Homosexual Murders Another Man Named Shepherd Who Resisted Sodomite Advances: What Part of "No" Don't These Homsexuals Understand?

Ah, the tolerance of the Left. I hear such long-suffering whispers from their soft-spoken activists.

Not really.

Here's another story of another man named Shepherd that you won't hear in the mainstream liberally biased media, but is reported at Worldnetdaily:

Quote:

A pro-family organization in Pennsylvania is raising questions about the lack of outrage over the murder of a man named Shephard in a dispute involving homosexuality.

No, not Matthew Shepard, whose murder in Wyoming a decade ago has been used by "gay" activists ever since as a reason to demand enhanced "hate" crimes for anyone who perpetrates criminal activity against a homosexual.

This case involves an innocent man who was murdered by a homosexual when the victim resisted his attacker's sexual advances.

The latest case involves Jason Shephard, 23, who was attacked and killed by Bill Smithson, an openly homosexual man, who slipped the victim the date rape drug GHD and attempted to rape him.

"When the young man resisted his sexual advances, he was strangled," reported the American Family Association of Pennsylvania....

But unlike with Matthew Shepard's death, there's been no outcry from the ranks of homosexual activists....

"Jason Shephard was a young college student targeted by a homosexual man to fulfill his sexual desires. Homosexual activists are silent on this murder – yet they still use Matthew Shepard as the poster child for their campaign to write 'sexual orientation' into hate crimes laws. Hate crime laws are not needed - Wyoming still does not have one and Pennsylvania's was thrown out this summer," the organization said....

WND also reported after voters in Florida, Arizona and California joined residents of 27 other states with constitutional protections for traditional marriage – and homosexual activists responded with terroristic threats against Christians and their churches.

"Burn their f---ing churches to the ground, and then tax the charred timbers," wrote "World O Jeff" on the JoeMyGod blogspot after California officials declared Proposition 8 had been approved by a margin of 52 percent to 48 percent. Confirmation on voter approval of amendments in Florida and Arizona came earlier.

The amendments in all three states essentially limit marriage to one man and one woman. In California, the measure states the only marriages "valid and recognized" in the state are those between one man and one woman.

On a blog website, "Tread" wrote, "I hope the No on 8 people have a long list and long knives."

Another contributor to the JoeMyGod website said, "While financially I supported the Vote No, and was vocal to everyone and anyone who would listen, I have never considered being a violent radical extremist for our equal rights. But now I think maybe I should consider becoming one. Perhaps that is the only thing that will affect the change we so desperately need and deserve."

A contributor identifying himself as "Joe" said, "I swear, I'd murder people with my bare hands this morning."

End quote.

This reminds me of the Sodomites who wanted to sleep with the angels that visited Lot just before God brought down judement on the people of Sodom and Gomorrah and the surrounding cities:

Gen 19:4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, the men of Sodom, both young and old, all the people to the last man, surrounded the house.
Gen 19:5 And they called to Lot, "Where are the men who came to you tonight? Bring them out to us, that we may know them."
Gen 19:6 Lot went out to the men at the entrance, shut the door after him,
Gen 19:7 and said, "I beg you, my brothers, do not act so wickedly.
Gen 19:8 Behold, I have two daughters who have not known any man. Let me bring them out to you, and do to them as you please. Only do nothing to these men, for they have come under the shelter of my roof."
Gen 19:9 But they said, "Stand back!" And they said, "This fellow came to sojourn, and he has become the judge! Now we will deal worse with you than with them." Then they pressed hard against the man Lot, and drew near to break the door down.

Rom 1:26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature;
Rom 1:27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.
Rom 1:28 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a debased mind to do what ought not to be done.
Rom 1:29 They were filled with all manner of unrighteousness, evil, covetousness, malice. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, maliciousness. They are gossips,
Rom 1:30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, haughty, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents,
Rom 1:31 foolish, faithless, heartless, ruthless.
Rom 1:32 Though they know God's decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them.

Over the years my view of seminaries have changed. I used to hold them in high esteem, but no more. I have noticed how liberal they turn out to be and worse, how liberal their men they pump out. This happens for a number of reasons, one of which is they believe they must expose these young men to error. They don't always know its error they are feeding, but nevertheless it is.

Unfortunately, when someone I am aquainted with, said his seminary class is having him read JI Packer I said he's a heretic.

Apparently I touched God's anointed author.

I offended the guy who is proudly taking a seminary class and I offended others by what I said.

If a teacher comes from the Romanish Anglican "church", signs the Evangelica And Catholics Together document and continues to defend his position as well as continues to push inter-faith relations between the RCC and Christians, then that is heresy. Its causing a schism away from Truth. But Packer has done more than that.

As Ken Silva notes in his article on JI Packer, Packer's defense of signing the Inter-faith ECT:

“Why I Signed It,” an article for the ecumenical neo-evangelical publication
Christianity Today: …though I was not a drafter of the document, I endorsed it. (as cited at Online source)

So I ought to have anticipated that some Protestants would say bleak,
skewed, fearful, and fear-driven things about this document — for instance, that
it betrays the Reformation; that it barters the gospel for a social agenda …
Why, then, should any Protestant, such as myself, want to maximize mission
activity in partnership with Roman Catholics? Traditionally, Protestants and Catholics have kept their distance, treating each other as inferiors; each
community has seen the other as out to deny precious elements in its own faith
and practice, and so has given the other a wide berth. There are sound reasons
why this historic stance should be adjusted. First: Do we recognize that good evangelical Protestants and good Roman Catholics — good, I mean, in terms of their own church’s stated ideal of spiritual life — are Christians together? (as cited in Online source)

End quote.

One's church doesn't determine what "good" is; God does. "Isa 45:19 ...I the LORD speak the truth; I declare what is right. "

Silva continues to note in an exchange between John Ankerberg and John MacArthur:

JA: one of the things that we told Chuck, and Jim Packer, and Bill Bright,
and that was this statement [from the ECT]: “We together, Evangelicals and
Catholics, confess our sins against the unity, that Christ intends for all His disciples” (ECT). Now the assumption in that statement is that Evangelicals and Catholics are all Christ’s disciples. What do you think of that assumption?

