Merry Christmas

No matter what the secular world keeps proclaiming, Jesus is still the reason for the season. Have a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Homosexual agenda versus God's Word

A New Zealand church billboard with the image of Christ in the manger with a rainbow style halo and the caption "It's Christmas. It's time for Jesus to come out," has added to the homosexual controversy versus God's word. Reverend Glynn Cardy claimed the billboard is merely trying to uplift the "humanity of Jesus" (HuffingtonPost). And he is quoted as saying, "The fact is we don't know what his sexual orientation was" (Huffington Post). And Cardy then questions whether it would matter if Jesus was gay... and would that matter to us.

Additional emphasis to the gay agenda is brought forth in the content of Bishop Gene Robinson, the first openly homosexual bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church. During an interview with Jon Stewart, Robinson -- who was promoting his book "God Believes in Love: Straight Talk About Gay Marriage" -- side-stepped actually calling Jesus gay, but then put as much innuendo regarding the relationship Christ had with his male disciples as he could. And he is quoted as saying, "Now I'm not saying Jesus was gay, but let's be careful (not) to rope this guy in for a husband, wife and 2.2 children model for family" (Huffington Post).

It makes you wonder what is being taught in the seminaries these days; it cannot be the Word of God. The Word of God is very clear on homosexuality being considered a detestable act, such as the following:

"Do not practice homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman. It is a detestable sin." -- Leviticus 18:22 (NLT)

"If a man practices homosexuality, having sex with another man as with a woman, both men have committed a detestable act. They must both be put to death, for they are guilty of a capital offense." -- Leviticus 20:13 (NLT)

And you can find similar examples of homosexuality being condemned or shown as sinful in the following verses: Genesis 19:1-11, Judges 19:16-24, 1 Kings 14:24 and 15:12, 2 Kings 23:7, Romans 1:18-32, 1 Corinthians 6:9-11, 1 Timothy 1:8-10, and Jude 7.

It would appear that Cardy and Robinson have not gotten to those areas of their bibles yet. And when both so-called religious leaders defend homosexuality in a biblical context, and even have the audacity to hint at Christ being "sinful" it clearly shows that they have not read the parts of the bible that specifically warn of not adding to or taking away from God's Word, such as the following:

"Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the Lord your God that I give you." -- Deuteronomy 4:2

"See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it." -- Deuteronomy 12:32

"Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar." -- Proverbs 30:6

And you can find similar verses in Revelations 22: 7, 9-10, and 18.

There really is no controversy over homosexuality in God's Word, it is very clear. The controversy is only in the minds of those who do not want to obey God because it condemns their sinful desires. And, like spoiled children, they will continue to throw their tantrums for all to hear and see in the hopes that they can get enough people frustrated so they will give them what they want just to shut them up. And, unfortunately, that tactic appears to be working since so many other groups want their sinful desires to be tolerated as well.

It appears that the majority of people no longer strive to be the best they can be; instead, they strive to see how much they can get away with. That is a poor example of human nature, and an even worse recipe for a happy life.

I pray they realize that true freedom comes through the grace and love of God and not through the chains of human addictions.

(Note: this is the same church that put up the scandalous Joseph sleeping with Mary billboard in 2009)

What lesson does it teach?

Did you see the story of the family evicted from section 8 housing because the 13-year-old son stole a pair of shoes from K-mart to keep his feet warm? A single-mother and her three children have been told to vacate their Grand Junction apartment in two weeks, right around Christmas, because of the incident that had nothing to do with the apartment complex.

By no means am I condoning the act of stealing, but what type of lesson has the system just taught this family (especially the young kids)? This boy, after being forced to wear tattered shoes because of the family's poverty, which kept his feet cold and hurting, was tempted (as any child would be) to find a way to relieve the pain. And he made a wrong choice. But the system that blindly and callously casts the entire family, including the boy's two younger siblings, out in the dead of winter is a far greater criminal act than what the child did.

The manager of the Garden Village Apartments in Grand Junction said in a statement to the media that "shoplifting violated the family's lease agreement" -- (Huffington Post). Any criminal activity, even off the premises, is grounds for immediate eviction. But what they fail to take into account is the extenuating circumstance. This was not a case of a hard-nosed delinquent trying to get over on the system; it was a poor child with hurting feet trying to ease the suffering. And now that child is riddled with guilt over his mother and siblings being cast out into the cold for something he did.

