A Man and His Toys

A few years ago, I embarked on a quest to recover a part of my childhood. I wanted a toy that I bought with my own money. I put this toy on lay-away for what seemed like six months at Mack’s (a defunct department store in Taylorsville). I’m not sure how much it cost but it was worth it – I eventually had a Mego Batmobile. I already had the Batman and Robin (both with the “oven mitt” gloves). I finally got the Batmobile out and it quickly became my favorite toy of all time.

I’m not exactly sure what happened to it but it disappeared as I grew older. As I said, I went on Ebay a while back and saw they were going for well over one hundred dollars. I wasn’t about to spend that much but one day I found one in good shape for about half that and snapped it up. Nostalgia knows no logic! It sits proudly on my shelf.

That got me thinking of other toys from my childhood. See if any of these were in your toybox. If not, post your favorites below.

I never got into G.I. Joe that much but all my friends did so I didn’t miss out on much. But I did have Steve Austin – the SIX MILLION DOLLAR MAN. Yep, the one with the hole in the back of his head that you could look through and see things that looked exactly the same as looking with your own eyes. You could roll back the skin on his arm to see his bionic circuitry. Sadly, he didn’t make that cool “nah-nah-nah-nah” sound when he moved but I had it down pretty good. He came with an engine block that he could easily hoist to shoulder-level in case you ever needed an engine block hoisted to shoulder level. I suppose that when Oscar Goldman ran out of missions, Steve went to work at Pep Boys.

Remember when the world used to come to a complete stop whenever Evel Knievel was on TV? Could that happen today? I remember sitting mesmerized watching him jump a couple buses or the fountains in Las Vegas and then totally blowing it in the attempt to jump Snake River (IN PRIME TIME!). But he had a cool toy – the Scramble Van. Just look at it! All those barely discernible plastic parts. The trailer to haul the motorcycle I already had. The ramp to jump his own van. It didn’t get much cooler than Evel thirty years ago.

I mentioned earlier that I didn’t have a lot of GI Joe toys but I did have his AT Helicopter. I got it from my grandparents one Christmas and I can still remember blocking out all human contact for the rest of that day as I assembled that bad boy – snapping the plastic parts together and applying with precision the few stickers. It had a button right behind the cockpit that would make the blades rotate until your thumb fell off. It had a rope (string) that you could lower to rescue Joe (or Steve Austin) from peril. All in all – a great, great toy.

I also remember Santa Claus bringing a Stretch Armstrong one year. I think I asked for it but if I didn’t, my parents were gift-giving geniuses. This guy was phenomenal. You could stretch him, pull him, tie him in knots and do all sorts of things. As an adult, you could have fun with this guy for seconds. As a child, hours. I guess I outgrew him early because I remember putting him in the freezer until he was a solid block of . . . something. I had to find out what was inside so I took him into the back yard and got my dad’s ax and then cut off both legs in one fell swoop. No bones – just pink goo. Dad wasn’t upset that I did that but he was upset that I put the still-frozen Armstong on his lawn mower, which quickly thawed out all over the seat. Now that was a mess.

Sometime after getting Armstrong, I got his archnemesis – Stretch Monster. As the instructions said, he’s a docile creature but you don’t want to get him mad. And when he sees Stretch Armstrong, he gets very mad. I’m not sure what happened to this guy but I’m pretty sure he escaped death by dismemberment. But the way, these things wouldn’t last long anyway. The skin would dry out and crack or the goo would lose its gooiness. There aren’t a lot of them around anymore but you can still find some of the originals on EBAY and pay nearly $1000 for them. Nostalgia has no logic but it does have its spending limits.

The ultimate toy of boys growing up in the 70s – THE BIG WHEEL. I remember pedaling so fast my ankles almost broke. We had great “Ben Hur” type races, spinning out and spraying gravel all over the place. We lived on a hill which offered nearly impossible to resist temptation to attempt.

Then a friend of mine got a Green Machine and it was all over. I didn’t have a chance. It was like I was driving a GMC Pacer and he was driving a Corvette. He soon became the Alpha Male of the neighborhood.

By the way, you can now get these things in ADULT SIZES. That’s right – for a few hundred dollars, you can have your own Big Wheel or Green Machine! Imagine the fun of tearing around your neighborhood on these bad boys with adult leg power.

Once I reached middle school, electronic games made the scene. I spent mucho dinero at Galaxy 2000 – playing Donkey Kong (third elevator) and Galaga and Pole Position. In those days before PSPs and Nintendo DS games, we had single game players with little LED blips to resemble players. I could absolutely DOMINATE on the Mattel Basketball. The trick was to try to shoot from the left or right of the free throw line. Believe it or not, I found this toy in my old bedroom last year and put some new batteries in it and it still works like new. I’m sad to say my reflexes are not as new. A lot of my friends had the football version of this game but I never could get the handle on it.

Russell Moore Hits The Nail On The Head

Russell Moore is the Dean of the School of Theology at the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky. It is the SBC's flagship seminary. Moore also contributes regularly as member of the Henry Institute (The Carl F.H. Henry Institute for Evangelcial Engagement). In a recent post, Moore exposed a little bit of the bias to be found in the New York Times. He wrote:

Did you see the article in today's New York Times exposing how many of the nation's leading Darwinists are atheists, agnostics, or members of left-leaning religious bodies? Did you notice how the Times pointed out that such irreligious worldviews draw suspicion to the scholarship of these thinkers?

Of course you didn't. No such article appeared. But the Times did publish an article pointing out how many signers of a recent petition calling for debate over Darwinian naturalism are members of evangelical churches.

(Kenneth Chang, "Few Biologists But Many Evangelicals Sign Anti-Evolution Petition," New York Times, 21 February 2006, D2.)

As MOore goes onto to note, Christians knew Genesis 1 and John 1 and Colossians 1 long before we ever heard of irreducible complexity. OF COURSE most opponents of evolution are Christian.

However, it seems odd that the NY Times failed to make the connection that almost all of the proponents of Darwinism are motivated just as equally by their "religious" thought system. And make no mistake - it is a religion.

Moore writes, "The problem instead is that the Times doesn't explore the equally theological and metaphysical presuppositions of the parties decrying creationism and Intelligent Design. Now that would make for an interesting article, and the beginnings of an honest and perhaps fruitful discussion."

Bert Publicly Endorses W!

In a remarkable switch from the left-leaning Public Broadcasting System, long-time television personality Bert has gone public with his support of President George W. Bush. There has been no report of censure or disciplinary action by PBS on this icon of public television.







Actually, Bert is leading the local chapter of "W LOVERS." Their theme song is:

Oh what is the letter we love?
The sound that we're extra fond of?
It's not any trouble-you
Know it's a W
When you hear wuh-wuh-wuh-wuh!"

Without this fine wuh sound
You couldn't say wash
Or which, wax, or wiggle
My gosh.

Without this fine wuh sound
Well wink would be ink!
And week would be eek,
Don't you see?
Of course,
A fine word like waffle
Would turn out just "affle" (awful)
Oh W's grand as can be!"

I also appreciate Bert's praise of the "WAFFL." It's good to be recognized by the national media. (Inside joke to three of my (now) four readers!).

