No Tolerance of Your "Freedom"

I am not required to tolerate your "freedom" if you sin by flaunting it.

1Co 8:9  But take care that this right of yours does not somehow become a stumbling block to the weak.

1Co 8:11  And so by your knowledge this weak person is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died.

1Co 8:12  Thus, sinning against your brothers and wounding their conscience when it is weak, you sin against Christ.

1Co 8:13  Therefore, if food makes my brother stumble, I will never eat meat, lest I make my brother stumble.

Rom 14:15  For if your brother is grieved by what you eat, you are no longer walking in love. By what you eat, do not destroy the one for whom Christ died.

Rom 14:19  So then let us pursue what makes for peace and for mutual upbuilding.

Rom 14:21  It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.

Rom 14:22  The faith that you have, keep between yourself and God. Blessed is the one who has no reason to pass judgment on himself for what he approves. 

Finally A Few Liberals and Pro-Sodomy Folks See the Hypocrisy Within Their Own Ranks

Andrew Sullivan notes: 

The guy who had the gall to express his First Amendment rights and favor Prop 8 in California by donating $1,000 has just been scalped by some gay activists. After an OKCupid decision to boycott Mozilla, the recently appointed Brendan Eich just resigned under pressure.

In a follow up article Sullivan wrote in part:

He did not understand that in order to be a CEO of a company, you have to renounce your heresy! There is only one permissible opinion at Mozilla, and all dissidents must be purged! Yep, that’s left-liberal tolerance in a nut-shell. No, he wasn’t a victim of government censorship or intimidation. He was a victim of the free market in which people can choose to express their opinions by boycotts, free speech and the like. He still has his full First Amendment rights. But what we’re talking about is the obvious and ugly intolerance of parts of the gay movement, who have reacted to years of being subjected to social obloquy by returning the favor. Reihan notes the use of the word “integrity” about Mozilla....

This is a repugnantly illiberal sentiment. It is also unbelievably stupid for the gay rights movement. You want to squander the real gains we have made by argument and engagement by becoming just as intolerant of others’ views as the Christianists? You’ve just found a great way to do this. It’s a bad, self-inflicted blow. And all of us will come to regret it.

The in-tray is inundated with your dissents, which we will air in full tomorrow, since it will some time to find the strongest counterpoints. Only a small percentage of emailers are as disgusted as I am:

This really frightens me. Eich may well be wrong – very wrong, in fact – but he has a right to his opinion, and the fact that the Internet threw a hissy fit certainly doesn’t justify firing him. There’s no freedom of speech if you can’t be employed while holding your opinion. And he even made it clear that he wasn’t going to change any of Mozilla’s benefit policies or the like! This wasn’t going to affect anybody in any way. This is entirely about his right to hold his opinion.

This is particularly depressing to me because the tech industry has generally been fairly open-minded. I wouldn’t have expected this from them.

End quote.

I have expected it from them because they are not open-minded nor tolerant, while claiming to be so. This is the hypocrisy and self-contradiction of Post-Modern liberals today.

Murder by "Christians"

Each year 250,000 Evangelical Christian women murder their babies. 

"The Alan Guttmacher Institute is a nonprofit corporation for reproductive health research and policy analysis. The Institute is also a public education arm of Planned Parenthood. 
It reports that one in six women who have had abortions are evangelical Christians. Based on these statistics, 5.6 million women in our churches have chosen abortion as a way out of an unwanted pregnancy. Each year, 1.5 million American women have an abortion. This means 250,000 evangelical Christian women could choose to abort a child this year. "
~Source
When will  this  issue be directly addressed? 

Why point to the world when those within the churches are guilty of murder AS "Christians"?

So the number of sexually immoral "Evangelical Christians" is at least half a million (and no doubt it's far far more than that---but we can say with confidence that the least number of immorality is 500,000 because it takes two to have sex in order to get pregnant (and no, rape and incest is not the issue, since I believe their number statistically small).

