What is salvation?
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Affliction and Encouragement For Those In Christ Jesus
(Letters of John Newton)
Dear friend,
I hope that you have found your trials so sweetened, and so sanctified, by God's blessing, that you have been enabled to rejoice in them! Whatever may be the immediate causes of your troubles--they are all under the direction of a gracious hand--and each, in their place, cooperating to a gracious end. Your afflictions all come from God's heart, who loves you better than you love yourself! They are all tokens of His love and favor--and are necessary means of promoting your growth in faith and grace.
You are in the hands of Him who does all things well, and conducts His most afflictive dispensations to those who fear Him, with wisdom and mercy!
The Lord knows what is best for you! When there is an especial need-be for your being in the furnace--He knows how to support you; and at what season, and in what manner, deliverance will best comport with His glory and your good. These are the two great ends which He has in view, and which are inseparably connected together.
He knows our frame, and of what we are made. His pity exceeds that of the most tender parent. And though He causes grief--He will have compassion. Your afflictions which at present are not joyous but grievous, shall, when you have been duly exercised by them--yield the peaceable fruits of righteousness. I trust the Lord gives you a measure of patience and submission to His holy will. If so, everything shall be well--and when He has fully tried you--you shall come forth as gold!
The thoughts of what we have deserved at His hands--and what Jesus suffered for our sakes--when applied by his Holy Spirit, have a sovereign efficacy to compose our minds, and enable us to say, "Not my will--but may Yours be done!" How unspeakably better is it to be chastened by the Lord now--than to be left to ourselves for a season, and at last condemned with the world.
The path of affliction is sanctified by the promises of God, and by the consideration of our Lord Jesus, who walked in it Himself, that we might not think it too much to tread in His steps. Yes, it has been a beaten path in all ages; for the innumerable multitudes of the redeemed who are now before the eternal throne, have entered the kingdom by no other way. Let us not then be weary and faint--but cheerfully consent to be the followers of those who, through faith and patience, are now inheriting the promises!
If, after much tribulation, we stand accepted before the Lord in His glory, we shall not then think much of the difficulties we met with in our pathway to glory. Then sorrow and sighing shall cease forever--and songs of triumph and everlasting joy shall take their place! Oh, happy transporting moment, when the Lord God Himself shall wipe every tear from our eyes!
Until then, may the prospect of this glory which shall be revealed, cheer and comfort our hearts! Hitherto the Lord has helped us. He has delivered us in six troubles--and we may trust Him in the seventh.
Whatever storms may arise, we have an infallible and almighty Pilot, who will be a Sun and a Shield to those who love Him!
As long as we live, new trials will be needful. It is not that the Lord delights in grieving us and putting us to pain; on the contrary, He rejoices in the prosperity of His servants. No, it is not for His pleasure--but for our profit, that we may be made partakers of His holiness!
Perhaps you may have observed a bird, in a hedge, or upon the boughs of a tree; if you disturb it--it will move a little higher--and thus you may make it change its place three or four times. But if it finds, after a few trials, that you continue to follow it--it takes wing at last, and flies away!
Thus it is with us! When the Lord drives us from one creature-rest, we immediately perch upon another! But He will not allow us to stay long upon any. At length, like the bird, we are sensible that we can have no safety, no stable peace below! Then our hearts take flight and soar heavenwards, and we are taught by His grace to place our treasure and affections out of the reach of earthly vanities. So far as this end is accomplished, we have reason to be thankful and say, happy rod--that brought me nearer to my God!
Dear friend,
I hope that you have found your trials so sweetened, and so sanctified, by God's blessing, that you have been enabled to rejoice in them! Whatever may be the immediate causes of your troubles--they are all under the direction of a gracious hand--and each, in their place, cooperating to a gracious end. Your afflictions all come from God's heart, who loves you better than you love yourself! They are all tokens of His love and favor--and are necessary means of promoting your growth in faith and grace.
You are in the hands of Him who does all things well, and conducts His most afflictive dispensations to those who fear Him, with wisdom and mercy!
The Lord knows what is best for you! When there is an especial need-be for your being in the furnace--He knows how to support you; and at what season, and in what manner, deliverance will best comport with His glory and your good. These are the two great ends which He has in view, and which are inseparably connected together.
He knows our frame, and of what we are made. His pity exceeds that of the most tender parent. And though He causes grief--He will have compassion. Your afflictions which at present are not joyous but grievous, shall, when you have been duly exercised by them--yield the peaceable fruits of righteousness. I trust the Lord gives you a measure of patience and submission to His holy will. If so, everything shall be well--and when He has fully tried you--you shall come forth as gold!
The thoughts of what we have deserved at His hands--and what Jesus suffered for our sakes--when applied by his Holy Spirit, have a sovereign efficacy to compose our minds, and enable us to say, "Not my will--but may Yours be done!" How unspeakably better is it to be chastened by the Lord now--than to be left to ourselves for a season, and at last condemned with the world.
The path of affliction is sanctified by the promises of God, and by the consideration of our Lord Jesus, who walked in it Himself, that we might not think it too much to tread in His steps. Yes, it has been a beaten path in all ages; for the innumerable multitudes of the redeemed who are now before the eternal throne, have entered the kingdom by no other way. Let us not then be weary and faint--but cheerfully consent to be the followers of those who, through faith and patience, are now inheriting the promises!
If, after much tribulation, we stand accepted before the Lord in His glory, we shall not then think much of the difficulties we met with in our pathway to glory. Then sorrow and sighing shall cease forever--and songs of triumph and everlasting joy shall take their place! Oh, happy transporting moment, when the Lord God Himself shall wipe every tear from our eyes!
Until then, may the prospect of this glory which shall be revealed, cheer and comfort our hearts! Hitherto the Lord has helped us. He has delivered us in six troubles--and we may trust Him in the seventh.
Whatever storms may arise, we have an infallible and almighty Pilot, who will be a Sun and a Shield to those who love Him!
As long as we live, new trials will be needful. It is not that the Lord delights in grieving us and putting us to pain; on the contrary, He rejoices in the prosperity of His servants. No, it is not for His pleasure--but for our profit, that we may be made partakers of His holiness!
Perhaps you may have observed a bird, in a hedge, or upon the boughs of a tree; if you disturb it--it will move a little higher--and thus you may make it change its place three or four times. But if it finds, after a few trials, that you continue to follow it--it takes wing at last, and flies away!
Thus it is with us! When the Lord drives us from one creature-rest, we immediately perch upon another! But He will not allow us to stay long upon any. At length, like the bird, we are sensible that we can have no safety, no stable peace below! Then our hearts take flight and soar heavenwards, and we are taught by His grace to place our treasure and affections out of the reach of earthly vanities. So far as this end is accomplished, we have reason to be thankful and say, happy rod--that brought me nearer to my God!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
The Jesus of Scripture: He Didn't Try To "Get Along" But Came To Declare Truth And The ONLY Way of Salvation
John MacArthur's article on Jesus in the Washington Post:
If that link ends up failing go here.
Quote:
Let's be brutally honest: most of Jesus' teaching is completely out of sync with the mores that dominate our culture.
I'm talking, of course, about the Jesus we encounter in Scripture, not the always-gentle, never-stern, über-lenient coloring-book character who exists only in the popular imagination. The real Jesus was no domesticated clergyman with a starched collar and genteel manners; he was a bold, uncompromising Prophet who regularly challenged the canons of political correctness.
Jesus was pointedly, deliberately, and dogmatically counter-cultural in almost every way. No wonder the religious and academic aristocracy of his generation were so hostile to him.
Would Jesus receive a warmer welcome from world religious leaders, the media elite, or the political gentry today? Anyone who has seriously considered the New Testament knows very well that he would not. Our culture is devoted to pluralism and tolerance; contemptuous of all absolute or exclusive truth-claims; convinced that self-love is the greatest love of all; satisfied that most people are fundamentally good; and desperately wanting to believe that each of us is endowed with a spark of divinity.
Against such a culture Jesus' message strikes every discordant note.
Check the biblical record. Jesus' words were full of hard demands and stern warnings. He said, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and is himself destroyed or lost?" (Luke 9:23-25). "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:26).
Proud people, including lots of religious people who call themselves Christians, don't really believe Christ's message at all. He said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance" (Mark 2:17).
So what would Jesus say to a pluralistic, tolerant, self-indulgent society like ours? I'm convinced his approach today would be the very same strategy we see in the New Testament. To smug, self-satisfied, arrogant sinners (including multitudes on church rolls) his words would sound harsh, shocking, provocative. But to "the poor in spirit" (Matthew 5:3)--those who are exhausted and spent by the ravages of sin; desperate for forgiveness and without any hope of atoning for their own sin--Jesus' call to repentant faith remains the very gateway to eternal life.
This is a particularly hard message in cultures like ours that elevate self-love, self-esteem, or self-righteousness, but Jesus was absolutely clear, and these words do still speak to us: "Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18:14).
End quote.
If that link ends up failing go here.
Quote:
Let's be brutally honest: most of Jesus' teaching is completely out of sync with the mores that dominate our culture.
I'm talking, of course, about the Jesus we encounter in Scripture, not the always-gentle, never-stern, über-lenient coloring-book character who exists only in the popular imagination. The real Jesus was no domesticated clergyman with a starched collar and genteel manners; he was a bold, uncompromising Prophet who regularly challenged the canons of political correctness.
Jesus was pointedly, deliberately, and dogmatically counter-cultural in almost every way. No wonder the religious and academic aristocracy of his generation were so hostile to him.
Would Jesus receive a warmer welcome from world religious leaders, the media elite, or the political gentry today? Anyone who has seriously considered the New Testament knows very well that he would not. Our culture is devoted to pluralism and tolerance; contemptuous of all absolute or exclusive truth-claims; convinced that self-love is the greatest love of all; satisfied that most people are fundamentally good; and desperately wanting to believe that each of us is endowed with a spark of divinity.
