Tuesday, April 29, 2008
PASTOR ANDREW ROGERS EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH
Excellent Bible Teaching; Gifted leadership for today's church
Monday, April 28, 2008
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH JACKSONVILLE BEACHES
PLEASE COME VISIT WITH US.
We delve deeply into Scripture and we are a ferociously loving congregation. You will be warmly welcomed.
We delve deeply into Scripture and we are a ferociously loving congregation. You will be warmly welcomed.
Sunday, April 27, 2008
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH JACKSONVILLE
I LOVE my church. Simply excellent Bible teaching in the last couple of years and the people are very loving and friendly.
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH in JACKSONVILLE
SUNRISE COMMUNITY EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH
EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH in JACKSONVILLE
SUNRISE COMMUNITY EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Sunrise Community Church - Jacksonville, FL
My Church for the last 22 years has been SUNRISE COMMUNITY EVANGELICAL FREE CHURCH located in Atlantic Beach (Jacksonville) Florida.
We are a part of the EVANGELICAL FREE denomination. We are an autonomous congregation but hold to the 12 doctrines of the E.V. Free.
It is a terrific church. If you are ever in Jacksonville, please visit.
We are a part of the EVANGELICAL FREE denomination. We are an autonomous congregation but hold to the 12 doctrines of the E.V. Free.
It is a terrific church. If you are ever in Jacksonville, please visit.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Pretty Maids all in a row
The Eagles; one of my favorite songs. Joe Walsh seems to be an interesting guy. I think he's been pretty addictive but he plays a nice guitar and sings with his heart.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Dr. Patrick Devlin M.I.A.
Pat Devlin, I wish you'd call me sometime. I've missed seeing you for the last many years. I'll buy the lunch.
A counselor needs a counselor.
A counselor needs a counselor.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
.jpg)
Saturday, September 22, 2007
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
THEY LIKE IT
(From Nationalreview.com - the corner
"Because They Like It, That's Why [Michael Ledeen]
From an email, clear thinking for what lies ahead:
The real question remains “Why at all?” and the status of these would-be murderers as privileged post-graduates debunks the usual Lefty nostrums about terrorism arising inexorably from the poverty, oppression and “disenfranchisement” of the globe’s Darwinian short-bus. The answer lies more plainly in a memorable line of a memorable character. In 1971’s “Dirty Harry” the city of San Francisco is being terrorized by the rampant Scorpio serial killer. Clint Eastwood is in classic formulaic dialogue with the big shots down at City Hall who just don't understand what they’re dealing with. Eastwood says “You're crazy if you think you've heard the last of this guy. He's gonna kill again” and the archetypal skeptical D.A. character responds “How do you know?” (A little imagination here to invoke the Eastwood signature voice enhances the flavor of the closing fastball). “Because he likes it” answers Dirty Harry.
It doesn't matter a whit if these manqu̩ human bonfires are doctors, shepherds, bureaucrats or street vendors Рthis is what they do, and they do it because they like it. They are fanatics, subsumed in a crippling theology that fosters self-hatred and murder. Their economic conditions are irrelevant. The Left doesn't get this of course because Marxist materialism denies belief systems altogether, so they therefore must assume that all human behavior is derived from economic determinism. Tell that to Dr. Kill-dare.
These monsters wish to inflict as much pain and death on as many innocents as they can because… because they’re evil and they’re crazy. And it’s not pretty to say so, but the only reasonable and effective defense is to kill them first. "
"Because They Like It, That's Why [Michael Ledeen]
From an email, clear thinking for what lies ahead:
The real question remains “Why at all?” and the status of these would-be murderers as privileged post-graduates debunks the usual Lefty nostrums about terrorism arising inexorably from the poverty, oppression and “disenfranchisement” of the globe’s Darwinian short-bus. The answer lies more plainly in a memorable line of a memorable character. In 1971’s “Dirty Harry” the city of San Francisco is being terrorized by the rampant Scorpio serial killer. Clint Eastwood is in classic formulaic dialogue with the big shots down at City Hall who just don't understand what they’re dealing with. Eastwood says “You're crazy if you think you've heard the last of this guy. He's gonna kill again” and the archetypal skeptical D.A. character responds “How do you know?” (A little imagination here to invoke the Eastwood signature voice enhances the flavor of the closing fastball). “Because he likes it” answers Dirty Harry.