Indiscriminate Giving and Misdirected Compassion

“Let it be pointed out, however, that God requires us to use discretion and discrimination in the bestowments of charity. There is a class of shiftless idlers who are ever ready to impose upon the compassionate and generous hearted, and make the benevolence of others a reason for their own indolence. It is positively wrong to encourage those who seek to subsist on the liberality of others, instead of earning their own bread. Indiscriminate giving often does more harm than good. It is our bounden duty to go to the trouble of properly investigating each case on its own merits, instead of allowing our sentiment to override our judgment. God Himself has said,

“This we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10),

and it is sinful for us to negate that by giving money to able-bodied loafers.”

~Arthur Pink, "An Exposition of Hebrews"

Huckabee's Theme: effeminate cowardice

Mike Huckabee's theme is accurate for the GOP as well as "Christians" who continue to compromise: 

"More Conversation Less Confrontation "

That's today's leaders' "battle cry". Well it's not a battle cry, as they've no wish to to battle for what they believe in with passion and conviction. Why, they don't even see there's a battle of worldviews going on, much less a spiritual battle.

If people rather be loved by the masses, then they will give up what they claim they believe in (thus showing such values and principles were not such, but merely convenient slogans) and go with the flow of sludge down river--fit for nothing useful and getting in the way of clear, healthful water.

So who will EARNESTLY FIGHT for the TRUTH (and I mean spiritually--politics reveals a person true spiritual condition)? 

Huckabee's theme is of complacency, non-conviction, effeminate cowardice. 

With friends like these, we don't need enemies.

GOP of Clark County, NV Removes Traditional Marriage and Pro-Life Abortion From It's Party Platform

LAS VEGAS – The Republican Party of one county in Nevada recently voted to remove its definition of marriage from its party platform, as well as its position on abortion.

Members of the Clark County Republican Party largely agreed to the changes on Saturday, editing out language in the party platform that outlined their belief in marriage being only between a man and a woman. A statement affirming the party’s opposition to abortion and its commitment to life was also removed from the document.

Director Nick Phillips told reporters that the adjustments came as a result of discussions during the party’s committee meeting this weekend in Las Vegas. He said that black and white statements on social issues run contrary to the group’s belief in personal freedom.

~Christian News

Certainly this isn't surprising, as the GOP has been against the true pro-life stance and has been accepting of sodomy for years now. This was merely a formality, and frankly, at least honest. No doubt that the national party will follow suit. This is exactly what the GOP leadership has been demanding, from McCain, to Condaleeza Rice, to Boehner. 

This is not what freedom means. What GOP wants is anarchy against the truth; an abandonment of principles and values. What they're after is to be liked by the masses of liberals. Because they ARE liberal.

Hillary Clinton Ahead in the Polls Among "Protestant" and "Evangelical" "Born Again" "Christians--Yes "Christians"!

John MacArthur said back in September 2012 that the Democrat party is an unholy, godless party:

Quote:

One of the parties, the Democratic Party, has now made Romans 1, the sins of Romans 1, their agenda. What God condemns, they affirm. What God punishes, they exalt. Shocking, really. The Democratic Party has become the anti-God party, the sin-promoting party. By the way, there are seventy-two million registered Democrats in this country who have identified themselves with that party and maybe they need to rethink that identification...

And I’m here to tell you that if you advocate a life of sexual sin, adultery, fornication, effeminateness, or homosexuality, you will not inherit the Kingdom of God. What that means is, you’re on your way to hell, not heaven. This is the spiritual kingdom of those who are in Christ. The church is made up of people who were like this. Please notice, here’s the good news, verse 11, “Such were some of you.”

End quote.

He is right. And now a new poll shows that not just "Protestants" but "Born again" "Evangelical" "Christians"  are willing to vote for her above other candidates. According to Zogby:

"Mrs. Clinton also is ahead among Catholics (47%-34%) and Protestants (47%-39%), including receiving 36% support among Born Again/Evangelical voters."