Against such a culture Jesus' message strikes every discordant note.
Check the biblical record. Jesus' words were full of hard demands and stern warnings. He said, "If anyone desires to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow Me. For whoever desires to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for My sake will save it. For what profit is it to a man if he gains the whole world, and is himself destroyed or lost?" (Luke 9:23-25). "If anyone comes to Me and does not hate his father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and his own life also, he cannot be My disciple" (Luke 14:26).
Proud people, including lots of religious people who call themselves Christians, don't really believe Christ's message at all. He said, "Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners, to repentance" (Mark 2:17).
So what would Jesus say to a pluralistic, tolerant, self-indulgent society like ours? I'm convinced his approach today would be the very same strategy we see in the New Testament. To smug, self-satisfied, arrogant sinners (including multitudes on church rolls) his words would sound harsh, shocking, provocative. But to "the poor in spirit" (Matthew 5:3)--those who are exhausted and spent by the ravages of sin; desperate for forgiveness and without any hope of atoning for their own sin--Jesus' call to repentant faith remains the very gateway to eternal life.
This is a particularly hard message in cultures like ours that elevate self-love, self-esteem, or self-righteousness, but Jesus was absolutely clear, and these words do still speak to us: "Everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and he who humbles himself will be exalted" (Luke 18:14).
End quote.
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
Brian McLaren To Celebrate Ramadan With Muslims
From Apprising Ministries:
...At his website Brian McLaren, unquestionably a leader in the egregiously ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—morphing into Emergence Christianity (EC)—tells us in Ramadan 2009: Part 1 What’s going on?:
Ramadan is the Muslim holy month of fasting for spiritual renewal and purification. It commemorates the month during which Muslims believe Mohammed received the Quran through divine revelation, and it calls Muslims to self-control, sacrificial generosity and solidarity with the poor, diligent reading of the Quran, and intensified prayer.
This year, I, along with a few Christian friends (and perhaps others currently unknown to us will want to join in) will be joining Muslim friends in the fast which begins August 21. We are not doing so in order to become Muslims: we are deeply committed Christians. But as Christians, we want to come close to our Muslim neighbors and to share this important part of life with them… (Online source)
End quote.
1. Mclaren is not a Christian.
2. Muslims have no common ground with Christians (see verse below).
3. Mclaren has learned well from Schuller and Ricky Warren, who find common ground with the Jesus-hating, Scripture-rejecting Muslims.
4. Mclaren is an idiot. He'd never survive living under true Islam.
5. Mclaren is not a Christian.
6. What he is saying and doing violates Scripture for TRUE Christians: 2Cor. 6:14-15:Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?
7. Mclaren is not a Christian.
...At his website Brian McLaren, unquestionably a leader in the egregiously ecumenical Emerging Church aka Emergent Church—morphing into Emergence Christianity (EC)—tells us in Ramadan 2009: Part 1 What’s going on?:
Ramadan is the Muslim holy month of fasting for spiritual renewal and purification. It commemorates the month during which Muslims believe Mohammed received the Quran through divine revelation, and it calls Muslims to self-control, sacrificial generosity and solidarity with the poor, diligent reading of the Quran, and intensified prayer.
This year, I, along with a few Christian friends (and perhaps others currently unknown to us will want to join in) will be joining Muslim friends in the fast which begins August 21. We are not doing so in order to become Muslims: we are deeply committed Christians. But as Christians, we want to come close to our Muslim neighbors and to share this important part of life with them… (Online source)
End quote.
1. Mclaren is not a Christian.
2. Muslims have no common ground with Christians (see verse below).
3. Mclaren has learned well from Schuller and Ricky Warren, who find common ground with the Jesus-hating, Scripture-rejecting Muslims.
4. Mclaren is an idiot. He'd never survive living under true Islam.
5. Mclaren is not a Christian.
6. What he is saying and doing violates Scripture for TRUE Christians: 2Cor. 6:14-15:Do not be bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? Or what harmony has Christ with Belial, or what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?
7. Mclaren is not a Christian.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
And You Trust The Government With All Your Health Care Needs And Private Information?
White House And Your Emails On the Death Care Bill:
Quote:
The White House for the first time Sunday seemed to acknowledge that people across the country received unsolicited e-mails from the administration last week about health care reform, suggesting the problem is with third-party groups that placed the recipients' names on the distribution list.
In a written statement released exclusively to FOX News, White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said the White House hopes those who received the e-mails without signing up for them were not "inconvenienced" by the messages.
"The White House e-mail list is made up of e-mail addresses obtained solely through the White House Web site. The White House doesn't purchase, upload or merge from any other list, again, all e-mails come from the White House Web site as we have no interest in e-mailing anyone who does not want to receive an e-mail," the statement said. "If an individual received the e-mail because someone else or a group signed them up or forwarded the e-mail, we hope they were not too inconvenienced."
Unquote.
Quote:
The White House for the first time Sunday seemed to acknowledge that people across the country received unsolicited e-mails from the administration last week about health care reform, suggesting the problem is with third-party groups that placed the recipients' names on the distribution list.
In a written statement released exclusively to FOX News, White House spokesman Nick Shapiro said the White House hopes those who received the e-mails without signing up for them were not "inconvenienced" by the messages.
"The White House e-mail list is made up of e-mail addresses obtained solely through the White House Web site. The White House doesn't purchase, upload or merge from any other list, again, all e-mails come from the White House Web site as we have no interest in e-mailing anyone who does not want to receive an e-mail," the statement said. "If an individual received the e-mail because someone else or a group signed them up or forwarded the e-mail, we hope they were not too inconvenienced."
Unquote.
Obama's Green Czar, Van Jones: Communist Enviornmentalist
Catagories: No Free Speech For Dissenters and Green Is the New Red
Van Jones wants to shut down Glen Beck for expressing his opinion. Why would an environmentalist want to take away someone's free speech rights? Because Van's a known communist, spurred on by non other than Rodney-Can't-We-All-Just-Get-Along- King.
Apparently Jones doesn't want to get along with Beck.
Excerpts from Worldnetdaily:
Glenn Beck fans are fighting back against a campaign led by a black activist organization prompting major advertisers to withdraw from Beck's top-rated Fox News Channel program.
Last week, NewsBusters reported President Obama's "green jobs czar," Van Jones, is co-founder of ColorofChange.org, an activist organization that has led a furious campaign against Beck culminating in major companies such as Geico and Lawyers.com pulling their spots from the Fox News star's daily show.
In recent weeks, Beck has done several critical segments about Van Jones, who was appointed as the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Van Jones' group says the controversy stems from Beck's recent comment while a guest on another Fox News show that Obama is a "racist" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people."
ColorofChange did not return a WND request for comment about whether its crusade is tied to Beck's recent reporting about Van Jones' radical connections.
NewsBusters exposed Van Jones is a co-founder of ColorofChange. The group's executive director is James Rucker, who previously served as director of Grassroots Mobilization for the radical MoveOn.org.
Immediately following the NewsBusters report, ColorofChange scrubbed its site of any mention of Jones. However, a Google cache of the site lists Jones as a founder.
Jones, formerly a self-described "rowdy black nationalist," boasted in a 2005 interview with the left-leaning East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class "justice."
He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.
The leftist blog Machete 48 identifies STORM's influences as "third-worldist Marxism (and an often vulgar Maoism)."
Speaking to the East Bay Express, Van Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.
"I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."
"I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.
His appointment as a White House environmental adviser was announced March 10.
End quote.
So why would an environmentalist liberal care about what someone says on tv? After all, liberals claim to be uber tolerant and hail dissent from the "establishment", right? What does "being green" have to do with someone expressing their views publically?
Environmentalism is NOT about the environment; its about communism: they dictate what you shall buy, wear, drive, work, and say.
THIS IS WHERE LIBERALISM LEADS.
Birds of a feather flock together: Barrack Hussein Obama, Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Bill Ayers, ACORN.....
Van Jones wants to shut down Glen Beck for expressing his opinion. Why would an environmentalist want to take away someone's free speech rights? Because Van's a known communist, spurred on by non other than Rodney-Can't-We-All-Just-Get-Along- King.
Apparently Jones doesn't want to get along with Beck.
Excerpts from Worldnetdaily:
Glenn Beck fans are fighting back against a campaign led by a black activist organization prompting major advertisers to withdraw from Beck's top-rated Fox News Channel program.
Last week, NewsBusters reported President Obama's "green jobs czar," Van Jones, is co-founder of ColorofChange.org, an activist organization that has led a furious campaign against Beck culminating in major companies such as Geico and Lawyers.com pulling their spots from the Fox News star's daily show.
In recent weeks, Beck has done several critical segments about Van Jones, who was appointed as the special adviser for green jobs, enterprise and innovation at the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Van Jones' group says the controversy stems from Beck's recent comment while a guest on another Fox News show that Obama is a "racist" with "a deep-seated hatred for white people."
ColorofChange did not return a WND request for comment about whether its crusade is tied to Beck's recent reporting about Van Jones' radical connections.
NewsBusters exposed Van Jones is a co-founder of ColorofChange. The group's executive director is James Rucker, who previously served as director of Grassroots Mobilization for the radical MoveOn.org.
Immediately following the NewsBusters report, ColorofChange scrubbed its site of any mention of Jones. However, a Google cache of the site lists Jones as a founder.
Jones, formerly a self-described "rowdy black nationalist," boasted in a 2005 interview with the left-leaning East Bay Express that his environmental activism was a means to fight for racial and class "justice."
He was a founder and leader of the communist revolutionary organization Standing Together to Organize a Revolutionary Movement, or STORM. The organization had its roots in a grouping of black people organizing to protest the first Gulf War. STORM was formally founded in 1994, becoming one of the most influential and active radical groups in the San Francisco Bay area.