It doesn't matter a whit if these manqu̩ human bonfires are doctors, shepherds, bureaucrats or street vendors Рthis is what they do, and they do it because they like it. They are fanatics, subsumed in a crippling theology that fosters self-hatred and murder. Their economic conditions are irrelevant. The Left doesn't get this of course because Marxist materialism denies belief systems altogether, so they therefore must assume that all human behavior is derived from economic determinism. Tell that to Dr. Kill-dare.
These monsters wish to inflict as much pain and death on as many innocents as they can because… because they’re evil and they’re crazy. And it’s not pretty to say so, but the only reasonable and effective defense is to kill them first. "
Thursday, June 14, 2007
2007 Mustang GT
My son drove up last night in his brand-new, jet-black, Mustang GT - the classic "throaty purr" indicating the presence of 8 honkin' cyclinders creating 300 horses at 6000 rpm. Oh, it's nice.
He didn't listen to his old Dad. I said, light colors last longer and 6 cylinders will be all the horsepower you'll need.
I was WRONG. I'm glad he got the real thing. At this stage he can afford the gas (he's single) and every guy should have a hot car at least once in his life. It's good to be young when you're young. He bought like a 27 year old, not like a 57 year old and that's good.
Enjoy it Tom. You made the right choice.
He didn't listen to his old Dad. I said, light colors last longer and 6 cylinders will be all the horsepower you'll need.
I was WRONG. I'm glad he got the real thing. At this stage he can afford the gas (he's single) and every guy should have a hot car at least once in his life. It's good to be young when you're young. He bought like a 27 year old, not like a 57 year old and that's good.
Enjoy it Tom. You made the right choice.
Sunday, June 10, 2007
Life and death of Judy Garland (Francis Gumm)
(Found on James Lilek's blog in response to his post on Judy Garland Days in Grand Rapids)
The Case of Frances Gumm vs. Judy Garland
Submitted by CivilDefense on Sun, 06/10/2007 - 7:39am.
Do you really "...have to wonder how her life would have unfolded if she’d stayed" home in small-town middle America"?
With respect, I don't think so. Her life would have been better, far happier, and almost certainly much longer. (Her daughter, too, wouldn't have been a bundle of second-generation neuroses and inherited pathologies.)
Google the sad end in summary of Garland's story and you learn that she was just 47, full of sleeping pills, and that "everybody loved her" ... everybody but Frances Gumm, apparently. (As I recall, "everyone loved" Marilyn Monroe, too --- not to mention Elvis, Jim Morrison, etc. ad nauseum)
When you're very, very young, deeply impressed by what you see and unaware of what you don't yet know, Garland's meteoric life story has great appeal. Young people don't see those brassy, rouged twin whores, Glamour and Fame, as the flattering, life-sapping, withering harpies they truly are.
As you age, have a family, enjoy the profound pleasures of a modest life and the peaceful retreat of relative obscurity, I think most of us come to regard a life like that lived by Gumm/Garland as a curse and a tragedy ... even if it's set to music and recorded in Technicolor.
The Case of Frances Gumm vs. Judy Garland
Submitted by CivilDefense on Sun, 06/10/2007 - 7:39am.
Do you really "...have to wonder how her life would have unfolded if she’d stayed" home in small-town middle America"?
With respect, I don't think so. Her life would have been better, far happier, and almost certainly much longer. (Her daughter, too, wouldn't have been a bundle of second-generation neuroses and inherited pathologies.)
Google the sad end in summary of Garland's story and you learn that she was just 47, full of sleeping pills, and that "everybody loved her" ... everybody but Frances Gumm, apparently. (As I recall, "everyone loved" Marilyn Monroe, too --- not to mention Elvis, Jim Morrison, etc. ad nauseum)
When you're very, very young, deeply impressed by what you see and unaware of what you don't yet know, Garland's meteoric life story has great appeal. Young people don't see those brassy, rouged twin whores, Glamour and Fame, as the flattering, life-sapping, withering harpies they truly are.