JM: Well, I think that is in grave error! And just going back, if I can
make the point solidly, to borrow the language of the Apostle Paul, “Any attempt
at self-righteousness, no matter how noble the effort, no matter how frequently
the “God” vocabulary is used and the divine is brought into it—any attempt at
self-righteousness, Paul classifies as “skubalon” (Greek), in Philippians 3.
That word is about as vivid a word as he could possibly use. It could be
translated “rubbish”—the most accurate translation is “dung”…


What you have got [with Roman Catholicism] is a whole system built on “skubalon” and you can’t throw your arms around that system. You can’t embrace it, and simply say, “Well, they talk about Jesus, and they talk about God, and they talk about faith, and they talk about grace, and we have got to embrace them. And if we don’t embrace them then we are violating the unity of the Body, and we are being ungracious to other disciples.” That is a frightening misrepresentation of the distinctiveness of “Justification by faith, and faith alone” …


It is a false religion, it is another religion. When you throw your
arms around that you literally have to undo any doctrinal distinction. In fact, ECT doesn’t just do that implicitly, they do that explicitly. In the document, in effect, they say, “we have to accept all baptized Roman Catholics as brothers and sisters in Christ. In an article that followed that up in Christianity Today, J. I. Packer said, “We should acknowledge as brothers and sisters in Christ, anyone who lives to the highest ideals of their communion.” My response to that is the opposite. I maybe could fellowship with a bad Roman Catholic, that is, one who has rejected the system, but was still in the church and came to know Christ. But one who holds the highest ideals of Roman Catholicism—on what grounds do I have spiritual unity? (Online source)

2Co 6:15 " What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? " Could Scripture be any more clear? Why is this "theologian" so blind to the simple truth of purity in doctrine and practice with God?

As Silva shows us, JI Packer says in "Reclaiming the Great Tradition: Evangelicals, Catholics & Orthodox in Dialogue":

To be sure, fundamentalists within our three traditions are unlikely to
join us in this, for it is the way of fundamentalists to follow the path of
contentious orthodoxism, as if the mercy of God in Christ automatically rests on
the persons who are notionally correct and is just as automatically withheld
from those who fall short of notional correctness on any point of substance. But this concept of, in effect, justification, not by works but by words — words,
that is, of notional soundness and precision — is near to being a cultic heresy in its own right and need not detain us further, however much we may regret the fact that some in all our traditions are bogged down in it. (as cited at Online
source)

Yet the Bible says:

Gal 2:16 yet we know that a person is not justified by works of the law but through faith in Jesus Christ, so we also have believed in Christ Jesus, in order to be justified by faith in Christ and not by works of the law, because by works of the law no one will be justified.

Rom 4:5 And to the one WHO DOES NOT WORK BUT trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness,

Rom 3:20 For by works of the law no human being will be justified in His sight, since through the law comes knowledge of sin.

Rom 3:24 and are justified by His grace AS A GIFT, through the redemption that IS IN Christ Jesus,

In contrast the Roman Catholic Catechism from the Vatican says:

RCC 1992 …Justification is conferred in Baptism, the sacrament of faith. It conforms us to the righteousness of God, who makes us inwardly just by the power of his mercy. Its purpose is the glory of God and of Christ, and the gift of eternal life

RCC 1993 Justification establishes cooperation between God's grace and man's freedom. On man's part it is expressed by the assent of faith to the Word of God, which invites him to conversion, and in the cooperation of charity with the prompting of the Holy Spirit who precedes and preserves his assent:

RCC # 2027 we can merit for ourselves and for others all the graces needed to attain eternal life, as well as necessary temporal goods.

RCC Cat. #2006 The term "merit" refers in general to the recompense owed by a community or a society for the action of one of its members, experienced either as beneficial or harmful, deserving reward or punishment. Merit is relative to the virtue of justice, in conformity with the principle of equality which governs it.

Rome's view of justification is hardly biblical. Its quite the opposite; its damnable.

Moreover it has never changed its view:

RCC Catechim #846…the Council teaches that the Church, a pilgrim now on earth, is necessary for salvation...

RCC # 846 Hence they COULD NOT be saved who, knowing that the Catholic Church was founded as necessary by God through Christ, would refuse either to enter it or to remain in it.

Silva says: J.I. Packer who in 1996 endorsed a book by Roman Catholic “apologist” Peter Kreeft called Ecumenical Jihad: On the back cover on my personal copy we read:

This racy little book opens up a far-reaching theme. With entertaining insight
Kreeft looks into the attitudes, alliances and strategies that today’s state
of affairs requires of believers. Catholics, Protestants and Orthodox alike
need to ponder Peter Kreeft’s vision of things–preferably in discussion
together. What if he is right?- J.I. Packer

Silva goes on to say:

Kreeft, an apostate “once a Dutch Reformed Protestant, [who] converted to Catholicism” (Online source), ”right” when he says of a false World Religion offering sacrifices to demons, not to God (see—1 Corinthians 10:20):

there is Christian-Muslim ecumenicism… Nothing in the Jewish Scriptures
contradicts Christianity, but some things in the Qur’an do. Yet even here an “ecumenical jihad” is possible and called for, for the simple and strong
reason that Muslims and Christians preach and practice the same First Commandment: islam, total surrender, submission of the human will to the divine will.

We fight side by side not only because we face a common enemy but above
all because we serve and worship the same divine Commander. Many Christians, both Protestant and Catholic, do not believe what the Church says about Islam (for example, in Vatican II and in the new Catechism): that Allah is not another God, that we worship the same God… (30)

Why is Islam expanding so spectacularly? Sociologists and physchologists and historians andeconomists and demographers and politicians are quick to explain this growth with “expert” worldly wisdom from each of their specialties; but to any Christian familiar with the Bible, the answer is obvious: because God keeps His promises and blesses those who obey His laws and fear Him… (38)

End quote.



It is expected that as an Anglican Packer doesn't know what biblical justification is or for that matter what the gospel is, because if he had, 1) he would have left the false Anglican "church" and 2) he would see how the RCC is an arch-enemy of Christ Jesus and His Gospel.

Packer is not an ignoramous. He knows what he is doing, to his condemnation. He is trying to bring the false and true together, against God's command. That is exactly the definition of a heretic.

Christians: God Will Bring Judgment On Your Church and Seminary Before He Judges the World You Point Fingers At!

I read a comment by a fellow Christian in the UK who is decrying (rightly so) the immorality of his nation and knows our's is following suit. He is praying for American and requests we pray for the UK. Absolutely we should! But I wanted to post my response to him here as well because its my heart as I observe so much of "Christianity" these days.


Sadly, the major problem isn’t the world; it’s the “churches”. It seems a lot of professing Christians here point fingers at the world, especially since the election of Obama, saying God is going to judge this nation. What I point out to them is that God IS going to judge alright, but He will start His judgment with everyone’s church!

