Christian based commentaries and observations.

Quote of Note

Billy Graham's Prayer For Our Nation

: 'Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek your direction and guidance.
We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good,' but that is exactly what we have done.

We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery.

We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare.

We have killed our unborn and called it choice.

We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable.

We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem.

We have abused power and called it politics.

We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition.

We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression.

We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment.

Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and Set us free.
: Amen!'

Who is Jesus


Saturday, December 08, 2007

Mr. Deity Rebuffed

There seems to be a co-ordinated attack on the character of God this month. It happens every Easter and Christmas. While there are many out there this month, the following three made the covers of three magazines in three different media this month. Interestingly enough one attacks the character of God and faith, one attacks the character of God and those who worship him, and the third tries to kill/replace God with an idealized pagan/earth religion.

#1 Mr. Deity
The December 2007 issue of PCWorld highlights an YouTube hit series, "Mr. Deity". It has become so popular that YouTube put it on their homepage. Now there are book and T.V. deals in the works. Here is a paragraph from the PCWorld article.

'soon after the devastating Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami of December 2004, Brian Dalto, a writer/director in Temecula, California, began pondering why such tragedies occur. Why would an all-loving, all powerful God allow such misery? His musings led him to write a short comedy script, "Mr. Deity and the Evil," in which an anxious, distracted, yet essentially benign creator decides what types of suffering should afflict the human race. "holocausts?" asks his clipboard-carrying assistant, Larry. "Yeah, I'm gonna allow it," answers Mr.Deity matter-of-factly. Torture, natural disasters, and Down syndrome make the cut too. Taking those things out "will make it way too easy for people to believe in me," Mr. Deity decides.'

#2 And Lead Us Not
Published in Harper's Magazine Dec. 2007 issue. It is article written by David Lewis and Philip Kitcher, from "Divine Evil" in Philosophers Without Gods, published in august by Oxford University Press.
Here are three paragraphs. It is enough to see where they are going with this one!

'Standard versions of the Argument from Evil concern the evils God fails to prevent: the pain and suffering of human beings and the sins people commit. The most ambitious versions of the argument claim that the existence of evil is logically incompatible with the existence of an omnipotent, omniscient, and completely benevolent deity. In my view, this version succeeds conclusively. But I think the usual philosophical discussions of the problem of evil are a sideshow. What interests me here is a simpler argument, one that has been strangely neglected.
We might start instead from the evils God himself perpetrates. In duration and intensity, these dwarf the kinds of suffering and sin to which the standard versions allude. For God has prescribed torment for insubordination. The punishment is to go on forever, and the agonies endured by the damned intensify, in unimaginable ways, the sufferings we undergo in our earthly lives, In both dimensions, time and intensity, the torment is infinitely worse than all the suffering and sin that have occurred during the history of life in the universe. What God does is thus infinitely worse than what the worst of tyrants have done.
Many Christians appear to be good people, worthy of admiration of those of us who are non-Christians. From now on let us suppose, for simplicity's sake, that these Christians accept a God who inflicts infinite torment on those who do not accept Him. Appearances notwithstanding, are those who worship the perpetrator of divine evil themselves evil?'(end of quote)

Attacks #1 and #2 are very similar accept Lewis and Kitcher go on to attack Christians. It's the old "can't make war on God so make war on the people of God" routine. Both authors ignore that it was the choice of humans to disobey one simple command that allowed all of death, evil, chaos, and suffering into the world in the first place. They want to blame God and call him evil for allowing it. That argument is as old as Eve blaming the serpent, and Adam blaming God and Eve, by saying, "[it was]...the woman that YOU (God) put here in the garden with me...". Adam was blaming God for creating the woman and therefore God was the source of this sin and evil. The writers of Mr. Deity are blaming God again for his creation in which suffering is allowed. The argument didn't work before a Holy God in the Garden of Eden and it doesn't work now, especially after the price for sin has been paid by Christ Jesus, for those who accept him. God gave man a choice and a way back for making a second choice.
I wonder, what kind of creation would the writers of Mr. Deity make? In a Slice of Infinity publication by Ravi Zacharias, Ravi lays out 4 possible choices for creation:

Ravi four possible worlds

'“Would you create a world with such pain,” the skeptic charges, “and if you did, could you at the same time still be called good?“.