~ The Washington Times

It's long past time for any true Christians to repent from being a member of the Democratic party. If they don't, if they continue to vote for people who advocate killing babies and sodomy, they should fear the judgement of God, for it is a fearful thing to be in the hands of the Living God. Especially as you tout the name of Jesus Christ  as if you know Him and honor Him. Examine yourself to see if you are in the faith.

 

NOAH’S Ark would have floated — even with two of every animal on board, physicists have determined based on the weight of the beasts and the buoyancy of the boat

       

            (photo source)

The students from the Department of Physics and Astronomy at the University of Leicester who came to this conclusion used the dimensions for the boat that were given in the Bible....

Student Thomas Morris, 22, said: “You don’t think of the Bible necessarily as a scientifically accurate source of information, so I guess we were quite surprised when we discovered it would work. We’re not proving that it’s true, but the concept would definitely work.”

~News.com.au

Ah the presuppositions of "science" students (an all liberals, "Christian" ones included). 

I presume that the Bible is scientifically accurate and therefore an accurate source of information when it speaks. It's no surprise to those who believe the Scriptures that the science of a floating ark with thousands of animals could float. 

Enemies Within the Churches

“The deadliest foes of the Faith are now to be found inside of the professing Church and not outside” 

—Taken from “The Redeemer’s Return” by A. W. Pink (1886-1952)

One "Noah" Movie, Two "Christian" critics, One right view

Dr. Brian Matton went to see the "Noah" movie and made several notes about the blatant gnostic mysticism of Kabbala in it. He notes (among several examples):

Quote:

It occurred to me that a mystical tradition more closely related to Judaism, calledKabbalah (which the singer Madonna made popular a decade ago or so), surely would have held a similar view, since it is essentially a form of Jewish Gnosticism. I dusted off (No, really: I had to dust it) my copy of Adolphe Franck’s 19th century work, The Kabbalah, and quickly confirmed my suspicions:

“Before they were beguiled by the subtleness of the serpent, Adam and Eve were not only exempt from the need of a body, but did not even have a body—that is to say, they were not of the earth.”

Franck quotes from the Zohar, one of Kabbalah’s sacred texts...

I discovered what Darren Aronofsky’s first feature film was: Pi. Want to know its subject matter? Do you? Are you sure?

Kabbalah....

The entire movie is, figuratively, a “Zohar” mine.

If there was any doubt about these “Watchers,” Aronofsky gives several of them names: Semyaza, Magog, and Rameel. They’re all well-known demons in the Jewish mystical tradition, not only in Kabbalah but also in the book of 1 Enoch.

What!? Demons are redeemed? Adolphe Franck explains the cosmology of Kabbalah: “Nothing is absolutely bad; nothing is accursed forever—not even the archangel of evil or the venomous beast, as he is sometimes called. There will come a time when he will recover his name and his angelic nature.”

Okay. That’s weird. But, hey, everybody in the film seems to worship “The Creator,” right? Surely it’s got that in its favor!

Except that when Gnostics speak about “The Creator” they are not talking about God. Oh, here in an affluent world living off the fruits of Christendom the term “Creator” generally denotes the true and living God. But here’s a little “Gnosticism 101” for you: the Creator of the material world is an ignorant, arrogant, jealous, exclusive, violent, low-level, bastard son of a low level deity. He’s responsible for creating the “unspiritual” world of flesh and matter, and he himself is so ignorant of the spiritual world he fancies himself the “only God” and demands absolute obedience. They generally call him “Yahweh.” Or other names, too (Ialdabaoth, for example)....

Many reviewers thought Noah’s change into a homicidal maniac on the ark, wanting to kill his son’s two newborn daughters, was a weird plot twist. It isn’t weird at all. In the Director’s view, Noah is worshiping a false, homicidal maniac of a god. The more faithful and “godly” Noah becomes, the more homicidal he becomes. He is becoming every bit the “image of god” that the “evil” guy who keeps talking about the “image of god,” Tubal-Cain, is.

