Vern Poythress, who has taught at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia for 30 years, writes a semi-regular column for WORLD. In the current issue, he points out that when we place our hope in the latest technological gadgetry, we can easily lose perspective:

“Sometimes science only increases the problem. If, instead of seeing the wisdom of God in it, you listen to the propaganda of scientism, it will solemnly assure you that you inhabit a faceless, lonely, materialistic universe that is heading only toward ultimate death. And the gadgets of technology become Band-Aids to cover spiritual wounds and empty hearts. One more electronic game or one more DVD movie or one more pop song holds back the slide into boredom and depression. We search for one entertainment after another to keep back the dread of facing the hollow inside

“God will not be mocked (Galatians 6:7). If you sow a ‘me’-centered life, you will reap a harvest of emptiness. If you hope in the human wisdom of science, it will fail. Knowledge it may offer, by the truckload. But when such knowledge is detached from the God who gave it, it cannot give you wisdom to know yourself or to know God. The technology in which you hoped will mock you and testify to your ingratitude to God.”

You can read his entire column here.

In case you missed it this week, the International Olympic Committee banned Iraq’s Olympic team from next month’s games in Beijing because of the Iraqi government’s “political interference in the Olympic movement.” This “interference” was the naming of a new national Olympic committee that was not recognized by the IOC. According to the Iraqi government, a new committee was necessary because of corruption on the old one along with the fact that four committee members, including its chairman, had been kidnapped and their whereabouts were unknown. Of course, eight years ago, when Saddam Hussein’s brutal son Uday was in charge of the team—raping, torturing, and murdering athletes who fell short of his expectations—the IOC looked the other way.

An editorial from yesterday’s Washington Post describes the hypocrisy of the current situation:

“That [the IOC] has chosen to crack down on the democratically elected government that replaced the Hussein regime—while welcoming to Beijing Zimbabwe, Burma, Cuba, North Korea and Sudan, all of which it must consider innocent of any ‘political interference’ in sport—says a good deal more about the values of the international Olympic bureaucracy than it does about Iraq.”

Negotiations are underway to get the team reinstated. “We still have the hope the Iraqi flag will fly at the opening ceremony in Beijing,” said Jazair al-Sahlani, a spokesman for the disputed Iraqi Olympic committee.

We Americans may think we know a thing or two about political satire, but we don’t have anything on the Brits. Gerard Baker, the United States editor and an assistant editor of The Times of London, is, as they say, “spot on” in his column today, which chronicles Barack Obama’s world tour:

“And so it was, in the fullness of time, before the harvest month of the appointed year, the Child ventured forth—for the first time—to bring the light unto all the world.

“He travelled fleet of foot and light of camel, with a small retinue that consisted only of his loyal disciples from the tribe of the Media.”

I can’t do it justice in this short post, so read the whole thing here.

There’s never a shortage of discussion on this blog about same-sex marriage, but what about the problems facing men and women united in holy matrimony? These struggles are real and growing more problematic every day, affecting believers and nonbelievers alike. Fireproof, a film by the makers of the surprise hit Facing the Giants, takes on the societal issues of infidelity, addiction to porn, and divorce while offering a message of hope and redemption.

Blogger Tim Challies attended a screening the other night, and despite being stood up by the movie’s star, Kirk Cameron (Cameron’s flight was late), he offered this positive assessment:

“I enjoyed Fireproof and am excited to know that, come September 26, a film with such a good message will be debuting on hundreds or thousands of screens across America. It is a refreshing film with a refreshing message that speaks boldly to a culture infatuated with immorality and convinced that divorce is freedom. I am grateful for this film and pray for its success.”

Tim adds, “While the movie deals with difficult and serious themes, it does not take itself so seriously that it cannot pause for a few laughs now and again.” You can read the rest of his review here.

Here’s the movie’s trailer:

Although Cal Thomas is pictured on the left, and Bob Beckel is on the right, their political ideologies are just the opposite. In this day and age of polarization, have you ever wondered what brought these two highly opinionated men together to co-author Common Ground: How to Stop the Partisan War That Is Destroying America and to co-write USA Today columns that attempt to rise above the usual partisan bickering? In a fascinating interview with WORLD’s Marvin Olasky, Beckel shares how he and Thomas came to be fast friends despite their political differences:

“I was in the process of getting divorced. … I had a lot of difficulties. I had retreated to a farm in rural Maryland and refused to come back to Washington to do any television appearances. I got a call one day from Fox saying, would you come and do an appearance with Cal Thomas? And for some inexplicable reason, I said yes. Five different times I tried to call and cancel. And I couldn’t cancel.

“I reluctantly drove in and there was Cal. I knew him a bit, but not really well. He looks at me and says, ‘Is there something wrong?’ Right away. Instead of saying the normal Washington thing—’Good. Fine. Great’—I said, ‘Actually it’s not.’ And he said, ‘Let’s talk about it after we’ve done the show.’ He spent many hours with me after that and talked about faith but never pushed faith on me. He sent me a lot of books. I was one of those people who needed to have proof. I needed to see skin and bones. The idea of whales and arks and burning bushes and opening seas—all that was just in my mind Charlton Heston.