The Point of No Return

Ever since the conservatives took control of the left-leaning Southern Baptist Convention a few decades ago in the now-famous "Battle for the Bible," people have wondered what would be the next big issue. It seems pretty clear now: Calvinism!

It has already been mentioned that a "discussion" (not a debate) will be held this summer at the SBC's annual meeting in Greensboro, NC. Dr. Paige Patterson, President of Southwestern Theological Baptist Seminary in Fort Worth, Texas and Dr. Al Mohler, President of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, Kentucky, will meet during the Pastor's Conference to discuss the theological merit of the Doctrines of Grace in Southern Baptist life. Along with all the other issues to be handled at this meeting, the 2006 event should produce near-record crowds.

The interest in the discussion was surely fanned into flame thanks to some rather frisky back-n-forth on the Founders blog run by Tom Ascol. In a piece written on February 14, Tom Ascol noted that Johnny Hunt was going to be nominated to serve as the next President of the SBC. The purpose of the article was to discuss the method by which potential presidents are nominated. He rightly noted that the SBC's "kingmakers" decide beforehand who will next lead the convention and the annual meeting is closer to a "coronation" than an election. He asked for some good men as alternative candidates. What followed is mind-blowing!

As of this moment (9:13 PM on Saturday, Feb 18), there have been 188 comments posted in response to that article. Several have called for a true election by asking for a nomination from the floor during the convention. Several more have proposed men like Al Mohler or Mark Dever or Roy Hargrave.

Soon after, the conversation sadly degenerated somewhat into some attacks on Johnny Hunt. That is too bad. While I disagree wholeheartedly with some fine points of Hunt's theology, Hunt is a fine pastor and a true servant in the kingdom. He has served faithfully for years and would no doubt make a fine conservative president (unless those "fine points" become blunt instruments).

However, it cannot be denied that he has made some incredibly asinine comments regarding Calvinistic beliefs at last year's Pastors Conference and in the pulpit at his church (most famously: "Everyone that gets in is elected and He's elected all of us). Does that disqualify him from the SBC presidency? Not necessarily but people should be able to ask for clarification on these points without being labelled "divisive" or "hateful." Hunt is an incredibly well-known pastor (especially in SBC circles) so any comments he makes are rightfully deserving of public scrutiny. And it is not a personal attack to say someone is wrong!!!

Anyway, back to the point at hand. Ascol asked for all posters to return to the original issue of the SBC presidency. Soon after, Ergun Caner made his debut on the blog. Caner is the new dean of Liberty Theological Seminary in Lynchburg, Virginia. Caner has made a very big name for himself very quickly - and deservedly so.

Caner was soon joined by his brother Emir Caner, the president of the College at Southwestern (part of Paige Patterson's Southwestern). Sadly, however far the conversation had degenerated previously, it soon reached its nadir with the addition of the two brothers.

At about the 75-comment, Dr. Caner wrote this:

I BEG of you- PLEASE bring another name to the floor of the SBC. I would be thrilled to watch that person go down in flames, as we enjoy another conservative who has not adopted semi-Presbyterianism. On the positive side, you can always just "punt" and say it was predestined for you to lose.

Caner went on to say that "five-point Calvinism is a VIRUS." He wrote that Calvinism has "never" grown a church by conversions - only transfer growth of "the people we don't want." He even pulled off a great line, saying, "You guys are mules- you make much noise, but cannot reproduce." However clever that comment is, it seems obvious that Caner has forgotten about Capital Hill Baptist in D.C. or Bethlehem Baptist in Minneapolis or Mar's Hill in Seattle.

Speaking of growth, we all must admit that the SBC has been defined in the last 80 years as "Sandy Creek, do-anything-to-get'em-down-the-aisle and dunk'em-before-they-change-their-minds" types. The sorry state of the SBC (only 37% of SBC members bothering to show up on an average Sunday morning worship service) falls squarely in their own laps - not Calvinists.

Then the self-described "Caner the lesser" joined the fray and somehow the conversation went further downhill. He wrote:

Also, is it true Bethlehem Baptist has revised their hymnal to fit the mold of their hyper-Calvinist pastor? I hear they now sing, "Jesus loves some of the children, some of the children in the world..."

Let the nations be glad that God is the author of evil and takes joy in people going to hell...

Piper a hyper-Calvinist? Ridiculous! However, I can understand how a "hyper-Arminian" would think that way in a relative fashion. Caner the Elder has openly endorsed Dave Hunt's remarkably bad book "What Love Is This?: Calvinism's Misrepresentation of God." To hold Hunt's "scholarship" in such high esteem can only lead one to see Piper's theology as extreme, as well.

It was soon suspected that this "Caner" was an imposter because of some errors (John Gill would kill you for not baptizing babies and talking about "Armenians" (sic)). That suspicion was soon removed after some fact-checking and emails. It was the two deans, acting in a very unbecoming way.

A poster challenged Ergun Caner to debate James White of "Alpha and Omega Ministries." Several years ago, Dr. Norm Geisler wrote "Chosen But Free." White wrote a rebuttal to that book called "The Potter's Freedom." Geisler followed up with a second edition of that book that has been exposed by White for its sophomoric reasoning and research. Read that response by White and sit slack-jawed at the fact that Caner can write "As for the offer to debate, I would be happy to debate- a Baptist. Why should I debate Dr. White? Especially since Dr. Geisler so aptly decimated him in the second edition of CHOSEN?"

WOW! Talk about being blinded by your traditions! First of all, White is a Baptist (not SBC but so what). Second, White is an adjunct professor at a fellow SBC seminary - Golden Gate.

Caner later answers a poster's question by stating:

Do I see as synonymous 5-point Calvinism (supralapsarian) and "Hyper-Calvinism?"

OF COURSE I DO.

So, Five Point Calvinists are all supralapsarians? I'm a "five-pointer" but not supra!

Ergun clarified his position, stating:

I do not believe that limited atonement and irresistible grace are biblical.

I even take issue, as a Geisler-type Thomist, with any description of Total Depravity that erases the imago Dei, and I believe that repentance preceeds salvation. No one is dragged kicking and screaming against their will into the Kingdom.

Thus, using the Scholastic Protestant definition, I am a fighting one-pointers.

Thankfully, I am not a protestant.
I am a Baptist, Free-Church dissenter.

What true Calvinist believes that the image of God is "erased" in mankind? I sure don't. It is marred, fractured, broken if you will but not removed or erased.

What true Calvinist believes that people are "dragged kicking and screaming against their will into the Kingdom"? I sure don't.

This shows an appalling lack of understanding of the opponent's position. It appears quite obviously that Caner has erected a man of straw, named him "Calvinism" and then finds great joy in easily knocking this straw man to the ground. That works for Dave Hunt - no one expects more from him. I would expect more from a seminary dean and professor of theology.

So, the debate will continue to rage in the days to come as we near ground-zero at Greensboro. The shots have been fired across the bow. The big guns will be coming out soon.

I have enough faith in God to believe that good will come from this. I just hope all the good that the conservative SBC has going for it does not go down in the battle.

What's Wrong WIth This Picture - PART 2

Can you spot the problem with the Bible verse in this church's banner?

No prize for the winner except world-wide fame and no small dose of envy from the multitudes who visit this blog regularly.

