Category Archives: creation

MIXING TWO WORLD VIEWS

The reason why I write this blog is based on that I believe the idea of God creating the universe based in millions and billions of years only compromises with the secular world view and it has implications that are far more reaching than just difference of opinion.

If you have the time here is a nice little debate or conversation between the idea of young earth and old earth via Ken Ham and Hugh Ross. Ken Ham is young earth and backs his theology by scripture while Ross is old earth that is trying to interpret scripture and the Bible with the idea of fitting millions of years into the Biblical historical picture.

Most secularists will say both proponents Ham and Ross are wrong because the universe is billions of years old.

What I find as the problem with the old earth belief is there is not good evidence and you have to add to scripture to make the point while the young earth is better equipped to follow scripture.

Interesting out of a panel of six on this show, five of the guest believed in a young earth and one (Ross) believes in an old earth that included the big bang.

Out of that 5 only three so it was split evenly (with Ross being the 6th), but only three Ken Ham, Ray Comfort and Eric Hovid believed the scripture was more clear on the idea of each day as it was created by God (day being 24 hours) and that this statement of scripture was very important, not only understanding Biblical creation but it aided in the understanding of Biblical knowledge for everyone.

The interpretation of each creation day being one day (24 hour day) is important to teach people based on if we demand that people believe in the parting of the red seas, a virgin woman getting pregnant by the Holy Spirit and a man dying and coming back to life. How then can we tell people that in Genesis God was not talking about 24 hour day but he meant millions of years and that the passages of Genesis aids itself more to how modern science interprets the age of the earth via millions and billions of years.

On one end we demand people believe in supernatural events but in Genesis we compromise and say there is nothing supernatural how God created the universe. That statement maybe a bit over the top due to that Christians believing in a creation of a million years still view it as supernatural but the idea of God creating the world in 6 days has to be agreed as a bit more of a supernatural event than using a naturalistic way to explain creation.

Sean McDowell and John Bloom from Biola University were more on the fence of Biblical interpretation, McDowell even so far as to going there and saying so much as can we really know the true interpretation from Greek, Hebrew to English. I chalk McDowell statement to his youth; this statement is what secularist use to kill the conversation on Christians that don’t know there Biblical history or believe in actual words of our Biblical authors and we cannot accept such a statement.

Bloom and McDowell were willing to question interpretation while Comfort, Ham and Hovid felt that the Bible was God’s breathed word that all can know, people could know then (thousands of years ago) we can know now. 1 Timothy 3:16 Ephesians 4:11-16 and Hebrews 11: 1-40

McDowell and Bloom walk a slippery slope that will have you back peddling trying to explain Biblical truth in a sea of secular lies and it does not have to be that way if we take scripture at its word.

I believe Ross is trading certainty for truth and McDowell and Bloom are entertaining that idea as well Bloom more so than McDowell.

The truth is we can know scripture and what it says, understanding that not everyone will completely get what is being stated in every book or letter but the main theme of the Bible is God and following God. His grace to us and for us and how and why he did what he did for his creation.

You will see at the end of the video Ross offers a truce and I have no doubt Ross was very sincere just as I have no doubt Ross is a Bible believing man of God. The problem I have with Ross’s truce is it is not as the same way we can view the main purpose of truth from such men as George Whitfield and John Wesley.

Whitfield was a strong preacher of election with his main theme on salvation, while Wesley was a strong preacher on the will to know God with the main theme on salvation so we see two men that preached different styles had the same theme and that was salvation. This is what made these men great in the eyes of Biblical history the final authority was God and his salvation for you.

Ross’s truce is genuine but misguided based on the issue we live in different times than Wesley and Whitfield did; the average person had a standard of who was God and the respect of who God was not to mention being a pastor or evangelist during the 1700’s was a very respectable position.

Today’s western world does not respect God as it once did nor has a standard of who God is. Today’s western world does not respect men like Ross or Ham they view them as the enemy. People like Bill Nye who puts out hate messages that parents that teach creation are abusing their children.

We can easily see why main stream media and science who is desperate to be the grand daddy of all authority of life will mock and tear down our children and young people in the public arena.

How can we as Christians tell our children God did all these great supernatural things but that stuff in Genesis may not be literal, can you see why liberal Churches are not teaching that Jesus died or was born of a virgin, compromise to secularism to be relevant in today’s world is the in thing for people and Churches that think this is the only way to get people to God.

The difference between Ross and Ham is that Ham uses the Bible to interpret scripture for both knowing God and understanding God in a Biblical context with the final goal preaching the word of God for the purpose of following Jesus to salvation. Ross uses the Bible to prove science is correct and prove there is a God while returning a standard of the belief in God to science and while this is important without the notion of one following Jesus and putting God first before all things there is no real hope for people to know God.

Final thoughts I know those six men, Ham, Comfort, Hovid, Ross, McDowell and Bloom  are good men of God and I know they want the best for bringing the Gospel to all people but the western world we live in is now requiring we either go with the world or against the world.

Trying to compromise or make a hybrid world view with a mix of some world and some Christianity will not work. It is not Biblical to mix Holiness with evil 1 Corinthians 15:33, like my old youth pastor use to say, two rivers running into each other, one is flowing clear blue water the other is dirty brown water and when the two come together and mix the clear blue water turns to dirty brown. The two cannot mix.

IT HAS TO END NOW

37

Abortion has to end now, pro life and right to life groups are for slow incrementalism.
The goal is to slowly change the laws state by state all the while change the hearts and minds of humans that abortion is wrong.
I completely understand this but logically this form of action makes no sense.