The leftist blog Machete 48 identifies STORM's influences as "third-worldist Marxism (and an often vulgar Maoism)."
Speaking to the East Bay Express, Van Jones said he first became radicalized in the wake of the 1992 Rodney King riots, during which time he was arrested.
"I was a rowdy nationalist on April 28th, and then the verdicts came down on April 29th," he said. "By August, I was a communist."
"I met all these young radical people of color – I mean really radical: communists and anarchists. And it was, like, 'This is what I need to be a part of.' I spent the next 10 years of my life working with a lot of those people I met in jail, trying to be a revolutionary," he said.
His appointment as a White House environmental adviser was announced March 10.
End quote.
So why would an environmentalist liberal care about what someone says on tv? After all, liberals claim to be uber tolerant and hail dissent from the "establishment", right? What does "being green" have to do with someone expressing their views publically?
Environmentalism is NOT about the environment; its about communism: they dictate what you shall buy, wear, drive, work, and say.
THIS IS WHERE LIBERALISM LEADS.
Birds of a feather flock together: Barrack Hussein Obama, Jeremiah Wright, Van Jones, Bill Ayers, ACORN.....
Obama's Watching You Surf The Internet As Well As What You Say About Death Care
Every breath you take,
every click you make,
every site you check,
every email you take,
Obama's watching you...
GET YOUR LAWYERS LINED UP NOW!
WASHINGTON – The Barack Obama administration has announced plans to lift a government ban on tracking visitors to government websites, and potentially, collect their personal data through the use of "cookies" – an effort some suspect may already be in place on White House sites.
A ban on such tracking by the federal government on Internet users has been in place since 2000, however, the White House Office of Management and Budget now wants to lift the ban citing a "compelling need."
In fact, according to the Electronic Privacy and Information Center, federal agencies have already negotiated agreements and contracts with social networking sites like Google, YouTube, SlideShare, Facebook, AddThis, Blist, Flickr and VIMEO to collect information on visitors for federal web sites. All of these private companies are known to have agreements with federal agencies, but the public has never seen them.
When White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was recently asked by Fox News reporter Major Garrett why Americans who had not signed up to receive any e-mails from the White House, were now receiving e-mails from White House adviser David Axelrod promoting President Obama's health care plan, Gibbs refused to answer the question.
"The Obama administration's favorite book seems to be '1984' by George Orwell," said Brad O’Leary, publisher of The O'Leary Report monthly newsletter and author of "Shut Up, America: The End of Free Speech." "Only they don't see '1984' as a warning, but rather a blueprint for spying on every American who visits a government website – something that has been banned for nearly a decade."
According to Obama "technology czar" Vivek Kundra, the "compelling need" driving this major policy reversal is the administration's desire to create "more open" government and to "enhance citizen participation in government."
End quote.
But Obama is not "more open" with HIS information of birth, school records, college transcripts, medical records.
All this is contrary to what one Obama minon, Bill Burton told Megyn Kelly on Fox News last week (the liars):
Something smells fishy and it ain't the citizens of America. China restricts certain websites to their citizens. Iran shut down cell phone usage during the riots.
every click you make,
every site you check,
every email you take,
Obama's watching you...
GET YOUR LAWYERS LINED UP NOW!
WASHINGTON – The Barack Obama administration has announced plans to lift a government ban on tracking visitors to government websites, and potentially, collect their personal data through the use of "cookies" – an effort some suspect may already be in place on White House sites.
A ban on such tracking by the federal government on Internet users has been in place since 2000, however, the White House Office of Management and Budget now wants to lift the ban citing a "compelling need."
In fact, according to the Electronic Privacy and Information Center, federal agencies have already negotiated agreements and contracts with social networking sites like Google, YouTube, SlideShare, Facebook, AddThis, Blist, Flickr and VIMEO to collect information on visitors for federal web sites. All of these private companies are known to have agreements with federal agencies, but the public has never seen them.
When White House press secretary Robert Gibbs was recently asked by Fox News reporter Major Garrett why Americans who had not signed up to receive any e-mails from the White House, were now receiving e-mails from White House adviser David Axelrod promoting President Obama's health care plan, Gibbs refused to answer the question.
"The Obama administration's favorite book seems to be '1984' by George Orwell," said Brad O’Leary, publisher of The O'Leary Report monthly newsletter and author of "Shut Up, America: The End of Free Speech." "Only they don't see '1984' as a warning, but rather a blueprint for spying on every American who visits a government website – something that has been banned for nearly a decade."
According to Obama "technology czar" Vivek Kundra, the "compelling need" driving this major policy reversal is the administration's desire to create "more open" government and to "enhance citizen participation in government."
End quote.
But Obama is not "more open" with HIS information of birth, school records, college transcripts, medical records.
All this is contrary to what one Obama minon, Bill Burton told Megyn Kelly on Fox News last week (the liars):
Something smells fishy and it ain't the citizens of America. China restricts certain websites to their citizens. Iran shut down cell phone usage during the riots.
Do You Love God Surpremely?
Their supreme deity!
(Edward Griffin)
It is distressing to look through our congregations and see how people neglect God--how they live as though there were no God.
Supreme love to God will certainly produce self-denial for His sake. It will habitually avoid everything which He has forbidden; and will obey, not a part, but all of His commands. Supreme love will seek communion with its object more than any worldly pleasure. It will pant after Him--and after greater conformity to Him; it will seek His glory as its highest interest; it will consider Him as its most desirable portion; it will delight in thinking of Him more than in any worldly object; it will delight in prayer; it will renounce the world and idols--and cultivate a heavenly mind.As humiliating as the thought is--we know that every person is God's enemy, until he is born again. "The carnal mind is enmity against God." Hence it is, that so many people who attend public worship and lead regular lives, are . . . so unmindful of God from day after day, neglect prayer, put eternal things out of view, and lose themselves in the eager pursuit of the world.
They must be conscious, if they will but reflect, that the world engages more of their care--than God or their souls--and is of course their supreme deity. They must be conscious that prayer is a burden--that pious fellowship is a burden--that the thoughts of God which sometimes intrude are unwelcome--that the Christian service is not agreeable to their taste--that they would rather be employed in amusement, or business, or pleasure, or sloth--than in piety; that they would rather be reading an amusing story--than in searching the Scriptures.
Surely such people do not love God. Such minds could not be happy in heaven--if admitted there. They must undergo a radical change--or certainly they can find no happiness beyond the grave. Ah Lord God, how many of such are to be found among us--among the dearest friends of our hearts!
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Tullian Tchividjian: Not all is well at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church
All is not well at Tullian Tchividjian's church, Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church (formly D. James Kennedy's church before he suddenly passed away):
Quote:
Six members of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church -- including the daughter of founding pastor D. James Kennedy -- have been banned from the premises and all functions of the Fort Lauderdale church.
Besides Jennifer Kennedy Cassidy, Kennedy's daughter, the people banned are Lorna Bryan, Kaye Carlson, Romeo DeMarco, and Jim and Jeanne Filosa. They have been ordered to stay off church property and out of church programs, and ``to stop writing accusatory letters to the congregation.''
Tchividjian fired back in his letter to the congregation: ``No church government can tolerate such an insurrection from those who will not listen to admonition, refuse all counsel, and will stop at nothing until they have overthrown legitimate authority and replaced it with their own.''
End quote.
Time will reveal what's going on, however I think Tchividjian's view of church government not only is off, but has echoes of Rome's toward those within who was protesting its leadership. Interesting....
About Tchividjian:
Quote:
His second book, Unfashionable: Making a Difference in the World by Being Different (foreword by Tim Keller), is due out from Multnomah next month. Keller is Emergent with a Reformed bent. But as long as he claims TULIP he gets a free pass AND a big push by Reformers.
Tullian's list of favorite books include interfaith and ecumenical authors listed. Shane Trammel notes: "T.M. Moore, J.I. Packer, Os Guinness, and Chuck Colson. All four of these men signed the document “Evangelical and Catholics Together”.
Tullian likes Ricky Warren. Go here on why Rick Warren is a false teacher.
A woman is Director of Ministry Development at his New City Church. Her "testimony" as well as having this kind of leadership role over the direction of the church gives one pause.
All these issues gives a red flag for Tchividjian being a senior pastor of anything. Of course, D. James Kennedy was pretty man-centered as well, so I think this is actually a good fit. However, the rubber stamping of men who either have famous connections or claim TULIP or Reformed, is utterly shameful, when its clear that such men have shown a lack of biblical discernment.
End quote.
Quote:
Six members of Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church -- including the daughter of founding pastor D. James Kennedy -- have been banned from the premises and all functions of the Fort Lauderdale church.
Besides Jennifer Kennedy Cassidy, Kennedy's daughter, the people banned are Lorna Bryan, Kaye Carlson, Romeo DeMarco, and Jim and Jeanne Filosa. They have been ordered to stay off church property and out of church programs, and ``to stop writing accusatory letters to the congregation.''
Tchividjian fired back in his letter to the congregation: ``No church government can tolerate such an insurrection from those who will not listen to admonition, refuse all counsel, and will stop at nothing until they have overthrown legitimate authority and replaced it with their own.''
End quote.
Time will reveal what's going on, however I think Tchividjian's view of church government not only is off, but has echoes of Rome's toward those within who was protesting its leadership. Interesting....
About Tchividjian:
Quote:
His second book, Unfashionable: Making a Difference in the World by Being Different (foreword by Tim Keller), is due out from Multnomah next month. Keller is Emergent with a Reformed bent. But as long as he claims TULIP he gets a free pass AND a big push by Reformers.