Check out #6 on their "Top Ten Reasons to try us":

No boxes! God can blow the lid off any box, unfold it and turn it into a dance floor. We tend to be the “out of the box” people. Among our many firsts, we were the first mainline church to take a stand against slavery (1700), the first to ordain an African American person (1785), the first to ordain a woman (1853), the first in foreign missions (1810), and the first to ordain openly gay lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons (1972). We value education for all people. We founded Harvard and Yale, as well as many historically black colleges, six of which remain affiliated with the UCC to this day.

Common Sense in the Senate

I don't live in Oklahoma but if I did, I believe I could be persuaded to vote for this guy: TOM COBURN. Why can't all Senators understand this man's common sense?

George Will wrote the article and describes Coburn as Coburn "the most dangerous creature that can come to the Senate, someone simply uninterested in being popular."

Comic Books

Confession time: I have a LOT of comic books. A LOT. Mostly Batman. That makes this webpage very interesting to me. It's an "Our Army At War" issue with Sgt. Rock from February 1972. A separate story at the back was written by Bob Haney and pencilled and inked by Alex Toth with a nice surprise ending.

Haney worked for DC for decades and wrote some great stories for Brave and Bold, World's Finest, Batman, Wonder Woman, Teen Titans (which he gets credit for co-creating) comics. On a lesser note, he was responsible for the "Super Sons" story arcs found in World's Finest (where Batman and Superman had "sons" who also fought crime in an attempt to woo the teen market). He also wrote a lot of "war comics" such as BlackHawk and Sgt. Rock and Suicide Squad.

Toth also has a great record in the comics industry. He drew a great Batman story from 1974 called "Death Flies the Haunted Sky." He is most often noted for his work on some great animated TV shows, including "Johnny Quest" and Space Ghost" and "SUPER FRIENDS." Yes, THAT "Super Friends."

EBAY Atheist Visits Church: Willow Creek

A few days ago, I noted that Hemant Mehta, a self-professing atheist, put his body/mind/soul up for sale to the highest bidder on EBAY. He promised that he would go to a church once for every ten dollars of bid money. The winning bid was $504, which means he will attend 50 church services in the next year. Jim Henderson posted the winning bid. He lives near Chicago and is a Christian. Mehta wrote that Henderson:

would like me to go to a variety of different churches in and around Chicago. This is for a number of different reasons, the main one being that he would like me to fill out surveys for him about my observations on the different churches for his website. That information can be used to help Christians get a better understanding of what non-Christians think about their church and the way they show their faith.

I am especially interested in this research-oriented aspect of the event. I am very curious as to the thoughts of a man with no religious background entering local churches and giving honest evaluations of what he sees. (not unbiased, it turns out - but honest). Of course, I am also interested in watching the Holy Spirit deal with this young man in the upcoming year. I believe we will see ample proof of Jesus' words in John 6 in this man's life: "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him."

Mehta is writing some about his experiences on his blog but is chronicling his thoughts and observations about the churches he attends on Henderson's blog - Off The Map.

Mehta's first visit was to a small Roman Catholic Church on February 7 and he left confused (just like I think I would). However, on his second church visit, he went to Willow Creek Community Church on February 8. WCCC is quite possibly the most well-known of America's mega-churches and also one of the oldest. He went to WCCC on a Wednesday night and heard associate staff member Randy Frazee preach. According to the WCCC website, Frazee is a graduate of Dallas Theological Seminary and is the "newest Teaching Pastor at Willow Creek Community Church in June, 2005. He was senior pastor at Pantego Bible Church in Fort Worth, Texas for 15 years."

Mehta made several comments about his visit that pique my interest:

• His first impression that he notes is "the parking lot." It was FULL. On a Wednesday night.
• He was amazed that a church had escalators. I guess I would be, as well.
  
• He was amazed at the sheer number of white people.
  
• He was impressed with Frazee's communication skills although he admits that he didn't believe Frazee's message for one moment (hence the bias).
• He took in his surroundings and said, "The megachurch had everything seemingly taken care of. From my vantage point, there were 4 huge television screens to watch the service. (There were many more everywhere else in the building.) When Frazee recited scripture, it was up on the screen. The broadcasting-aspect of the service was extremely professional. There was a soundproof area in the back where people with crying babies could listen to the service. There was a sign-language section. A separate handicapped section. Outside the auditorium, there was a cafe, another cafeteria, a bookstore, a prayer room… It was impressive. It’s not hard to see how people could spend their whole lives *in* this church. And I can understand why it’s so popular."
  
• He noticed that WCCC "took in" over a half million dollars last week alone.
• He finally admitted that IF he were a believer, he would come to this church.
  
• One funny point that also made me cringe because I see it happening in the church I attend: "As soon as the sermon ended and the singing began, I could see a good number of people begin to leave. It’s like they were at a sports game and the final score was already decided. They wanted to leave early to avoid the traffic. I didn’t know that was permitted at church." It shouldn't be!
  

That next to last point made me think about how "appealing" the church is supposed to be. This man is a gentleman and doesn't seem to be very antagonistic towards Christians. However, the Bible describes him as a hater of God and a being upon whom the holy wrath of God resides. This man is on the broad road towards destruction and truly wants to be there. Yet, he comes into a church and feels so comfortable!

I don't think he should hear "sinner" and "you're going to hell" every minute he's in the building but it seems the "seeker-sensitve" model has gone too far the other direction. This makes me want to discern exactly where that line between the two extremes should be drawn.

Disco Died for a Reason!

The pastor - excuse me, he prefers "speaker" - at Element Church in Chesterfield, Missouri will continue his sermon series in the weeks to come on the subject of "CRAZY LOVE." Using "Romance Hits Of The 70's," the sermons roll on this Sunday. Next up, the attendees will "learn how to keep your relationship alive in, 'Stayin' Alive,' and not to mention keeping that flame burning in your romance with, 'Disco Inferno.'" Last week's sermon was based on the song "Don't Go Breaking My Heart."

Amazing! We've come a long way from men of God composing great songs of the faith based on the message of the Bible to now co-opting the message of the Bible to fit worldy songs from an era in complete antithesis to the worship of a holy God.

A while back, the same church preached this message: THE GIFT OF YOU! If you listen to the archived message, you will learn that "God has given this world a special gift and that is the gift of you. You have probably never thought of yourself as a gift, but you are. Learn more about how important you are and how to unwrap all the great things God has placed inside you."

I wonder what songs they sang that day? This might be a sample order of worship:

• I Exalt Me
• Now I Lift My Name On High, How I Love To Sing My Praises
• There is None Like Me, No One Else Can Do The Things That I Do
• I Am Why I Sing, I Am Why I Live
• O Come Let Us Adore Me
• How Great I Am
  

Regarding the current sermon series, I picture Travolta walking down the street with the BeeGees hitting the high-notes in the back ground: Well, you can tell by the way they preach the Word, they are worldly men, sure to lose! Ahh, Ahh, Ahh, Ahh - staying alive, staying alive!

The Madness of Islam

Back in January of this year, the Associate Press ran a story about the recent Islamic hajj. What is a “hajj”?