Plainly speaking, there are only four possible worlds. The first is that there be no creation at all. Would it not have been better for God to have not created a world than to have created ours—where good and evil are both possibilities? The second is a world where only good is permitted, a kind of robotically beneficent universe. The third option is a world where there is no such thing as good or evil, an amoral world. There, right and wrong would not even be legitimate categories for consideration. The fourth is the world that we live in, where good and evil exist with the possibility of choosing either.

... our world is the only one where love is genuinely possible because freedom is a precondition for authentic love. We intuitively recognize that love is the supreme ethic and where love is possible, freedom is necessary. Where freedom is real, so is the possibility of suffering.
...Through the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus perceive the infinite holiness of God and His boundless love, we see God’s twin desires fulfilled in the Cross: His holiness satisfied through suffering, and motivated by love strong enough to endure pain.
...In the Cross love, holiness and suffering are brought together. God cannot be at the same time both holy and unloving, or both loving and unholy. Who of us cannot understand that love cannot exist without goodness.'

Now on the question of God being evil or perpetrating evil, Lewis and Kitcher claim that God is evil because he punishes evil with hell. Does that really make any sense?
Joe Boot of RZIM spoke on the topic..."if God is real, He must punish evil... Thus, hell assures us that there is an unbridgeable chasm between right and wrong as defined by God, and to deny it is to advocate the triumph of evil. If we refuse to believe Christ's doctrine of hell, we are denying that God is on the throne. Hell assures us justice is real and it is God's".
Isn't that what Lewis and Kitcher are really doing here: "advocating the triumph of evil" and "denying the God is on the throne". Repeating Ravi, Lewis and Kitcher lose their legs, "...Through the birth, death and resurrection of Jesus perceive the infinite holiness of God and His boundless love, we see God’s twin desires fulfilled in the Cross: His holiness satisfied through suffering, and motivated by love strong enough to endure pain.
...In the Cross love, holiness and suffering are brought together. God cannot be at the same time both holy and unloving, or both loving and unholy. Who of us cannot understand that love cannot exist without goodness.'

#3 The Golden Compass: 'How Hollywood Saved God'

This article written by Hannah Rosin is published in December 2007 Atlantic Monthly. It is not so much the article that is an attack on God, as it is the trilogy of books that the movie is based on. Hannah Rosin's title comes from the fact that Hollywood does not stay true to Author Pullman's theology. His purpose like that of Allistar Crowley's, and even Satan before that, is to tear down the notion and worship of God and replace it with a pagan, earth based, self deity, type of theology religion, which leaves a person separated from God and at the mercy of Satan. Of course Satan has no mercy people to him are just cannon fodder and pawns in the game of Who should be worshipped. Satan said to Eve, "...when you eat of it you will become like Gods..."Same old game in town!