But Noah fails “The Creator.” He cannot wipe out all life like his god wants him to do. “When I looked at those two girls, my heart was filled with nothing but love,” he says. Noah now has something “The Creator” doesn’t. Love. And Mercy. But where did he get it? And why now?...

Darren Aronofsky has produced a retelling of the Noah story without reference to the Bible at all. This was not, as he claimed, just a storied tradition of run-of-the-mill Jewish “Midrash.” This was a thoroughly pagan retelling of the Noah story direct from Kabbalist and Gnostic sources. To my mind, there is simply no doubt about this.

So let me tell you what the real scandal in all of this is.

It isn’t that he made a film that departed from the biblical story. It isn’t that disappointed and overheated Christian critics had expectations set too high.

The scandal is this: of all the Christian leaders who went to great lengths to endorse this movie (for whatever reasons: “it’s a conversation starter,” “at least Hollywood is doing something on the Bible,” etc.), and all of the Christian leaders who panned it for “not following the Bible”…

Not one of them could identify a blatantly Gnostic subversion of the biblical story when it was right in front of their faces.

I believe Aronofsky did it as an experiment to make fools of us: “You are so ignorant that I can put Noah (granted, it's Russell Crowe!) up on the big screen and portray him literally as the ‘seed of the Serpent’ and you all will watch my studio’s screening and endorse it.”

He’s having quite the laugh. And shame on everyone who bought it.

And what a Gnostic experiment! In Gnosticism, only the "elite" are "in the know" and have the secret knowledge. Everybody else are dupes and ignorant fools. The "event" of this movie is intended to illustrate the Gnostic premise. We are dupes and fools. Would Christendom awake, please?

In response, I have one simple suggestion:

Henceforth, not a single seminary degree is granted unless the student demonstrates that he has read, digested, and understood Irenaeus of Lyon’s Against Heresies.

Because it's the 2nd century all over again.

Some readers may think I'm being hard on people for not noticing the Gnosticism at the heart of this film. I am not expecting rank-and-file viewers to notice these things. I would expect exactly what we've seen: head-scratching confusion. I've got a whole different standard for Christian leaders: college and seminary professors, pastors, and Ph.Ds. If a serpent skin wrapped around the arm of a godly Bible character doesn't set off any alarms... I don't know what to say.

End quote.

Not, juxtapose that with this view of The "Gospel" Coalition's  Brett McCracken, which proves Matton's last point of scandal and shame:

Quote:

This is the core of it. Christians need to understand that, through common grace, even the most unregenerate heathen can create something good; something we should take seriously.

As I discuss in my book Gray Matters, the concept of common grace is hugely important in any conversation about Christian appreciation of art. The concept is similar to Calvin's notion of sensus divinitatis (a sense of the divine), the idea that God implanted in each person an inherent understanding of himself that complements the revelation of creation in which God "speaks to us everywhere." Calvin believed that "the mind of man, though fallen and perverted from its wholeness, is nevertheless clothed and ornamented with God's excellent gifts" (Institutes, Book 2, Chapter 2, Section 15).

What does this view mean for Christian filmgoers? It means we open our minds to the possibility of truth, beauty, and goodness shining forth in films from even the most secular filmmakers. It means we see other interpretations of biblical history not as threats but as testaments to the enduring wonder of God's story. And it means we should celebrate an excellent movie about Moses or Noah for being excellent, even if it's made by an atheist.

End quote.

As far as I am concerned, McCracken is a traitor to Christ Jesus and His sheep. Moreover he is  a defender of that which mocks and scoffs as the HOLY HOLY HOLY One of Israel. And for what? Entertainment. I must question the salvation of someone who cries out that Christians should "open our minds" to garbage of Noah (and other movies like "Son of god" and "Exodus"(coming out in December) and think there is "truth and beauty" there.

