Friday, November 18, 2011

Two Fire Chiefs

There once was a fire chief whose time as chief was coming to an end. In all the excitement surrounding his impending retirement, he became careless about a number of things, including what he did with the used motor oil from the fire engines and other official vehicles. Instead of recycling it, he had it poured out on the ground near the fire station. He knew of the danger, and several of his employees warned him that something bad could happen, but his attention was focused elsewhere, and he ignored their advice.

The incoming chief was a younger man with very little experience. In fact, he had never even been a firefighter, but he had done a great deal of organizing for the firefighters’ union. He was to take charge at the end of the chief’s retirement ceremony. He had ascended to the position by promising “change” and also promising never to return to the “failed policies of the past,” such as putting out fires with water and other proven methods of fire suppression.

The day of the chief’s retirement finally arrived. The firefighters had planned a retirement celebration which had gotten underway. During the celebration, the oil near the station caught fire. (It was suspected that some of the new chief’s friends actually set the fire in an attempt to help him off to a good start by giving him a chance to look good right away.)

Soon the fire station itself was on fire. The retiring chief took charge and began the process of getting the fire put out with the help of all the firefighters present. Good progress was being made, but before the fire was completely extinguished, the time came for the transition of leadership to take place.

The new fire chief immediately announced that he was in charge, and although he had no idea what to do about the fire, he asked his predecessor to leave. Before addressing the issue, he gave an acceptance speech in which he proclaimed that from now on, all problems involving fires would automatically and almost miraculously cease due to his presence with the department.

Even though he had no answers, the first thing he did after his speech was stop all firefighting activity and call a press conference to make it clear to everyone that he had inherited the fire from his predecessor. He then formed a committee of college professors and lawyers to study the situation, and he appointed a “Fire Czar” to oversee the committee. He then went to the city council to request funds to finance the new committee and the new czar’s salary, complete with all the benefits and freebies appropriate for someone in such an exalted position.

After meeting with his new czar and committee, he returned to the scene of the fire and called another press conference to announce that a plan was in place to put out the fire, pending approval of the environmental impact study and completion of numerous other reports and studies. Since this was going to take some time, he sent all the firefighters on vacation. He then decided that he might as well play some golf.

When the studies and reports were complete and approved, he finished his 74th round of golf since the fire started, left the golf course, and sent some firefighters to fight the fire, which now was in the process of burning all the buildings within a mile in all directions, by pouring 5,000 gallons of gasoline on it. When the fire got bigger, he ordered them to pour 10,000 gallons of gasoline on it. Not only did the fire not go out as he had decreed, it now was totally out of control, engulfing many city blocks and creeping into the nearby forest.

He finally came up with a solution. He ordered his firefighters to pour 500,000 gallons of gasoline on the fire. This, of course, made the fire much larger, which surprised him greatly, since his ideology told him the fire should have immediately gone ont. It also used up most of the reserves of gasoline, which would be hard to replace, since oil drilling, pipelines, and refineries were all on his “hit list.” When people accused him of making the fire worse through his solution, he reminded them that he had inherited the problem, and if he had not poured the gasoline on the fire, it would have become much worse. People should be thankful that his efforts had saved the city from a much larger disaster.

Three years went by, and he continued to have gasoline poured on the fire. Of course, the fire continued to burn and get larger. He used up many city resources that had been designated for other things, including police personnel and equipment and additional firefighting equipment as he bought more and more gasoline. He continued to blame his predecessor – “I inherited this problem, and if I had not acted decisively, it would be much worse.”

He continued to believe that the only way to put out the fire would be to re-double his efforts with the gasoline, but some of his own men balked at that idea, suggesting that they needed to use the fire control efforts they knew would work. He again responded that it would be irresponsible to go back to the “failed ideas of the past,” completely ignoring the facts that those procedures had a proven track record of putting out fires and also that his procedure had done nothing but make the problem worse.

He continued to blame his predecessor – “I inherited this problem. It’s his fault.” He went on by claiming it was his opponents – probably those pesky police officers – not his own men, who were preventing him from doing what was necessary.

The fire never did get put out. Instead, it just ran out of fuel and went out on its own. However, at least he was able to continue to blame his predecessor, and he was able to get more borrowed money allocated to further cover the cost of his new committee. Of course, he did not use the revenue for that purpose. Instead, he gave it to his friends who ran the unions.