The article

'This month, New Line Cinema will release The Golden Compass, based on the first book in a trilogy of edgy children’s novels written by the British author Philip Pullman. A trailer for the movie evokes The Lord of the Rings, and comparisons have been made to The Chronicles of Narnia. All three are epic adventures that unfold in a rich fantasy world, perfect for the big screen. But beyond that basic description, the comparisons fall apart. In the past, Pullman has expressed mainly contempt for the books on which the other movies were based. He once dismissed the Lord of the Rings trilogy as an “infantile work” primarily concerned with “maps and plans and languages and codes.” Narnia got it even worse: “Morally loathsome,” he called it. “One of the most ugly and poisonous things I’ve ever read.” He described his own series as Narnia’s moral opposite. “That’s the Christian one,” he told me. “And mine is the non-Christian.”
Pullman’s books have sold 15 million copies worldwide, although it’s difficult to imagine adolescent novels any more openly subversive. The series, known collectively as His Dark Materials, centers on Lyra Belacqua, a preteen orphan who’s pursued by a murderous institution known as “the Magisterium.” Or to use the more familiar name, “the Holy Church.” In its quest to eradicate sin, the Church sanctions experiments involving the kidnap and torture of hundreds of children—experiments that separate body from soul and leave the children to stumble around zombie-like, and then die.
The series builds up to a cataclysmic war between Heaven and Earth, on the model of Paradise Lost (the source of the phrase his dark materials). But in Pullman’s version, God is revealed to be a charlatan more pitiable even than Oz. His death scene is memorable only for its lack of drama and dignity: The feeble, demented being, called “the ancient of days,” cowers and cries like a baby, dissolving in air. The final book climaxes, so to speak, in a love scene that could rattle the sensibilities of an American culture that tolerates even Girls Gone Wild, because in this case the girl is still a few years away from college...
Four years ago, before anyone worried about marketing a movie, Pullman wondered why his books hadn’t attracted as much controversy as the Harry Potter series—another Hollywood favorite. As he told The Sydney Morning Herald, he was “saying things that are far more subversive than anything poor old Harry has said. My books are about killing God.”
The series begins in a parallel Oxford, England, at “Jordan College,” where the familiar and the fantastic coexist. Lyra is the anti-Disney heroine: an unruly, unteachable orphan cared for by the university’s dons who spits and lies her way out of trouble. She cobbles together a family from other brave, reckless cast-offs like herself: a kitchen boy; a young, runaway murderer; gypsies and witches. For a time she finds a surrogate father in Iorek Byrnison, a deposed bear king decked out in metal armor who speeds her through one of several parallel worlds. (As with most fantasies, any attempt to summarize plot and character edges too close to Dungeons & Dragons. Trust me, in the novels it all hangs together.) Her most intimate relationship is with her “daemon,” a soul that lives outside the body in animal form. In Lyra’s world, a child’s daemon can change form—hers can shift rapidly from moth to ermine to rat, depending on her mood—until its companion hits puberty, at which point it settles as a fitting animal. The daemons of the Holy Church functionaries? They tend to be dogs.
Iorek is an “insanely awesome character,” he added. “He can’t tell a lie,” Emmerich told me recently, “and [Lyra] is an expert liar.” ... while Iorek helps Lyra conquer the forces of God.)...New Line...spent enormous energy sorting out exactly how to characterize the villains in the movie.
“One small child can save the world.” With $180 million at stake, the studio opted to kidnap the book’s body and leave behind its soul. [ of course this is done with a witchcraft sex ritual like the ending of the movie 'The Fifth Element'- Mark]
Pullman has expressed admiration for Richard Dawkins, a fellow British atheist. Like him, Pullman views the prevailing forms of religion as destructive and oppressive forces in history. “Every single religion that has a monotheistic god ends up by persecuting other people and killing them because they don’t accept him...
When pressed, Pullman grants that he’s not really trying to kill God, but rather the outdated idea of God as an old guy with a beard in the sky. In his novels, he replaces the idea of God with “Dust,” made up of invisible particles that begin to cluster around people when they hit puberty. The Church believes Dust to be the physical evidence of original sin and hopes to eradicate it...for Pullman, sexual awakening triggers the beginning of self-knowledge and intellectual curiosity. To him, the loss of sexual innocence is not a tragedy; it’s the springboard to a productive and virtuous adulthood.'(End of quoting the article)