It is not just the movies that are a threat to Christians (the gullible ones particularly), but it is a blatant attack on God, His character, and His Word. THAT is what is wrong with McCracken and the movies. Mere man can't threaten the Almighty God of Scripture. But mere man does attack Him and His Word, as did the Serpent in the Garden. This is what McCracken is doing. He echoes the Serpent's voice "Hath God said?":

Gen 3:4  The serpent said to the woman, "You surely will not die! 

Gen 3:5  "For God knows that in the day you eat from it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil."

What Satan enticed Eve with is what McCracken, taking the name of Christ, is doing with  however many thousands if not hundreds of thousands who read and like the "Gospel" Coalition.

You Want To Follow Christ? You Better Count The Cost, Because It Will Cost You Everything

Error and Heresy Appeases and Entices the Tares In the Churches

“Error is bound to be much more popular than truth to the unregenerate; therefore, to make the truth in any way acceptable to them it has to be watered down, wrested and perverted. And there are always those who, for the sake of filthy lucre, are ready to perjure their souls.

Hence heretical sects and systems abound on every side. ‘What delusions are cherished about the character of God! ‘What erroneous ideas are entertained about His way of salvation! ‘What false opinions are held of man’s dignity, greatness, free will, even by many who call themselves Christians! Because of the unbelief, selfishness and impiety of men’s hearts, the false prophets, who speak smooth and flattering things, are assured of a ready hearing.

~ A.W. Pink

A religion which is all excitement, and has little instruction in it

A religion which is all excitement, and has little instruction in it, may serve for transient use; but for permanent life-purposes there must be a knowledge of those great doctrines which are fundamental to the gospel system. I tremble when I hear of a man’s giving up, one by one, the vital principles of the gospel and boasting of his liberality.

The spirit of the Broad School robs us of everything like certainty. I should like to ask some great men of that order whether they believe that anything is taught in the Scriptures which it would be worth while for a person to die for, and whether the martyrs were not great fools for laying down their lives for mere opinions which might be right or might be wrong?

This broad-churchism is a breaking down of stone walls, and it will let in the devil and all his crew, and do infinite harm to the church of God, if it be not stopped. A loose state of belief does great damage to any man’s mind.

Lately we have seen few men with backbone; the most have been of the jelly-fish order. I have lived in times in which I should have said, “Be liberal, and shake off all narrowness ; but now I am obliged to alter my tone and cry, “Be steadfast in the truth.”

The faith once delivered to the saints is now all the more attractive to me, because it is called narrow, for I am weary of that breadth which comes of broken hedges. There are fixed points of truth, and definite certainties of creed, and woe to you if you allow these stone walls to crumble down.

~Spurgeon

Bill Johnson's Daughter-in-Law Blasphemes the HOLY Spirit

Blaspheming God.

http://mywordlikefire.com/2014/03/26/holy-spirit-is-like-the-genie-from-aladdin-says-bethel-reddings-jenn-johnson/

"Building the Machine": what Common Core Curriculum is about

"It'll be a country where nobody is brilliant."

Bethel, Bethel, and Bethel: Ancient and Current Idolatry

Bethel

1Ki 12:28  So the king consulted, and made two golden calves, and he said to them, "It is too much for you to go up to Jerusalem; behold your gods, O Israel, that brought you up from the land of Egypt."

1Ki 12:29  He set one in Bethel, and the other he put in Dan.

1Ki 12:30  Now this thing became a sin, for the people went to worship before the one as far as Dan.

1Ki 12:31  And he made houses on high places, and made priests from among all the people who were not of the sons of Levi.

1Ki 12:32  Jeroboam instituted a feast in the eighth month on the fifteenth day of the month, like the feast which is in Judah, and he went up to the altar; thus he did in Bethel, sacrificing to the calves which he had made. And he stationed in Bethel the priests of the high places which he had made.