• The hajj is the foremost of all Muslim rituals.
• Islam requires that all Muslims who are financially and physically able make the hajj at least once.
• In modern times, about 2.5 million Muslims fulfill the hajj every year. However, less than 10% of all Muslims ever manage to complete it.
• A person performing, and having performed the hajj, is called hajji. Many hajjis add 'Hajj' or 'Hajji' to their name after returning from Mecca.
• As one significant part of the hajj, stones that have been gathered the day before are thrown by each hajji at the 3 jamra, pillars that represent the powers of Satan. At this place, Satan appeared in front of Ibrahim. When the 7 stones have been thrown, the hajj is more or less completed, although there are a few other ceremonies yet to be performed.

From the most recent hajj, we learn the following story, which you can read about at the BBC and CNN and FoxNews and even Al-Jezeera:

Thousands of Muslim pilgrims rushing to complete a symbolic stoning ritual during the hajj tripped over luggage Thursday, causing a crush in which at least 345 people were killed, the Interior Ministry said.

The stampede occurred as tens of thousands of pilgrims headed toward al-Jamarat, a series of three pillars representing the devil that the faithful pelt with stones to purge themselves of sin.

Interior Ministry spokesman Maj. Gen. Mansour al-Turki said 345 people were killed. More than 1,000 people were injured, said Dr. Abbasi with the Saudi Red Crescent.

Footage from the scene showed lines of bodies laid out on stretchers on the pavement and covered with sheets. Ahmed Mustafa, an Egyptian pilgrim, said he saw bodies taken away in refrigerator trucks.

You can read about other tragedies in past rituals here. The government has gone to great lengths to protect these people from themselves, even building a double-decker bridge to allow more disciples a greater opportunity to "stone the devil" at the same time.

What an amazing contrast between Christianity and Islam! In Islam, you have pilgrims rushing madly to cast stones at an idol, thinking they are destroying the devil. In Chrisitianity, you have God Himself coming down and did battle Himself against the devil who inspired Islam and then, "having disarmed the powers and authorities, he made a public spectacle of them, triumphing over them by the cross" (Colossians 2:15).

Now, we read of another "holy day" in Islam. During the Shia holy day of Ashura, devotees beat themselves with whips, chains, and knives - seeking to cover themselves in their own blood, an act called tatbir. Below are images from this "holy day." Oh, how desperately these deceived people need to know of the sacrifice of Jesus Christ and the precious blood that He willingly shed for sin.

Flagellation is a part of all the world's religions. It appeared in the Middle Ages in Roman Catholicism as flagellants went about in various cities during the Black Plague whipping themselves in hopes of averting the wrath of God. Stemming from the ancient Gnostic belief that all things physical are evil and only the spiritual is good, the history of Christianity is littered with the sordid tales of misguided disciples trying to earn favor with God by beating their bodies.

However, such ritualistic abuse has absolutely no place in authentic Christianity. Sadly, it seems to have found a home in Islam. However, many of the more moderate Muslims decry this spectacle, saying that it puts their entire religion in a "bad light."

What a tragic event. Even more tragic is the thought process that these men and women are propagating on these children, scarring them physically and emotionally and spiritually, all the while thinking they are getting closer to their God. The true God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob must hate this with a white-hot holy repulsion while Satan laughs at the foolishness of these deceived people.

These people are without hope unless they are freed from the evil tyranny of Satan and his ritualistic paganism to find the marvelous grace of Christ. I am motivated more than ever to ensure that I make the trip this summer with people from my church to witness to Islams and hand them Arabic copies of the Scriptures.

Christian Leaders to Fight Global Warning

In this column from the New York Times, 86 evangelical Christian leaders have decided to back a major initiative to fight global warming, saying "millions of people could die in this century because of climate change, most of them our poorest global neighbors."

The statement calls for federal legislation that would require reductions in carbon dioxide emissions through "cost-effective, market-based mechanisms" — a phrase lifted from a Senate resolution last year and one that could appeal to evangelicals, who tend to be pro-business. The statement, to be announced in Washington, is only the first stage of an "Evangelical Climate Initiative."

Among those signing the statement are:

• Charles W. Colson, the founder of Prison Fellowship Ministries;
  
• James C. Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family;
  
• Richard Land, president of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention
• Rick Warren, Pastor of Saddleback Church
• Duane Litfin, President of Wheaton

ONE difference between Christ and Muhammad

There are several differences between Muhammad and Jesus, most notably the matter of divinity. However, in a must-read post from John Piper, we learn a major difference is this: The work of Muhammad is based on being honored and the work of Christ is based on being insulted.

More on the Muslim cartoon controversy

Some very interesting contradictory behavior has recetnly been brought to the forefront:

Muslims are outraged regarding twelve cartoons published in Danish newspapers.

However, you can go here to see MUCH more offensive, outrageous and horrific cartoons published in Arab newspapers.

From a certain point of view, it seems this particular community can dish it out but can't take it.

All Hail the Power of . . . Darwin's Name?

According to a report from "Answers in Genesis," over 400 congregations in 49 states in the USA will participate this Sunday (February 12) in what could be called a “Darwin praise service.” They will be celebrating the 197th anniversary of the birth of Charles Darwin. It’s called “Evolution Sunday.”

The pastors and leadership of these church buildings will try to educate their congregants that science and faith can co-exist, as long as science has the larger berth of the two.

Of course, many evolutionists would completely disagree with that statement, as the linked article explains.

Is "un-Koranic" a word?

Over the past few days, angry Muslims have set fire to the Danish and Norwegian embassies as an act of protest over cartoons of the Prophet Mohammad. One cartoon showed their prophet Mohammad with a turban shaped like a bomb and another had Mohammed in "heaven" declaring to a long line of men that there are no more virgins left for the afterlife.

In response to this "attack on their faith," a great multitude of Islamic believers have reacted in what seems to be the only way they know: violence. Why don't the Islamic leaders stand up and denounce this? Why not use that as an opportunity to teach from their holy book what Islam is allegedly all about? Why not declare their eschatology and try to prove exegetically what the Koran teaches?

In a very interesting article in the Wall Street Journal from February 8, 2006, author Amir Taheri makes some very poignant observations:

The "rage machine" was set in motion when the Muslim Brotherhood--a political, not a religious, organization--called on sympathizers in the Middle East and Europe to take the field. A fatwa was issued by Yussuf al-Qaradawi, a Brotherhood sheikh with his own program on al-Jazeera. Not to be left behind, the Brotherhood's rivals, Hizb al-Tahrir al-Islami (Islamic Liberation Party) and the Movement of the Exiles (Ghuraba), joined the fray. Believing that there might be something in it for themselves, the Syrian Baathist leaders abandoned their party's 60-year-old secular pretensions and organized attacks on the Danish and Norwegian embassies in Damascus and Beirut.

The article goes on to explain the rationale for the violent reaction:

The Muslim Brotherhood's position, put by one of its younger militants, Tariq Ramadan--who is, strangely enough, also an adviser to the British home secretary--can be summed up as follows: It is against Islamic principles to represent by imagery not only Muhammad but all the prophets of Islam; and the Muslim world is not used to laughing at religion. Both claims, however, are false.

There is no Quranic injunction against images, whether of Muhammad or anyone else. ... The claim that the ban on depicting Muhammad and other prophets is an absolute principle of Islam is also refuted by history. Many portraits of Muhammad have been drawn by Muslim artists, often commissioned by Muslim rulers. There is no space here to provide an exhaustive list, but these are some of the most famous: (and the article goes on to list several such works).