In spite of all of his efforts to make things better, it soon became obvious that total tax revenue was going down, because the fire had destroyed so many businesses and homes, forcing people out of the area, which in turn made the tax base smaller. This caused him to petition city hall to further raise taxes to make up the shortfall. He demanded that those who were already paying all the taxes be compelled to pay their “fair share.” That way, he figured he could raise enough revenue for more gasoline to put out the fire, but he could also give rebates to all those who paid no taxes at all. That would be “win-win” for him. Just in case the revenue did not come in from the greedy rich people, he made alternate plans to borrow whatever amount was needed from China. Hopefully, that would provide enough that he could actually exempt all those who liked him from paying any taxes at all and shift the entire tax burden to his political enemies.

Even though he knew, in spite of all of the evidence, that gasoline was extremely effective in putting out fires, he also requested an additional amount of revenue to study alternative fire suppression sources, since as ethanol, wind, solar, etc. He figured that would get him in good with the environmental lobby and other anti-oil groups.

He also requested twenty-five 50,000 gallon gasoline tanks to be used to fight future fires, if and when the city and the fire station ever got rebuilt. His wisdom told him that the best way to solve a problem is to do more of what caused the problem. Of course, the city and the forest were all but completely destroyed, but forests could grow again, and “the rich” and businesses, at least those who did not move away, could always be soaked for even more taxes in order to pay for more of his brilliant solutions to problems that weren’t his fault.

Thankfully, his term as chief finally came to an end, and there was nothing better at the end than it had been at the beginning. Actually, everything was much worse. But come on… at least he was sincere.

Friday, November 11, 2011

A Tribute to My Dad: World War 2 Veteran

Wayne W. Livesay

June 16, 1922 – October 31, 2009

On this Veteran's Day, I honor my dad for his service to our country and for his service to our Lord.

My dad was not famous, but he did more for his country than most of us could ever imagine. He fought and bled for the freedom we all enjoy, even for the freedoms of those who today spit on the flag and make a mockery of the liberty we have in this country. His thirty-three missions in B-17 bombers were many beyond the average life-expectancy of bomber crews in World War 2. His nine months as a prisoner of war in Germany took a toll on his body that caused him to suffer until the end of his life.

In addition to his service to his country, he had a long life of service to the Lord, serving as a pastor and church planter, teaching adult Sunday school for many years, and presenting the gospel of Christ to unbelievers. His life’s verse was Galatians 2:20, “I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.”

Thursday, November 10, 2011

Go Lady Warriors!

Here it is … the first day of basketball practice … and I am not there. I finally came to a decision a couple of weeks ago … a decision I really knew I needed to make. I stepped down as varsity girls’ basketball coach and left the team in the very able hands of my long-time assistant.

As I saw the season approaching, I found myself doing something I had never done before … I was dreading it. I was dreading spending two hours a day in practice. I was dreading the games two nights a week, especially the away games and late return times on school nights. I was also dreading what it might do to my effectiveness in the classroom.

I always told my teams that basketball is a game, and games are played for fun. I also told them that if they could not have fun and enjoy it, they should not play. I know that applies to coaches, as well. Even though basketball, as well as other sports, can be a great vehicle for teaching biblical principles, what I do in the classroom as a Bible and math teacher is of far greater significance than anything I might do in the gym.

I knew a long time ago that when the time came to step away from coaching, I would just do it with no regrets. I thoroughly enjoyed my 22 seasons of coaching at the varsity level and several other seasons at the JV and junior high levels.

Coaching is very tiring and time-consuming, and we all reach the age where we have to slow down and realize we can no longer do everything we used to do. I step away with many fond memories of past seasons. The Lord was very good to me and to my teams over the years, and I thank Him for the experience.

Now I say to the team, “Go Lady Warriors! Play with all your might as unto the Lord! Have a great season!”

All of the Proof for Darwinian Evolution is Between the Lines

___________________________________________

___________________________________________

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Moral Relativism

By My Annonymous Friend

I watched a documentary yesterday telling the story of the Canadian military in Afghanistan. At one point the narrator opened a window to his mind and world view when he stated that Afghanistan created a problem for him intellectually. He said that he was raised to believe in a morally relative world where distinctions between right and wrong, or good or evil, were blurred or perhaps non existent. It is true that this view is prominent in western culture. A Zogby poll some years ago showed that 75% of American college professors teach and believe that there is no such a thing as right or wrong. Individuals and cultures must make decisions about what is right or wrong for them. This is how we hear statements like "I decide what is right for me!" or, "This is my truth!" A variation of this thinking is an absurdity I sometimes offer in jest – "I stand up for the truth whether it is right or wrong!"