For one point of logic the right to kill an unborn child with the idea that the baby is not a real human these days is antiquated and out dated at best.

In an age of 3D sonograms and medical sonograms that show at 5 weeks (one month) this is a baby and we are still saying “yes you can kill that child”.
Interesting note do a web search on sonograms and just about every medical site uses the term baby not globs of cells.

It took one day in 1973 for unelected judges to legalize killing our offspring yet we are expected to be patient and allow smart guys using the political process to slowly change the law through court cases one at a time. In the meantime millions of babies are being killed each year, in this country alone over a billion world wide since 1973.

The logical option is to end abortion now, every state needs to end abortion now today not tomorrow.

So what if the federal government says its legal, each state can still end abortion now.

Plenty of states have laws that are contrary to federal law yet they choose not to follow or the Feds choose not to prosecute so the precedent has been set many years ago, we don’t need judges to tell our states what kind of killing is right and wrong we need to end abortion now.

The logic is today all states make abortion illegal and criminal.
Now that it is illegal then pro life, right to life and all the good men and women everywhere can start explaining why killing your child is wrong. Why life is important, we educate people we educate our children why life is better alive than dead.

It is easier to explain to somebody why somethings is wrong to do when it’s wrong to do it.

When something is against the law you have a precedence on your side, you have the the legal right to explain why it’s wrong, the morality of the issue makes more sense because the law states this is wrong.

The ethics and philosophy of the law makes more sense and scientifically it confirms that yes there is a baby in that belly yes there is life living here.

Pro life and pro choice cannot be a preference, it cannot be an opinion abortion has to end now we owe this to our children and to the human race.

Logic demands we end abortion now

http://endabortionnow.com/

A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 2

28

A COMMON SYMPTOM (10 statements  unbelievers don’t believe about the Bible)

This in respond to a blog that was posted some time ago on a Christian blog forum by a professing Christian that obviously does not really believe in true Christianity.  The blogger made 10 statements that they did not believe about the Bible and what I found is these are not just statements or beliefs from Christians on the theological fence but these are statements that unbelievers would make as well in fact these statements are nothing new.

Because these statements are common in today’s world view I will take each statement as its own otherwise this can become a long drawn out blog so in order to keep your attention we will focus one statement at a time and this is statement 2, you can check out my first blog on these statements at A COMMON SYMPTOM, STATEMENT 1

I don’t believe the Bible explains the time and manner of earth’s creation and population accurately. The Creation accounts in Genesis are not scientific writings designed to instruct, as much as they are poetry and song meant to inspire. They should not be read as a literal explanation of the fashion or timetable of what Science clearly tells us were the far older and more gradual evolution of life than a literal Biblical translation contends. Genesis 1 and 2 are a who story, not a how story.”:

Understandably one who lacks faith and trust in God will question God’s creation. If we cannot believe the Bible is the real inspired word of God then how can we believe God created all things much less in 6 days.

There is much debate in the creation theater; secular science today has muddied the waters that have divided Christians on how many days to how many billion years old the earth is. One thing is for sure Genesis is not a who story but a real account on God creating the universe, the earth and its inhabitants.  Nehemia 9:6 and Acts 14:15 

There is a debate on how many years the earth is and it falls under good credible conversation. Both Greg Koukle and Ken Ham have a radically different perspective on the earth age yet both will agree Genesis is a story on how and why God created the earth Christians can agree on this.

People that do not believe in the sufficiency of the word of God will of course be incline to believe the account of Genesis is poetry and song and a story of who. The problem with people that do not consider the Bible as the sole word of God is the who is only two people when in fact the who needs to be on more than a man and a woman, there is a creator involved and eventually a redeemer involved.  Isaiah 44:24 Thus says the Lord, your Redeemer,  who formed you from the womb: “I am the Lord, who made all things, who alone stretched out the heavens, who spread out the earth by myself”

The complete understanding of God’s time table is not needed fully. Understand even today when secular science throws out time tables it is not concrete but a theory. Science uses dating that can be fallible; there is not exact perfect way to date God’s creation.

Some Christians use God’s word (Bible) along with archaeology, the flood and other scientific anomalies like volcano and earthquakes to help date while other Christians use stars and light years to help their definition of the date of the earth. Either way does not diminish what God has created and how he created and why he created.

To say the Genesis account of the earth population states that writer of Genesis is not in literal is to have no credibility.  When you make a statement like what is made in first statement “I don’t believe the Bible was dictated by God” then we can fully understand why a person cannot believe in the full account of Genesis 1-2 and how man and woman flourished.

If Genesis and the Bible is not a full account of how and why God made everything do we then fall back on the worlds view of evolution and big bang and if so then how did that start and as a Christian would then one begin to compromise the word of God. To not completely understand how society became many is to deny how God made his creation or a coward of the truth.

It was Martin Luther that said “ But, if you cannot understand how this could have been done in six day then grant the Holy Spirit the honor of being more learned than you are” Simply stated we know what we know because God lets us know.

CLIMATE CHANGE HAS LITTLE ROOM FOR ATHEIST

16

We might think atheism and secularism as a minor force with strong arms today trying to end Christianity as we know it.

Atheist claim they don’t believe in any religion but for reasons that can be debated they seem to pay particular attention to Christianity trying to discredit it, they’re more anti theist than just people that claim not to believe in a God or the supernatural and leave it at that.