So, on a trumped up charge, thousands of Muslims have made numerous attacks for un-Koranic (Is that a word - like "unbiblical"?) reasons. There is something jarring about the way the Muslims responded - beyond the sheer level of violence. Regarding this, John Piper had some good words (as usual) here:

"Am I missing it, or is there an unusual silence in the blogosphere about the Muslim outrage over the cartoons of Mohammed. To me this cries out for the observation that when artists put the crucifix in a flask of urine, Christians were grieved and angered, but not one threatened to kill anyone. Our longing is to convert the blasphemers with the Good News of Christ's death and resurrection, not kill them.

Our faith is based on One who was reviled not just in cartoons but in reality and received it patiently for the salvation of the cartoonists. These riots are filled with intimations about the glorious difference between Christ and Mohammed, and between the way of Christ and the way of Islam.

And the cowing of the press around the world and the US government is ominous for the fear we are under of Islam--not just extremist Islam. I do not respect the teachings of Islam which when followed devoutly lead to destruction.

So I have been pondering which will take me out first, Islam, Uncle Sam, or cancer. No matter, all authority belongs to Jesus. I just want to bear faithful witness to his glorious gospel of peace to the end."

Moderate Christians and King Abdullah II - Moderate Muslim

In this column from the Washington Post last September, Jordan's King Abdullah II, keynote speaker at the recent National Prayer Breakfast, proves that he is a centrist ruler:

Six years after inheriting the throne, Jordan's King Abdullah II has picked up his father's mantle as a leading voice of moderate Islam, calling for the "quiet majority" of Muslims to "take back our religion from the vocal, violent and ignorant extremists," in a speech yesterday at Catholic University.

Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick of Washington told the king that "you have said things that we have looked forward to hearing from major Muslim leaders" and, in a reciprocal gesture, offered a concluding prayer "in the name of Allah, the merciful and compassionate."

Isn't it shocking to think of a Roman Catholic Cardinal praying in the name of Allah? Not in today's politically correct and theologically bankrupt world.

In the article, Abdullah went on to say:

Quoting from the Hebrew Bible, the Christian Gospels and the Koran, Abdullah said all three faiths teach "devotion to the One God and love for our fellow human beings." He called for a "dialogue of deeds as well as words" and said that the "road of moderation, and respect for others, is not one for Muslims alone. All humanity today needs to meet this challenge. That means more than just 'tolerating' each other; it means real acceptance, based on human equality and fellowship."

This acceptance is based on human equality and fellowship. I note that he says nothing about basing this acceptance on Holy Scripture (whether it is what he calls holy - the Koran - or what Christians know to be holy - the Bible). That is because both books call for separation from non-believers.

In 2 Corinthians 6, Paul writes:

14 Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness?
15 What harmony is there between Christ and Belial ? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever?
16 What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people."
17 "Therefore come out from them and be separate, says the Lord. Touch no unclean thing, and I will receive you."

All this leads me to ask: Whose idea was it to have a Muslim - even a peace-loving moderate Muslim - to be the keynote speaker at an evangelical prayer breakfast?

Syncretism at National Prayer Breakfast

From this year's National Prayer Breakfast, via the Washington Times:

King Abdullah II of Jordan quoted from the Bible and the Koran in a brief speech to a lunchtime crowd of 2,000 mostly evangelical Christians yesterday, invoking "our Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage" and urging moderates of the three great religions to unite.
"At this point in history, our service to God, our countries and our peoples demands that we confront extremism in its myriad forms," he told listeners at the annual National Prayer Breakfast luncheon at the Washington Hilton.
"To overcome this common foe, we must explore the values that unite us, rather than exaggerating the misunderstandings that divide us."

Our "Judeo-Christian-Islamic" heritage? I don't have any Judeo-Christian-Islamic heritage!
Does King Abdullah II have a Judeo-Christian heritage? His official website says that he is the "43rd generation direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him)."

What values unite us? I guess there are some - humanitarian and secular in nature - but not spiritual or theological or biblical.

The article continues to tell us:

The king got an enthusiastic welcome from the crowd, and Sen. Bill Nelson, Florida Democrat, called Abdullah "a great example of unity for us." Praying in the name of Jesus Christ, a name otherwise hardly mentioned by anyone else at the event sponsored by evangelical Christians, Mr. Nelson asked God for "a double portion" of the spirit of the late Jordanian King Hussein to rest upon Abdullah, his son.

The king reciprocated with a speech that included six verses from the New Testament, eight from the Koran, two from the Old Testament and remarks from Martin Luther King.

So, evangelical Christians organized a prayer breakfast but hardly ever mentioned the name of Jesus Christ? Why? Scared it might offend someone? The words Paul wrote to Timothy need to be heard by these "church leaders": For God did not give us a spirit of timidity, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline. So do not be ashamed to testify about our Lord (2 Tim 1:7-8). In Mark 8:38, Jesus said "If anyone is ashamed of me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man will be ashamed of him when he comes in his Father's glory with the holy angels."

Is Senator Nelson's prayer one that Jesus would be in agreement with?

Later, we read this:

After yesterday's lunch, the king met privately with 23 religious leaders for an hour. Joseph Lumbard, the king's interfaith adviser and a convert to Islam from the Episcopal Church, called the meeting "very, very, very friendly."
Christian leaders included:

• The Rev. Richard Cizik, vice president for governmental affairs for the National Association of Evangelicals;
  
• The Rev. Rick Warren of Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif.;
  
• Richard Mouw, the president of the Fuller Theological Seminary in Pasadena, Calif.;
  
• Don Argue, president of Northwest University in Kirkland, Wash.; and
  
• Rabbi Arthur Schneier of Park East Synagogue, an Orthodox congregation, in Manhattan.

Church Growth via EBAY

An atheist from Chicago has put an item up for bid on EBAY: HIMSELF! He says it this way: "For every $10 you bid, I will go to church for 1 day."

You can read information leading up to the bid and his time in a church at his blog, which you can find HERE.

I imagine that it won't be long until some "enterprising" church picks up on this idea and starts auctioning off their services or prime spots or dedicating a service tothe winner. We're really not that far from this in the modern church's zeal to "be all things to all people."

Wait a minute - that has already happened!!!

Pat Robertson Let Us In On The Secret

Pat Robertson has taken his foot out of his mouth and put pen in hand to write a new book: "Miracles Can Be Yours Today." In this $15.00 book, Robertson outlines steps you can take to create the opportunity for your own miracle. Here they are:

1. Have Faith in God
2. Speak a Command: talk to the disease, talk to the financial trouble, talk to the storm
3. Be Specific
4. Do Not Doubt
5. Appropriate the Answer
6. Immediately: God will send you an answer immediately to coincide with His perfect timing for your life
7. Forgive Those Who Have Wronged You

That's it. Kinda takes the "magic" out of it all, doesn't it? If you want a miracle, you just have to follow the seven easy steps. Speak to the financial trouble? What in the world does that mean? What do I say - "one million dollars, get over here right now!"? How do I appropriate that answer? Start spending tons of money on credit cards - believing God will miraculously give me a million bucks to pay it off?