The act of shoplifting should not be condoned, but the manager missed a great opportunity to make a huge difference in the life of both this boy and his family. Instead of evicting them it would have been much better to let the boy see the error of his ways, and then give him the opportunity to make up for his mistake by working around the apartment complex (about two weeks), and then paying him enough to buy a pair of shoes. The boy would learn he had to take responsibility for his actions and that it is better to work for things you need instead of stealing. And his younger siblings would have seen the lesson as well, and their mother would have felt that someone in society actually cared about her circumstance and attempted to help instead of simply adding to her burden because it's easier for the manager and property owners to callously cast an adult and three children into the cold: hoping they can find a shelter that will take them.  

The action taken by the manager and property owners has only reinforced the belief to this family, especially the children, that nobody cares for them so they need to look out for themselves. And that kind of belief will create the temptation for more bad choices.

The majority of Americans use to have compassion and think about others more than themselves, but those days appear to be long gone. That's what happens when you take a loving God out of a society's belief system.

Obama art: The liberal "truth" in all its unholy glory

If you are one of the few Christians who have not heard or seen the artistic rendition of Barack Obama as the liberals pretend crucified savior, be thankful. It is not worth your time. As a Christian I find it absurd and humorous, though obviously not in the way the artist, Michael D'Antuono, intended. It is only humorous in the audacity and foolishness of such a ludicrous comparison; especially given the knowledge that this president is probably the most anti-Christian president of all time (which his record confirms).

The artist claims that the crucifixion of the president was intended metaphorically, and no comparison to Jesus was meant. And yet, isn't it odd that he chose to depict Obama in the same style and posture of crucifixion, crown of thorns and all, that is specifically linked with Jesus? History has many other methods of crucifixion that the artist could have chosen if he truly did not want his artwork to be contrary to Christ and Christians. The crown of thorns is a major identifier with the crucifixion of Jesus because it was done as a mocking action by the Roman soldiers in response to the people calling Jesus the King of the Jews. Therefore, you do not see it at crucifixions prior to Christ. And, as an artist, who naturally would research his piece, D'Antuono most likely knew this.

Isn't it funny that all the blasphemous artwork against Jesus is done by liberal artists that claim to be a part of a political view that wants tolerance for all? And yet, the artist claims that his First Amendment rights should override someone else's feelings. That's tolerance for you, a real fine upstanding example of caring about others. And isn't it equally funny that the same artists that have the so-called "guts" to make light of Christ's crucifixion with a pretend savior like Obama, or by utilizing a vat of urine as we saw earlier, never have the guts to mock Allah or Mohamed in the same fashion and put it in a public event in a Muslim country? I suppose some artists will always have to resort to the artistic version of the "shock jock" when their talent is mediocre. It's the only way they can get recognized and keep their career going.

A Sad Day, Indeed

I guess the majority of Americans feel 16 trillion dollars in debt isn't quite enough from this president, so they gave him four more years to really sock it to us. Well, at least my conscience is clear. But I wonder how many of those who voted for him will end up on their knees before the end of this term. It will be interesting to see, though sad all the same.

It is indeed a sad day... and such a shame, cause this use to be such a great country. Unfortunately, as we are all seeing, when a country loses its morals it equally loses its way. However, do not let it stop you from praying for the country and our leaders. We need to get back on track... a forward moving track, that is.

Keep the faith.

Enemy of Christians?

I was sent the following list in an email from a concerned Christian brother, and I feel it is important enough to place in my blog just as it came to me, especially at this time before the election. And I say, don't just vote your conscience... pray, and vote the way God has you vote.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



David Barton of Wall builders.com <http://wallbuilders.com/> has come out with a list explaining why Barack Obama is the most biblically hostile President of all time. While most of these stories have been seen before, seeing them all laid out in one list is pretty astonishing.