Tullian's list of favorite books include interfaith and ecumenical authors listed. Shane Trammel notes: "T.M. Moore, J.I. Packer, Os Guinness, and Chuck Colson. All four of these men signed the document “Evangelical and Catholics Together”.
Tullian likes Ricky Warren. Go here on why Rick Warren is a false teacher.
A woman is Director of Ministry Development at his New City Church. Her "testimony" as well as having this kind of leadership role over the direction of the church gives one pause.
All these issues gives a red flag for Tchividjian being a senior pastor of anything. Of course, D. James Kennedy was pretty man-centered as well, so I think this is actually a good fit. However, the rubber stamping of men who either have famous connections or claim TULIP or Reformed, is utterly shameful, when its clear that such men have shown a lack of biblical discernment.
End quote.
Thursday, August 13, 2009
When God Laughs
Keeping in mind our wicked times....
When God laughs
(Charles Spurgeon, "The Treasury of David")
"The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord ridicules them!" Psalm 2:4
Note God's derision of the rebellious! What will the King do unto those who reject Him? Mark the quiet dignity of the Omnipotent One, and the contempt which He pours upon His raging enemies. He has not taken the trouble to rise up and do battle with them--He despises them, He knows how absurd, how irrational, how futile are their attempts against Him. He therefore laughs at them! (Charles Spurgeon)
"The One enthroned in heaven . . ." Hereby it is clearly intimated,
(1) that the Lord is far above all their malice and power;
(2) that He sees all their plots, looking down on all;
(3) that He is of omnipotent power, and so can do with His enemies just as He desires. "Our God is in the heavens! He has done whatever He has pleased."
(Arthur Jackson)
"Sinners' follies are the righteous sport of God's infinite wisdom and power. Those attempts of the kingdom of Satan, which in our eyes are formidable, in God's eyes are despicable." (Matthew Henry)
When God laughs
(Charles Spurgeon, "The Treasury of David")
"The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord ridicules them!" Psalm 2:4
Note God's derision of the rebellious! What will the King do unto those who reject Him? Mark the quiet dignity of the Omnipotent One, and the contempt which He pours upon His raging enemies. He has not taken the trouble to rise up and do battle with them--He despises them, He knows how absurd, how irrational, how futile are their attempts against Him. He therefore laughs at them! (Charles Spurgeon)
"The One enthroned in heaven . . ." Hereby it is clearly intimated,
(1) that the Lord is far above all their malice and power;
(2) that He sees all their plots, looking down on all;
(3) that He is of omnipotent power, and so can do with His enemies just as He desires. "Our God is in the heavens! He has done whatever He has pleased."
(Arthur Jackson)
"Sinners' follies are the righteous sport of God's infinite wisdom and power. Those attempts of the kingdom of Satan, which in our eyes are formidable, in God's eyes are despicable." (Matthew Henry)
Wednesday, August 12, 2009
Evangelicalism: Dogmatically Non-Dogmatic
In a piece from Christian Post we read:
In a climate where dogmatism is the new heresy, many evangelicals have backed away from bold preaching while “freely imbibing” the spirit of the postmodern age, says one well-known minister.
“It seems that zeal for the essential doctrines of biblical Christianity has become virtually as unacceptable among evangelicals and post-evangelicals as it always has been in the world at large,” John MacArthur writes in his newly released book, The Jesus You Can’t Ignore.
The evangelical movement used to be known for two nonnegotiable theological convictions – one of them being the absolute accuracy and authority of Scripture, and the other being Jesus Christ as the only way of salvation.But today, evangelicalism has become an “amorphous monstrosity” where practically every idea is brought to the evangelical table for discussion, MacArthur says… Before writing his book, MacArthur – pastor of the nondenominational megachurch Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, Calif. – read through literature representing “postevangelical” points of view.
End quote.
Go to the link above for more.
Democrat Bob Beckel Admits He Used to Organize "Townhall" Meetings
Under the Catagory of: Tell Us Something We Didn't Already Know!
Proving my point that when a liberal is accusing others of something,its because they do it and assume others do too (here's another example, and here), is Bob Beckel, a Democrat with a "grass roots" company (which by the way, is an oxymoron) admits on Fox News, that he used to organize townhall meetings (read: stack them, plant them, stage them, astroturf), so he ASSUMES that's the case with the anti-Death Care Bill townhall meetings. Sadly, the likes of this guy can't fathom that people are actually reading the bill and are dissenting vehemently.
According to even liberal Media Matters: From the August 12 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom: start at time mark 1:30
BECKEL: You all ought to back off. Did he make progress yesterday? Yes, because he underscored a couple of things. How absolutely ridiculous and fearmongering these arguments are. And secondly, for anybody who believes that these things are not organized, I used to do this for a living. I used to get these town meetings organized with my grassroots company.
TANTAROS: Bob, the only thing that is organized are the unions showing up. Those are the most professionally made signs --
BECKEL: Oh, come on.
TANTAROS: No, look at the signs, Bob. They are professionally made. You can't tell me when you have a bill that is baked with every kind of political poison -- I mean, tax increases, half a trillion dollars in tax increases, penalties for businesses, something that's going to increase the national debt, something that's going to cut 500 billion for Medicare, you cannot expect anything but real outrage.
BECKEL: You believe -- you believe -- you really believe that this was a nonorganized, spontaneous outpouring of democracy?
TANTAROS: Oh --
BECKEL: If you believe that, then you believe in the tooth fairy.
TANTAROS: Oh, yeah.
BECKEL: I'm telling you, these people, they don't like this health care reform. I understand that, and they've got a right to be heard. But to suggest that they are not organized by groups on the other side that are spending their time calling these people, getting to these things, and saying, by the way, make sure you write handwritten signs. If you believe that that is spontaneous, then --
TANTAROS: Bob, keep telling yourself that.
Proving my point that when a liberal is accusing others of something,its because they do it and assume others do too (here's another example, and here), is Bob Beckel, a Democrat with a "grass roots" company (which by the way, is an oxymoron) admits on Fox News, that he used to organize townhall meetings (read: stack them, plant them, stage them, astroturf), so he ASSUMES that's the case with the anti-Death Care Bill townhall meetings. Sadly, the likes of this guy can't fathom that people are actually reading the bill and are dissenting vehemently.
According to even liberal Media Matters: From the August 12 edition of Fox News' America's Newsroom: start at time mark 1:30
BECKEL: You all ought to back off. Did he make progress yesterday? Yes, because he underscored a couple of things. How absolutely ridiculous and fearmongering these arguments are. And secondly, for anybody who believes that these things are not organized, I used to do this for a living. I used to get these town meetings organized with my grassroots company.
TANTAROS: Bob, the only thing that is organized are the unions showing up. Those are the most professionally made signs --
BECKEL: Oh, come on.
TANTAROS: No, look at the signs, Bob. They are professionally made. You can't tell me when you have a bill that is baked with every kind of political poison -- I mean, tax increases, half a trillion dollars in tax increases, penalties for businesses, something that's going to increase the national debt, something that's going to cut 500 billion for Medicare, you cannot expect anything but real outrage.
BECKEL: You believe -- you believe -- you really believe that this was a nonorganized, spontaneous outpouring of democracy?
TANTAROS: Oh --
BECKEL: If you believe that, then you believe in the tooth fairy.
TANTAROS: Oh, yeah.
BECKEL: I'm telling you, these people, they don't like this health care reform. I understand that, and they've got a right to be heard. But to suggest that they are not organized by groups on the other side that are spending their time calling these people, getting to these things, and saying, by the way, make sure you write handwritten signs. If you believe that that is spontaneous, then --
TANTAROS: Bob, keep telling yourself that.
Patrick Henry Speaks To Us Today
Patrick Henry's passionate speech is just as appropriate for today against King Obama as it was against King George III.
"No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings."
"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
...Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land.
....And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves."
...We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope....--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!"
"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power....
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come."
"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
"No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The questing before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings."
"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
...Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with those warlike preparations which cover our waters and darken our land.
....And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain. Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves."
...We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne! In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope....--we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of hosts is all that is left us!"
"They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance by lying supinely on our backs and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power....
The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable--and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come."
"It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace-- but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Monday, August 10, 2009
Nancy Peolosi Calls Heated Debate On Socialistic Health Care "Unpatriotic"
I wrote to Nancy Pelosi on her article "'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate".
I reminded her of her pal Hillary's tirade on the Senate Floor a few years back when she said:
“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any and disagree with any administration.”
I asked Nancy if she actually read the whole Health Care Bill or was it a staffer who just told her what they thought she needed to know. The fact is that Americans ARE reading this horrific socialistic bill and are outraged and rightly so.
Seeing as, according to a recent Homeland Security report, I'm a security risk anyway, so what's one more thing added to that?I'll just need to have the name of a good lawyer. ;)
Here Barney Frank gets emotional and irrational over a Harvard Law student asking hard and important questions and Frank is unable to do so with civility...perhaps Pelosi needs to have a little talk with her pal Frank?
Let's also look at a townhall meeting where Dems get physical.
****UPDATE****
Here's a "civil" townhall meeting with the infamous Sheila Jackson Lee on her phone during a voter's question to her:
I reminded her of her pal Hillary's tirade on the Senate Floor a few years back when she said:
“I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any and disagree with any administration.”
I asked Nancy if she actually read the whole Health Care Bill or was it a staffer who just told her what they thought she needed to know. The fact is that Americans ARE reading this horrific socialistic bill and are outraged and rightly so.
Seeing as, according to a recent Homeland Security report, I'm a security risk anyway, so what's one more thing added to that?I'll just need to have the name of a good lawyer. ;)
Here Barney Frank gets emotional and irrational over a Harvard Law student asking hard and important questions and Frank is unable to do so with civility...perhaps Pelosi needs to have a little talk with her pal Frank?
