This is not any political statement taking any political position. This is a Biblical statement confessing Christ in the public square.
The shameless and bloodthirsty women of our nation are crowing over their success killing more of their babies after Dobbs reversal of Roe v Wade than before Dobbs. They were worried, but with a few years counting their post-Roe murders, they’re chortling that their number of murders are much “better” than what they had feared when Dobbs was announced.
Three states defeated school choice. Aside from ending baby genocide, nothing’s more important than ending government monopoly on child formation. Focus there.
Precisely what many of us who knew Chick Koop thought when he became Surgeon General under PresReagan. What a terrible disappointment he was. Turns out Christian commitment not much of a predicter of leadership ability, nor of holding to Christian morality in high places.
On Thanksgiving Day having resigned my pulpit couple yrs ago, my thanks to God for love of His people for their pastors only keeps growing. It’s a miracle. Nothing else explains men continuing in the ministry. To love and to be loved. God’s love shed abroad.
Truth is we oppose “human rights.” It’s “human wrongs” we excel in, and God will reward us for them. Fully.
This is one of the things Christians give thanks for on Thanksgiving Day—that the King of all the earth shall return as our dread Judge Eternal and right every wrong. Only those who flee to Jesus will escape His terrible wrath. Believe it.
A word I think we are loathe to use, and the context in which it ought to be used, is the word harlot used to describe the people of God at various times. For instance:
Ezekiel 16:33-39 (NASB95) 33 “Men give gifts to all harlots, but you give your gifts to all your lovers to bribe them to come to you from every direction for your harlotries. 34 “Thus you are different from those women in your harlotries, in that no one plays the harlot as you do, because you give money and no money is given you; thus you are different.” 35 Therefore, O harlot, hear the word of the LORD. 36 Thus says the Lord GOD, “Because your lewdness was poured out and your nakedness uncovered through your harlotries with your lovers and with all your detestable idols, and because of the blood of your sons which you gave to idols, 37 therefore, behold, I will gather all your lovers with whom you took pleasure, even all those whom you loved and all those whom you hated. So I will gather them against you from every direction and expose your nakedness to them that they may see all your nakedness. 38 “Thus I will judge you like women who commit adultery or shed blood are judged; and I will bring on you the blood of wrath and jealousy. 39 “I will also give you into the hands of your lovers, and they will tear down your shrines, demolish your high places, strip you of your clothing, take away your jewels, and will leave you naked and bare.
The people of God were harlots, but different in that they paid their suitors. They reveled in their harlotry and idolatry, and did so for free, willingly.
We would not dare refer to idolaters in the church as harlots, or even idolaters for that matter.
We instead say things like “well, they practice a bit different than us……they aren’t as mature as us, let’s show grace to them in their idolatry, weren’t we all that idolatrous at some point?..…what they do isn’t something I’d partake in, but they are free to exercise their preferences….”
We dress up the idolatry because we are all guilty of it. We turn a blind eye to it. We would have to stop following so and so, we’d have to stop reading this talking head or that. We’d lose our reformed street cred, and all our online followers, if we called out the idols and idolaters in the church by referring to them as spiritual harlots.
(having now located the article). His comparison of “wokedom” to the Enlightenment is an interesting one, given the damage the Enlightenment did to Christian faith. E.g.
Now this is funny. It appears AI writes poetry pretty well.
Apparently “real” poet-made poetry is best identified by its incoherence.
As AI-generated text continues to evolve, distinguishing it from human-authored content has become increasingly difficult. This study examined whether non-expert readers could reliably differentiate between AI-generated poems and those written by well-known human poets. We conducted two experiments with non-expert poetry readers and found that participants performed below chance levels in identifying AI-generated poems (46.6% accuracy, χ2(1, N = 16,340) = 75.13, p < 0.0001). Notably, participants were more likely to judge AI-generated poems as human-authored than actual human-authored poems (χ2(2, N = 16,340) = 247.04, p < 0.0001). We found that AI-generated poems were rated more favorably in qualities such as rhythm and beauty, and that this contributed to their mistaken identification as human-authored. Our findings suggest that participants employed shared yet flawed heuristics to differentiate AI from human poetry: the simplicity of AI-generated poems may be easier for non-experts to understand, leading them to prefer AI-generated poetry and misinterpret the complexity of human poems as incoherence generated by AI.