Note: there are 4 main categories of hostility, with numerous items listed under each

1. Acts of Hostility Toward People Of Biblical Faith:

a. April 2008: – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who are not like them.”

b. February 2009: – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, and fully implements the plan in February 2011.

c. April 2009: – When speaking at Georgetown University, Obama orders that a monogram symbolizing Jesus’ name be covered when he is making his speech.

d. May 2009: – Obama declines to host services for the National Prayer Day (a day established by federal law) at the White House.

e. April 2009: – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three.

f. October 19, 2010: – Obama begins deliberately omitting the phrase about “the Creator” when quoting the Declaration of Independence;– an omission he has made on no less than seven occasions.

g. November 2010: – Obama misquotes the National Motto, saying it is “"E pluribus Unum"” rather than "“In God We Trust,"” as established by federal law.

h. January 2011: – After a federal law was passed to transfer a WWI Memorial in the Mojave Desert to private ownership, the U. S. Supreme Court ruled that the cross in the memorial could continue to stand, but the Obama administration refused to allow the land to be transferred as required by law, and refused to allow the cross to be re-erected as ordered by the Court.

i. February 2011: – Although he filled posts in the State Department, for more than two years Obama did not fill the post of religious freedom ambassador, an official that works against religious persecution across the world; he filled it only after heavy pressure from the public and from Congress.

j. April 2011: – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.

k. August 2011: – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.

l. November 2011: – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.

m. November 2011: – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech.

n. December 2011: – The Obama administration denigrates other countries’ religious beliefs as an obstacle to radical homosexual rights.

o. January 2012: – The Obama administration argues that the First Amendment provides no protection for churches and synagogues in hiring their pastors and rabbis.

p. February 2012: – The Obama administration forgives student loans in exchange for public service, but announces it will no longer forgive student loans if the public service is related to religion.

2. Acts of Hostility From The Obama-Led Military Toward People Of Biblical Faith:

a. June 2011: – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery.

b. August 2011: – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD;– a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).

c. September 2011: – Air Force Chief of Staff prohibits commanders from notifying airmen of programs and services available to them from chaplains.

d. September 2011: – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”

e. November 2011: – The Air Force Academy rescinds support for Operation Christmas Child, a program to send holiday gifts to impoverished children across the world, because the program is run by a Christian charity.

f. November 2011: – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans.

g. February 2012: – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point dis-invites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian.

h. February 2012: – The Air Force removes “God” from the patch of Rapid Capabilities Office (the word on the patch was in Latin: Dei).

i. February 2012: – The Army orders Catholic chaplains not to read a letter to parishioners that their archbishop asked them to read.

3. Acts of Hostility Toward Biblical Values:

a. January 2009: – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations.

b. January 2009: – President Obama’s nominee for deputy secretary of state asserts that American taxpayers are required to pay for abortions and that limits on abortion funding are unconstitutional.

c. March 2009: – The Obama administration shut out pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit.

d. March 2009: – Obama orders taxpayer funding of embryonic stem cell research.

e. March 2009: – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA, the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations.

f. May 2009: – The White House budget eliminates all funding for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive” sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies and abortions. He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets.

g. May 2009: – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use racism in their “criminal” activities.

h. July 2009: – The Obama administration illegally extends federal benefits to same-sex partners of Foreign Service and Executive Branch employees, in direct violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

i. September 16, 2009: – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”

j. July 2010: – The Obama administration uses federal funds in violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution to include abortion.

k. August 2010: – The Obama administration Cuts funding for 176 abstinence education programs.

l. September 2010: – The Obama administration tells researchers to ignore a judge’s decision striking down federal funding for embryonic stem cell research.

m. February 2011: – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

n. March 2011: – The Obama administration refuses to investigate videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers get abortions for victimized underage girls.

o. July 2011: – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military, reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778.

p. September 2011: – The Pentagon directs that military chaplains may perform same-sex marriages at military facilities in violation of the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

q. October 2011: – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion.

4. Acts Of Preferentialism For Islam:

a. May 2009: – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan.

b. April 2010: – Christian leader Franklin Graham is dis-invited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer Event because of complaints from the Muslim community.

c. April 2010: – The Obama administration requires rewriting of government documents and a change in administration vocabulary to remove terms that are deemed offensive to Muslims, including "jihad," "jihadists," "terrorists," "radical Islamic," etc.

d. August 2010: – Obama speaks with great praise of Islam and condescendingly of Christianity.

e. August 2010: – Obama went to great lengths to speak out on multiple occasions on behalf of building an Islamic mosque at Ground Zero, while at the same time he was silent about a Christian church being denied permission to rebuild at that location.

f. 2010: – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.

g. October 2011: – Obama’s Muslim advisers block Middle Eastern Christians’ access to the White House.

h. February 2012: – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do.