He’ll get to the world, but He is starting to sift through these groups that call themselves churches, who name Christ, yet have hirelings or worse, wolves, shepherding His flock. These are men who have no love for His people even when they say they do, who preach for the paycheck and benefits (which is a consideration before they take the top job), busy “feeding” everyone else’s’ flock but their own (conference circuit) at a price (preaching isn’t done for free anymore); they scatter the sheep, starve them of food, refuse to care for those who are burdened, and make a nice living off the sheep. See Ezek. 34.

Moreover these “churches” haven’t a clue about the Gospel of Jesus Christ and consider biblical doctrine as optional. How dare any Christian point fingers at the world, when those who name HIS name defy the very Master they say they believe!

Hypocrites are running amuck. Christians vote for abortionists, think politics will save our nation and our churches; they cower at the feet of leaders who are in serious error, ignore the sin of those in their church, play footsies with God-haters, water down the gospel, judge others for being judgmental, pretend they are a solid church and say the “right” things but inwardly they are dead. They use code words like “Sovereignty of God” yet mock that very thing by acting like atheists. They graduate from a conservative seminary yet twist Scripture for their own means. They claim "context is king" then turn around and eisogete God's Word. They say they want everyone to use their spiritual gifts, then shut down the very gifts God has given to their church because it goes against their agenda. They demand if the people really want to honor and glorify Christ, they will sacrifice for their multi-million dollar building fund—all the while the sheep are abused, wandering, starving, thirsty, dirty, scared, and feeling helpless.

God will judge this nation, but He will judge these “churches” first. It won’t be pretty and it won’t be easy. It will be painful and those who are His will have to endure much pain and persecutiong. But God is our Rock and Hiding Place. He is our Great Shepherd.

New US Anglican "Church" Won't Deal With the Issue of False Teaching

http://www.onenewsnow.com/Church/Default.aspx?id=328110

"A church constitution, to be unveiled December 3 at Wheaton College near Chicago, would unite some 100,000 disaffected former Episcopalians who now adhere to various conservative Anglican archbishops abroad. Rev. Daryl Fenton says breakaway Episcopalians will soon unveil a new church constitution. "What's being planned is the organizing of a new Anglican Church in the U.S. that will be related to the rest of the worldwide Anglican Communion, and that will distinguish itself from the Episcopal Church in the U.S. by virtue of its holding to historic doctrines of the faith," he explains."

The problem is that the Episcopal church is a daughter of Rome and therefore is illegitimate. It holds to works-salvation as well and illegitimate authority over the people. And furthermore, being part of the Anglican Communion is still to be associated with the liberals within the EC. Remember, the head of the AC is Rowan Williams, as the Archbishop of Canterbury, and is also an honorary Druid, is pro-homosexual, and pro- Islam.

According to the Times:

Quote:

Dr Williams goes on to set out a possible case for active same-sex relationships by arguing that revisionists who support “sexual expression” for homosexuals may, like evangelicals, be trying to be faithful to the Bible.

His arguments, couched in diplomatic theology, make clear his support for committed gay partnerships and his belief that the Church’s traditional ban on homosexual activity should not apply to those in faithful gay relationships.

Dr Williams says that there are plenty of homosexual Christians who do not recognise themselves in Romans i, where St Paul condemns a society where “God gave them up unto vile affections”, where women turned to lesbian love and “the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burnt in their lust one toward another”.

Unquote.

So there is no real difference for this new US Anglican church because they will still be under the leadership of a pro-homosexual leader. See how liberal the Anglican Communion really is (note their inter-faith and ecumenical catagories).

Emergent Leader Tony Jones Joins Ravi Zacharias In Being Homosexual-Friendly

Ken Silva at Apprising Ministries has a new article:


Quote:


Tony Jones, author of the book The New Christianity Christians and a leading theologian in the Emergent Church is out of the closet now concerning his views that unrepentant practicing homosexuals can become Christians, which Apprising Ministries first pointed out in Tony Jones and the Emergent Church: “Christian” Gay is A-Ok.
We took a lot of heat for bringing it out but yesterday in Same Sex Marriage Blogalogue: How I Went from There to Here Jones has removed all doubt as to his position, and that which he feels the Body of Christ itself should take, regarding those who are unrepentantly practicing the sin of homosexuality:

And yet, all the time I could feel myself drifting toward acceptance that gay
persons are fully human persons and should be afforded all of the cultural and
ecclesial benefits that I am. (”Aha!” my critics will laugh derisively, “I knew
he and his ilk were on a continuous leftward slide!”) In any case, I now believe that GLBTQ can live lives in accord with biblical Christianity (at least as much as any of us can!) and that their monogamy can and should be sanctioned and blessed by church and state.(Online source, bold theirs)

You know, a couple of years ago Dr. John MacArthur was dead on target when he said, “One of the big issues is homosexuality in the emerging church; they don’t want to take a position on homosexuality… A homosexual will not inherit the Kingdom of God (see-1 Corinthians 6:9-10); that’s pretty clear” (Online source). However, one is now emerging.



End quote.



How interesting this comes on the heels of Ravi Zacharias saying the same thing here (video here). And let's not forget it was also recently that Clay Aiken and Ray Boltz, both claiming Christ Jesus, who also have come foreward unashamed in declaring their homosexuality. T.D. Jakes also says the same thing here.



Get ready for more "Christians" clamouring to brazenly proclaim themselves homosexuals. They are bringing God's judgment upon themselves. HE will NOT be mocked nor allow HIS name to be maligned.

1Ti 1:8 Now we know that the law is good, if one uses it lawfully,
1Ti 1:9 understanding this, that the law is not laid down for the just but for the lawless and disobedient, for the ungodly and sinners, for the unholy and profane, for those who strike their fathers and mothers, for murderers,
1Ti 1:10 the sexually immoral, men who practice homosexuality, enslavers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine,
1Ti 1:11 in accordance with the gospel of the glory of the blessed God with which I have been entrusted.

1Co 6:9 Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality,1Co 6:10 nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.
1Co 6:11 And such were some of you. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God.

Corporate Welfare

$700 billion dollar bail out to top banks and companies = CORPORATE WELFARE.

Why aren't the Democrats screaming about corporate welfare now? Why have they pushed for this corporate welfare yet yell and scream when they perceived Bush and his circles doing it on a smaller scale?

I love how NOW the GOP is suddenly concerned about HOW the $700 B that no one has,will be spent, AFTER they pushed for it. Sort of like what the banks and mortgage lenders did.

Homosexuals Persecute Christians in America

Homosexuals continue their persecution of Christian American citizens, hoping the bullying will silence them.

Is this America or Germany?

GOP senator: McCain betrayed Republican principles

MYRTLE BEACH, South Carolina (CNN) – South Carolina Sen. Jim DeMint on Friday became one of the first high-profile Republicans to publicly criticize John McCain following his electoral defeat, blaming the Arizona senator for betraying conservative principles in his quest for the White House.