It is my thoughts that liberalism cannot at this point in time allow atheism to totally destroy the idea of God from our heart, our minds yes but the idea of a God must be allowed to live in the heart of man. Romans 12:2

The reason being is atheism for the most part is a leftist point of view. Yes there maybe some conservative atheist out there but they would be more economically conservative rather than socially conservative and those people that identify themselves as atheist rarely identify with the same moral ideology as people that do believe in God or Christianity. Note both can but most of the time there is normally a difference of opinion on a moral law code.

Conservatives and Christian conservatives in general think similar and believe similar. They tend to share values much the same and the embrace moral and ethical values much the same.

The leftist agenda is contrary to the conservative agenda particularly in climate change and global warming. This idea is not universally anti Christian as we see a few Christians take up the leftist cause of radical environmentalism.

Most Christians that subscribe to radical environmentalism can be defined as liberal leaning and therefore are sometimes dismissed as legitimate  believers in true Christianity but make no mistake those Christians that do endorse radical environmentalism such as Pope Francis have a wide following in the leftist community.

This is where I have wrote before it’s a fine line for leaders like Sir Francis to court radical environmentalism but being that said it is also a fine line for leftist to court Christians that embrace this idea as well. 1 John 2:15

By no means is Pope Francis an advocate of abortion something leftist embrace with open arms as a rite of passage. For leftist  hope to convince as many people as possible to believe in radical man made climate change they need all the help they can. If they cannot legislate it down our throats then having the aid of top Christians leaders to preach radical climate change in the pulpit is a plus which is why they cannot fully condone the actions of radical atheism that is anti theist.

To the atheist that believe in no God, believes in random chance, believes in subjective morality they in principle should not care one way or another if man made climate change is real or just junk science..

In the words of Jeff Durbin pastor of Apologia church in Tempe Arizona “So what”, so what if it’s man made or not it does not stop the random chance of happening.

So what if the polar bears run out of ice, survival of the fittest regardless if man made carbon from cars that melt ice or if three super volcanos erupt and ash covers the earth and kills one quarter of the earth species, it happens. In reality what happens is so what; if naturalism is real then life will go on, government regulations won’t change that.

Leftist who rely on radical environmentalism for power cannot have this, they need people to be behind them and to believe in the cause and while many atheist won’t buy this idea of a “so what” reality they should in order to be true to their beliefs.

Liberal leftist may just need the belief in God to continue and having the aid of Christians that believe God puts man in total control of his creation is a win. They need leaders like Rev Mitchell C Hescox that have doubt in what God can do to infiltrate the minds and emotions of their followers and a total disbelief in God cannot be on the agenda at this time.

While both atheist and like minded liberals would love to see the end of a Biblical moral law the goal might be to rid God from people’s minds but keep the notion of a God that is good, environmentally gentle and emotionally illogical in our hearts.

COEXIST CAN ONLY CONTRADICT

15

You run across one of these stickers probably once a week on somebody’s Prius, most likely it’s a hippie or a sharp leftist but do you wonder is it possible to truly coexist with everyone and do these people really know what they are demanding.

Next to every “coexist” sticker should be a sticker that says “contradict”. Each belief contradicts the others belief making coexistence impossible.

Each belief demands exclusivity to that belief and that belief alone. Islam demands Allah is the only God, Jews their God is the only God, Hindi has many Gods but their belief of reincarnation is a must. Atheist demand naturalism and science is the only truth.

There is contradiction with all these beliefs so who do you follow, who will you give your life to?

Atheists believe there has to be proof to be something, seeing is believing. Yet no one has seen large scale evolution, no one has seen a big bang creating life out of nothing. Gravity just exists, no why or how it just exists. DNA is magic per Richard Dawkins but wait is not magic something that cannot be seen or understood?

Buddha was a Hindu that believed there was more; he abandoned the core beliefs of Hinduism and ended up mixing atheism with reincarnation. One has to die and die again to obtain nirvana a complete blowout of the mind where one ceases to exist there is no God.

Christians and Jews believe in a one true God but unlike Jews Christians believe the one true God sent his son Jesus to die for us so that we would be worthy. That through his death God now gives us salvation by his grace alone. John 14:6  and Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved”.

COEXIST is either a complete insult or complete ignorance by one that is reaching for an end to free thought. COEXIST is not new it is the same exclusivity in the idea that no one is correct that there is no truth.

Without truth your ideas are invalid to my ideas, making the ability to truly coexist is impossible.

TUESDAY MEMES 1

alta net

I saw this gem on a friend’s FB page some time ago and what intrigued me was it’s from AlterNet. If you do not know who AlterNet is you can check them out but I can give you the short version here. They are a liberal e-mag rag that does nothing to further the Gospel of Jesus Christ that I’m sure of.

On first glance you can see this is AlterNet pointing their finger at both the Christian and the atheist, “shame on you two for arguing so much on a petty subject while people or being slandered.

One only has to think its ISIS that is destroying the world and who are they destroying? I think they are called Christians and Jews or anyone that disagrees with ISIS. Yes ISIS has been destroying priceless artifacts and monuments but hey people are getting their heads chopped off for just believing differently of Islam.

First who is fighting over whom, both Christians and Jews both believe the one true God of the Bible who created the world. Even Islam believes one God created the world but I don’t see Christian Jews and atheist killing each other over it.

Atheists believe in a bang although science is finding more and more that such a bang can’t be. Islam ideology fits more in line with evolution; it believes in one God but allows evolution to work its magic as Richard Dawkins would call it as evolution does its creation of everything internal. Still I have yet to see atheist and Christians kill each other because one believes in magic and the other believes in  intelligent design.