“One of the first books that Cal sent me was Evidence That Demands a Verdict. I began to read that. Cal continued to send me books. … Finally, Cal said, ‘Why don’t you come to church with me?’ Now, I hadn’t been to church in … well, I hadn’t been to church. So Cal takes me to Fourth Presbyterian Church in Washington, which is full of more right-wing Republicans than any church in all of Washington. [But] the message that day was a message that worked. It was about faith and belief and that there is a certain leap that you need to take but in the end what else is there? When you compare the rest of life, what else is there really? Slowly but surely it came to me that there was something there.”

In light of recent discussions on this blog about showing civility toward one another, I encourage you to read this interview in its entirety to see how these two men from opposite sides of the fence approach issues that divide America (and WORLDMagBloggers).

After all the hubbub over The New Yorker’s cover featuring the Obamas, the magazine’s Condé Nast rival Vanity Fair has posted on its blog a version featuring John and Cindy McCain. The blog post reads:

“We had our own presidential campaign cover in the works, which explored a different facet of the Politics of Fear, but we shelved it when The New Yorker’s became the ‘It Girl’ of the blogosphere. Now, however, in a selfless act of solidarity with our downstairs neighbors here at the Condé Nast building, we’d like to share it with you. Confidentially, of course.”

And, of course, this isn’t an actual Vanity Fair cover; just one created so that people like me would post something about it.

Many found the Obama cover offensive, including both the Obama and McCain campaigns. Do you find the McCain one offensive, as well?

John McCain’s campaign wants your input in selecting the best song to go along with the mainstream media’s affection for Barack Obama. Here are your choices:

 Song No. 1

Song No. 2

In the third in a series of articles examining the presidential candidates’ positions on key campaign issues, WORLD political reporter Jamie Dean takes a look at John McCain and Barack Obama’s stance on faith-based initiatives. Jamie writes:

Both Obama and McCain say they support the concept behind the White House program that enables some religious organizations that offer social services to receive federal funds, and each candidate says he would continue the program as president.

But Obama’s recent proposal revealed a key difference in how the candidates would implement the policy: Obama said groups that accept federal funds shouldn’t be allowed to take religious beliefs into consideration when hiring employees. The senator’s aides say the regulations should extend to sexual orientation as well. …

McCain’s campaign says the senator disagrees with Obama’s departure from current policy, but McCain has offered few details about how he would manage faith-based initiatives as president.

Read Jamie’s entire analysis here.

Campaign Issues series:
McCain and Obama on abortion
McCain and Obama on the economy

Editor’s Note (July 23): In the print edition of WORLD, a portion of the final paragraph of Jamie’s faith-based initiatives article was accidentally left out. The article’s ending should read:

Towey wants to hear more about both candidates’ plans, and he says the hiring issue won’t go away. He notes that a slew of social-services programs are currently log-jammed in Congress because of disagreements over how to apply the current hiring rules for faith-based groups. Without more clarity, he says, “The poor become the losers because they are denied access to some very effective programs.”

The complete article can be found here.

There’s lots of speculation out there today on how well the media is dealing with the two presidential candidates.

First Associated Press television writer David Bauder raises the issue of fairness in the media coverage of the two campaigns, using the major TV news anchors pursuit of Barack Obama on his global tour as a prime example. Bauder even quotes Rush Limbaugh on the subject:

“My prediction is that the coverage of Obama on this trip will be oriented toward countering the notion he has no idea what he is talking about on foreign policy and defense issues and instead will prop him up as a qualified statesman. McCain, on the other hand, is a known quantity on these issues and his position does not excite nor fit the mainstream media’s narrative on Iraq and Afghanistan, so they simply ignore it and him.”

The other controversy revolves around The New York Times‘ refusal of a John McCain op-ed response to a recent Obama editorial on the Iraq War. In an email to the McCain campaign, Times Op-ed Editor David Shipley demanded a rewrite, saying that McCain would “have to lay out a clear plan for achieving victory—with troops levels, timetables and measures for compelling the Iraqis to cooperate. And it would need to describe the senator’s Afghanistan strategy, spelling out how it meshes with his Iraq plan.” McCain spokesman Tucker Bounds replied, “John McCain believes that victory in Iraq must be based on conditions on the ground, not arbitrary timetables. Unlike Barack Obama, that position will not change based on politics or the demands of The New York Times.”

Barack Obama and John McCain have agreed to appear together on August 16 and answer questions posed by pastor Rick Warren at the Saddleback Civil Forum on Leadership and Compassion. After the two candidates appear briefly together, they’ll separately field a hour’s worth of questions from Warren, the author of The Purpose Driven Life. Obama, who last spoke at Saddleback in 2006, won the coin toss and will go first.