Many of these actions are literally unprecedented -- – this is the first time they have happened in four centuries of American history. The hostility of President Obama toward Biblical faith and values is without equal from any previous American president.

God or no God?

In 2004, the Democratic Party Platform had seven references to God. In 2008, there was only one reference to God. And most of us have heard by now that during the initial "acts of business" at this year's Democratic Convention the final reference to God (along with recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital) was removed from their platform. The uproar that followed was instantaneous. Ironically, however, the majority of that vocalization came from Republicans.

 

 image is from historicwings.com



It is not ironic because Republicans (for the most part) proudly proclaim their faith in God and believe this country was originally founded on godly principles (with obvious exceptions). It is ironic because the Democratic Party has proclaimed to be the "working man's" political party for many decades (though it's highly debatable). Yet, the middle-class and below, who proclaim faith in God by a majority, are clearly being duped by the Democratic leaders who just as clearly do not.

Yes, the one reference to God and Jerusalem being acknowledged were eventually put back into the platform: but only after a week of bad political press that they were trying to squelch. And even then it required three consecutive rounds of voting before it was re-accepted. And a cacophony of "boos" by many so-called Democratic Party leaders erupted immediately following the "affirmative" vote over one pitiful reference to God in a country that claims to be founded on godly principles.

 

image is from firstjohnfourfive.wordpress.com

 



If you truly believe in God it is clearly hypocritical to imagine we, as the creations, can vote the Creator out of the political arena with a "yay" or "nay" and a stroke of a pen. It is equally hypocritical to believe there should be a total separation of church and state. A believer cannot vote against what they believe God stands for. If they do, than they honestly do not believe their god is a holy god. After all, if you say you believe in the biblical God, and that God condemns specific things, yet you still vote for them, what does that tell you? It tells you that you don't believe your god and you do not fear your alleged god's consequence to your disobedience: either he's not holy or he's too weak to bother you (according to that type of belief and action). But if your god is so weak and unholy how can he save you? In fact, how can such a god be of any use to you?

Personally, I have witnessed events that defy the laws of nature, so I believe in God. That belief is special to me. My faith has helped me endure great adversity and pain. And I know that some day I must answer for all my thoughts, choices, and actions. So I will not vote for any political leader or party that wants to remove God from their decisions.

Olympics: a breath of media fresh air

Getting caught up in the Olympics is easy to do. The thrill of victory. The heartbreak of defeat. And the rush of seeing our country do well. After all, it is a patriotic affair. And who doesn't get in touch with their humanity when the inspirational stories are told? The first double amputee running in the regular Olympics (from South Africa). A young American who made it on the track team after having both legs blasted with buckshot. Numerous athletes from various countries competing after having operations or losing loved ones. Each of these inspirational stories, with very few exceptions over the years, can have a positive affect on us if we take them to heart. They are lessons to learn, lessons to pass on, or simply a positive uplifting tale that allows us to relish the good in humanity for awhile.

from MadHatter 17

from Deviant Art Website



Dwelling on the positive in humanity is far better than filling our minds with all the negative stories you hear daily on the news. In fact, when a scandal pops up during the Olympics, for the most part, they try to play it down: which is the exact opposite at any other time.

I am not saying that the negatives during the Olympics are not reported, of course they are, but it does not over-shadow the rest of the games, achievements, and stories like it does when the Olympics are not going (with a few exceptions).

from Pazzles.net



It would be great if all forms of the media would play down the negative stories in favor of positive, inspirational, and uplifting topics. After all, if you take the spotlight (or celebrity status) and other benefits away from all negative behavior we would see a decline in such behavior. Unfortunately, the media in this country (and all others) loves to reward bad behavior with celebrity status: the more inhumane the behavior the more media coverage it receives.

Nearly every textbook relating to human psychology touches on the simple truth that if bad behavior is continually reinforced or rewarded the behavior will continue, and often increase. In other words, it is no surprise that as our laws become more liberal and progressive -- following a more liberal and progressive society that does not want to insult anyone, including criminals, and giving their abnormal behavior more tolerant and clinical names -- we will continue to see the "progressive" decline of this once great nation.