"We have to be honest, and there's a lot of blame to go around, but I have to mention George Bush, and I have to mention Ted Stevens, and I'm afraid I even have to mention John McCain," he said.

DeMint offered a long list of complaints about McCain's record in the Senate and on the campaign trail.

"McCain, who is proponent of campaign finance reform that weakened party organizations and basically put George Soros in the driver's seat," DeMint said. "His proposal for amnesty for illegals. His support of global warming, cap-and-trade programs that will put another burden on our economy. And of course, his embrace of the bailout right before the election was probably the nail in our coffin this last election. And he has been an opponent of drilling in ANWR, at a time when energy is so important. It really didn't fit the label, but he was our package."

Bush and Stevens, he said, had corrupted the party brand by expanding the size of government and engaging in wasteful government spending. Had Republicans not strayed from their core beliefs in recent years, DeMint argued, the election results might have been different.

"Americans do prefer a traditional conservative government," he said. "They just did not believe Republicans were going to give it to them."

End quote.

Ya think? I've been saying this for weeks as have other true conservative Christians. Funny DeMint didn't mention McCain's pro-abortion view (in cases of rape or incest) or his repeated and admitted adultery, though.

I wonder if DeMint voted for McCain anyway? If he did, he's just as guilty as the men he places blame on.

Why didn't he speak out before now?

"Christians" Can't Be Light When They Are Woefully Ignorant of Truth

Tim Wildmon Says Cal Thomas Does Not Practice What He Preaches

'You may have read the recent post-election column by Cal Thomas about conservative Christians needing to get out of politics, government and public policy. Thomas argues that Christians should abandon these areas, leave all the decisions of the country to non-Christians, and give total devotion to something he calls “obscurity.” To which I must respond: Huh?Thomas writes: “Thirty years of trying to use government to stop abortion, preserve opposite-sex marriage, improve television and movie content into the conservative Evangelical image has failed?”'

I don't know what Thomas means by "obscurity" either, but I do know he's right. Christians have been unable to turn or at least keep the morality of this country on the right course. Christians have thought, mistakenly, that politics can help change behavior and perhaps hearts. They have been more involved and passionate about politics than Scripture. They will lock arms with Mormons and Roman Catholics on political issues, and be blinded to the fact their political buddies are lost and earning hell. They will not risk offending their political bedfellows, because they need all the numbers on the "Conservative" side they can get. Yet God calls us to a spiritual battle. They could win the political day, but their bedfellows will still go to hell without hearing the Gospel.

Have you walked into a "Christian" book store? Have you see "Christian" t.v.? Listened to "Christian" radio? Have you talked with the average "Christian"? If you have, then you must realize they are woefully ignorant of biblical truth and therefore do not live by what Scripture says.

Divorce is just as high in "churches" as it is in the world. Sexual immorality is increasing among the "Christian" youth. Inter-faith tolerance is at an all-time high in "Christian" circles. For crying out loud, Rick Warren and Ed Young (a la the Emergent Church Movement) is growing in popularity. Psychology and anti-Trinitarianism and Romanism are accepted happily by "Christians" across the board.

This is happening INSIDE "Christianity"---so what hope do these "Christians" have to offer the world? They ARE the world! Look at "Christian" music. Its hard to tell the difference between them and secular "artists". How many of them cross over to the secular side, anyway, once they "make it big" with "Christians"?

Thomas is right: Christians have proven to be powerless in life. But the reasons may not be what he thinks they are. They are powerless because they are ignorant of truth. Without biblical wisdom, they can offer no truth b/c they don't know what it is.

By the looks on the bookshelves at "Christian" book stores, you'd think the Bible was useless in helping "Christians" live life. All those self-help psychology books...diet books...get rich books....be happy books. Its truly pathetic, but a true barometer of "Christianity" right now.

"Christians" need to seek God's Word and live according to it. But until they have a high view of HIS powerful and living Word, they will seek what pleases their flesh and be no different than the world. They are NOT salt nor light. They are just religious bobbleheads wanting a happy-fix.

Ed Young

Eph 5:6 Let no one deceive you with empty words, for because of these things the wrath of God comes upon the sons of disobedience.

Over at Slice of Laodicea, Ingrid reports:

Ed Young: Have Sex 7 Days Straight!

"The moral and political apocalypse all around us in America hasn’t dampened the libido of Pastor Ed Young in Grapevine, Texas (suburb of Dallas). The media is busy reporting on how Barack Obama will be overturning the ban on stem cell research and forcing taxpayers to pay for abortions, and how the gays are now marrying in Connecticut and rioting in California, but Ed Young is bringing a bed to church, and he plans to be sitting on it, on “stage”, when he issues his challenge. This is how Christians are making headlines in the secular news while the leftist machine implements spiritual and political change."

"P.S. While Mr. Young plans his sex-a-palooza at his church, he is completely unconcerned about his repeated hosting of Word of Faith, Trinity-denying heretic, T.D. Jakes. Doesn’t this say it all? They’re not teaching Christian doctrine in churches—they’re teaching sex, and look at the heresy this has allowed in the door. Here’s an idea, Ed. Have your congregation read the Bible for 7-days straight. The only problem is, they’ll leave your church!"

Thoughts when I read this:

*Someone so obssessed with sex tells me that they've likely got sexual sin going on. God will shed light on Young's secret sins in due time, just as He did with Swaggart, Bakker, Haggard, the RCC, etc.

*This sure puts a new twist on "strange bedfellows".

* Whoring around with doctrinal error is just as bad as sexual immorlity.

* What do the single people do during their "sex" I mean "church" services? If he talks to the whole "church" on this topic, then he is causing many professing Christians to stumble into sin.

Clearly he is concerned only with the things of the flesh and earth.

Jud 1:4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

Jud 1:12 These are blemishes on your love feasts, as they feast with you without fear, looking after themselves; waterless clouds, swept along by winds; fruitless trees in late autumn, twice dead, uprooted; Jud 1:13 wild waves of the sea, casting up the foam of their own shame; wandering stars, for whom the gloom of utter darkness has been reserved forever.

Gal 5:13 For you were called to freedom, brothers. Only do not use your freedom as an opportunity for the flesh, but through love serve one another.

2Ti 3:12 Indeed, all who desire to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted, 13 while evil people and impostors will go on from bad to worse, deceiving and being deceived.

Tim Keller the Reformer Joins ECM's Exponential '08 Conference.

