ARE THE NO KINGS RALLIES JUST A WARM-UP? PLUS, AN UPCOMING SERIES THAT IS NOT COMPLETELY UNRELATED.

King David Playing the Harp by Gerard van Honthorst

You may have heard of the "No Kings" protests. They seem to think that President Trump is acting like King Trump. I personally believe its because he's doing what he said he'd do (politicians aren't supposed to do that, are they?) 

The biggest issues that are driving that are the views on illegal immigration and transsexuallism. Sorry, but mind translates these respectively as condoning law-breaking and as telling God He goofed in creating us. 

Before I go further, I don't consider myself a MAGA fan; I might even identify more with the label "Deplorable." I have questions on how Iran is being handled or some of his other policies. Like every other President between Washington and whoever we elect in 2228 (no, not a typo) he has both good and bad points. 

In reality, both major parties act like they're monarchs. We currently have a country divided, with both sides wanting their rights protected to the point it removes protection of the rights of their opponents. My opinion, but are any No-Kings crowd ready to stand up for me not using the right pronouns or not wanting my taxes to pay for Planned Parenthood or make sure that we keep the bad guys from crossing our border?

It hit me, though. The reality is President Trump is just a President, not a King, and answerable to the true King of all the earth, Jesus of Nazareth. Former VP candidate Sen. Tim Kaine argued that he felt better with rights coming from the Government preferable to being given by a creator. Could it be that a lot of our leaders as well as a good portion of U.S. citizens want to be accountable only to themselves and not the King of Kings and Lord of Lords?

Yes, I ended on a question. I'm not sure I've got the answer. Do you have it? Please let me know.

But now, I'll look at my plans for the blog. Yes, it's mostly reviews and a few opinion pieces like this one, and I'm not finding time to do interviews. But I do have in my mind a series. It's inspired by a comment the Southern Baptist University's Presiden Al Mohler said on The Briefing, that many believe creating art requires transgression, both in their work and in their lifestyle. It crosses over into my interest in the arts, which is a major reason for me starting this blog, and thoughts on heroes (super and otherwise). So I'm going to hopefully have that possibly in May, or maybe in June or July (no later than that). 

Let me know what you think. I'm looking forward to writing the series, and hope you are to reading it as well.

MOVIE REVIEW - DIXNEY PIXAR "THE INCREDIBLES" AND "INCREDIBLES 2"

I'll confess - I haven't been interested in most Pixar films. So far, I've only watched three, two of which I thoroughly enjoyed, the third not so much ("Finding Nemo"). In case you can't guess, the two I liked were "The Incredibles" and "Incredibles 2."

"The Incredibles" came out in 2005, the same year as "The Fantastic Four," which was interesting because three of the Incredibles had power matches with the FF (super strength, elasticity, and invisibility). However, the two movies had nothing in common. The Incredibles not only has the action you'd expect from a superhero movie, but it also deals with family issues, plus some good philosophy: ... I was going to give a quote, but that would have spoiled it.

Fourteen years later, Disney/Pixar released "Incredibles 2." It had big shoes to fill, and succeeded, keeping the charm that was in the original. There are hints of being a formula movie comparing the plots, but they both have their unique emphasis. And most of the time, the original is better and more enjoyable than the sequel, but this is an exception.

One difference between these movies are that they're rated PG, no "13" added to it. The Marvel and DC movies are always rated PG-13, with a couple pushing the envelope for an R rating. One possible reason "the Incredibles" movies earned the straight PG is because it is aimed to be a movie that parents can feel comfortable bringing the whole family to. Now, as you'd expect, there are things that are aimed more at adults in both films, but if I had kids I would gladly watch the film with them. 

I thoroughly recommend both movies.

THE SPIRITUAL STATE OF EGGS AND RABBITS AND WHETHER CHRISTIANS SHOULD CELEBRATE THE PASSOVER

The rabbit gets enough criticism at Easter time, but I thought I'd add the Christmas controversy to the table. Photo by yours truly at Cincinnati Zoo and Botanical Park, Oct. 22.

It's that time of the year... well, one of the times. Let me share three concepts I saw on one FB thread, from different authors:

• Rabbits and Eggs are pagan.
• Rabbits and Eggs are Biblical.
• Christians should observe the Passover, since Jesus did.

If you're a regular reader of the blog, I have at least one installment each year dealing whether Christmas and Easter are holidays Christians should observe. Well, when I saw this, I thought it was time for another.

Anybody besides me crack up (pun unintentional) about the two statements about rabbits and eggs? Both hit the edge of credibility. 

Given, pagans use rabbits and eggs as fertility symbols. But does that mean they're pagan? Uh, no. Who created the rabbits and the eggs? Sorry, but I think it's ridiculous to call rabbits pagans. Same with eggs.

So are they Biblical? Well, if you look above, I gave all the Biblical references that the authors gave on the rabbits and eggs quotes. What? There aren't any Scripture references? No, they didn't give any. A commenter noted that the one who said rabbits and eggs were Biblical gave NO references to prove his point. My hunch is he's one of the troublemakers who make a ridiculous statement to start heated debate and disappears. (By the time I got to it, the comment option had been turned off for that thread.) 

I'm one who prefer using the term "Resurrection Sunday" instead of Easter. There is an instance in the KJV where "Easter" appears in Acts 12:4, but the Greek Word is pascha, the word elsewhere and in all other versions is translated passover. I also don't think Easter eggs and bunnies have a place in the church. However, Paul states that he who observes the day does so to the Lord, and the one who does not observe the day, to the Lord he does not observe it. (Romans 14:6). Why can't we aceept those who disagree? Maybe because we like disputing doubtful things (Jubilee Bible says "doubtful discernment) (Rom. 14:1).

Let's move from Resurrection Sunday to Passover. I read that in the Nicene Council one other item decided on was to separate the dating for Easter from the Passover, in spite of the fact that they're connected together. But should a Christian celebrate the Passover? Or should he abstain? Or is it another of those things that we shouldn't divide over?

I'll definitely go with it not being something to divide over. But let me deal with some arguments.

First, dealing with those who say Christians should observe the Passover. I heard a conversation where someone used 1 Corinthians 5:7-8 to say it commands Christians to observe the feast. Here's the passage: "Therefore purge out the old leaven, that you may be a new lump, since you truly are unleavened. For indeed Christ, our Passover, has been sacrificed for us. Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, nor with the leaven of malice and wickedness, but with unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

To me, it's obvious it's not talking about the official celebration of Passover and the Feast of Unleavened bread. Thus, it's not a command for Gentile Christians to act like Jews. 

Now, Christians often say that Passover has been replaced with the Eucharist/Communion/The Lord's Supper. Sorry, I don't see that in the text. They are two different events observed differently. Passover is an annual event, starting a week of celebration. Communion is offered with differing frequency. Becky and I both grew up in churches that observed communion weekly. When we got into Baptistic Churches, it was observed on the first Sunday of the month. I attended a church that at first had communion irregularly, but realized it was so rare they celebrated it on the first Sunday. Another decided to go from monthly to quarterly. None of those options are commanded or condemned in Scripture.

A couple of years, though, I was reading through Exodus, and there was something that hit me when God was giving instructions for the Passover (Exodus 12:43-49). Participation was limited to households where all the men have been circumcised. Is that a law we should observe? It does make me question whether Gentile Christians are to observe the Passover. On the other hand, one can try to argue that in the Age of Grace it refers to the circumcision of the heart, though it sounds like the argument of someone who wants to keep the Passover because he has the freedom to.

But I will again put in a plug for Easter caroling. One book suggested it, and I thought it sounds great and uplifiting.