1Ki 12:33  Then he went up to the altar which he had made in Bethel on the fifteenth day in the eighth month, even in the month which he had devised in his own heart; and he instituted a feast for the sons of Israel and went up to the altar to burn incense. 

After reading that chapter this morning it hit me: there are a few Bethels today who follow in their footsteps.

So it seems today that both  Bethel Church in CA and Bethel University in MN are appropriately named “Bethel”. They are indulging in the golden calf idolatry of ancient Bethel, seeking after gods, borrowing pagan practices out of pragmatism and mysticism. By telling people their gods are the ones that “brought them up out of Egypt” ( the sole claim and repeated one at that by the thrice Holy Triune God of Scripture), they are blaspheming God.

Bethel Church in Redding CA which is a NAR church headed up by heretic Bill Johnson.

Bethel Church of Redding, CA - severe errors by their false apostles and teachers.

Bethel University in MN is inter-faith and Emergent/mystic:

Theydo not require graduate and degree completion students to be Christians

Womenpastors - in clear violation of 1 Timothy, Titus 1-2, and 1Cor. 14.

Mysticism

http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=191

http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/blog/?p=273

They are also heavily into psychology even in their Religious Department - psychology is the world's philosophy that Christians are told to reject. In addition psychology is at its heart, anti-Christ and anti-Scripture. In fact, some of the founding fathers of psychology involved in the occult, as Martin and Deidre Bobgan discuss (first on page 42) in their book, "The End of Christianity Psychology".

The point of all of this is that I find it ironic that two very infamous liberal and heretical institutes follow in their namesake's idolatrous footsteps.

World Vision (Worldly Vision) Backs Off of Sodomite Hiring But the Problem Is Still There

Well it seems the money was too much to lose for Worldly Vision to hold up their unbiblical and quite hostile view of sodomy vs. biblical Christians to publicly hold on to for now.


"The last couple of days have been painful," president Richard Stearns told reporters this evening. "We feel pain and a broken heart for the confusion we caused for many friends who saw this policy change as a strong reversal of World Vision's commitment to biblical authority, which it was not intended to be."

"We did inadequate consultation with our supporters. If I could have a do-over on one thing, I would have done much more consultation with Christian leaders."

"We need to have a process to do further and wider consultation with key Christian leaders around the country, and we will be discussing how that can happen," he said.

~"Christianity" Today magazine

"At a recent gathering in Los Angeles, Stearns privileged the work he and others do around poverty issues and criticized Christians who he sees as preoccupied by work focused on the meaning and purpose of marriage. “No one ever died of gay marriage,” he argued".

 - Religion and Politics, June 25,2013

Stearns expects the board to continue to deal with questions about employment and same-sex relationships. "I think every Christian organization will continue to deal with this sensitive issue," he said. "The board will continue to talk about this issue for many board meetings to come. ... The original decision was overwhelmingly ratified by the board, and the decision to reverse the policy today after a lot of deep reflection, a lot of listening to supporters … was also overwhelmingly supported today."

End quote.

Sensitive issue? There's nothing sensitive nor blurry about sodomy.

It's only "sensitive" (read: complicated) and blurry when you deny the sole authority of Scripture to dictate all your thinking and decisions and instead turn to the world and then try to ride the fence. There's absolutely nothing sensitive, complicated, nor gray about sodomy.

So this reversal no doubt was not for the sake of the Truth, but purely for MONEY. We saw what is in their hearts and on their agenda. They will do it in time. Of that I'm absolutely sure. Why? Because it's their unbelief in Scripture and their secular worldview. Their backpedaling isn't impressive nor is it repentant. Stearns' hostility against biblical Christians has been the same for a while, as revealed in a CT article last June.