Let's also look at a townhall meeting where Dems get physical.
****UPDATE****
Here's a "civil" townhall meeting with the infamous Sheila Jackson Lee on her phone during a voter's question to her:
The utter ruin and spiritual death of your children
Parents! Your children are as surely as grown-up people, "dead in trespasses and sins!" May no parent fail fully to realize the spiritual state in which all human beings are naturally found. Unless you have a very clear sense of the utter ruin and spiritual death of your children, you will be incapable of being made a blessing to them. Go to them, I beg you, not as to 'sleepers' whom you can by your own power awaken from their slumber--but as to 'spiritual corpses' who can only be quickened by a divine power!
If you think that your child is 'not really depraved', if you indulge foolish notions about the 'innocence of childhood', it should not surprise you if you remain barren and unfruitful.
If you would bring spiritual life to your child--you must most vividly realize that child's state. It is dead, dead! God will have you feel that your child is dead in trespasses and sins--as you once were. God would have you come into contact with that death by painful, crushing, humbling sympathy. If you would raise your dead child to spiritual life--you must feel the chill and horror of your child's death yourself. You must have, more or less, a distinct sense of the dreadful wrath of God, and of the terrors of the judgment to come. Depend upon it, when the spiritual death of your children alarms and overwhelms you--then it is that God is about to bless you!
~Spurgeon
If you think that your child is 'not really depraved', if you indulge foolish notions about the 'innocence of childhood', it should not surprise you if you remain barren and unfruitful.
If you would bring spiritual life to your child--you must most vividly realize that child's state. It is dead, dead! God will have you feel that your child is dead in trespasses and sins--as you once were. God would have you come into contact with that death by painful, crushing, humbling sympathy. If you would raise your dead child to spiritual life--you must feel the chill and horror of your child's death yourself. You must have, more or less, a distinct sense of the dreadful wrath of God, and of the terrors of the judgment to come. Depend upon it, when the spiritual death of your children alarms and overwhelms you--then it is that God is about to bless you!
~Spurgeon
Saturday, August 08, 2009
In The Great Exchange, I Was No Bargin, Surely!
Thanks to Slice of Laodicea for this heads up.
I truly believe that in the Great Exchange on the Cross; Christ in my stead, I was no bargin! The King of Glory, sinless and Ruler of all creation took my rightful place on the hideous cross? Truly a wonderous thought!
Here it is:
“That Christ should love man when he was most unlovely, that man’s extreme misery should but inflame Christ’s love and mercy, this melts the believing soul.
That Christ should leave the eternal bosom of his Father; that he that was equal with God should come in the form of a servant; that he that was clothed with glory, and born a king, should be wrapped in rags; that he that the heaven of heavens could not contain should be cradled in a manger; that from his cradle to his cross, his whole life should be a life of sorrows and sufferings; that the Judge of all flesh should be condemned; that the Lord of life should be put to death; that he that was his Father’s joy should in anguish of spirit cry out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”; that that head that was crowned with honour should be crowned with thorns; that those eyes that were as a flame of fire, that were dearer than the sun, should be closed up by the darkness of death; that those ears which were wont to hear nothing but hallelujahs should hear nothing but blasphemies; that that face that was white and ruddy should be spit upon by the Jews; that that tongue that spake as never man spake, yea, as never angel spake, should be accused of blasphemy; that those hands which swayed both a golden sceptre and a iron rod, and those feet that were as fine brass should be nailed to the cross; and all this for man’s transgression, for man’s rebellion: Oh! the sight of these things, the believing of these things, the acting of faith on these things, makes a gracious soul to break and bleed, to sigh and groan, to mourn and lament.”
—Thomas Brooks, Heaven on Earth
I truly believe that in the Great Exchange on the Cross; Christ in my stead, I was no bargin! The King of Glory, sinless and Ruler of all creation took my rightful place on the hideous cross? Truly a wonderous thought!
Here it is:
“That Christ should love man when he was most unlovely, that man’s extreme misery should but inflame Christ’s love and mercy, this melts the believing soul.
That Christ should leave the eternal bosom of his Father; that he that was equal with God should come in the form of a servant; that he that was clothed with glory, and born a king, should be wrapped in rags; that he that the heaven of heavens could not contain should be cradled in a manger; that from his cradle to his cross, his whole life should be a life of sorrows and sufferings; that the Judge of all flesh should be condemned; that the Lord of life should be put to death; that he that was his Father’s joy should in anguish of spirit cry out, “My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?”; that that head that was crowned with honour should be crowned with thorns; that those eyes that were as a flame of fire, that were dearer than the sun, should be closed up by the darkness of death; that those ears which were wont to hear nothing but hallelujahs should hear nothing but blasphemies; that that face that was white and ruddy should be spit upon by the Jews; that that tongue that spake as never man spake, yea, as never angel spake, should be accused of blasphemy; that those hands which swayed both a golden sceptre and a iron rod, and those feet that were as fine brass should be nailed to the cross; and all this for man’s transgression, for man’s rebellion: Oh! the sight of these things, the believing of these things, the acting of faith on these things, makes a gracious soul to break and bleed, to sigh and groan, to mourn and lament.”
—Thomas Brooks, Heaven on Earth
Tolerance of Terrorists, But Not Dissenting Americans
Your White House, Your President, Your Elected Leaders...aren't practicing the same tolerance they give to terrorists by sitting down and having tea and a chat. Then again, the GOP is known for cowering to any strong arm.
Quote:
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.
The hourlong session was the last opportunity for Democratic leaders and the White House to prepare senators for what will be a crucial month in shaping public opinion on health care. With no final legislation to promote, senators have expressed concern about dealing with questions and criticisms about the almost $1 trillion overhaul. The spate of confrontational town hall meetings have raised the stakes.
“They are just helping us understand the fringe that is trying to mess up our meetings,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
End quote.
See here for video of the violence of the left toward those on the right.
Quote:
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting.
The hourlong session was the last opportunity for Democratic leaders and the White House to prepare senators for what will be a crucial month in shaping public opinion on health care. With no final legislation to promote, senators have expressed concern about dealing with questions and criticisms about the almost $1 trillion overhaul. The spate of confrontational town hall meetings have raised the stakes.
“They are just helping us understand the fringe that is trying to mess up our meetings,” said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.).
End quote.
See here for video of the violence of the left toward those on the right.
Liberal Hypocrisy: Spoiled Children Who Can't Fathom "NO!"
Funny how the liberals within and without the White House can't fathom that the American citizens aren't taking their lies and their socialism lying down! They act like spoiled children who have just come across a grown up that is the first person in their life to tell them "NO".
The key to understanding liberals is this: whatever they are accusing us of saying, just turn it around on them and you pretty much have the truth. Only the Dems and libs bus in fake protesters and voters, but now they are accusing their opponents of doing that. Wait a second, even if that were true (which its not proven to be), so what? They do it all the time. Just as ACORN.
The key to understanding liberals is this: whatever they are accusing us of saying, just turn it around on them and you pretty much have the truth. Only the Dems and libs bus in fake protesters and voters, but now they are accusing their opponents of doing that. Wait a second, even if that were true (which its not proven to be), so what? They do it all the time. Just as ACORN.
Keith Olbermann: That Protester Right There is Holding *gasp* a BIBLE!!!!
On MSNBC's show w/ Keith Olbermann who calls protesters against BHO as "fake", said, "That protester right there is holding a Bible."
Oh Keith, the shock! The horror!
And the woman holding the Bible says "Its the only truth...right here."
Ironically this notation of a Bible comes on the heels of Keith slaming all protesters and tea parties and townhall meetings as "fake"--which makes the Bible-holding "fake" protester, what, exactly? LOL He can't have it both ways.
However this highlights the ultimate issue, which all liberals and Olbermann can't stand: God and His Word are the first and FINAL authority, period. And people actually DO believe It. Olbermann speaks like a vemonous, angry adolescent who is stomping at his parents for not doing what he wants them to do.
Would ol' Keith have commented if someone held a quran up?
Scripture alone is the sole authority for all things pertaining to life and godliness. Those outside of Christ go everywhere but the God of Truth, and thus follow after the spirit of disobedience and the god of this world, fulfilling their sinful fleshly desires and shoving an angry fist up at God.Friday, August 07, 2009
Silence of US Leaders On White House Call For List of Death Care Dissenters
News:
Texas Sen. John Cornyn, accusing the White House of compiling an "enemies list," has asked President Barack Obama to stop an effort to collect "fishy" information Americans see about a health care overhaul.
Cornyn was responding to a post on the White House's blog Wednesday in which users are asked to help stop the spread of disinformation about legislation to overhaul health insurance. The post offers an e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov, for users to forward anything "on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy."
The White House said the post was merely designed to fight "intentionally misleading" information in the health care debate.
"We want to be sure people have the facts about health insurance reform that will lower costs, protect consumers from insurance regulations that deny them coverage and assure quality and affordable health care for all Americans," said Adam Abrams, a White House spokesman. He said no lists or sources of the information would be compiled.
He said Cornyn had not yet considered whether he would push for legislation to address the matter if necessary.
Unquote.
Actually the White House IS compiling a list:
"Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
The problem is that Obama and his minions have done nothing BUT lie about the Death Care bill. Obama's ticked off because Americans, UNLIKE THEIR COWARDLY "leaders", are actually READING THE BILL.
I thought this was America. I thought the Constitution ACTUALLY says we have freedom of expression (including making posters of Obama as "The Joker")? But King Obama can't stand to have dissent.
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT CORYN AND ANY OTHER LEADERS WOULD NOT PUSH FOR LEGISLATION TO STOP THE WHITEHOUSE FROM REQUESTING AND COMPILING NAMES OF THOSE WHO THEY DISAGREE WITH?
This should've already been done by now. Where's the anger of our leaders????