So where is the fight, Christianity does not fight but holds to a belief in the God of the Bible creating the world. They hold that it should be taught in school whether it is science or philosophy they believe it holds a place in education.

It’s mainly the atheist, the secularist and the humanist that argue the creation of the universe. It’s those groups that fight both in and out of the classroom to ban the thought of Christianity from the conversation. Childlike men such as Lawrence Krauss who say parents that teach their children creation is a form of child abuse; anything goes unless it’s about God right Lawrence.

I have said as have others that Islam (ISIS) is more of a threat to the world than the small percentage of atheism and I still stand by that. I would love to see the atheist give up or at least be willing to have a coexisting conversation on how the world began but they will not in a public forum like education. Unlike the Christian it is not in the atheist/secularist  best interest and belief  to embrace a world not created by God.

Mind you Christians argue amongst themselves over how God created the universe and the world we live in but one thing they do agree on is God and God alone was the creator.

Yes there is debate amongst atheist on the big bang and evolution but the one thing that unites them is their belief that there is no God.

Can Christians and atheist stop fighting like AlterNet wants them to, considering whom AlterNet is I think they should take a page from the quote they stand on. The answer is no, because that is the world we live it.

Atheists fight for our hearts and minds, it asks us to believe their theories and study those theories founded mainly in conjecture.

Christianity fights for our hearts and minds, it ask us to believe in a God, in a way of life and to study that belief in a book known as the Bible. Transcripts that have been historically accurate (Bible). Christianity asks we give our lives to a God and believe in a man called Jesus that many eye witnessed and wrote about.

ISIS fights for our hearts, minds and body, it hates anyone that disagrees and will kill anyone that disagrees. I agree with Alan Shlemon from Stand to Reason with his most accurate statement on Islam. To paraphrase; Islam is hate and war hijacked by a minority of peaceful Muslims. ISIS will fight until something new and more powerful arrives. Islam will not stop because it has too much invested in its lie

No AlterNet, there will not be any compromise and not because Christians and Jews want war but because truth about God and Jesus are too important to put on a shelf for someone to knock it off and break it into a thousand pieces unrecognizable faith.

TWITTER

FACEBOOK

 

NOT KNOWING THE OLD KEEPS US FROM UNDERSTANDING THE NEW

pro-life-holly-fisher-gun-bible-us-flag

Not knowing the old will keep us from knowing the present and surly lead our future to fail. Both the Old Testament and the Bill of Right particularly the 2nd Amendment have a bunch in common and can teach us a lot about mankind history, God and country.

The right to keep and bear arms is important right that most Americans take very seriously.

For the most part people that are for and against this right with little in the middle. With those that are against feeling this right the right to keep and bear arms is much like the Bibles Old Testament.

It’s old and does not apply today, it was relevant then but not now society has evolved better and most of all its very violent.

Much like the Old Testament, the 2nd amendment is just as relevant then and now. It holds a very import piece of history in our society and way of life.

To disregard both text would be to change everything, America would be different not better without the 2nd amendment and Christianity would be obsolete and a fraud without the Old Testament.

Statements like Pope Francis It makes me think of … people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit of distrust, doesn’t it? become hypocritical in nature since his own money from the Vatican buys guns and weapons to protect him.

Pope Francis is not the only well known face that has made this kind of hypocrisy our federal and state leaders elect do the same.

President Obama and my own state Senator from California Diane Feinstein both have spoken out against private citizens protecting themselves again hypocrisy.

Don’t get me wrong I believe I get what the Pope is saying in a Biblical text way but that way cannot be, it can never be since the day man fell in the garden of Eden.

Although the comment is Marxist in nature and meaning it shows little understanding of historical and spiritual importance of the Old Testament to the nature of man in which led up to the 2nd Amendment to be made.

I will be fare and add that Pope Francis most likely made this a general accusation and not towards one country or one human nature unlike President Obama and Senator Feistein.

The Old Testament and the 2nd amendment both tell a tale of disobedience of man and we can use both to help with the protection of our lives and our societies we live in.

In the Old Testament we are given countless times of disobedience to God by men and by God’s chosen people the Jews. Since the day Adam and Eve fell from grace man has been evil in nature and because of that man has had to arm himself for protection.

No matter if you live in a country like American or a communist country such as North Korea you will always have a moral right to defend yourself from bodily harm. The difference is does the country you live in support your right.

The American framers understood this right, it spurred from many different aspects but they knew this was a right that every citizen needed to be free in this new society.

The American framers saw firsthand what it was like to live in oppressive society and what happened when you disobeyed that form of government.

The Old Testament showed everyone what it was like to live under an oppressive society with God’s chosen people the Jews; the Old Testament also showed everyone what happens when you disobey God.

Understanding the relevance of the Old Testament is crucial to understanding the New Testament just as understanding why the American framers felt so passionate for the right to keep and bear arms be a freedom for every person living in the new world.

For those saying the Old Testament is outdated and not relevant to the new covenant (New Testament, grace and salvation) is truly showing ignorance.

Understand this, Old Testament during the days of Jesus and after his ascending to heaven was a collection of writings put together called the Septuagint in plane it was the Bible of the Jews.

Both Jesus and the saints used this Bible, they wrote the letters of what today we now call the New Testament. If the Old Testament was irrelevant then why would Jesus and the saints use it or quote from it.

For those saying the 2nd amendment is old fashion and relevant only to the war of independence then why was the right to keep and bear arms added to the Bill of Rights after the war of independence?

