican Trucks Into U.S. Goes Ahead Despite New Law to Block It

ANDREW TAYLORAP News

Jan 04, 2008 15:09 EST

The Bush administration is going ahead with a controversial pilot program giving Mexican trucks greater access to U.S. highways despite a new law by Congress against it.

The decision to proceed with the four-month-old program, which allows participating Mexican trucking companies to send loads throughout the United States, comes despite language in the recently signed catchall spending bill aimed at blocking it.

But the Department of Transportation is taking advantage of a loophole in the new law, which prohibits the government from spending any money to "establish" the program. The government says the new rules don't apply to the current program since it was started in September.

"The U.S. Department of Transportation will not establish any new demonstration programs with Mexico," said Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration spokeswoman Melissa Mazzella DeLaney. "The current cross-border trucking demonstration project — established in September — will continue to operate in a manner that puts safety first."

Congressional opponents of the programs insist that it's clear what lawmakers were trying to do last year when both House and Senate voted against allowing the program to go forward.
The provision, as signed by President Bush last month, says: "None of the funds made available under this act may be used to establish a cross-border motor carrier demonstration program to allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to operate beyond the commercial zones along the international border between the United States and Mexico."

"They know what the law says," retorted Sen. Byron Dorgan, D-N.D., who won a 74-24 vote to block the program. "And they're not above the law." Dorgan warned they better follow the law.
The hotly contested program, opposed by labor, independent truck owners and environmental groups, permits up to 500 trucks from 100 Mexican motor carriers full access to U.S. roads.
Opponents have been fighting the measure — part of the 1994 North American Free Trade Agreement — since it was first proposed, saying the program will erode highway safety and eliminate U.S. jobs. And they say that there are insufficient safeguards exist to make sure that Mexican trucks are as safe as U.S. carriers.

"When you open up U.S. highways to long-haul Mexican trucks without equivalent safety standards, it poses risks for American drivers," Dorgan said.

Supporters of the plan say letting more Mexican trucks on U.S. highways will save American consumers hundreds of millions of dollars. And they say U.S. trucking companies will benefit since reciprocal changes in Mexico's rules permit U.S. trucks new access to that country.
Since 1982, Mexican trucks have had to stop within a buffer border zone and transfer their loads to U.S. trucks.

Still, there's widespread opposition to the program within Congress. The House voted without a roll call in July to block the program and the Senate's 3-to-1 margin in September to block it came despite administration assurances that safeguards are in place to "ensure a safe and secure program."

The Teamsters Union, Sierra Club and Public Citizen joined together in a lawsuit filed in August seeking to block the program.

A hearing is scheduled for Feb. 12 before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, Teamsters spokeswoman Leslie Miller said.

Source: AP News

YouTube - John Edwards in Ames, Iowa Part III

I don't know where it is all going to fall out! Because he refuses money from special interests he doesn't have the money of the other candidates, but he is right. This is a great clip!!