Texas Sen. John Cornyn, accusing the White House of compiling an "enemies list," has asked President Barack Obama to stop an effort to collect "fishy" information Americans see about a health care overhaul.
Cornyn was responding to a post on the White House's blog Wednesday in which users are asked to help stop the spread of disinformation about legislation to overhaul health insurance. The post offers an e-mail address, flag@whitehouse.gov, for users to forward anything "on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy."
The White House said the post was merely designed to fight "intentionally misleading" information in the health care debate.
"We want to be sure people have the facts about health insurance reform that will lower costs, protect consumers from insurance regulations that deny them coverage and assure quality and affordable health care for all Americans," said Adam Abrams, a White House spokesman. He said no lists or sources of the information would be compiled.
He said Cornyn had not yet considered whether he would push for legislation to address the matter if necessary.
Unquote.
Actually the White House IS compiling a list:
"Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov."
The problem is that Obama and his minions have done nothing BUT lie about the Death Care bill. Obama's ticked off because Americans, UNLIKE THEIR COWARDLY "leaders", are actually READING THE BILL.
I thought this was America. I thought the Constitution ACTUALLY says we have freedom of expression (including making posters of Obama as "The Joker")? But King Obama can't stand to have dissent.
HOW IS IT POSSIBLE THAT CORYN AND ANY OTHER LEADERS WOULD NOT PUSH FOR LEGISLATION TO STOP THE WHITEHOUSE FROM REQUESTING AND COMPILING NAMES OF THOSE WHO THEY DISAGREE WITH?
This should've already been done by now. Where's the anger of our leaders????
Thursday, August 06, 2009
Liberal Theology Makes An Idol of God's Grace
Mike Ratliff says in part (teaching on Romans 8:1-2):
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1-2 ESV)
Liberal theology makes an idol of God’s grace. It claims that God’s grace trumps His wrath, His judgment, His holiness, and His righteousness. Some of its proponents go so far as to separate our Lord Jesus Christ from God as He is revealed in the Old Testament. The New Evangelism and the emergents have bought into these errors in a big way. Combine this with very “cool” preachers, such as Rob Bell, who are somewhat intellectual in how they write and preach and you have a combination of sorts that is particularly attractive to the younger generation. Of course, those who believe like this are most certainly not limited to just the young. In any case, of what does the genuine Christian life in the Spirit consist? What does it mean that Christians belong to the Lord Jesus?
End quote.
He goes on to share a Puritan Prayer and then exegete Romans 8:1-2. But the above caught my eye because he is RIGHT ON TARGET! He said it better than I could. Liberal theology really does make an IDOL of God's grace. That is to say, its no longer true grace nor that of the true God of Scripture---twisting and distorting Scripture and God is what the ignorant and unstable do, to their own destruction, 2Peter 3:16 says.
People who reject God's holiness will never see their own total depravity and therefore their need of forgiveness of sin, mercy, and grace. They still own pride and wave it around in their rebellion against the Holy Holy Holy God. They are glory robbers, white-washed tombstones: looking pretty good with some "good" works, but inside they are dead, rotten, and decayed with a stentch that is putrid.
Coming "face to face" with the God of Scripture, not the god of our own imagination or dreams, but as HE truly IS, will cause us to face ourselves as we TRULY ARE: sinful, unclean, unholy, desrving Hell, dead, disobedient, in the flesh, lawless, disobedient, and His enemy.
A few examples of those who saw God as He is:
Isaiah:
Isa 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple.
Isa 6:2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.
Isa 6:3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!"
Isa 6:4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke.
Isa 6:5 And I said: "Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!"
Isa 6:6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a burning coal that he had taken with tongs from the altar.
Isa 6:7 And he touched my mouth and said: "Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for."
Job:
Job 42:5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you; 6 therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes."
The Samitan villiage where the woman at the well lived:
Joh 4:42 They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world."
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. (Romans 8:1-2 ESV)
Liberal theology makes an idol of God’s grace. It claims that God’s grace trumps His wrath, His judgment, His holiness, and His righteousness. Some of its proponents go so far as to separate our Lord Jesus Christ from God as He is revealed in the Old Testament. The New Evangelism and the emergents have bought into these errors in a big way. Combine this with very “cool” preachers, such as Rob Bell, who are somewhat intellectual in how they write and preach and you have a combination of sorts that is particularly attractive to the younger generation. Of course, those who believe like this are most certainly not limited to just the young. In any case, of what does the genuine Christian life in the Spirit consist? What does it mean that Christians belong to the Lord Jesus?
End quote.
He goes on to share a Puritan Prayer and then exegete Romans 8:1-2. But the above caught my eye because he is RIGHT ON TARGET! He said it better than I could. Liberal theology really does make an IDOL of God's grace. That is to say, its no longer true grace nor that of the true God of Scripture---twisting and distorting Scripture and God is what the ignorant and unstable do, to their own destruction, 2Peter 3:16 says.
People who reject God's holiness will never see their own total depravity and therefore their need of forgiveness of sin, mercy, and grace. They still own pride and wave it around in their rebellion against the Holy Holy Holy God. They are glory robbers, white-washed tombstones: looking pretty good with some "good" works, but inside they are dead, rotten, and decayed with a stentch that is putrid.
Coming "face to face" with the God of Scripture, not the god of our own imagination or dreams, but as HE truly IS, will cause us to face ourselves as we TRULY ARE: sinful, unclean, unholy, desrving Hell, dead, disobedient, in the flesh, lawless, disobedient, and His enemy.
A few examples of those who saw God as He is:
Isaiah:
Isa 6:1 In the year that King Uzziah died I saw the Lord sitting upon a throne, high and lifted up; and the train of his robe filled the temple.
Isa 6:2 Above him stood the seraphim. Each had six wings: with two he covered his face, and with two he covered his feet, and with two he flew.
Isa 6:3 And one called to another and said: "Holy, holy, holy is the LORD of hosts; the whole earth is full of his glory!"
Isa 6:4 And the foundations of the thresholds shook at the voice of him who called, and the house was filled with smoke.
Isa 6:5 And I said: "Woe is me! For I am lost; for I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips; for my eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts!"
Isa 6:6 Then one of the seraphim flew to me, having in his hand a burning coal that he had taken with tongs from the altar.
Isa 6:7 And he touched my mouth and said: "Behold, this has touched your lips; your guilt is taken away, and your sin atoned for."
Job:
Job 42:5 I had heard of you by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees you; 6 therefore I despise myself, and repent in dust and ashes."
The Samitan villiage where the woman at the well lived:
Joh 4:42 They said to the woman, "It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this is indeed the Savior of the world."
Splendid Sins!
Splendid sins!
(Charles Spurgeon)
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." Hebrews 11:6
Without saving faith, all moral virtues are but splendid sins!
Unbelief nullifies everything! It is the dead fly in the ointment! It is the poison in the pot!
All the moral virtues, all the benevolence of philanthropy, all the kindness of unselfish sympathy, all the talents of genius, all the bravery of patriotism--give no title to Divine acceptance, for "without faith it is impossible to please God."
(Charles Spurgeon)
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." Hebrews 11:6
Without saving faith, all moral virtues are but splendid sins!
Unbelief nullifies everything! It is the dead fly in the ointment! It is the poison in the pot!
All the moral virtues, all the benevolence of philanthropy, all the kindness of unselfish sympathy, all the talents of genius, all the bravery of patriotism--give no title to Divine acceptance, for "without faith it is impossible to please God."
Rick Warren And The Shack
In reporting on "The Shack" Warren Smith reveals more error with Rick Warren, and The Shack .
Quote:
In a November 9, 2003 Hour of Power sermon – just two months before he was a featured speaker at the annual meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals – Crystal Cathedral minister Robert Schuller unabashedly aligned himself with this same New Age/New World Religion teaching.
The man who claims to have mentored thousands of pastors, including Bill Hybels and Rick Warren, stated:
One of the many reasons I wrote Deceived on Purpose was because Rick Warren presented his readers with this same “God in everything” teaching. Quoting an obviously flawed New Century Bible translation of Ephesians 4:6, Rick Warren — whether he meant to or not — was teaching his millions of readers the foundational doctrine of the New World Religion. Describing God in his book, The Purpose-Driven Life, he wrote:“He rules everything and is everywhere and is in everything.” (p. 88)
Compounding the matter further, “immanence” has been taught as part of the Foundations class at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church. An ill-defined reference to immanence on page 46 of the Saddleback Foundations Participants Guide plays right into the hands of the New Spirituality/New World Religion by stating:
“The fact that God stands above and beyond his creation does not mean he stands outside his creation. He is both transcendent (above and beyond his creation) and immanent (within and throughout his creation).”
The Bible makes it clear that man is not divine and that man is not God (Ezekiel 28:2, Hosea 11:9, John 2:24-25, etc.)
End quote.
According to Lighthouse Trails Research:
" This panentheistic New Age/New Spirituality teaching that God is “in” everything will be the “common ground” melting pot belief that the coming New World Religion will ultimately rest upon. In The Tides of Change, it is clear that Rick Warren and Leonard Sweet are working toward a “New Reformation” of the church."
Panentheism is:
Related to Process Theology, panentheism is essentially a combination of theism (God is the supreme being) and pantheism (God is everything). While pantheism says that God and the universe are coextensive, panentheism claims the God is greater than the universe and that the universe is contained within God. Panentheism holds that God is the “supreme effect” of the universe. God is everything in the universe, but God also is greater the universe. Events and changes in the universe effect and change God. As the universe grows and learns, God also increases in knowledge and being.
Panentheism is most definitely not biblical. In fact, it is extreme heresy that impugns the character of God and makes Him more like a man. God is present everywhere (Psalm 139:7-8), but God is not everything. God knows everything, whether actual or possible (Psalm 139:1-6; Romans 11:33-35). God does not learn because He already has all knowledge. God is “affected” by things that occur in the universe, but only in that sin angers Him and holiness pleases Him. Our actions do not change God or impact His essential being.