Without the 2nd amendment how do we think the war of 1812 would have turned out 21 years after the war of independence and 49 years before the civil war; at what time in history did the second amendment become void and who made this call?

To make comments “people, managers, businessmen who call themselves Christian and they manufacture weapons. That leads to a bit of distrust, doesn’t it?” is either ignorance to God and history or arrogance to the common man.

One can make the point that Noah is just as guilty for the manufacture of weapons as anyone else.

If Noah had just ignored God and not build the Ark maybe God would have destroyed all mankind and started from scratch with a new and improved man and woman that would be more like a fun loving drone or robot to obey God’s every command.

Should Noah be left out of heaven because he built an ark and saved mankind only to have himself sin and mankind disobey God again and again? That leads to a bit of distrust, doesn’t it?

Why continue with the current model of man, why not scrap that model or heck not make man at all just pretty flowers, birds and maybe some bees.

These argument will rage on I know so I say again know your history both Biblical and what the framers of this country intentions were.

Without knowing the Old Testament we really can’t understand why things happen the way they do. Why God allowed what he did and what his purpose was for and what our purpose is for.

Not knowing and understanding the founding fathers and framers of this country’s purpose of designing the Bill of Rights is pure malicious ignorance on ones self. Without trying to know and understand is to not really love both God and country.

A CHRISTIAN CIVIL WAR?

A CHRISTIAN CIVIL WAR

 rewrittenimage-300x171

Few days ago I read a blog about how James Dobson of focus on the family warned of a civil war that could happen if the Church and Christians kept compromising on Biblical morality and worldly relativism he was a bit more precise in words but this is the gist of it.

The writer of the blog cited this from a leftist emag rightwingwatch.org and generally believed Dobson really meant a war with guns and bombs maybe like the war Ireland had.

After reading both articles I felt that Dobson may have been talking about a real civil war but I think Dobson was talking about a civil war within the church that if happens could it destroy the church as we know it. He may have meant both, if our leaders will not stand up for the rights of the church and Christians we could see dark days ahead.

My reply to the blogger was this “I’m not sure Mr. Dobson’s civil war means actual killing of people but the killing and injuring of souls. I believe what he maybe referring to is a war that will break the church, pitting two sides against each other.

The Conservative Christian who feels Christians need to follow Gods Natural and Moral law, their intent is not to judge people into submission but to point out what happens to a society that refuses to follow these laws most of what can be found Biblically.

The Liberal Christian that accepts the person for who they are regardless of the sin. They never try to judge behavior that is based in sin feeling that loving the person and showing the example of love will be enough and let God be the Judge of that heart.

The problem arises when Christians and churches attached themselves to sinful behavior that God has condemned and or asks us not to condone or be a part of. No one is saying don’t let the sinner in the sinner is already in but the sinner must repent and do the best to sin no more.

This is where the civil war can begin and it will be started by outside forces mainly political and media driven forces that want to see the church die and Christians be thrown in utter chaos”. The blogger didn’t even acknowledge anything I said but stated Dobson’s remarks sounded like a war to her.

At this time I see Christians already engaging in a civil war, churches are still on the sidelines but soon I suspect this will change with court rulings and new laws past. Again if our political and judicial leaders do not protect the Church and Christian rights dark days are ahead.

There already is a division between active Christians that feel Gods natural and moral law is being challenged and Christians that feel those types of Christians are too judgmental and need to allow God to be the judge and Christians need to love. The problem with the latter Christian is they give no boundaries to how far Biblical immorality can be taken before one takes a stand and many excuses will you give to laws that condone Biblical immorality.

There are three types of Christians to this civil war that I believe is in its infancy. 1st type are Christians that defend Gods natural and moral law, his commandments and they refuse to compromise on these issues.

They take these very seriously and feel without these laws and commandments Christianity will get watered down and loose its flavor or light for we are the salt and light of this world.

2nd type are Christians of the liberal nature that feel love is first and foremost and we should not judge if we are to lead people to Christ.

These Christians are willing to bend the rules or reinterpret them to make everyone feel comfortable.

Like the conservative Christian they condemn the other for the way they go about their business. They do not take Gods natural law and moral as serious because those can be always changing much like relativism there is not always a right and wrong way, some even believe all gods lead to heaven.

Mind you not all believe this some just see others as judgmental and thus take the opposite side.

3rd type are Christians are the ones sitting on the sidelines not wanting to be labeled either. They go to church or not, donate to charities or a church but do not get evolved with politics or social issues they have a family to raise mind you they don’t have time for this.

In some ways they are correct, they don’t have time due to everyday issues, issues due to some part politics and some parts social that can be very powerful and labeling

Money, time and family weigh down on them and those come first, they will sometimes support issues with money but will don’t take a stand the question is are you this Christian because this is the biggest type of Christian.

There might be a time when everyone will have to take that stand, I believe the civil war has begun and Christians are starting to take sides. Its sad this has to happen but I believe God demands us to follow him and to obey his commandments and uphold his moral law while others feel this is too strong and it needs to be crushed.

This division might destroy the church I believe or it will certainly divide the church and it is already starting to happen.

We know of several church denominations that have compromised on Biblical moral issues while others have stayed true to traditional Biblical moral issues. I suspect this civil war will slowly get bigger and eventually it will demand all church denominations to take a stand and when that happens division will start and in some cases it already has.

What are the stands that will fuel this civil war? 1: Compromising on atheism and natural science the intermingling of the two to make everyone happy or at least some happy.