The next paragraph of the article tells how in Pullman's mind original Sin in the Garden of Eden was not the eating of a fruit from a forbidden tree, but instead the fruit was the discovery of sexual intimacy between Adam and Eve. I guess he forgot the verse where it says, "and Adam KNEW his wife Eve". There wasn't any dust/sin at that point, and no need to hide themselves from God. Having Sex was not the original sin, it was eating from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil that was the original sin and it was committed in the spirit of ego, self, and pride.
Rosin makes note that Pullman makes the statement,"...My books are about killing God” and expresses an "admiration for Richard Dawkins, a fellow British atheist..." Then she mentions that his intent is not to "kill God" but to "replace the outdated notion of God". I personally do not believe that any of these attacks are written by Atheists. What all of these attacks are meant to do is create a spiritual and religious void that can be filled by the Satan in the person of the AntiChrist, and that is who the writers are working for, and in whom they put their faith!
These arguments are not new. I have often had these very conversations with a Unitarian/Universalist co-worker. It is not an accident that this attack is getting front place media attention. Satan still shows individuals the world from a high place and says, "fall down and worship me, [and do my bidding] and all of this I will give to you, for it has been given to me." Jesus did not deny that the world had been given over to Satan he just answered that,"it is written worship the Lord your God and him only"!
Sin and suffering are brought into the world by Satan, through pride and ego filled humans. Satan attempts to use that sin and suffering to cause unbelief in God. Thank God that in his infinite wisdom he only gave earth to man for a time ( 6 days or 6000 years) and that "this SAME Jesus is coming again" to repossess creation put an end to sin and suffering!
I leave you with one more thought from Ravi Zacharias:

"They raise the question of evil, and I’m telling you, it is more complex than they think it is. Why? Because one must question the questioner. If there’s such a thing as evil, you assume there’s such a thing as good. If you assume there’s such a thing as good, you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law on the basis of which to differentiate between good and evil. If you assume there’s such a thing as a moral law, you must posit a moral law giver, but that’s whom they are trying to disprove and not prove. Because if there’s not a moral law giver, there’s no moral law. If there’s no moral law, there’s no good. If there’s no good, there’s no evil. What is their question?

Now you may question the last jump: why do you actually need a moral law giver if you have a moral law? The answer is because the questioner and the issue he or she questions always involve the essential value of a person. That is, you can never talk of morality in abstraction. Persons are implicit to the question and the object of the question. In a nutshell, positing a moral law without a moral law giver would be equivalent to raising the question of evil without a questioner. So you cannot have a moral law unless the moral law itself is intrinsically woven into personhood, which means it demands an intrinsically worthy person if the moral law itself is valued. And that person can only be God."

And just think all of this just in time for Christmas!!!

Friday, November 09, 2007

No Seperation of God and State

I got this as an email with no author attached.

Somewhere along the way, the Federal Courts and the Supreme Court have
misinterpreted the U.S. Constitution. How could fifty States be wrong?

THIS IS VERY INTERESTING! Be sure to read the last two paragraphs.
founders did not intend for there to be a separation of God and state, as
by the fact that all 50 states acknowledge God in their state constitutions:

Alabama 1901, Preamble. We the people of the State of Alabama, invoking the
favor and guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish the following

Alaska 1956, Preamble. We, the people of Alaska, grateful to God and to
who founded our nation and pioneered this great land

Arizona 1911, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arizona, grateful to
Almighty God for our liberties, do ordain this Constitution...

Arkansas 1874, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Arkansas, grateful
Almighty God for the privilege of choosing our own form of government...

California 1879, Preamble. We, the People of the State of California,
to Almighty God for our freedom .

Colorado 1876, Preamble. We, the people of Colorado, with profound reverence
the Supreme Ruler of Universe.

Connecticut 1818, Preamble. The People of Connecticut, acknowledging with
gratitude the good Providence of God in permitting them to enjoy ..

Delaware 1897, Preamble. Through Divine Goodness all men have, by nature,
rights of worshipping and serving their Creator according to the dictates of
their consciences .

Florida 1885, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Florida, grateful to
Almighty God for our constitutional liberty .. establish this

Georgia 1777, Preamble. We, the people of Georgia, relying upon protection
guidance of Almighty God, do ordain and establish this Constitution...