Ah, but I see his "out" in Step #6 - God will send you an answer in HIS perfect timing. So if you do all Robertson tells you and it doesn't work, all he's got to say is that it must not be God's time to do the miracle. Very convenient for a person placing such demands on the Omniopotent Sovereign Lord!

What is a miracle is that miracles happened at all in the life of Moses. He was full of doubt. He didn't speak that well and generally just threw staffs down or lifted up his arms.

I know what miracle I'm going after - that Pat Robertson stop speaking and writing in the public arena!!! I'm even going to follow the steps:

1. Have Faith in God - I have absolute faith in God!
   
2. Speak a Command: Pat Robertson - BE GONE!
   
3. Be Specific: The Pat Robertson who once ran for the presidency, The Pat Robertson who spews forth inanities on a regular basis on TBN, The Pat Robertson who said Sharon had a stroke because he gave land back, The Pat Robertson who called for the execution of Hugo Chavez because it's cheaper than fighting a war, The Pat Robertson who dissed the entire town of Dover, PA - BE GONE!
   
4. Do Not Doubt - I do not doubt that Robertson should BE GONE!
   
5. Appropriate the Answer - I will henceforth act as if Robertson has BEEN GONE!
   
6. Immediately: God will send you an answer immediately to coincide with His perfect timing for your life (this part is out of my hands).
   
7. Forgive Those Who Have Wronged You - Not real sure who all that is but if you have wronged me - you are forgiven.
   

Now, sit back and wait.

You gotta give'em credit!

It seems that the folks over at NBC must stay up nights trying to dream up new ways to portray Christianity in the worst possible light. Their new series "Book of Daniel" has been cancelled after only SIX episodes due to the controversy (which means loss of advertising dollars) over its portrayal of a mixed-up minister and a horrible representation of Jesus Christ. There was little fanfare at NBC about the cancellation, only the following written on the blog of the show's creator:

"Unfortunately, due to many reasons, 'The Book of Daniel' will no longer be aired on NBC on Friday nights," he wrote to fans. "I just wanted to say 'thank you' to all of you who supported the show. There were many wonderful, talented people who contributed to its success – and I do mean success. Whatever the outcome, I feel that I accomplished what I set out to do: A solid family drama, with lots of humor, that honestly explored the lives of the Webster family. Good, flawed people, who loved each other no matter what ... and there was always a lot of 'what'! I remain proud of our product, proud of my association with Sony, NBC Universal, and NBC, who all took a chance on a project that spoke to them, and proud to have made an impact on so many of your lives."

"The Book of Daniel" was only show on television in which Jesus appeared as a recurring character and the only network prime-time drama series with a regular male "gay" character, a 23-year-old Republican son. The main character, Daniel Webster, was a troubled, pill-popping Episcopal priest. The show also included a wife who relied on midday martinis, a 16-year-old daughter who was a drug dealer and a 16-year-old adopted son who was having sex with the bishop's daughter. At the office, the priest's lesbian secretary was sleeping with his sister-in-law.

WOW! Hard to believe the common American didn't go crazy over that show. Does NBC think that really represents the common man in Statesville, North Carolina? Or even Los Angeles?

Here's where Jack Kenny messed up. In his blog, he wrote

And here's the kicker: I (apparently naively) thought that this show would be embraced by most Christians. It's ironic to me that the accusation has been that the show "demeans" and "mocks" Christianity when the intention was always the opposite: to treat the Christian beliefs of the Webster family as second nature. As a gay man (or "practicing homosexual," according to the AFA website — though I'm absolutely not practicing anymore, but have actually gotten quite good at it, thank you very much), I've always longed for gay characters for whom sexual orientation was not the defining feature but was simply... there. A policeman who happened also to be gay. A truck driver. A lawyer. Not the characteristic that informs their every line and movement, but second nature. Like their hair color or height or the fact that they don't like pastrami. And that's what I've tried to do with the Websters. Yes, they're Christian. But they are not defined by their Christianity.

I truly question a Christian who is not defined by his or her Christianity. That is exactly WHO I am. I am not a man who happens to be a Christian. I am not a husband or father who happens to be a Christian. I am a distinctly Christian man. I am a distinctly Christian husband, father, minister, employee, etc. You simply cannot separate the two.

As for homosexuality, you can separate that from a person's identity. Homosexuality is NOT WHAT YOU ARE, it is WHAT YOU DO! It is a behavior.

Anyway, let's get back to the purpose of this post: You'd think the higher-ups at NBC would learn from their mistakes. But, the noggins must grow pretty thick over there. Now, in the continually horrible "Will and Grace," we read that that Britney Spears will guest-star as a conservative host of a Christian TV show on a Christian network. Her show is a cooking show called . . . "cruci-fixin's."

Let's see: A Christian TV network that has outlandish (and allegedly) Christian shows on it? Could TBN be a factor in where NBC dreams up these horrible ideas for entertainment?

Someone's Not Telling The Truth

EveryTribeEntertainment claims that they had no idea that Chad Allen was gay before offering him the job. Something doesn't match up here! Below you will find a quote from Chad Allen in an interview with the Windy City Times from January 18, 2006.

WCT: It’s just that if you mention that the movie is about Christian missionaries, some people’s eyes immediately glaze over.

CA: [ Laughs. ] It’s true. Part of what’s happened is the result of vitriolic anger and fear that’s been put forth by believers and by us as well. People assume that they’re going to get hurt—and that’s something I experienced first-hand as well.

When they offered me this film, I loved the story—but I thought that they must not know who I am. I met with the producers, and they pulled out The Advocate. They said that the same things I spoke about in the magazine are the same things that Steve Saint fought his whole life for. From that point forward, it was about watching our bigoted notions melt away. When the movie was over, Steve and I were in tears when we said goodbye to each other. The movie has deepened my own spiritual understanding. Now, it’s about loving and respecting each other.

Washington Post Crosses The Line

The Washington Post recently ran an anti-war cartoon. You can click on the link to view it. The Joint Chiefs of Staff did not appreciate it and in a rare move, penned a letter to the editor and all the joint chiefs signed it. I agree with the soldiers - very bad form on the part of the "unbiased media."

One Tough Marine

You may have heard about a tough marine - Gunnery Sgt. Michael Burghardt. He has become the "poster boy" for the military's resolve in winning the war in the Middle East. Usually, such stories that explode through email inboxes all around the world are hoaxes. This is not, as determined by urban-legend-fact-finder Snopes.com.

Leading the fight is Gunnery Sgt Michael Burghardt, known as "Iron Mike" or just "Gunny". He is on his third tour in Iraq. He had become a legend in the bomb disposal world after winning the Bronze Star for disabling 64 IEDs and destroying 1,548 pieces of ordnance during his second tour. Then, on September 19, he got blown up. He had arrived at a chaotic scene after a bomb had killed four US soldiers. He chose not to wear the bulky bomb protection suit. "You can't react to any sniper fire and you get tunnel-vision," he explains. So, protected by just a helmet and standard-issue flak jacket, he began what bomb disposal officers term "the longest walk", stepping gingerly into a 5ft deep and 8ft wide crater. The earth shifted slightly and he saw a Senao base station with a wire leading from it. He cut the wire and used his 7in knife to probe the ground. "I found a piece of red detonating cord between my legs," he says. "That's when I knew I was screwed."