2: Compromising on sex and how the church views moral and immoral activity (this is one issue that will bring the church into a civil war it spits churches all the time).

3: Allow relativism to be apart church doctrine, no right and wrong just whatever fits your way of life.

4: Allowing or changing the act of homosexuality to be a non sin issue, this I believe will be the catalyst of allowing all sexual behaviors a right to exist in our society you may laugh but it all starts somewhere.

5: Condoning abortion to the point we no longer speak out against this atrocity.

6: Reinterpret the scriptures of the Bible or saying the writers of the New Testament are no longer relevant in today’s world thus saying the Holy Spirit is irrelevant.

So what will you do, what side will you take or have you taken. Typing this up its obvious I lean a certain way and I believe this way to be true.

I believe God spoke and continues to speak and to not listen and try and reinterpret what God has said in order to water down our faith is dangerous for us and  our society.

All six fuels I listed are dividing Christians now except for the ones sitting on the fence who have no time to know what is going on.

Prayer is good it is always good but I believe we will need to take this further and prayer with action will be needed.

Understand what God says (read your Bible and ask questions), know him and pray to him (church and Bible studies). Repent from our sins and ask for forgiveness and do our best not to sin again. Uphold Gods natural and moral law but also forgive and love your neighbor.

 

Illogical and absurd Monday 1-26

Daniellion

Welcome to Monday and more illogical and absurd articles and blogs from the left media to discuss around the water cooler.

Believe it or not it was a slow illogical and absurd week in the progressive agenda due to the state of the union address and deflated footballs I suspect but still there were a few to not ignore.

First up the progressives are panicking over the 2014 election, scared to death ironically that they may no longer be able to kill unborn children. CNN publishes “How states are playing politics with women’s bodies”

Progressives love to frame abortion like this, “it’s our bodies your taking away a woman’s right to end her unborns life”. The article is scary to think our society is demanding this but reality is It’s not, abortion is becoming an extreme idea.

Part of the article reads as this “After she was unable to get the care she needed at the clinic closest to her, she left her small town in the Texas panhandle and went to Oklahoma, where she was told that her pregnancy was too far along to receive an abortion there. So she came to us.”

The writer of the article tries to call an abortion medical care, whatever happened to do no harm I guess they forgot that one. Those of us who oppose abortion are called anti-choice yet does not the choice start before the baby is made.

You choose to have sex and bam a child is made, yes we know pro abortion advocates will want to use rape and incest to condone abortion but be honest this is a tiny percent and believe it or not there are churches and groups out there that will take on the responsibility for these babies that are born.

If a culture wants to hang on to a small percentage and condone killing knowing unborn children are living and feeling inside the mother  then we now have a corrupt and bankrupt society.

Next Slate publishes a blog from Alternet so this is kind of a two for one for these two progressive rags. “The 12 worst ideas religion has unleashed on the world”

The shocking thing is they actually pick on more than one religion. Normally leftist progressives will focus on Christians or Christianity but I have to say they seemed to try and spread the love hate here. I’m going to just lay out the Christian points since I’m not Muslim or Hindu, I’ll stay out of their domain.

First of the 12 ideas they go after is the concept of Chosen people: This is where lack of reading and understanding your Biblical text bites you and shoots out a red flag in this article, for sure an atheist wrote this (Valerie Tarico).

Chosen people is not an idea it was a name given by God in the Old Testament to Abrahams lineage aka children of Abraham then later defined as the Jews or Hebrews. In the New Testament after dying for our sins by Jesus then his resurrection the chosen people now extend to everyone that excepted Jesus as their  personal savior in their hearts and minds aka salvation.

Only God knows who will except his gift of salvation so only God has chosen these people something atheist and people not willing to give themselves to God can understand.

Heretics: people don’t like the word because it calls them out on their corrupting of God’s word. Heretics tend to water down Gods word or misinterpret Biblical text to fit their immorality.

Atheists look at it as religious people not being tolerant of others belief but as Christians we have to follow the basis of God’s word.

We are not to add to or take away to fit our needs. God fits our needs and we have to add to or take away from our lives to receive what God can give us.

Holy War: Something we see in Islam constantly and it’s apart of their culture. Early Catholic leadership used this to try and free Israel and fight back Islam but in all reality Christians do not fight in Holy wars not for the last few hounded centuries.

What one century mistake made has always followed the Catholic Church and Christianity but let’s be real guys Christians don’t do holy wars.

Blasphemy: Again the writer not understanding Biblical text somewhat gets this wrong in the Christian definition; they have it right in the Islamic definition.

God gives us free will so the ability to disbelieve in God is tolerated but does not go unpunished but man will not dole out that punishment that will be left up to God.

Making fun of Christians and God is something Christians do not like or encourage but living in a free society we have to deal with it and sometimes except its existence but we as Christians are not to harm the offender but to defend God with truth and righteousness.

Glorified suffering: Something that is not really practiced anymore. The definition given in this the article is basically an old concept of injuring one’s self to keep you on the narrow path of right.

Tarito use the crucifix as a glorified torture again not understanding Biblical history can bite you. God does not and has not suggested injuring one’s self as a means to make things right, this is a man made concept.

Forgiveness has always been God’s way of making things right since the resurrection of Jesus. Our suffering as Christians do glorify Gods name and I go back to again not knowing and understanding your Biblical text and history will mislead you from the truth.

 Genital mutilation: something Islam is known for not Christianity or Jews but Tarico has the stones to say circumcision is a form of genital mutilation talk about being out of touch and hating anything that God has commanded is but wow.