The Bible presents God as holy (Isaiah 6:3; Revelation 4:8), sovereign (1 Chronicles 29:11; Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 37:20), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-10), omniscient (Job 28:24; Psalm 147:4-5), omnipotent (Job 42:1-2), self-existent (Exodus 3:14; Psalm 36:9), eternal (Psalm 90:2; Habakkuk 1:12), immutable (Psalm 33:11; James 1:17), perfect (Deuteronomy 32:3-4), and infinite (Job 5:9; 9:10). None of these attributes are compatible with panentheism. God transcends all of His creation, and is in no sense limited or changed by events in His Creation.
End quote.
Quote:
In a November 9, 2003 Hour of Power sermon – just two months before he was a featured speaker at the annual meeting of the National Association of Evangelicals – Crystal Cathedral minister Robert Schuller unabashedly aligned himself with this same New Age/New World Religion teaching.
The man who claims to have mentored thousands of pastors, including Bill Hybels and Rick Warren, stated:
“You know in theology — pardon me for using a couple of big words — but in theology the God we believe in, this God of Abraham, is a transcendent God. But He is also an immanent God. Transcendent means up there, out there, above us all. But God is also an immanent God — immanence of God and the transcendence of God — but then you have a balanced perspective of God. The immanence of God means here, in me, around me, in society, in the world, this God here, in the humanities, in the science, in the arts, sociology, in politics — the immanence of God…. Yes, God is alive and He is in every single human being!”But God is not in every single human being. God is not in everything.
One of the many reasons I wrote Deceived on Purpose was because Rick Warren presented his readers with this same “God in everything” teaching. Quoting an obviously flawed New Century Bible translation of Ephesians 4:6, Rick Warren — whether he meant to or not — was teaching his millions of readers the foundational doctrine of the New World Religion. Describing God in his book, The Purpose-Driven Life, he wrote:“He rules everything and is everywhere and is in everything.” (p. 88)
Compounding the matter further, “immanence” has been taught as part of the Foundations class at Rick Warren’s Saddleback Church. An ill-defined reference to immanence on page 46 of the Saddleback Foundations Participants Guide plays right into the hands of the New Spirituality/New World Religion by stating:
“The fact that God stands above and beyond his creation does not mean he stands outside his creation. He is both transcendent (above and beyond his creation) and immanent (within and throughout his creation).”
The Bible makes it clear that man is not divine and that man is not God (Ezekiel 28:2, Hosea 11:9, John 2:24-25, etc.)
End quote.
According to Lighthouse Trails Research:
" This panentheistic New Age/New Spirituality teaching that God is “in” everything will be the “common ground” melting pot belief that the coming New World Religion will ultimately rest upon. In The Tides of Change, it is clear that Rick Warren and Leonard Sweet are working toward a “New Reformation” of the church."
Panentheism is:
Related to Process Theology, panentheism is essentially a combination of theism (God is the supreme being) and pantheism (God is everything). While pantheism says that God and the universe are coextensive, panentheism claims the God is greater than the universe and that the universe is contained within God. Panentheism holds that God is the “supreme effect” of the universe. God is everything in the universe, but God also is greater the universe. Events and changes in the universe effect and change God. As the universe grows and learns, God also increases in knowledge and being.
Panentheism is most definitely not biblical. In fact, it is extreme heresy that impugns the character of God and makes Him more like a man. God is present everywhere (Psalm 139:7-8), but God is not everything. God knows everything, whether actual or possible (Psalm 139:1-6; Romans 11:33-35). God does not learn because He already has all knowledge. God is “affected” by things that occur in the universe, but only in that sin angers Him and holiness pleases Him. Our actions do not change God or impact His essential being.
The Bible presents God as holy (Isaiah 6:3; Revelation 4:8), sovereign (1 Chronicles 29:11; Nehemiah 9:6; Psalm 83:18; Isaiah 37:20), omnipresent (Psalm 139:7-10), omniscient (Job 28:24; Psalm 147:4-5), omnipotent (Job 42:1-2), self-existent (Exodus 3:14; Psalm 36:9), eternal (Psalm 90:2; Habakkuk 1:12), immutable (Psalm 33:11; James 1:17), perfect (Deuteronomy 32:3-4), and infinite (Job 5:9; 9:10). None of these attributes are compatible with panentheism. God transcends all of His creation, and is in no sense limited or changed by events in His Creation.
End quote.
Tuesday, August 04, 2009
The White House Calls For Supporters To Report Opponents of Obamacare: welcome to communism
When will this page be either edited or taken down from the White House blog? I've put it here because I think they will revise it once people start looking at the page.
From the White House blog: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/
Quote:
THE BLOGReturn to Blog Homepage
SUBSCRIBE
WhiteHouse.gov Blog
TUESDAY, AUGUST 4TH, 2009 AT 6:55 AM
Facts Are Stubborn Things
Posted by Macon Phillips
Opponents of health insurance reform may find the truth a little inconvenient, but as our second president famously said, "facts are stubborn things."
Scary chain emails and videos are starting to percolate on the internet, breathlessly claiming, for example, to "uncover" the truth about the President’s health insurance reform positions.
In this video, Linda Douglass, the communications director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, addresses one example that makes it look like the President intends to "eliminate" private coverage, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth.
[Video]
For the record, the President has consistently said that if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them. He has even proposed eight consumer protections relating specifically to the health insurance industry.
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
Here are the complete videos that Linda refers to. First from the AARP:
[Video]
End quote.
What the United States Of America Constitution says:
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hillary Clinton said in April 2003:
Clinton said, “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.”
Well now, we say the same thing regarding all things Obama, especially his Death Care bill and Socialist package (aka Health Care and Stimulous Package).
Hear that, Obama? This isn't Chicago. WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE WILL CRITICIZE YOU AS THE PRESIDENT IF WE WISH TO. YOU CAN'T BULLY AMERICANS TO SHUT UP.
From the White House blog: http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Facts-Are-Stubborn-Things/
Quote:
THE BLOGReturn to Blog Homepage
SUBSCRIBE
WhiteHouse.gov Blog
TUESDAY, AUGUST 4TH, 2009 AT 6:55 AM
Facts Are Stubborn Things
Posted by Macon Phillips
Opponents of health insurance reform may find the truth a little inconvenient, but as our second president famously said, "facts are stubborn things."
Scary chain emails and videos are starting to percolate on the internet, breathlessly claiming, for example, to "uncover" the truth about the President’s health insurance reform positions.
In this video, Linda Douglass, the communications director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, addresses one example that makes it look like the President intends to "eliminate" private coverage, when the reality couldn’t be further from the truth.
[Video]
For the record, the President has consistently said that if you like your insurance plan, your doctor, or both, you will be able to keep them. He has even proposed eight consumer protections relating specifically to the health insurance industry.
There is a lot of disinformation about health insurance reform out there, spanning from control of personal finances to end of life care. These rumors often travel just below the surface via chain emails or through casual conversation. Since we can’t keep track of all of them here at the White House, we’re asking for your help. If you get an email or see something on the web about health insurance reform that seems fishy, send it to flag@whitehouse.gov.
Here are the complete videos that Linda refers to. First from the AARP:
[Video]
End quote.
What the United States Of America Constitution says:
Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression. Ratified 12/15/1791.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Hillary Clinton said in April 2003:
Clinton said, “I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and you disagree with this administration somehow you’re not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration.”
Well now, we say the same thing regarding all things Obama, especially his Death Care bill and Socialist package (aka Health Care and Stimulous Package).
Hear that, Obama? This isn't Chicago. WE ARE AMERICANS AND WE WILL CRITICIZE YOU AS THE PRESIDENT IF WE WISH TO. YOU CAN'T BULLY AMERICANS TO SHUT UP.
Astro Turf Churches
As usual, when I'm thinking or listening to something in the political arena, I often think of the spiritual arena. Today I heard about an article that called these White House "townhall meetings" nothing but "astro turf", and rightly so. I'd like to borrow that term for many "churches" in today's "Christianity".
Astro-Turf Churches:
* no roots
* won't grow
*no life
*no fruit
* deceiving: looks green and real until you get up close and personal
*needs no weekly maintainence like: mowing, watering, fertilizing
*expensive with little responsibility/care
*injury occurs (nice burns) if you slide on it
*synthetic, not authentic
Like astro-turf - fields, they come in all sizes: some are small some are large. They all have astro-turf shepherds, astro-turf worship, astro-turf believers, and astro-turf spirituality.
Astro-Turf Churches:
* no roots
* won't grow
*no life
*no fruit
* deceiving: looks green and real until you get up close and personal
*needs no weekly maintainence like: mowing, watering, fertilizing
*expensive with little responsibility/care
*injury occurs (nice burns) if you slide on it
*synthetic, not authentic
Like astro-turf - fields, they come in all sizes: some are small some are large. They all have astro-turf shepherds, astro-turf worship, astro-turf believers, and astro-turf spirituality.
Veterans Administration: What Obamacare Will Be Like
Want to know what Obamacare will be like? Ask the vets (thank you for fighting for our country) about their healthcare through the Veterans Administration. Given the choice between private health care and the VA, which would they choose?
Saturday, August 01, 2009
Flaunting "Liberties" For All the World To See: that's not loving the Brethren
Something I saw today on a Twitter page, Facebook, and a blog (not to mention church websites) disturbed me because it shows a growing trend among "mature" Christians: flaunting one's "freedoms". Photos of wine drinking, cigar smoking, and Twittering on drinking red wine is not acting in love of the brethren. The freedom (not a sin that you are merely re-labeling) we have in Christ is to be kept between ourselves and HIM, not announced to the world. (Gal. 5:13, 1Cor. 8:9-13; Romans 14:15-22)
Mature Christians need to consider the weaker brothers even when posting photos or twittering what we are doing.