Back to the Afghan documentary. Why did the narrator face an intellectual dilemma? The reason he cited is that is that he could not explain the Taliban who restrict education, force women into despicable life styles, blow up historic and religious shrines and monuments, and so on. I smiled when I heard him talk about this. Of course he faced a troubling situation. The world he was told existed was in reality a different kind of world. Some have said that moral relativists in fact see the world more as they would like it to be rather than how it is in fact. I think that is true. For many moral absolutism is annoying and interferes with how they live. I commend the narrator for his honesty!

I am aware that I have selected a major and very serious topic. There is a great deal in ancient philosophy and religion about the topic of good and evil. It is for some a reason to believe that God does not exist because if He is a good God then He could not allow evil to exist. This argument has an answer. In Taoism, the ying and yang concept is an effort to show that there is a complementarity between good and evil. I reject this way of thinking as well.

Today's disciples of moral relativism claim that tolerance and neutrality are their virtues. For example, the President of Planned Parenthood Federation of America once stated, "…teaching morality doesn't mean imposing my moral values on others. It means sharing wisdom, giving reasons for believing as I do - and then trusting others to think and judge for themselves." She claims to be morally neutral, but this is categorically untrue. Recent talks about defunding Planned Parenthood have been met with howls of protests and incredibly dishonest propaganda. Those who promote abortions are in no mood to hear the arguments of those who value the life of the unborn. Here is another example of supposed tolerance and neutrality. I found it amusing and also disappointing that a recent climate change (it is now embarrassing to call it “global warming”) conference refused to allow a leading British author and skeptic of this politically fashionable theory to speak at a conference on climate change. So much for tolerance!

Our society is paying a huge price for the false teaching of moral relativism. Contrast today's world with the thinking of George Washington. In his September 19, 1796 Farewell Address to the nation, George Washington stated, "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, Religion and Morality are indispensable supports. In vain would that man claim the tribute of Patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great Pillars."

William McGuffey, author of the McGuffey's Readers, which were used by students in America's public school system from the early 1800's to the early 1900's, wrote, "Erase all thought and fear of God from a community, and selfishness and sensuality would absorb the whole man." McGuffey's ideas are being validated every day when we watch the evening news!

God is not the author of evil! Mankind was given a choice and chose evil. Ever since, humans have been born with both an evil nature and an evil desire. I marvel that it is not necessary to teach small children to be naughty, mean-spirited, to fight with each other, to take away each other's toys, and so on. Even my angelic children, and now grandchildren, seem to take to all these kinds of behaviors with ease. As we continue in life, we continue to make wrong and hurtful choices at times which have horrible consequences.

I commend the honesty and integrity of the narrator of the documentary I saw. Would that others in our society would honestly examine the world in which we live and question their presuppositions and theories. Moral relativism has serious flaws. It cannot answer for the behavior of brutal regimes like the Taliban and others. Nor can it answer for the evil nature that is present in each of us as well.

The great news is that God has an answer for evil. Without compromising His own righteousness and perfection, He established a way for forgiveness and restoration to be possible. This was accomplished by asking His Son, a perfect and thus legally acceptable sacrifice, to assume all the guilt of humanity by dying. Now the offer of salvation and forgiveness has solid philosophical and theological grounds. Justice and mercy were perfectly combined on the Cross.

Monday, September 12, 2011

"Bibley"

Glenn E. Chatfield has posted an article entitled "Is Your Church Too 'Bibley?'" on one of his blogs, "The Watchman's Bagpipes." This brief article touches on something very important in the church today -- the teaching of God's Word. I commented on his post as follows:

I really like your new word, "Bibley." Wish I had thought of it. Thank the Lord for "Bibley" churches and "Bibley" pastors.

I have always believed that there is no substitute for teaching the Scriptures, and that is what I have practiced in my 20+ years of teaching adult Sunday school. All of the topical and "timely" and "relevant" material in the world cannot replace the teaching of the Word of God. As for me, I plan to remain "Bibley" in my approach.

I fugure if someone doesn't like the "Bibley" approach, they have come to the wrong church and the wrong Sunday school class.

Thursday, August 25, 2011

Qualifications for the Office of President


The Constitution makes it clear that there are some specific requirements for the office of President, as follows:

• Must be a natural born citizen,

• Must be at least thirty-five years old, and

• Must have been a resident of the United States for fourteen years.

(US Constitution, Article II, Section 1)

It seems that some have now added to those requirements:

• Must “believe in science,” to be defined as believing in the existence of “man-made global warming,” otherwise known as “climate change,” and also must believe in evolution, regardless of biblical truth, common sense, and the evidence.

• Must not believe in God, especially the God of Christianity, regardless of references to God in other founding documents, and regardless of the intent of the framers of the Constitution.