Remember the adage "we are only as strong as our weakest link." As long as more and more people in this country accept negative human behavior -- whether as a participant or tolerating it through inactivity -- more links in the American chain will weaken and be ready to crumble when eventually put to the test.

from communities.washingtontimes.com



So I hope you enjoyed these Olympics. It was the rare breath of fresh air when positive stories out number negative in media coverage. And if your smart you will learn the lesson that positives can teach. Sadly, the media never seem to grab hold of that fact... except during the Olympics.

Chrislam: a decision we all need to make

We have been hearing about the Chrislam religion for several years now. It is the unifying push by many religious leaders to combine the Muslim and Christian beliefs into a single religion, and it started with a so-called simple comparison of similarities between the two. Many people have even voiced the opinion that Chrislam may be the foretold One-World religion. Thus, it is clear that all believers need to take a stand on this issue. It is too important individually and collectively to leave to chance, or worse... like leaving it only to the radicals.

photo from Time Magazine





There are some high-profile people on both sides of the issue. However, the presense of the high-profile personalities appears to be detrimental to the primary issue. As I perused the online fare regarding this topic I found that the issue has become more of a personality war instead of a search for the truth. A perfect example is the warring factions of Jack Van Impe versus Rick Warren and Robert Schuller. The media hype surrounding this "he said - they said" controversy has become so bitter that roughly 90% of the responses are simply choosing sides between the various personality camps. The Van Impe followers blast Warren and Schuller's progressive stance in buddying-up with Muslims, and Warren and Schuller's followers blast Van Impe for being an arrogant know-it-all who continually boasts about how many verses he's personally memorized.

Unfortunately, while the two primary sides pick the personalities apart very few are actually spreading what God's Word says about the issue. And the rare times when God's Word is injected into the conversation it is not the main focus and is overlooked, intentionally pushed aside, or shouted down by opposing comments. The warring factions appear so concerned with "being right" in the public's eye that the truth has become the casualty.

Personally, I am not a fan of Schuller (based on personal experience), but I do respect Van Impe and Warren. Sadly, I believe they were both well-intentioned in the beginning, but this media driven feud has skewed some of their decisions. For instance, Warren and his camp insist that he does not believe in Chrislam. They claim Warren is simply gaining close ties with non-believers (just as Jesus did) so that he might be able to lead them to salvation in the future. Unfortunately, some of his actions appear to over-step biblical boundaries.

It is true that Christ came not for the well but for the sick and lost. However, God's Word specifically tells believers to not be "unequally yoked" with unbelievers. And when Warren puts himself in positions that appear to suggest more than a casual association or tolerance, as a high-profile pastor, his actions portray acceptance of being unequally yoked. Warren may honestly be well-intentioned but his actions are detrimental to various believers who view him as being unequally yoked. And this may cause his supporters to view the other believers who think Warren is unequally yoked as being in the wrong... which is untrue. As a pastor Warren has greater responsibility in God's eyes. And God's Word tells us that even if eating meat is not wrong for us, we need to abstain from it in the sight of those that it is wrong for, so we do not cause them to stumble in their spiritual walk. And Warren's actions are clearly a stumbling block to many believers since this media battle has come to the fore-front.

photo of Jack & Rexella Van Impe

from whme.com



On the other hand, Van Impe could have gotten his point across far better without creating a media firestorm by pointing fingers and picking a few names to openly challenge and condemn. If he had simply pointed out God's Word and showed why the actions violated the biblical account readers and viewers would have had nothing but the facts to ponder. Instead, he chose to name-drop high-profile names (probably for marketability) which would no doubt be looked upon as a personal attack by the individuals named and their followers. Thus, they get defensive and the war of words begins... pushing the real issue into the background.

Investigation of God's Word in comparison to the Muslim beliefs show two separate and distinct Gods. There are dozens of other differences as well, including the various roles of Jesus/prophet/Madhi that are tossed back and forth in the debate. Furthermore, there is a ton of evidence available showing that Muslim leaders have a militant agenda against true Christians. Those leaders have publicly threatened to kill Christians, claimed that a Muslim flag will fly over the White House (which Obama apparently is in favor of), and will eventually be the sole religion of the world when they are through.

I have personally come to grips with how I believe on this topic. I believe God's Word. You need to study the Word for yourself and make up your mind on this issue. Choose wisely or answer to God for it later... and that includes who you help get into the White House.