Tim Keller ( Reformer and Presbyterian) is joining Emergents and ECM- friendlies as well as feminists at the ECM seminare (I could not find any indication on the scheduale that the women would teach only women, therefore, true to the feminist view of ECM, women will teach men on spiritual matters), Exponential:

Francis Chan (although not considered Reformed, many who like The Master's College and those connected to the seminary, consider him a theological friend)

Erwin McManus - ECM leader

Alan Hirsch - ECM leader

Ed Setzer - ECM leader

Steve Childers (professor at Reformed Theological Seminary) - presumably Reformed

Debbie Jones: "With 30 years of ministry experience she has conducted numerous workshops and seminars throughout the United States and provides coaching for children's leaders and ministry spouses."

Kelly Kastens - "Kelly has served for five years as the Worship Program Director at Mountain Christian Church where she gets to do what she loves most - create environments for folks to encounter the living God. She is also a pastor's wife."

Tammy Melchien - "Tammy serves as Kids' City Champion for Community Christian Church, a multi-site church in the western suburbs of Chicago. She also provides Leadership and Children's Ministry coaching through NewThing Networks. Originally from Cleveland, Ohio, Tammy spent 6 years in campus ministry at Eastern Illinois University before leaving the cornfields for the bright lights of the city in 2002. She loves identifying leaders, developing leaders, talking to leaders, leading leaders... basically if you are a leader she loves you!"

Sommer Wisher - "Sommer is the Family Life Minister at LifePointe Church in Raleigh, North Carolina. In February 2008, LifePointe launched its second site, intended to be the first of several multi-site locations. Through that experience, Sommer has gained valuable insight into how to effectively make family ministry work by engaging leaders, managing expectations and ultimately, delivering a successful program that ignites parents and kids to own their faith. Sommer is a graduate of Kentucky Christian University and is all about making life fun and planning her awesome wedding in June of 2009!"

Go here for Slice of Laodicea's article on the question of recent econmy woes will affect all the tiresome ECM leadership conferences.

Intolerant and Infantile Sodomite Interrupt Church Service

This is TYPICAL liberal homosexual behavior. They prove themselves to be like unreasoning animals (worse, really) and adolescent in mentality. They want no one to oppose their views nor tell them they are in sin and wrong. They try to take away the right to free speech from the rest of us, but they are bound and determined to shove their vomit down our throats. Unbelievable. By the way, their idea of secretly sneaking into the church is what Planned Parenthood robots do to crisis pregnancy centers, in order to use up all their resources to cause them finanical harm. Folks, this is Spiritual War. Do not underestimate what the real problem is here. And do NOT think being tolerant and "loving" is the answer. Proclamation of the Gospel, and using the government's resources like calling the police and pressing charges is what a law-abiding Christian should do.

Lesbians, condoms go wild in attack on Christian church

By Bob Unruh© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Worshippers at a Bible-teaching church in Lansing, Mich., were stunned Sunday when members of a pro-homosexual, pro-anarchy organization named Bash Back interrupted their service to fling propaganda and condoms around the sanctuary, drape a profane banner from the balcony and feature two lesbians making out at the pulpit.

According to a blog posting by Nick De Leeuw on Right Michigan, the Bash Back organization orchestrated a protest in front of Mount Hope Church to draw the church's security staff away from the sanctuary.

Then Bash Backers who had dressed up and mixed in with church worshippers took action.
According to De Leeuw, "Prayer had just finished when men and women stood up in pockets across the congregation, on the main floor and in the balcony.

According to the alternative Lansing City Pulse – which reported it was notified of the protest ahead of time and sent a reporter along instead of warning the church – the protesters also screamed at parishioners and pulled the church facility's fire alarm. Printed material protesters distributed said, "We specialize in confronting homophobia, transphobia and every and all other forms of oppression."

Bible Commmentaries

Today at Apprising Ministries, I read a quote I like:

"The Bible sure does shed an awful lot of light upon those ol’ Bible commentaries.”

Unfortunately people in higher education (like colleges and seminaries) see it just the opposite. To paraphrase what a friend of mine has rightly observed, they see Scripture as milk and theologians as meat.

May Christians who actually love Christ Jesus, hold His Name and Word above ALL ELSE. God does.

Bobblehead "Christianity"

Slice of Laodicea has a new article on interspirituality in Toyland:

"Now Muslims, Jews, Hindus and Sikhs are not different “religions” but “denominations”, and this company wants to have your child learn about all of these “denominations” when she plays with her dolls. “Look, Mommy, my dolly with the hajib has her Koran and her plastic explosives and she’s ready to blow up our church!”"

I think this whole notion of religions merely being different denominations started when "Christians" said the same thing about the Roman Catholic Church. Once it was accepted as merely a different denomination, it was easy to go to the next level which is to accept other cults and religions in the same way (Oneness Pentecostals who deny the Trinity like TD Jakes and Philips Craig and Dean are happily embraced as Christians even though they deny the Triune Godhead as three distinct Persons in the Godhead; New Age mysticism in the forms of Adele Calhoun --promoted by Tim Keller---and Richard Foster are favorite authors and teachers in "Christian circles", for example).

I expect the world to be clueless to the difference (although happily, there still are some that DO see the difference), but "Christians" who include Rome as merely another denomination of Christianity are willingly ignorant and have caused GREAT HARM to the cause of Christ Jesus. Shame on them. Even as a child I knew the RCC was a totally different religion. But in this day and age "Evangelicals" are mindless bobbleheads who want to get along with everyone except those who stand against error.

Those who embrace Rome are also embracing Islam. When Rome and "Evangelicals" are both saying they worship the same God as Muslims, it makes sense that Islam would be accepted as another denomination (after all, as two professors of Old Testament at The Master's Seminary have told me, "they have the Old Testament!")

Bill Barrick of The Master's Seminary believes as Imad Shehedah and Timothy George do, that Allah is God, if only in part: http://www.biblebb.com/files/MAC/SC03-1024CDNotes.htm (what NONE of them tell you is that Allah had to add mercy to himself, perfect his light, is the Greatest of Deceivers---they ONLY tell you what they claim Allah has "in common" with YAWEH--which is dishonest and anti-biblical).

Now there is a new label called "Muslim Christians". http://www.missionfrontiers.org/2008/04/200804.htm Ralph Winter is pushing this.

For a more in-depth treatment of this notion about Muslim Christianity including quotes and links go here and here for the article I wrote on this issue in a two-part series at Biblical Thought.

1Jo 2:22 Who is the liar but he who denies that Jesus is the Christ? This is the antichrist, he who denies the Father and the Son.

Isa 46:5 "To whom will you liken me and make me equal, and compare me, that we may be alike?

1Jn 2:23 No one who denies the Son has the Father. Whoever confesses the Son has the Father also.

Bobblehead "Christianity". Its absolutely pathetic.