"I believe that one reason why the church at this present moment has so little influence over the world, is because the world has so much influence over the church! Nowadays, we hear professors pleading that they may do this, and do that--that they may live like worldlings. My sad answer to them, when they crave this liberty is, "Do it if you dare. It may not cost you much hurt, for you are so bad already. Your cravings show how rotten your hearts are. If you are hungering after such dogs food--go dogs, and eat the garbage!" – Spurgeon
"The substitutionary sacrifice of our blessed Lord and Savior is lightly esteemed, and even repudiated, by some prominent teachers; the future destiny of the sinner has become, in consequence, a vain speculation in the thoughts of many. The plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, the personality of the Holy Ghost, and his presence and power in the church of God, with other verities of the faith of Christ, are qualified or explained away in many instances. The results of this erroneous teaching and perversion of the gospel are painfully apparent; worldliness, sensuality, and luxury, with the desecration of the Lord's day, abound, and Christian liberty has become license in the walk and conversation of many professed disciples of Christ."
- Spurgeon
Mature Christians need to consider the weaker brothers even when posting photos or twittering what we are doing.
"I believe that one reason why the church at this present moment has so little influence over the world, is because the world has so much influence over the church! Nowadays, we hear professors pleading that they may do this, and do that--that they may live like worldlings. My sad answer to them, when they crave this liberty is, "Do it if you dare. It may not cost you much hurt, for you are so bad already. Your cravings show how rotten your hearts are. If you are hungering after such dogs food--go dogs, and eat the garbage!" – Spurgeon
"The substitutionary sacrifice of our blessed Lord and Savior is lightly esteemed, and even repudiated, by some prominent teachers; the future destiny of the sinner has become, in consequence, a vain speculation in the thoughts of many. The plenary inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, the personality of the Holy Ghost, and his presence and power in the church of God, with other verities of the faith of Christ, are qualified or explained away in many instances. The results of this erroneous teaching and perversion of the gospel are painfully apparent; worldliness, sensuality, and luxury, with the desecration of the Lord's day, abound, and Christian liberty has become license in the walk and conversation of many professed disciples of Christ."
- Spurgeon
Fellowshipping With Opponents of Christ Jesus
The theologically liberals are so predictable, that I called this one in my own car just the other day! (I see what happens in politics parallel what goes on in "Christianity".) My take was and is this: people seem to think that "understanding" your opponent is imparative to discussion. And I don't mean understanding what they said. I mean, getting to know them personally. I saw it with Gates, Obama, and Crowley and I've seen it done with Christian bloggers and those whom they have rightly criticized in the past. Everyone wants to get along and have understanding. To this I said, and will say here,
Why is a personal relationship now the "thing" to do with opposing sides (well, professed opposing sides)?
There is no call in Scripture to become a friend of your enemy (the enemy of Christ Jesus, really), so there can be "mutual understanding and openness of ideas and acceptance". It simply states to separate ourselves from the world AND professing Christians who are immoral, impure, etc. and point out their error and EARNESTLY contend for the Faith.
Jud 1:3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 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.
2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?
2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?
2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2Co 6:17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
What's to understand about a person personally, when their views are publically and repeatedly against Scripture?
All I see is acceptance of the person and therefore, a compromise of the views of the one more "conservative" or "biblical" , and eventually the ceasing of striving for Truth and Against error. Getting in the pigstye will lead to one getting dirty, not the pig getting clean.
I've seen it happen already.
Why is a personal relationship now the "thing" to do with opposing sides (well, professed opposing sides)?
There is no call in Scripture to become a friend of your enemy (the enemy of Christ Jesus, really), so there can be "mutual understanding and openness of ideas and acceptance". It simply states to separate ourselves from the world AND professing Christians who are immoral, impure, etc. and point out their error and EARNESTLY contend for the Faith.
Jud 1:3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 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.
2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?
2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?
2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.
2Co 6:17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler--not even to eat with such a one.
What's to understand about a person personally, when their views are publically and repeatedly against Scripture?
All I see is acceptance of the person and therefore, a compromise of the views of the one more "conservative" or "biblical" , and eventually the ceasing of striving for Truth and Against error. Getting in the pigstye will lead to one getting dirty, not the pig getting clean.
I've seen it happen already.
Is Isa the Arabic equivalent of Jesus?
As this came up in a comment section on Michael Jackson and Islam, I'll post the information here, because we often deal with Muslims and need to know the truth accurately.
Is Isa the Arabic equivalent of Jesus?
The traditional Arabic name for Jesus is Yasu'. Until very recent times, all Arab Christians used no other name for Jesus. And even today, that is the name used by more than 99% of all Arab Christians. Just walk into any Arab Christian church, turn on Arabic Christian broadcasting, read Arabic Christian literature written for Christians. You will only find Yasu', never Esa. Only very recently (perhaps some 25 years ago) some Christians started to use the name Esa in Arabic publications written specifically for Muslims in the hope that they may more easily accept their message if they see the quranic name for Jesus instead of the traditional Christian one.[1] Nevertheless, among themselves, Arab Christians do not use Esa.
[I'll add here: This is wrong because it doesn't give distinction between Jesus and Isa and causes HUGE confusion. Besides being man-centered and not faithful to Scripture, it also gives the impression they have part of Jesus correct, when in fact they don't. Using Yesu' makes a clean break from all things Muslim for clarity and truth.The same is to be said for using "Allah" instead of God or Jehovah.-Denise]
The traditional Arabic rendering or transliteration of the original Hebrew name (Yeshua') is Yasu'.
Since Hebrew and Arabic are both Semitic languages, and they are closely related, there are certain well-known rules which sounds/letters in Hebrew correspond to which sounds/letters in Arabic. Specifically, the Hebrew letter Shin regularly turns into the Arabic letter Sin, e.g. the Hebrew word for peace, shalom, corresponds to the Arabic word salam. According to those linguistic rules and relationships between Hebrew and Arabic, Yasu' is the proper Arabic equivalent for the Hebrew Yeshua'.
Yeshua' = Yod + Shin + Waw + 'Ain
Yasu' = Ya + Sin + Waw + 'Ain
Again, the linguistically most appropriate Arabic equivalent for the Hebrew Yeshua' is Yasu'. Thus, the traditional Arabic name for Jesus is the linguistically most appropriate one. The transition from Yeshua' to Yasu' follows the common rules of phonetic changes from Hebrew to Arabic. In that sense, Yasu' is the true Arabic name of Jesus. There is nothing arbitrary about it. On the contrary, Yasu' is the natural equivalent of Yeshua'.
On the other hand, it is a long-standing mystery where Esa, the quranic name for Jesus, is coming from. Although there exist a number of theories that are more or less convincing, we will probably never know for sure.
End quote.
-Source
Also, more on the Muslim Isa versus the Biblical Jesus Christ here.
I'd like to add that it should be obvious to biblical Christians that Islam uses a different name for what they think is Jesus, simply because its a totally different Jesus and totally different God and totally different Book and totally different religion altogether.
Is Isa the Arabic equivalent of Jesus?
The traditional Arabic name for Jesus is Yasu'. Until very recent times, all Arab Christians used no other name for Jesus. And even today, that is the name used by more than 99% of all Arab Christians. Just walk into any Arab Christian church, turn on Arabic Christian broadcasting, read Arabic Christian literature written for Christians. You will only find Yasu', never Esa. Only very recently (perhaps some 25 years ago) some Christians started to use the name Esa in Arabic publications written specifically for Muslims in the hope that they may more easily accept their message if they see the quranic name for Jesus instead of the traditional Christian one.[1] Nevertheless, among themselves, Arab Christians do not use Esa.
[I'll add here: This is wrong because it doesn't give distinction between Jesus and Isa and causes HUGE confusion. Besides being man-centered and not faithful to Scripture, it also gives the impression they have part of Jesus correct, when in fact they don't. Using Yesu' makes a clean break from all things Muslim for clarity and truth.The same is to be said for using "Allah" instead of God or Jehovah.-Denise]
The traditional Arabic rendering or transliteration of the original Hebrew name (Yeshua') is Yasu'.
Since Hebrew and Arabic are both Semitic languages, and they are closely related, there are certain well-known rules which sounds/letters in Hebrew correspond to which sounds/letters in Arabic. Specifically, the Hebrew letter Shin regularly turns into the Arabic letter Sin, e.g. the Hebrew word for peace, shalom, corresponds to the Arabic word salam. According to those linguistic rules and relationships between Hebrew and Arabic, Yasu' is the proper Arabic equivalent for the Hebrew Yeshua'.
Yeshua' = Yod + Shin + Waw + 'Ain
Yasu' = Ya + Sin + Waw + 'Ain
Again, the linguistically most appropriate Arabic equivalent for the Hebrew Yeshua' is Yasu'. Thus, the traditional Arabic name for Jesus is the linguistically most appropriate one. The transition from Yeshua' to Yasu' follows the common rules of phonetic changes from Hebrew to Arabic. In that sense, Yasu' is the true Arabic name of Jesus. There is nothing arbitrary about it. On the contrary, Yasu' is the natural equivalent of Yeshua'.
On the other hand, it is a long-standing mystery where Esa, the quranic name for Jesus, is coming from. Although there exist a number of theories that are more or less convincing, we will probably never know for sure.
End quote.
-Source
Also, more on the Muslim Isa versus the Biblical Jesus Christ here.
I'd like to add that it should be obvious to biblical Christians that Islam uses a different name for what they think is Jesus, simply because its a totally different Jesus and totally different God and totally different Book and totally different religion altogether.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)