As you age, have a family, enjoy the profound pleasures of a modest life and the peaceful retreat of relative obscurity, I think most of us come to regard a life like that lived by Gumm/Garland as a curse and a tragedy ... even if it's set to music and recorded in Technicolor.
Saturday, June 09, 2007
"Kakes" graduates
My youngest, "Kakes," graduated from college a month ago. She ended up with a triple major; English, Psych & Linguistics. Through-out her 4 years she received all A's except for one B+. I'm quite proud of my two children. Having graduated from college they should be able to find gainful employment and support my early retirement. That's my plan; not necessarily their's.
Anywho, congrats to Kakes for a job terrifically done.
Anywho, congrats to Kakes for a job terrifically done.
Sitting quietly
This morning while I was unloading my Motobecane racing bicycle, I "twinged" my back. Well I completed the 24 miles with my friend Ron but my back is warning me that I need to be very careful in the next couple of days. Such is life right?
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Live while you can
A D.J. Drummond posted the following on Wizbangblog.com. It is very perceptive.
On Death
Yesterday, I went to the funeral of my old church choir director, the sort of man who achieved greatness the old-fashioned way; he changed the lives of countless people around him by helping them find character strengths and skills they did not know they possessed, and he helped them grow from uncertain youth to a more confident adulthood. Today also happens to be the one-year anniversary of the death of my father. Also, in the past year I have been diagnosed with Cancer, been to several other funerals, and had some unpleasantly direct experience with how the present media culture treats the families of violent crime, so I am a bit more aware of death in my thoughts and ponderings than normal.
We live, we die. These are immutable facts in the human condition. I could make some profound religious or philosophical observation on what happens after we die, I suppose, but it would likely not be original, even if it was worth the effort. And it would be poor, cold comfort to the people left behind to mourn the loss. It's nice to be told that our loved ones are happy and doing well on the other side of the grave, and we might even take some comfort in the hope that we can believe in something more after the death of the body, but in the present we all have to face that death is right here, everywhere all the time. Dying means pain, the grotesque internment of the body as garbage, and the undesired change in reality for everyone connected to the deceased. C.S. Lewis, the Oxford Don and famous as a great apologist for Christianity in the modern age, wrote about the pain he endured when his wife Joy died from Cancer. It was, he felt, grossly unfair and painful to everyone, and it also seemed that everything someone said to him showed how little they understood the situation. If so great an optimist as Lewis felt this way during the passing of his wife, we should not be surprised that anyone else would feel the same suffering.
Yet for all of that, I cannot accept the notion that death should be the focus of a person's life. We are born and we must die, yes, but all that happens in between those events is of tremendous importance. Indeed, all of History comes down to men and women choosing ways to use their opportunities to act in ways that change Reality. Even when they sometimes had to die to do so. And many times, the people who changed the world the most, were far more than they seemed on the outside.
It's no great wisdom to say it, but I think it's a good idea to repeat the fact that living matters more than dying. Anyone can die, and we all get there eventually. Living, and living to a good end, is much much harder and significant. People mourn a person's death, specifically because the way they lived mattered.
By: DJ Drummond
On Death
Yesterday, I went to the funeral of my old church choir director, the sort of man who achieved greatness the old-fashioned way; he changed the lives of countless people around him by helping them find character strengths and skills they did not know they possessed, and he helped them grow from uncertain youth to a more confident adulthood. Today also happens to be the one-year anniversary of the death of my father. Also, in the past year I have been diagnosed with Cancer, been to several other funerals, and had some unpleasantly direct experience with how the present media culture treats the families of violent crime, so I am a bit more aware of death in my thoughts and ponderings than normal.