Richard Foster

The following is from Ken Silva at Apprising Ministries. He hits it on the head with the current "Evangelical Christianity" mindset. He shows more on why Richard Foster is not biblical.

Quote:

AM has also previously pointed out that by now it ought to be quite obvious evangelicalism is deep into her sick lust affair with the repackaged so-called “Christian” mysticism of Foster who is hands down the leading proponent of spiritually corrupt Contemplative Spirituality/Mysticism (CSM). And this neo-Gnosticism with its Contemplative/Centering Prayer (CCP) actually flowered in the antibiblical monastic traditions of apostate Roman Catholicism but has now slithered its way deep into evangelicalism from its den in the Emergent Church.

Now some ask: Why must you use those kinds of descriptors? Can’t you just leave out terms e.g. like “Living Spiritual Teacher” and/or “Quaker mystic”? Of course I could; and the few writing on the subject of contemplative spirituality, contemplative prayer, and the like do leave them out. Unfortunately people aren’t listening to them either. This even though they essentially use the typical, safe and accepted, apologetic I’ve referred to before as a “plus/minus” approach.

You’ve seen it many times, one begins pointing a few positive things on a given subject, followed by many negative things, and then the foregone conclusion said subject cannot be “recommended.” Let me say, there is most definitely a place for this kind of non-polemic research, absolutely. However, due to the lateness of the hour I simply skip the often patronizing step one. At the outset here I’ll simply say, if you really do want to know the truth concerning these issues related to Richard Foster then make the time to actually check out the sources and links within.

If not, then you just rest assured that the rains of apostasy have softened up the sand of what’s passing for Christianity today; and no doubt your head will slide right in with no effort. However, in the case of Richard Foster, the absolute facts are: 1) Foster actually is a Quaker; 2) Quakerism is itself rooted in mysticism, and 3) Foster’s “Christian” message is so convoluted that it is considered compatible with, and he is himself listed in, what is known as the Living Spiritual Teachers Project along side such spiritual fools as “Progressive Christian” Marcus Borg, CSM Guru Thomas Keating, Deepak Chopra, The Dalai Lama, Ram Dass, Thich Nhat Hanh, and Marianne Williamson.

Unquote.

We cannot afford to sugar coat the evil that is inside "Christianity". Playing footsies with the enemy is not an option. In fact, to do so is to trivialize the matter on which God has already said is wickedness and shipwrecks the faith of some.

Regarding the descriptions used for such false movements and teachers, listen to what Thomas Brooks said:

Always look upon wicked men, under those names and notions which the Scripture describes them, such as: lions for their fierceness, bears for their cruelty, dragons for their hideousness, dogs for their filthiness, wolves for their subtleness, scorpions, vipers, thorns, briars, thistles, brambles, stubble, dirt, chaff, dust, dross, smoke, scum.

You may know well enough what is within them, by the apt names which the Holy Spirit has given them. By looking upon them under those names and notions that the Scripture sets them out by, may preserve the soul from frequenting their company and delighting in their society. Such monsters are wicked men—which should render their company to all who have tasted of the sweetness of divine love, a burden and not a delight."Blessed is the man who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked or stand in the way of sinners or sit in the seat of mockers." Psalm 1:1

Go here for the problems with Foster's "Celebration of Discipline" (which was written decades before Renovare and should've been a problem for Don Whitney and Tim Challies).

Voting In The Lesser Of Two Evils: What Christians Gave California By Voting In Their Candidate

What does voting for "the lesser of two evils" look like?

The California governor, that is to say, the lesser of two evils voted in by Republicans and Christians has done the following:

Publically expressed his position AGAINST Prop 8.

Reporting from Sacramento and Pasadena -- Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today expressed hope that the California Supreme Court would overturn Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage. He also predicted that the 18,000 gay and lesbian couples who have already married would not be affected by the initiative."It's unfortunate, obviously, but it's not the end," Schwarzenegger said in an interview on CNN this morning. "I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area." --LA Times

After running against such heavy taxes in 2003, is now increasing MORE taxes:

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger on Thursday proposed $4.4 billion in new taxes and a similar amount in spending cuts to deal with California's worsening fiscal crisis, saying, "We must stop the bleeding." - Associated Press

Signed into law pro-homosexual agenda:

"Mom and Dad" as well as "husband and wife" effectively have been banned from California schools under a bill signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who with his signature also ordered public schools to allow boys to use girls restrooms and locker rooms, and vice versa, if they choose. ....Thomasson said SB777 prohibits any "instruction" or school-sponsored "activity" that "promotes a discriminatory bias" against "gender" – the bill's definition includes cross-dressing and sex changes – as well as "sexual orientation." - Worldnetdaily

Has signed into law nurse-assisted suicide:

SACRAMENTO – California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has officially approved an assisted suicide measure allowing nurses to sedate, dehydrate and starve depressed or confused individuals they consider to be "terminally ill." - Worldnetdaily

Tim Challies and Donald Whitney Accept New Age Richard Foster As One Who Helps Spiritually

We know of John Piper's compromise with Emergent leader Mark-filthy-mouth-pastor-Driscoll. As a result many Reformers are following Piper's lead and seem to like Driscoll and some of what the Emergent Church Movement offers. Now there's another Reformer doing the same thing.

I read with interest Ken Silva’s article on Spiritual Formation:

I would like to take a slightly different emphasis than Ken Silva.

Quote:

But things like Lectio Divina cannot be made “safe” because they didn’t originate with Protestants; we don’t get to then redefine these practices of apostate Roman Catholicism. Yet this is exactly what is causing such a huge problem in the Body of Christ right now as men like Donald Whitney mean well while they labor to make it appear as if some of these monastic practices were ever part of what Dr. Walter Martin (1928-1989) so often called “the historic orthodox Christian faith” to begin with. As further illustration of what I mean we take the following from well-respected Reformed blogger Tim Challies.

This comes from Challies’ review of Spiritual Disciplines for the Christian Life:

And so this book is an examination of spiritual disciplines -
disciplines provided by God which are designed to help us grow in godliness,
allowing us to become more and more conformed to the image of Christ. The
disciplines Whitney writes about are:

* Bible intake* Prayer* Worship* Evangelism* Serving*
Stewardship* Fasting* Silence and solitude* Journalling* Learning

The book is prefaced with an examination of the reason for
disciplining ourselves in the spiritual disciplines and Whitney teaches here
that we are to do all things for God’s glory. Because God requires each of these
disciplines of us, there is danger in neglecting any of them. (Online source, emphasis
mine)

Can anyone point to a specific list of these spiritual disciplines within the Bible; no. And “God requires” e.g. journaling in Scripture; where? We could now just as easily ask: Who made Donald Whitney a law-giver; we’re not to let any man act as our judge. So suppose I say to Whitney: “Go jump in the lake—I refuse to practice the existential and highly subjective practice of journaling and you have no authority to command me to do so or then suggest that I’m not properly ‘disciplined’ if I don’t.” Can you see how this actually ends up a transgression of Sola Scriptura; and worse, may even take us back to what DeWaay is talking about above.