Hawaii 1959, Preamble. We, the people of Hawaii, Grateful for Divine
Guidance .
establish this Constitution.

Idaho 1889, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Idaho, grateful to
God for our freedom, to secure its blessings .

Illinois 1870, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Illinois, grateful
Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberty which He hath so
long permitted us to enjoy and looking to Him for a blessing on our

Indiana 1851, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Indiana, grateful to
Almighty God for the free exercise of the right to chose our form of

Iowa 1857, Preamble. We, the People of the State of Iowa, grateful to the
Supreme Being for the blessings hitherto enjoyed, and feeling our dependence
Him for a continuation of these blessings establish this Constitution

Kansas 1859, Preamble. We, the people of Kansas, grateful to Almighty God
our civil and religious privileges ... establish this Constitution.

Kentucky 1891, Preamble. We, the people of the Commonwealth of grateful to
Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties...

Louisiana 1921, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Louisiana, grateful
Almighty God for the civil, political and religious liberties we enjoy.

Maine 1820, Preamble. We the People of Maine acknowledging with grateful
the goodness of the Sovereign Ruler of the Universe in affording us an
opportunity ... and imploring His aid and direction.

Maryland 1776, Preamble. We, the people of the state of Maryland, grateful
Almighty God for our civil and religious liberty...

Massachusetts 1780, Preamble. We...the people of Massachusetts,
with grateful hearts, the goodness of the Great Legislator of the Universe
in the course of His Providence, an opportunity .and devoutly imploring His

Michigan 1908, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful
Almighty God for the blessings of freedom . establish this Constitution

Minnesota, 1857, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Minnesota,
grateful to
God for our civil and religious liberty, and desiring to perpetuate its

Mississippi 1890, Preamble. We, the people of Mississippi in convention
assembled, grateful to Almighty God, and invoking His blessing on our work.

Missouri 1845, Preamble. We, the people of Missouri, with profound reverence
the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, and grateful for His goodness . establish
this Constitution ..

Montana 1889, Preamble. We, the people of Montana, grateful to Almighty God
the blessings of liberty. establish this Constitution

Nebraska 1875, Preamble. We, the people, grateful to Almighty God for our
freedom . establish this Constitution .

Nevada 1864, Preamble. We the people of the State of Nevada, grateful to
Almighty God for our freedom establish this Constitution ...

New Hampshire 1792, Part I. Art. I. Sec. V. Every individual has a natural
unalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own

New Jersey 1844, Preamble We, the people of the State of New Jersey,
grateful to
Almighty God for civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted
to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing on our endeavors .

New Mexico 1911, Preamble. We, the People of New Mexico, grateful to
God for the blessings of liberty

New York 1846, Preamble. We, the people of the State of New York, grateful
Almighty God for our freedom, in order to secure its blessings.

North Carolina 1868, Preamble. We the people of the State of North Carolina,
grateful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of Nations, for our civil,
political, and religious liberties, and acknowledging our dependence upon
for the continuance of those

North Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of North Dakota , grateful to
Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, do ordain...

Ohio 1852, Preamble. We the people of the state of Ohio, grateful to
God for our freedom, to secure its blessings and to promote our common

Oklahoma 1907, Preamble. Invoking the guidance of Almighty God, in order to
secure and perpetuate the blessings of liberty . establish this

Oregon 1857, Bill of Rights, Article I. Section 2. All men shall be secure
the Natural right, to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of

Pennsylvania 1776, Preamble. We, the people of Pennsylvania, grateful to
Almighty God for the blessings of civil and religious liberty, and humbly
invoking His guidance.

Rhode Island 1842, Preamble. We the People of the State of Rhode Island
to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long
permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing

South Carolina, 1778, Preamble We, the people of he State of South Carolina
grateful to God for our liberties, do ordain and establish this

South Dakota 1889, Preamble. We, the people of South Dakota , grateful to
Almighty God for our civil! and religious liberties ... establish this

Tennessee 1796, Art. XI.III. That all men have a natural and indefeasible
to worship Almighty God according to the dictates of their conscience...