Realizing he had been sucked into a trap, Sgt Burghardt, 35, yelled at everyone to stay back. At that moment, an insurgent, probably watching through binoculars, pressed a button on his mobile phone to detonate the secondary device below the sergeant's feet. "A chill went up the back of my neck and then the bomb exploded," he recalls. "As I was in the air I remember thinking, 'I don't believe they got me.' I was just ticked off they were able to do it. Then I was lying on the road, not able to feel anything from the waist down."

His colleagues cut off his trousers to see how badly he was hurt. None could believe his legs were still there. "My dad's a Vietnam vet who's paralyzed from the waist down," says Sgt Burghardt. "I was lying there thinking I didn't want to be in a wheelchair next to my dad and for him to see me like that. They started to cut away my pants and I felt a real sharp pain and blood trickling down. Then I wiggled my toes and I thought, 'Good, I'm in business.' As a stretcher was brought over, adrenaline and anger kicked in. "I decided to walk to the helicopter. I wasn't going to let my team-mates see me being carried away on a stretcher." He stood and gave the insurgents who had blown him up a one-fingered salute. "I flipped them one. It was like, 'OK, I lost that round but I'll be back next week'."

Copies of a photograph depicting his defiance, taken by Jeff Bundy for the Omaha World-Herald, adorn the walls of homes across America and that of Col John Gronski, the brigade commander in Ramadi, who has hailed the image as an exemplar of the warrior spirit. Sgt Burghardt's injuries — burns and wounds to his legs and buttocks — kept him off duty for nearly a month and could have earned him a ticket home. But, like his father — who was awarded a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts for being wounded in action in Vietnam — he stayed in Ramadi to engage in the battle against insurgents who are forever coming up with more ingenious ways of killing Americans.

You might get upset that a picture of an obscene gesture is on this page. Sorry about that but this is the man I want fighting for me. What an amazing story of strength, inspiration and pride.

I pray he's a believer and if not, I pray that God uses this "second chance" in life to draw Burghardt to Himself.

NOTE: You can also read on Snopes.com the history of the gesture of raising your middle finger to show your anger, disgust or frustration. However, be warned - there are a few references in the article to an even more obscene word.

Son-In-Law at the End of the Spear

The son-in-law of one of "the other men" killed in 1956 while on a mission work has spoken about the controversial casting incident surrounding this movie. Click on the first link to read the comments but here is the email in its entirety:

I have been waiting for a national Christian leader to comment on “End of the Spear” and the casting of Chad Allen in the lead role. Their voices are strangely silent. After all of their build up, that we finally have a movie of our own, they seem to be frozen in indecision or mired in accepting silly arguments for Chad’s inclusion.

My name is Dan Kachikis. My deceased wife, Beth Youderian, was Roger Youderian’s daughter. Roger was one of those men who died on “Palm Beach” in 1956, at the end of a spear.

Beth and I were strong supporters of the work Mart and Steve have been doing. Beth would have been appalled at this decision and I feel betrayed.

I’m sure Chad is a nice guy, but he wasn’t the man for this role. Making the “story the Star” and using the best secular means to tell it, sounds like “the end justifies the means.” Would the Christian community be ok with doing the “Billy Graham Story” with an atheist pedophile because he had the best audition? Would Franklin Graham, James Dobson, Farwell and the rest, sit silent and just say that it’s the story that’s important? And why not have secular professionals perform your church music if it enhances the worship of God? If we cannot respond to this firmly, but in love, this is a sad day for the Christian church in the US. This film and it’s making have become a parable for the weakness of the American church. How dare we wonder why our divorce and “lives adrift” counts look just like the secular world. We talk one thing, and live something else.

What bothers me is that the story of what happened on the beach wasn’t just one man’s story. There were five men and five families. I don’t mind them taking “artistic liberty” with the way Nate Saint died. Factually, he was probably the first man dead on the beach, speared in the temple. Although Mart knew it was controversial to use Chad, he didn’t ask the other families. Why did he take this liberty with our hearts and our heritage?

My mother-in-law, Roger’s wife, was in Panama for part of the filming and was never told. She didn’t find out until 3 days after the film’s release. Apparently everyone else in Panama, the other wives, knew. I can only conclude that this was kept from her because my brother-in-law, Roger’s son, has not been a fan of this project. Had they asked both of them, they would have said “no.” Had I known, I would have said no, for myself and for Beth.

In Mart’s public correspondence in “Sharperiron” he mentioned that after Chad was on Larry King Live with John MacArthur, there was an opportunity to politely ask Chad to step back and Chad would have accepted this. Now I know they prayed, but when Mart begins mentioning practical concerns like, “We have locations in Panama that we will lose if we don't shoot on schedule,” I can’t help but understand this pragmatically. They would have lost time, missed deadlines and opening dates, they would have lost money, they would have lost locations, salaries. Practically speaking, the easier decision was pray, have a dream and say “yes” to Chad.

Will blessing come from the movie? Yes. God’s plans are bigger than we are. When a pastor living in adultery preaches, do people trust Christ? Yes. Does “fruit” or God’s blessing always justify us? No.

So now we have our Christian movie. But I will never buy the DVD, encourage anyone to watch it or consider it a part of my kids heritage. It is for me a symbol of a confused North American church. Many Christian groups will see it. Some will glory in the testimony, others will wish they had found out first that someone who doesn’t represent what they want their kids to be, plays the most important part in it. Maybe in four or five more weeks, after the film has made most if its revenue, someone will broaden the “sorry if you feel hurt” line to “we’re sorry we made such a selfish, spiritually blind decision.” Maybe the “big dogs” will find their voices and utter a protest.

But until then, maybe we can make Hollywood sit up and take notice. We’ll show ‘um what good Christian entertainment is all about. We’ll make ‘um notice us Christians. Oh, I think they already have, as we stand here with egg dripping down our faces. We showed ‘um.

In Christ,
Dan Kachikis

Prepare to be humbled!

Go here to view the Milky Way at 10 million light years from the Earth. Then move through space towards the Earth in successive orders of magnitude until you reach a tall oak tree just outside the buildings of the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory in Tallahassee, Florida. After that, begin to move from the actual size of a leaf into a microscopic world that reveals leaf cell walls, the cell nucleus, chromatin, DNA and finally, into the subatomic universe of electrons and protons.

24: 12PM to 1PM

I am now more convinced than ever that "24" is the best show on TV. It is the one show I will NOT miss - my friends and family should just be aware of that. In case you're new to the show, here's a run-down of what has happened so far (don't read if you don't want to know "the ending"):

As season 4 ended, everyone except former president David Palmer, Chloe, Tony and Michelle thought Jack had been killed by a Secret Service Agent. Of course, it was all a setup. Jack wasn't dead, well, technically he was dead, but not from a gunshot wound as they thought. They revived Jack from the drug they had given him to stop his heart and he escaped! He was on his own now, never to return....at least until season 5!

So, Season Five starts out a year and a half later with Jack working sporadically with oil crews under an assumed name with a single mom and her suspicious teenage son. Early on, the unthinkable happens as former President (and Jack Bauer fan) David Palmer is assassinated, former co-worker Michelle Dessler is killed in a car-bombing, and yet-another-former colleague Tony is seriously injured while attending to Michelle as another explosion occurs. This is all in the first 10 minutes!