UnQuote.


I read Challies’ full review. My response is to what he publically wrote.

In part he says:

While the vast majority of sources cited in this book are from Puritan and other Reformed authors, there were several references to Richard Foster. I questioned Whitney about this and he replied as follows: "...since it was not an academic book, I didn't want the emphasis to be critical (in the academic sense), but rather simply to set forth in practical ways what I thought the Biblical teaching on the subjects to be, and to find good supportive quotations. Occasionally it served my purposes to quote Foster. But I never tried to sound as approvingly of him when I quoted him as I did with most other writers. For instance, I never said something like, 'As the GREAT Richard Foster said,'...it was before Foster had started Renovare and before he had tipped his hand on some other matters." He also referred me to a couple of article he has written which show his thoughts on Christian mysticism (link and link 2). Lest I make a mountain of a molehill, I was completely satisfied with Whitney's answer and in no way do I feel that his references to Foster's work detracts from the powerful message in Spiritual Disciplines For The Christian Life. I merely did not wish to have people see the references to Foster in the bibliography and be scared away from a wonderful book.

Whiteny didn't want to criticize Foster merely on academics? Truth is not academic. This is about spiritual issues. How can he resign New Age quaker mysticism to mere "academics"? That's a sure sign of lacking wisdom and discernment with spiritual things and certainly considers New Age mysticism to be optional and not needed to be dealt with.

That which is from error cannot lead people in Truth. This is the other problem.

References to Foster SHOULD cause all Christians to run. He is a false teacher steeped in New Age garbage. Yet it appears that Challies and Whitney find something positive from Foster in regard to spiritual matters. Scripture says there is to be separation in 2 Cor. 6:14-17.

It really seems that Reformers are are man-centered.

Richard Foster has never been a Christian, before or after coming out with Renovare. Foster is a Quaker, and Quakers deny biblical doctrine such as all men are enemies of God and dead in their sins and trespasses. Instead, Quakerism claims the New Age philosophy that all men have “a spark of divinity” in them and men are neutral toward good and evil. They do not believe in the authority of pastors/elders. Foster was out of Christianity decades ago, but Challies ignores that (he was concerned with references to Foster, so he does know of something of his error). In fact it seems that these men think they can take from what is evil and pick out the “good” and be satisfied. Its rather reminecent of how many Reformers view the RCC: its now apostate, but it once had truth and was a true church, therefore we can use its history and church fathers and councils and confessions as our own. Scripture's test proves the RCC to be a false church from the beginning. An apostate was never HIS (1John 2:19). God calls for doctrinal purity as well as personal purity. Why don't people, particularly Reformers see this? Why are they so willing to compromise?

As time marches on, I continue to see Reformers embrace all kinds of doctrine, including Emergent Church movement junk. I believe it's because they think in terms of philosophy and not biblical truth; they rely on intellect (which some apparently think, was not infested with sin at the Fall, thus they appeal to the fallen mind to reveal Truth to the God-haters), not spiritual wisdom and understanding. They often accept part of Romanism (its infant sprinkling or a variation on the bread and wine or the magisterium, its history, its councils,), thus its far easier for them to accept other error as well.
God calls for separation from error and those in error. We cannot be sanctified with things outside of infallible truth. Error does not bring us truth.

1Jo 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because NO LIE IS OF THE TRUTH.

1Co 13:6 it [agape] does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

John 17: 17 SANCTIFY THEM IN THE TRUTH; Your word is truth. 18 As you sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world.

Tit 1:9 He must hold firm to the trustworthy word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to rebuke those who contradict it.

Rom 16:17 I appeal to you, brothers, to watch out for those who cause divisions and create obstacles contrary to the doctrine that you have been taught; avoid them.

Jud 1:4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

Richard Foster has always been heretical. He was never of Christ. The blindness and total tolerance of a little heresy and a little sin by the likes of Challies and Whitney are inexcusable. They both know Foster is in error, but I suppose as long as he serves their purpose and they think they can pull out the poison from the water, they will do so. They will do so, however to their own peril and those who look to them for advice or wisdom.

It seems to me that Reformers find more inspiration in books of men rather than Scripture. Its as if they find Scripture to be mere milk, but theologians or scholars offer REAL MEAT. This is pure Roman Catholic magisterium thinking. It certainly is not biblical thinking. When an author offers a false teacher as a good example of something spiritually right, its time to dump the author. God calls for purity of doctrine:

1Tim. 1: 3As I urged you when I went into Macedonia—remain in Ephesus that you may charge some that they teach no other doctrine

2Tim. 4: . 3 For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths.

Titus 2: You must teach what is in accord with sound doctrine.

It seems those who offer poisoned books are violating clear Scripture, and in doing so, are helping to confuse and mislead the sheep of Christ.

As Spurgeon right said one time, “Discernment is not simply a matter of telling the difference between what is right and wrong; rather it is the difference between right and almost right.” Those who taught things "almost right" are described in Jude and Galatians. Its time we love Truth more than some author or blogger or pastor who gives us some experience or good feeling. Our spiritual lives depend upon it and we will answer to Christ Jesus.

Schwarzenegger Is A Hypocrit On Taxes: but I never trusted nor voted for him--he's a RINO ---like McCain

2003 "From the time they get up in the morning and flush the toilet, they're taxed. Then they go and get the cup of coffee, they're taxed....This goes on all day long. Tax, tax, tax."Arnold Schwarzenegger

11-06-08 SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) - Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger has proposed $4.4 billion in tax increases and billions more in spending cuts to close California's worsening budget deficit, declaring: "We must stop the bleeding."

HYPOCRIT and LIAR. HE'S helping us bleed.

Our economy in California is far WORSE than it was when Gray-lights-out-Davis drove us into enormous debt. We voted him out for a lesser of a problem. Its time to vote out Schwarenegger now and hire Tom McClintock.

McCain Campaign Slams Palin Harder Than Obama: that's no surprise

Rush Limbaugh has reported that according to Carl Cameron of Fox News, the McCain campaign has been slamming Sarah Palin. It appears that they spent more time criticizing their own VP running mate rather than Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and Barack Obama combined.

