The World According to kcillini77

April 25, 2007

How to Screw Up Your Children

Filed under: America,Christianity,Family,Parenting — kcillini77 @ 11:06 pm

Not much of my own insight lately, but here is an article that I found to be good food for thought.

How Religious Parents Royally Screw Up Their Children by Michael Spencer


April 17, 2007

How valuable is a life?

Filed under: Abortion,America,Baby,Christianity,Ethics,Family — kcillini77 @ 12:06 pm

This weekend the Kansas City Star ran a wonderfully written story about a couple who was faced with a serious dilemma.  The baby growing inside the mother’s womb would be unable to live once born.  This family made the decision to take the baby to term and deliver, and allowed a Star reporter to follow them during much of the pregnancy.  The resulting work is amazing, and incredibly thought provoking.    The first link is for a video slideshow narrarated by the mother.  It tells the story through words and pictures in about six minutes.  The article is in 2 parts and is much more detailed than the slideshow.  I recommend experiencing them all, but feel free to go in any order you choose.  I’m already registered for the Kansas City Star Online, so I’m not sure if you will be required to register or not.  If so, just do it (it’s free).

Grab your tissues, take a seat, and step into this family’s pain and great joy.

Loving Zeke – Slide Show

Love to Last a Lifetime – Article, Pt. 1

‘Hi. This is Mommy’ – Article, Pt. 2

April 15, 2007

Faithbusters Pt. 2

Filed under: America,Christianity,Family — kcillini77 @ 7:21 pm

The Hypocrisy of Men

This was a topic I intended to address later, but as it hit close to home today, I will see how cathartic writing can be.

This morning our church was informed that our senior pastor was stepping down due to an adulterous affair. This all too common scenario has played out in churches large and small throughout the history of the church, and the pain is substantial. Trust is deeply betrayed, and the whole church suffers. Someone we respect has committed a sin of substantial consequence, and that consequence is far-reaching. In the face of such a situation, the charge of hypocrisy is often bandied about within and outside of the church: ‘How could someone tell me that such an action is wrong and be doing it himself? The church is full of hypocrites like that! I don’t want to be involved in a religion full of hypocrites!’

First and foremost, let me address the issue of hypocrisy itself. In light of the Christian message – that we all sin, that we all need Christ’s sacrifice to cover our sins, and that we only need repent and accept the gift of forgiveness to be in relationship with God – the charge of hypocrisy is only valid up until the point where the person in question admits the sin and repents of it. At that point they are an example not of hypocrisy, but of the grace of God. Often in a situation such as this, someone recognizing the fact that we are all susceptible to sin misapplies the phrase “There but for the grace of God go I.” Actually, it should be “There but for my choices go I – but God’s grace will sustain me even if I go there.”

That is what is so wonderful about the message of Christ. We are all susceptible to such sins – and God makes no promise to spare us from the consequences of our sin on Earth. Our pastor, his family, and the church are suffering and will continue to suffer because of it. But God’s grace, through Christ, will redeem him, his family, and us.

Is the hypocrisy of men a valid reason for losing faith or failing to come to Christ? Far from it – it is a strong indicator of why we all need Him. It may be cited as a faithbuster by many, but it is merely an excuse.

April 14, 2007


Filed under: America,Christianity,Evolution/I.D. — kcillini77 @ 5:04 pm


A new friend of mine who is highly skeptical but interested in the claims of Christianity posed a question to me that I had never been asked before. Since a fair question to a skeptic is “What evidence would it take for you to believe in Christ”, he asked me, “What evidence would it take for you to abandon your faith?” I didn’t have any reasonable off the cuff answer for him, so I told him I’d have to think about that. It’s been in the back of my mind lately, and so I’d like to explore the question by examining some potential faithbusters and how I have either come to grips with them or how I feel I would respond if the situation arises. This will no doubt become a multi-post effort. Okay, without further ado – here’s the first:

The Origin of the Universe and of Man: Could there ever come a point at which science could prove to me that the God I believe in does not exist? Obviously, science can never disprove the existence of God, but in theory it could rule out the need for God. Prevailing scientific theory already believes it has done so, but Darwinian thought is prefaced with the assumption that only natural causes are valid. Hence, macroevolution as currently presented has already ruled out the existence of God and only surmises that God is not necessary via circular reasoning.

The reasoning of intelligent design scientists such as Michael Behe, William Dembski, and others make sense to me. I don’t intend to rehash their arguments here – you can research them for yourselves if interested. What I can say about my beliefs is that at this point I think the idea that Genesis 1 is intended as a literal retelling of creation (i.e. seven days and the earth is only 6,000 years old) is a stubborn idea based on a lack of understanding of the genres employed in scripture. That doesn’t mean that God couldn’t have created the earth in seven days, but that given the fairly irrefutable scientific evidence surrounding us, those who hold to such a notion (ie. Ken Hamm) are turning a blind eye to science in support of one interpretation of a section of scripture. Science is not an enemy of faith.

The age of the earth may require a different interpretation of Genesis than believing it to be a scientific textbook. But one thing that is clear no matter how you read it is that God created man in his own image and made a clear distinction between animals and man. The metaphysics of our being – the very fact that we can reason and emote and think as we do – separates us from animals and is one thing that even the theory of evolution cannot ever explain.

But I’m starting to go off on a tangent. I began by questioning what would make me question or perhaps abandon my faith. Because I believe that God created man in His own image, a strong indication that we DID evolve from randomness to the complex individuals we are today would make me rethink some of my positions. One might say, ‘but you have already been convinced to a point that you would reason away any proof that I might show you.’ Fair contention. Here’s what I would need to see. Forget your faked or extremely imaginative “missing links.” Forget your spotted moths and other evidences of microevolution. Show me one species born from another one and I’ll have questions about my understanding of the nature of God. If everything is constantly evolving, there has got to be a species somewhere in the world ready to make the leap into a more progressive species. Where is it?

April 11, 2007

Imus Isn’t the Real Problem

Filed under: America,Race,Sports — kcillini77 @ 6:39 pm

Props to Jason Whitlock (not usually my favorite sportswriter) for this column.  Amen.

Blog at