Hell: Yes hell is in the Bible because God created hell, Tarico suggest it is used to change or curb bad behavior and to a degree it is used.

Man still sins and does bad things no matter if there is a heaven or hell. If there is no hell then there is no heaven, the idea of everyone except Hitler is going to heaven is just not reality or Biblical.

Christians are not happy that people Hitler and Stalin existed but they do and did and God has made a place for them.

Christians don’t want to see anyone walk that path but it is a reality since God gave free will. If the concept of hell scares you to do the right thing and seek God out then that’s not a bad thing in my opinion.

Eternal Life: Atheist hate this because it’s not fare so they call this a fairytale. Tarico again lacks the Biblical understanding and states the problem with eternal life is it keeps people from seeing the beauty of what we already have on earth.

“The real reason that the notion of eternal life is such a bad invention, though, is the degree to which it diminishes and degrades existence on this earthly plane. With eyes lifted heavenward, we can’t see the intricate beauty beneath our feet. Devout believers put their spiritual energy into preparing for a world to come rather than cherishing and stewarding the one wild and precious world we have been given”-Torico

Not so, eternal life is just a bigger reward. What is here on this earth is be bigger in heaven and in the new earth that God will have waiting for us. Believe me I have seen some of Gods greatest creations in this country and I can’t wait to see what he has in store for the next.

Male Ownership of Female Fertility: This idea is a complete misunderstanding of Biblical text to think God condones female ownership and women are slaves to men. No God celebrates women baring children as a great gift. Women were created by God to have children to continue the human race how much more of a gift from God could there be.

Bibliolatry (aka Book Worship): Now this is really stretching it and again the lack of understanding Biblical text shows us just how much lack of knowledge is at play here.

The concept of Bibliolatry is a direct contradiction of the 1st commandment and nobody that follows God and seeks the truth of Jesus worships the Bible they worships God of the Bible.

I suspect that Tarico thinks all religious idea are bad, I do feel she made some progress by adding Islam and Hindu to the list but but also loses it with some very illogical and communist remarks.

Pretty much she is reaching on most of these concepts. There is a lot of misunderstanding, hate, lack of Biblical studying and understanding of who and what God is so we can’t expect much with this blog.

Mr. T

ILLOGICAL AND ABSURD MONDAY #3

ILLOGICAL AND ABSURD MONDAY JANUARY 19TH

It’s Monday again and time for some more Illogical and absurd articles from main stream media. Somewhat of a slow news week so the progressives kind of pushed the throttle down on a few of these articles rehashing some old ideas that they would love us to pay for or make illegal.

First up from the Huffington Post “Charlie Hebdo Editor Slams News Organizations for Not Publishing their Cartoons” Now the gist here is editor Gerard Biard feels that if the main stream media really is free speech they should have reported and showed their cartoons in Charlie Hebdo in a solidarity move to show the free world is not afraid of terrorism.

charlie-hebdo-frontpage

Ok let’s understand who the main stream media is, they make up of cowards that shout from a glass door. Main stream media has no problem standing up for freedom of speech and expression when they know it won’t get them killed. They are not afraid of Christians or Buddhist because they know Christians won’t retaliate but with Islam they are afraid.

Biard states every time they draw a cartoon of Mohammad or God they defend freedom of speech and I say no you don’t. Every time you draw a cartoon blaspheming God or any other religious symbol you are doing just that blaspheming a symbol that somebody holds important.

If you have no believes in anything then it makes it easy for you to make the statement your defending freedom of speech but look at it this way. If I were to tell unflattering embellishments about you or your family you might get offended you might even try and sue me.

Charlie Hebdo is a vulgar magazine at times, I’m not going to storm the doors and shoot your entire cartoonist but you insult my faith at times and I see nothing but insults not freedom in what you do.

Next article from Time “Pope Francis Opposes Contraceptives During Address of Millions in Philippines” I’m mainly mention this article by Time on the basis of I’m following the Pope due to his embracing of climate change and environmentalism which is nothing short than communism and communism embraces population control.

Pope Francis waves from the popemobile after leading a Mass at Rizal Park in Manila

Progressives and leftist love it when Pope Francis preaches about climate change and compromising on evolution but they hate it when people preach about birth control something very important to the Catholic faith.

This is where progressives despise Catholics and Christians for even thinking people take reproductive responsibility. Time keeps it tame but doe quote one person here to dig at the Popes stand on birth control.

They quote Jun Chura a former street child “Many terrible things happened to (street children) like drugs and prostitution,” said a former street child named Jun Chura. “Why is God allowing such things to happen? And why are there only very few people helping us?”

My response to Chura is I might ask you the same question, why are you allowing this to happen. You see the Pope and the Catholic/Christian church do not want to punish people by taking away their contraceptive tools they want you to take responsibility and follow God’s will.

Even if you can financially afford ten children does not mean you have ten children, can you emotionally afford ten children. Psalms 127-128, God blesses one that has children but he does require us to walk with him to be successful. Basically this, if you’re not willing to fear and walk with God then you just might limit your success.

The blog from Slate “French Government: Protesters Don’t Understand Our Values (But We’ll Imprison People for Speech)” is kind of interesting on the account that not only do Muslims and Islam do not get French values but nor does Slate and nor do they get values and freedom.

 protest

France has some interesting laws that are very free when it comes to speech but very strict when speech and expression becomes treason. France allows freedom of speech to a degree but when it become treasonous it can levy a stiff penalty in jail time something America seems not to practice thus is why Slate probably just does not get it.