If this is accurate, I am not surprised. I'm amazed that it shocks Limbaugh, though. After all, McCain is liberal, not conservative. McCain has been proven to have far more in common with the DNC than the GOP. Sorry, Rush, but this really is a "duh" moment. Why do you think Joe Biden went on t.v. claiming McCain would be a great VP for John Kerry back in 2004? Why do you think McCain voted along DNC lines for two Supreme Court Justices and various Senate bills? Why do you think McCain is pro-abortion, pro-illegal alien amnesty, pro-limited campaign contributions, and big-government bail outs?

HELLO?

So why did "Conservatives" vote for McCain?

If you want to rid the GOP of the moderates (read: Liberals), then don't vote FOR them.

It really IS that simple.

Voting: The Bullies Say It Is The Measure of A True Christian

Something weird is happening. Actually its tragic and pathetic, really.

Professing Christians are making politics an essential to Christianity, but at the same time turn a closed eye to the essentials of biblical Christianity.

Apparently "Christians" can view God's role for women, the literal 6 Day Creation, faith in the resurrection of Christ Jesus, the Lordship of the Lord, believer's baptism by immersion, and absolute truth, as all Non-Essentials. Yup, they are ready to generously "agree to disagree" on these doctrines and more, because these are issue of conscience (however Romans 14 is not about biblical doctrine, but about true gray issues, matters of conscience that Scripture has not spoken for or against).

But DON'T YOU DARE NOT VOTE! That's right, Christianity is now determined not by doctrine but by your patriotism.

HUH?

Scripture doesn't demand I vote. Voting is not an essential to my faith in Christ Jesus alone. But it seems that Christians (and Republicans in general) are bullying those of us with a clear conscience to vote for the "lesser of the two evils".

This is pitiful. And its based on fear of the opposing political party.

Where's their loyalty to all things of Christ Jesus? Scripture? Biblical truth?

Gone.

Charity is wide and tolerance high for those who hold to evolution, feminism, Romanism, eastern mysticism, pragmatism, and humanism. But vile anger is directed toward those who refuse to support evil in this year's elections.

What utter nonsense.

Let's remember that as Christians, we are loyal to Christ alone. We are to fear God, not man. We are to live faithfully to biblical truth, not be pragmatic.

Jeremiah 17:5, “Thus says the Lord, ‘Cursed is the man who trusts in mankind and makes flesh his strength and whose heart turns away from the Lord.’”

Prov. 21: 3 To do righteousness and justice Is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice.

A friend of mine sent me an article written by Peter Ditzel. In part he said:

Quote:

So, let’s picture Jesus faced with the possibility of voting in an election in which the best choice is merely the lesser evil. Can you honestly imagine Jesus voting for any kind of evil? If Herod and Pilate were running for the same office, would Jesus have voted for Pilate because he was the lesser evil? I can’t imagine it, can you? I can only see Jesus among the masses saying, “It is better to trust in the LORD than to put confidence in man” (Psalm 118:8), and, “Put not your trust in princes” (Psalm 146:3), and, “My kingdom is not of this world” (John 18:36).

At election time, is the only way we can show our patriotism and Christianity by voting for the lesser evil? I refuse to believe it. Did you know that most tyrants in the world legitimize themselves by making sure they win elections and then saying, “The people have spoken”? In the United States, we are only slightly more sophisticated. Here, the wizards of Oz who are working the controls behind the curtains set out two or three candidates for us (Tweedledee, Tweedledum, and Tweedledummer). Then they tell us to vote for one, and they convince even Christians that it is their patriotic and Christian duty to vote even if they realize that all of the candidates are some degree of evil. Having discharged their duty, the masses can feel good about themselves and go back to sleep while the powers that be pour more detergent into the brainwashing system called public education, erode our First Amendment rights, gain control over our food supply, and pick a fight with the next country that they want to control for strategic reasons.

Whoever wins, here are three Scriptures to keep in mind:

“Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above….” (John 19:11)

“This matter is by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.” (Daniel 4:17—emphasis mine)

“These things I have spoken unto you, that in me ye might have peace. In the world ye shall have tribulation: but be of good cheer; I have overcome the world.” (John 16:33)

End quote.

How is it possible to keep one's hands clean from supporting evil while at the same time be accused that by not voting for the evil, we ARE responsible for evil prevailing? How does that make any sense? By NOT supporting evil, I'm supporting evil?

By not supporting a pro-abortion (in rape and incest), feminist (tear a mom of a infant away from her family to rule a nation), liberal (voted FOR two liberal Supreme Court justices and stood against the conservative SCJ candidates) RINO, I am standing for a higher standard: God's. My hands are clean before God. I take a stand AGAINST evil by not supporting it. I pray against it (prayer is now considered "doing nothing" by "Christians"). I pray for HIS righteousness to rule this land. I trust in HIM.

But apparently these "Christians" think I'm perpetrating evil by doing that.

Movements

Why is it that Christians are obsessed with "movements"? Everything's a movement, particularly in "evangelism". They often dangle the movement in front of others, asking if they want to be a part of this movement or that movement of God (usually with the youth).

Why?

It often seems more like advertising to "get people excited". But movements historically aren't always good, and even those dubbed "of God" peter out. Does He loose enthusiasm for the movements? Is God affected by the lack of enthrallment of others, so the movements die?

Why do people think its a movement of God?

Why is it so complicated to evangelize the world?

Why are there so many programs?

Building Church Buildings In This Economy

Recently I discovered that my former church is continuing on its march ahead to raise money for a multi-million dollar building. I thought, how in the world do they have the nerve to cram this man-centered agenda down the sheeps' throat in this economy? I know at least one family has lost their business and are now renting a home. Apparently the church's answer is: bring the church together on one Sunday, show them a DVD, have a emotionally moving story about one family going through a horrendous trial, then have a pot luck afterward.

That didn't work.

Next up: have one of the elders explain in detail what this new building will look like, in hopes that the sheep will catch the vision of their new pen.

That didn't work.

Well, try, try, again. Next week: again an elder will discuss the plans and need for this multi-million dollar building and hope maybe the sheep will get excited. And if that weren't enough, the pastor will take time out of the Sunday service to march 750 people in single file around the property to get a vision for the new multi-million dollar building, on a "prayer walk". I wonder if they will dole out milk and cookies after their little field trip.

We'll see if it pushes the sheep into the rally for this building that they are determined to build, but I don't see that happening. In this area, several chain stores are closing up shop. This economy is going to hit hard here soon (its already started for some folks). They are already

falling short $5,000 each week.

I read with interest Slice of Laodicea's article on how this economy might affect megachurches. I am glad others are asking similiar questions. I hope some of these "churches" that are such a stench to God will actually shut down permanently.