We live, we die. These are immutable facts in the human condition. I could make some profound religious or philosophical observation on what happens after we die, I suppose, but it would likely not be original, even if it was worth the effort. And it would be poor, cold comfort to the people left behind to mourn the loss. It's nice to be told that our loved ones are happy and doing well on the other side of the grave, and we might even take some comfort in the hope that we can believe in something more after the death of the body, but in the present we all have to face that death is right here, everywhere all the time. Dying means pain, the grotesque internment of the body as garbage, and the undesired change in reality for everyone connected to the deceased. C.S. Lewis, the Oxford Don and famous as a great apologist for Christianity in the modern age, wrote about the pain he endured when his wife Joy died from Cancer. It was, he felt, grossly unfair and painful to everyone, and it also seemed that everything someone said to him showed how little they understood the situation. If so great an optimist as Lewis felt this way during the passing of his wife, we should not be surprised that anyone else would feel the same suffering.
Yet for all of that, I cannot accept the notion that death should be the focus of a person's life. We are born and we must die, yes, but all that happens in between those events is of tremendous importance. Indeed, all of History comes down to men and women choosing ways to use their opportunities to act in ways that change Reality. Even when they sometimes had to die to do so. And many times, the people who changed the world the most, were far more than they seemed on the outside.
It's no great wisdom to say it, but I think it's a good idea to repeat the fact that living matters more than dying. Anyone can die, and we all get there eventually. Living, and living to a good end, is much much harder and significant. People mourn a person's death, specifically because the way they lived mattered.
By: DJ Drummond
Friday, April 20, 2007
The insanity of feminism
Al Mohler and Kathleen Parker clarify our insanity:
"Tragically, the most damaging element of Ahmadinejad's media triumph was handed to him by the Royal Navy in the person of Leading Seaman Faye Turney, the only woman among the captives and the mother of a 3-year-old daughter.
Her presence among the captives taken from the British patrol vessel gave Ahmadinejad the opportunity to make this observation:
"You will know that among the detainees there is one lady who is a mother of a child. Why is it that the most difficult work like patrolling at sea should be given to a woman?
"Why is there no respect for motherhood? Why does the West not value its women?"
Ahmadinejad's questions still reverberate around the Muslim world. Nothing could more effectively demonstrate the immorality of Western values before Muslim eyes than this -- a mother of a little girl sent as a warrior.
As Kathleen Parker remarked in The Washington Post:
On any given day, one isn't likely to find common cause with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He's a dangerous, lying, Holocaust- denying, Jew-hating cutthroat thug -- not to put too fine a point on it.
But he was dead-on when he wondered why a once-great power such as Britain sends mothers of toddlers to fight its battles.
Driven by a fanatical ideology of feminism, the West has turned its back on a reality as basic as motherhood. We have adopted a new morality that insists -- nature's obstinacy notwithstanding -- that there is no difference between men and women. This produces mothers of babies and toddlers in uniform and in the killing zones."
"Tragically, the most damaging element of Ahmadinejad's media triumph was handed to him by the Royal Navy in the person of Leading Seaman Faye Turney, the only woman among the captives and the mother of a 3-year-old daughter.
Her presence among the captives taken from the British patrol vessel gave Ahmadinejad the opportunity to make this observation:
"You will know that among the detainees there is one lady who is a mother of a child. Why is it that the most difficult work like patrolling at sea should be given to a woman?
"Why is there no respect for motherhood? Why does the West not value its women?"
Ahmadinejad's questions still reverberate around the Muslim world. Nothing could more effectively demonstrate the immorality of Western values before Muslim eyes than this -- a mother of a little girl sent as a warrior.
As Kathleen Parker remarked in The Washington Post:
On any given day, one isn't likely to find common cause with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He's a dangerous, lying, Holocaust- denying, Jew-hating cutthroat thug -- not to put too fine a point on it.
But he was dead-on when he wondered why a once-great power such as Britain sends mothers of toddlers to fight its battles.
Driven by a fanatical ideology of feminism, the West has turned its back on a reality as basic as motherhood. We have adopted a new morality that insists -- nature's obstinacy notwithstanding -- that there is no difference between men and women. This produces mothers of babies and toddlers in uniform and in the killing zones."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
