“Coming to Jesus Christ is coming on His terms, not our own. The person who comes to Christ comes in humility, meekness, a needy beggar in spirit who hungers and thirsts for God’s righteousness, who cries for mercy, and is willing to be hated, reviled, and persecuted for the sake of his Lord (Matt. 5:3-12). The Lord may not take away comforts, money, or relationships with others, but all of those things-and everything else besides-must be given over to Him, to do with as He pleases. Otherwise He is not Lord, no matter how much allegiance to Him is professed.” John MacArthur
News
Christianity,Friday, September 04, 2009
Jenn and I are currently heading down a home-schooling route with Matthew and Claire. The main motivation is to provide them a learning environment that is spiritually nurturing as well as intellectually. We want to provide Matthew and Claire opportunities to gain wisdom and have communion with God throughout the day, rather than simply gaining facts about different subjects. There are so many reasons and so much more I can say on this subject, and there are good reasons to have our children in the public school; but for now, we have decided that home-schooling is the direction we think would be best for our children.
Now, do you think the government should have the right to tell us we are wrong? What if one of the government’s objections was that they thought our children should have the opportunity to consider other sources of wisdom from other gods. What if a court judge required that you send your children somewhere else for the purpose of opening their mind to other ideas. And what if you believed, as a parent, believed that those other ideas were in conflict with what you believe and would confuse and damage your child’s spiritual development? I grant, that it is a reasonable view to consider it beneficial that your child is aware of these other views and tolerant to living in harmony with other views in a peaceful co-existence; but what if the judge objected to your uncompromising views and beliefs on the source and the substance of truth? And shouldn’t a parent have the right to make these decisions, even if perhaps it would be better for the child to go to public school? Is it proper for a judge to require a parent to send their child to public school based on a judge’s objection to someone’s religious views?
I posed all the above in hypothetical questions, but the news is reporting that a court judge has perhaps acted in such a manner. Granted, it’s media reporting and it seems that the parents in this case are in a less than ideal situation; they are divorced and fighting over custody. Click here to see the article, Home-schooler ordered to attend public school, at Washington Times
News,Wednesday, September 03, 2008
My wise wife has always been on my case about grapes and not giving whole grapes to our children when they are too young. I resistively followed her advice, cutting grapes into quarters whenever we would serve them. On most grocery outings we would skip the grapes altogether because Jenn just didn’t want to have the stress of knowing that a stray grape might be left under a couch for Clarie to choke on.
Currently we struggle with my mother, who still insists on giving cherry tomatoes to Claire. Well, very recently, a young boy choked on a grape in San Jose and is has a severely damaged brain as a result. Read the story at the Mercury News and tell me if your not now convinced that foods like grapes, hotdogs, popcorn, cherry tomatoes can be a severe choking hazard for kids.
Baby Boy Chokes On Grape
Consider, it’s one thing to cut them up, but also consider that if you have older kids even though they may be old enough to eat them whole, it’s very easy for the parent to be distracted, leave the older child to eat his grapes, and then find that the older child had left the bowl of grapes on the floor and the younger one is crawling to get them!
To alleviate the stress of having to keep track of where individual grapes, etc may roll, you may find Jenn’s position easier. Don’t buy grapes until all your children are old enough that they are not a choking hazard.
News,Thursday, September 20, 2007
That very popular little infant seat called the Bumbo is getting news coverage because several parents have already experienced serious injury with their infants. It happens when the seat is placed on a high surface like a counter top or a table. The child shift his or her weight around enough to cause the seat to tip over and the infant falls to the floor. In one, case the child was airlifted to have critical surgery performed on his skull which cracked into several pieces.
Early when using the seat I noticed the prominent warning printed on the seat which says not to use it on raised surfaces. This makes sense considering the unpredictable movements on children. Would you trust your child up high in one of these spongy little seats? It is very tempting to try it since the seat is so small it easily fits on a counter top. Even the advertisements on the product box show the children on raised surfaces. When they are very young, it doesn’t seem like they will get out. But it’s not long before they become comfortable with the seat and figure things out, including how to tip it over. If the seat is up high, your child may fall to the floor and breaks his head or neck.
We used to put the seat on our counter tops when Matthew was very young. Thank God he hadn’t fallen. After hearing these horror stories, you can bet that we aren’t going to put Claire up high in this thing.
Check out a full news story on ABC news.
News,Thursday, September 13, 2007
It’s amazing how far people will go to suppress the obvious truth that when mommy and daddy have sex, a baby begins developing in the womb. In our age of science and technology we have gained knowledge but sometimes this knowledge just makes our excuses more complex so the people actually think their well constructed lies are the truth. Here’s the truth, a developing fetus is a human being! Eventually, becoming an adult like the rest of us! It doesn’t become just a collection of tissue, or blood cells or a tumor. Somehow this obvious truth is still denied by even the most intelligent doctors, lawyers and judges. I guess you can say they have made their foolishness clear and plain for all to see. The New York courts echo the stupidity and ignorance of the obvious in a latest ruling declaring that doctors aren’t required to tell their patients that it’s a baby in their womb. They don’t want women to know the truth, because they want women to have a CHOICE to kill their baby without any moral feeling of guilt. Read this section of the article.
Mrs. Acuna, now 40, said in court proceedings that when she was in the early stages of pregnancy in 1996, she had asked Dr. Turkish “if it was the baby in there” and that Dr. Turkish had replied, “Don’t be stupid, it’s only blood.”
According to court papers, Dr. Turkish denied having made such a statement, adding that he probably told her that a “seven-week pregnancy is not a living human being,” but rather that it “is just tissue at this time.”
Mrs. Acuna had an abortion, and several weeks later went to the hospital after experiencing bleeding. She said that only after a nurse told her that “the doctor had left parts of the baby inside” did she realize it “was a baby and not just blood” inside her.
Of course, you can also blame her for not knowing the obvious. It’s a baby in there. But look at what the doctors, courts and lawyers want to tell you about your developing baby. “It’s just tissue.” What a lie!
Click here to read the entire New York Times Article.
News,Thursday, September 06, 2007
Words can’t describe how incredibly moving this photo story is, titled “A Mother’s Journey” by Sacramento Bee photographer Renee C. Byer. It won the Pulitzer Prize for Feature Photography. All I can say is watch it, turn the captions on to read the story behind the pictures, and have plenty of Kleenex ready. Click here to see “A Mother’s Journey”.