The only one left who knew about Jack really being alive was Chloe and she is now on the run from suffering the same fate as the rest! To make it worse, a video is concocted showing Jack entering the building where the shot came from that killed President Palmer. Now CTU and the Oval Office believe Jack is responsible for the assassination and all guns are aimed his way. Of course, it will take more than the combined might of the United States to stop Jack.

Chloe, on the run, calls Jack and he commandeers a helicopter and gets back to Los Angeles as quickly as possible to help his friend and confidant. Naturally, while "commandeering" the helicopter, things don't go exactly according to plan and Jack ends up having to kidnap the son of the woman he has been seeing (all the while under the assumed name, never revealing his true identity). Best line of the first 4 hours? He tells the 15 year-old-boy, "The only reason you're not unconscious right now is because I don't want to carry you."

Well, to make a long story short, Jack rescues Chloe, kills the sniper who killed President Palmer (along with 4 or 5 of his henchmen) and then enlists Chloe to help him break back into the Penthouse where President Palmer's body is still lying in the middle of the crime scene (remember, they think Jack is responsible).

Somehow, Jack is able to evade all 125 Secret Service agents wearing only a stolen FBI jacket and some sunglasses (I guess Superman is right - glasses really do make a great disguise). He finds a lead with the help of Palmer's brother and takes off to the airport to follow up.

While in the airport, the terrorists plan begins in earnest. Hostages are taken as SOMEHOW 15 men are able to take control of an entire airport (though it is not LAX-size - more like Statesville sized). The teenage boy runs back inside to warn Jack and of course, he is the one chosen for exection. Jack saves his bacon and helps stop the terrorists thanks to his being in the "FLANK2" position (ask someone who watched the show what that means).

As usual, all the theatrics were just a cover for the next step in the plot - stealing canisters of nerve gas hidden (where else?) under the floor in an airport hangar. Thankfully, CTU has control of every single camera in the country and quickly found the man responsible for stealing the nerve gas.

The 5th hour (11:00 AM - 12:00 PM) begins with First Lady Logan (who must have had several mental episodes in her recent past) unconscious from the chloroform used on her by Walt Cummings, President Logan's Chief of Staff. Mrs. Logan found proof that President Palmer had contacted her about the terrorist plot. Of course, because of events in Mrs. Logan's past, no one believes her story about being attacked and the call log she had hidden in her blouse gone missing (no one else knew about the slip of paper she had hidden). Unfortunately this was the only proof that she had been telling the truth about the phone recording from President Palmer being tampered with. That callsheet would have launched an investigation and probably stopped the whole chain of events from happening.

The decision was made to have Mrs. Logan sent back to a Rehab center in Vermont. Apparently Mrs. Logan had mentioned before that she would rather die than go back to the Rehab facility. Upon discovering she was being shipped off to Vermont again, she slipped out of the bathroom window and escaped to hide in the stables.

As with any good 24 season, there must be a mole. MOles are EVERYWHERE - you can only trust Jack (and probably Curtis, Chloe and Edgar - everyone else is suspect). However, this season has a mole with a twist. Spencer (Chloe's boyfriend) had been placed inside CTU by Cummings under the guise of serving the President via Internal Affairs (or so it seems for now.) It was quickly discovered that Spencer was accessing classified information by hacking in with Level 5 access (when he was only supposed to have Level 3).

In the meantime he was, under the direction of Cummings, allowing in a "Server Technician" to CTU, presumably to help with surveillance on Jack, but, as it turns out he was an assassin sent to kill Jack. While Jack was talking to a recently-awakened Tony, he noticed the man approaching him from behind in a reflection of a heart monitor. A great hand-to-hand fight ensued with Jack receiving cracked ribs, and the assassin getting a new "neck ornament" installed courtesy of Jack. This episode ends with CTU hot on the trail of missing Military-grade nerve gas, apparently intended for the Kremlin and Jack preparing to go after Cummings.

It also looks as though Jack and Audrey might still have an interest in one another. However, Audrey continues her irritating habit of calling Jack right in the middle of a stressful event and "wanting to talk." To make things worse, she just stands there and emotes and doesn't talk. How does Jack stand that???

Walt Cummings finds out that Jack is coming after him and like any sane person - completely spills the beans. Cummings confessed to the President that he leaked information to the terrorists about the location of the nerve gas. However, he said that the nerve gas will never reach Russian soil because detonators will be triggered once the terrorists landed at their home base. This would prove the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Central Asia. It will allow America to increase its military presence in the area and guarantee the flow of oil.

He tells President Logan that he initiated the assassination of President Palmer in order to blow up some terrorist camps in Central Asia. Logan is going to turn him in until he figures out that "his administration" will look bad. As usual in this show, our government leaders opt for saving face and legacy and refuse to do what is right.

That only lasts until Jack shows up. Finally, this past Monday (Jan 30), we got to see more of Jack being Jack - without the beuaracracy of CTU slowing him down. If I ever have a secret to keep from the government, I hope they send ANYONE but Jack Bauer to "talk" to me. I would have spilled my guts the moment he drove his palm into my sternum - much less when he held a very sharp knife to my eye and demanded that Walt Cummings "TALK NOW!"

Jack finds out that Walt was also played for a fool. He thinks the nerve gas is going to be used on terrorists but the terrorists used him to get the nerve gas so they could use it on America. Oh, those sneaky terrorists.

Chloe finds information on the only ship leaving for Central Asia. Edgar narrows down which container the nerve gas could be in. Buchanan (head of CTU) sends Jack an image of the yellow tie man (the guy who stole the canisters and who was "working with" CUmmings). His real name is Ivan Erwich, a chemical engineer who joined his country’s separatist movement.

CTU finds the boxes containg the canisters but all the canisters are missing and Cummings' "inside man" is found dead. Jack has Cummings brought back in to see the video. Cummings swears that he doesn’t know what happened to the canisters but figures out “They must know!” (speaking of his plan to detonate the nerve gas canisters in their midsts once they return to their terrorist camp).

Then, Cummings’ cell phone rings, and he sees that it’s Schaeffer’s number. Jack has CTU monitor the call and he makes Cummings answer. It’s Erwich, the yellow tie man, who says that Schaeffer confessed everything. Cummings tells Erwich that this was an unsanctioned act and that no one else, including the President, was involved. “Your country is about to pay a very steep price,” Erwich warns.

Now, we wait for Hour Six (1:00 PM til 2:00 PM) as Jack goes looking for the nerve gas.

A few questions for you to answer:

1. Are Walt and Spencer really just "duped patriots?" The "coming next week" previews show Spencer working side-by-side with Chloe once again.
2. Is this a change in plans for the terrorists? Were they really going to use the nerve gas on Russia and are now going to use it on America because America was going to double-cross them?
3. Who is the person behind the bed that Jack has his gun trained on? The preview showed what appears to be the hands of a woman. Who is it? Nina Myers - back from the dead? That crazy bi-sexual assassin from SEVERAL past seasons? Daughter Kim turned rogue? Or maybe they're just dainty man-hands? Chase?