Gwyneth Paltrow And the Audacity of Committment

Quotes:

On Tuesday evening, Gwyneth Paltrow and her husband Chris Martin made the shock announcement they were splitting up. The couple, who have been married for ten years and have two children together, decided to reveal their separation on Gwyneth's lifestyle website Goop, in a post they had titled 'Conscious Uncoupling'....

[I]n the hours that followed, Gwyneth shared a second post on her website, titled Dr. Habib Sadeghi & Dr. Sherry Sami on Conscious Uncoupling....

Conscious Uncoupling, the name Gwyneth and Chris chose to give to their marital separation announcement, begins by saying that to change the concept of divorce "we need to release the belief structures we have around marriage that create rigidity in our thought process".

"The belief structure is the all-or-nothing idea that when we marry, it's for life. The truth is, the only thing any of us have is today. Beyond that, there are no guarantees. The idea of being married to one person for life is too much pressure for anyone," it reads.

End quote.

~Hello Magazine

Yes, like everything else that God has clearly designated as either right or wrong, now the world wants to remove the sting and ugliness of divorce by renaming it. However, changing the name won't change the reality that it is the ripping apart of two people who are in union spiritually as well as physically.

By trying to redefine something so heinous as divorce (as well as sodomy), the world and its celebrities try to justify their sin and selfishness.

Poor babies to be unable to be committed for life to one person of the opposite sex. But oh, the commitment (idolatry) to one's self!

Mat 19:4  And He answered and said, "Have you not read that He who created them from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 
Mat 19:5  and said, 'FOR THIS REASON A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER AND BE JOINED TO HIS WIFE, AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH'? 
Mat 19:6  "So they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate." 
Mat 19:7  They *said to Him, "Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND her AWAY?" 
Mat 19:8  He *said to them, "Because of your hardness of heart Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 

Mat 19:9  "And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery." 

Isa 5:20  Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter! 21  Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes And clever in their own sight! 

Franklin Graham Demonstrates the "Christian" Myth of Neutrality

“There has been huge pressure on the chaplains in our military – and our chaplains have been a wonderful thing for the military. But there is a move to get rid of the chaplains in our country, and to completely secularize our military. Actually, they are hostile to Christians....

A lot of this is coming from this administration and is being pushed by people within the White House,” said Graham.  “And when I say White House, I’m not saying the president, because I’m not sure how much of this he’s aware of.  But it’s people that work for him that have power, that are sitting in offices, and they are hostile to Christ.” 

~Franklin Graham with CNS News

"Some"? He's also not including Obama! 

How about just about "all" those in the administration, dare I say just about all in Washington DC?

This is the problem in "Christianity" today: the Christian myth that people are neutral toward God. On the contrary, Scripture boldly proclaims all men are born sinners, hostile toward God. You better believe Obama is anti-Christ, as are all outside of Jesus Christ. Some are just more bold about it than others.

Rom 8:7 because the mind set on the flesh is HOSTILE toward God; for it does not subject itself to the law of God, for it is not even able to do so,

Eph 2:1 And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 
Eph 2:2 in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 
Eph 2:3 Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were BY NATURE children of wrath, even as the rest.

Thoughts on the "Son of god" and "Noah" Movies and Why There's a Disconnect Between the Two By "Christians"

So let me get this straight: the "Son of god" movie is made by Christ-hating New Ager/Catholics and "Christians" think its good; an atheist makes a movie about Noah and "Christians" condemn it? Are not both attacking Scripture? Are not both scoffing at God? Are not both made by those who hate Christ? Yes, they are indeed.

As I think about it, it seems that politics  is the religion of most "Christians" and therefore that is why so many are against the "Noah" movie (PC, pro-environmentalism). Had biblical Christianity been their religion, they would be just as equally,if not MORE, irate with the "Son of god" movie  because of its attacks on Scripture and the Person and work of the risen Lord Jesus Christ.

Yes the world makes caricatures of Jesus Christ and Noah, but then so do most "Christians" in the West today.