Monday, January 22, 2007

Guess what... I'm writing

I'm posting from my sister's apartment.

She is now married. I have a new brother.

I also saw a good friend Mike get married last week.

Dmh and his boo are now engaged.

And he may be spending his last days as a single man with me in a big white house in Pasadena. We'll see if this actually happens. It would be nice.

I don't usually write about sports on this blog but I must mention the triumph of the Chicago Bears. The last time that they were in the Superbowl I was a five-year-old boy watching the game with my older sister. I remember her yelling out "fumble" about five times during the game. It was also the second time I remember caring about the outcome of a sporting event. The first time being July 15, 1984 when the Cubs beat the Dodgers 4 to 1. As the day has gone by, I am more excited about the Superbowl. Though I do think that Bears will probably lose the game. Regardless, I will cheer for them as any Sycz would. With all my heart.

As many of you like to hear about cool things on the internet, I stumbled upon Tom Green's website. Now, Tom Green does a live show every weeknite @ 8pm PST from his own house. It is remenisant of his style of comedy and some of the aspects of 60's live talk shows, but it is streamed live from tomgreen.com. I would encourage all of you to check it out because it is one of the best things I've ever seen on the internet.

I will be seeing the Cold Wars Kids this Sunday. It will rock my socks off.

Drew has a nice list of what will happen this year. I hope he is right on some things.

Hopefully I will write more often this year. The year of the Oso.
Posted by at

2 comments:

dmh said...

For mike

http://blog.higherthings.org/wcwirla/article/2428.html

and

http://blog.higherthings.org/wcwirla/article/2434.html

1/24/2007 2:15 PM
dmh said...

oh and RE: Lutherans adn the death penalty:

Via LCMS website

The Death Penalty


Q. What is the official stance of the Missouri Synod on the death penalty?
A. In 1967, The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod stated its position "that capital punishment is in accord with the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions." Resolution 2-38 of the New York convention of the Synod reads as follows:
"Whereas, Various church bodies have condemned capital punishment in recent years; and
"Whereas, God's Word supports capital punishment (Gen. 9:6; Lev. 24:17; Ex. 21:12; Num. 35:21; Deut. 19:11; Rom. 13:4; Acts 25:11; and
"Whereas, The Lutheran Confessions support capital punishment:
"Therefore neither God nor the government is included in this commandment, yet their right to take human life is not abrogated. God has delegated His authority of punishing evil-doers to civil magistrates in place of parents; in early times, as we read in Moses, parents had to bring their own children to judgment and sentence them to death. Therefore what is forbidden here applies to private individuals, not to governments. (Large Catechism I, 180 to 181 [Tappert, p. 389])
"Therefore be it Resolved, That The Lutheran Church--Missouri Synod declare that capital punishment is in accord with the Holy Scriptures and the Lutheran Confessions."
This does not mean that everyone who belongs to the LCMS or is a member of an LCMS congregation is conscience-bound to support the death penalty. Individuals within the LCMS may, for various valid reasons, object to the usefulness and fairness of the death penalty as it is being used or considered within a particular governmental system. Although it is clear from Scripture that the government has the God-given right to use the death penalty, the LCMS has not taken the position that the government must use this right if it determines that some other form of punishment would better serve society at large at a particular time and place.

--
Capital Punishment


Q. My friend and I are having a discussion over the death penalty. Using the FAQ on the death penalty, I quoted the scripture references, both Old and New Testaments, that support the death penalty. The person replied with Scripture references, all Old Testament, that gave instances of putting people to death for various sins, adultery, converting from judaism, etc., such as Deuteronomy 13:1-10, Leviticus 20 (select verses), Deuteronomy 22. How should I reply?
A. First, it is important that our understanding of scriptural teaching regarding capital punishment be understood properly. It is not the position of our church that the Bible requires or mandates that governments practice capital punishment. That is to say, the fact that there is biblical support or warrant for the practice, does not mean that a government is obligated to codify such support in civil laws. God has given the government the responsibility (Romans 13), as His agent for punishing wrongdoers and praising those who do right, for justly and fairly administering justice--including the possibility of capital punishment as a legitimate form of retribution.
Maybe an additional comment or two would be helpful in responding to the specific question you have asked. I would answer the question this way. The civil government that God has established could, if it wished, pass a law making adultery a capital crime. And, to press this further, the government could make it illegal, for example, in accordance with the Levitical code, to cut your hair at the sides of your head, clip off edges of your beard, or obtain tattoos (Lev. 19:27-28). For that matter, since divorce is universally declared sinful by God in the Bible, civil government could make a law forbidding, without exception, all divorce under the threat of severe punishment (e.g., imprisonment). However, since government has the responsibility of maintaining civil order in a fallen world (Romans 13), it simply would not be possible nor is it even wise for government to enact certain laws. In fact, to do so would likely create disorder and even chaos--and massively so. Even in the Old Testament, Moses accommodated the sinful human condition by allowing divorce under certain circumstances (Deut. 24:1ff.), even though God hates divorce (Malachi 2:16).
It is not at all inconsistent for someone to favor the enactment of civil law prescribing capital punishment for murder, while at the same time opposing the enactment of civil law prescribing capital punishment for adultery. One could cogently argue that for civil government to enact the death sentence for adulterers would completely destroy civil order and cause wholesale rebellion and disregard for law. But one could argue just as strongly that civil order cannot be long maintained if we allow people to kill each other without severe punishment, and perhaps even punishment by death. Without preserving the life of our neighbor--which is the highest and most valuable earthly possession--there would be no need for governments or law at all, for that matter!

1/24/2007 2:24 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)