The issue is Islam has no clue what true freedom is, both the Islamist practicing countries have little or no freedom and the religion its self has no freedom either.

Most progressive’s lack the understanding of freedom and values as well, feeling a government entitled society is freedom they just do not get free will and rugged individualism and their value system has no value.

The French are trying to play sides, embracing European socialism and still trying to stay as a free state can be quite complicated and will yield a very unfair society.

US NEWS and World Reports “U.S. Stands Alone on Lack of Paid Leave” published this blog on how the U.S. just won’t increase its taxes on the American People and pay for mothers to stay home with their children.

paid

At this point pretty much if you’re a mother or father you have to option to stay at home for a few months of bonding time without pay.

Those of you that can afford it do so, some have special insurance that pay the whole time and some don’t so they have to come back to work early seems unfair.

Should not a mom and a dad bond with their new born child why are the American people not willing to be taxed enough so all moms and dads at least the moms be paid to stay home?

You have to put yourself in the eyes of the employer; I know that evil corporation you work for that just makes tons of money off your sweat. It’s very hard on a company to have to replace somebody for a short time then give that position back.

The concept of free trade and independence is lost if a private business cannot do anything without the federal or state permission.

There is a compromise that our government could make but wont. If staying home and bonding with your child is so important and I believe it is as far as the mother is concerned then why not lower taxes.

Lower income tax maybe end the income tax as we know it, lower gas tax, lower property tax make it so a two parent family can afford for only one to work.

I know that does not work for everyone since everyone makes different pay something progressives would love to change but that’s called communism.

For the most part it would work if we lowered taxes so families could take home more money and have one parent stay home nurturing the children I know it worked for our family.

It’s easy for progressives to cry on this issue saying it’s not fair but their hypocrisy is huge on family values.

They want taxes to increase so both parents have to work, use that tax money so both can stay at home for a short while and bond then send that child to government daycare and public school.

It just seems smarter to lower taxes and have the parent stay home and bond and develop their child instead of having the tax payer do it.

Solon atheist goes all out in “Bill Maher is right about religion: The Orwellian ridiculousness of Jesus, and the truth about moral progress” This is a very long and tedious blog that hates all over Christianity again fear of Islam goes into play and a double standard is used but the writer Michael Shermer does attack the Jews and Mormons as well but I’m sure in his mind anyone that uses the Bible or Biblical ideas is bad.

2 Seat Interview: Bill Maher and Ralph Nader, Author, Unstoppable Panel left to right: Andrew Ross Sorkin - Financial Columnist, New York Times, Co - Anchor, CNBC’s “Squawk Box” ; Doug Heye -  Fmr. Comm. Director, Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Fmr

Basically Bill Maher is never really quoted but for those of you that don’t know Maher has said that God is a serial killer in the Old Testament.

Both Maher and Shermer don’t back any historical data up but take Biblical text out of order it’s mainly Shermer’s lack of understanding of Old Testament Biblical history of Israel and the tribes and societies that surrounded the Jews.

When you deal with atheists that bring this kind of hate to the table it’s like talking to a brick wall. They use this double standard to hate on Biblical belief and Christianity because they are afraid of Islam.

Christians are an easy target because true Christians practice peace through Christ something Maher and Shermer conveniently don’t read in the New Testament or even mention in their rants.

The truth is Maher and Shermer hate Jews and Christians because we try and live Gods truth, no we are not perfect we make mistakes but God forgives us something that Shermer I would bet hates to admit.

In Shermer’s eyes Christians live this smug holier than thou hypocritical life and they can’t stand that. If he really knew the truth and that is I don’t always live a holy life and yes I’m a hypocrite at times but every day I ask for forgiveness and every day God forgives me

“Meet the Right-Wing Judge Who Just Screwed over the People Taking Care of Your Grandma” From Alternet the same magazine that is willing to expose this judge but wont print Charlie Hebdo. This story is not about a judge but about a union that wants its workers paid more simple as that.

Nursing-home-photo

This story is near to me because I work in health care and at one time I worked in nursing/convalescent homes. I can say to you without a doubt the people that work in these nursing homes do not get paid much but the work is not that technical.

Whether you agree with this judge’s decision or not I will say this, if you really are concern for your loved ones you need to pay for their care because government insurance and that is who is paying for the majority of these people does not pay well meaning the nursing homes don’t get reimbursed well from social security or Medicare.

If you want the best care for your loved ones you’re going to have to pay out of pocket. I know that seems odd all those years of paying in to social security and it does not take care of your parents well welcome to the real world FDR was wrong and your loved ones fell for it.

Finally from Common Dreams “Supreme Court Could Settle Marriage Equality Fight Once and For All” Yes a few people that are not elected and have a job for life will decide on the not marriage equality but decide on the dismantling of God’s union between a man and a woman.

This is why voting is important; all these judges were appointed by a president and allowed in by our representatives that we voted for.

do_not_deny

When it comes to the defense in marriage I use Matthew 19: 4-6 and I refer you to 1 Corinthians 7: 1-16.

The best hope at this time is for the Supreme Court to make this a states rights issue something Jeb Bush used to get out of stating whether he is either for or against the homosexual movement.

The big question then will be if a gay marriage that is legal in California will it still be good in say like Oklahoma. Hugh Hewitt made a good statement on his radio show a few days ago stating that you may have a legal conceal carry permit in Texas but that permit is not valid in New York.

No matter what happens the fall and decline of the defense of marriage is here but it’s not the end. Abortion is legal but we still fight and pray for that issue daily and this issue is no different.