Texas 1845, Preamble. We the People of the Republic of Texas, acknowledging,
with gratitude, the grace and beneficence of God.

Utah 1896, Preamble. Grateful to Almighty God for life and liberty, we
this Constitution

Vermont 1777, Preamble Whereas all government ought to . enable the
who compose it to enjoy their natural rights, and other blessings which the
Author of Existence has bestowed on man .

Virginia 1776, Bill of Rights, XVI .. Religion, or the Duty which we owe our
Creator . can be directed only by Reason and that it is the mutual duty of
to practice Christian Forbearance, Love and Charity towards each other

Washington 1889, Preamble. We the People of the State of Washington,
grateful to
the Supreme Ruler of the Universe for our liberties, do ordain this

West Virginia 1872, Preamble. Since through Divine Providence we enjoy the
blessings of civil, political and religious liberty, we, the people of West
Virginia . reaffirm our faith in and constant reliance upon God .

Wisconsin 1848, Preamble. We, the people of Wisconsin, grateful to Almighty
for our freedom, domestic tranquility

Wyoming 1890, Preamble. We, the people of the State of Wyoming, grateful to
for our civil, political, and religious liberties .. establish this
Constitution ..

After reviewing acknowledgments of God from all 50 state constitutions, one
faced with the prospect that maybe, just maybe, the ACLU and the
federal courts are wrong!

"Those people who will not be governed by God will be ruled by tyrants."
---William Penn

If you found this to be "Food for thought," send to as many that you think
be touched by it also.


Thursday, October 11, 2007

Tuesday, September 25, 2007

The trinity

If you have time and want to investigate the argument over the Trinity visit this site!!

Thursday, September 20, 2007

Love the Fifth Great Question

In my post "talking to others about Christ" (11/26/05) I quoted Ravi Zacharias as listing four great questions of life. He says that, "each person must at some point in life answer for themselves these four great questions". The questions were; origin, morality, purpose, and destiny. I realized that since only the Bible satisfactorily answered each on of those question that each one of them was an entry point for talking to others about Christ. I also mentioned in that post that I was thinking of adding another question to that list of four biggies. My fifth great question is LOVE. What are you going to do with love?

Love in itself must relate to the other four questions and is answered most satisfactorily by the Bible. The Bible is called by Christian and non-Christian alike, "the Book of Love" Remember the song, "Who Wrote the Book of Love?" There you have the ORIGIN question. What passes as love or a loving act brings up the question of MORALITY. If The Theory Evolution is based on survival of the fittest, then what is the PURPOSE of a love that causes the strongest to sacrifice themselves to protect the weakest? It takes no love whatsoever to make offspring it does however take loving sacrifice to nurture them to adulthood. Finally there is always the question of DESTINY in love. The couple in a relationship ask. "where is this 'love' relationship going? Will it last? Is it real? All responses to the above questions are shaped by the respondent's view of God!

The Bible says, "...God is Love; and he that dwelleth in love dwelleth in God"(1John 4:16). If God is Love then it follows that love comes when God gives a part of himself to another as a gift. (If it is not a free gift then its not love.)
The one who receives God's gift of love must now decide what to do with it. Here are the options:
1) Dwell in it, enjoy it, and give it back to God (love God). The result here is the love multiplied and sent back from God. Thus a relationship is established with God. To succumb to love is to die to self and be made alive in Christ.
2) Give the love to another person. The result here is when the cup is poured out it is refilled by God with the same measure that it was given out in. The new receiver of the love must now also decided what to do with the love that was given to them, because, "Love continueth"(never fails, never stops 1 Corinthians 13.) They might return it to the giver and a relationship is established.
3) Taint the love with selfishness use it to enslave another for selfish purposes. This person perverts love, abuses it, and tries to keep it manageable, it is the same way they think of God. They what a humanized, manufactured, manageable God. In this case the love grows cold. "In the last days, do to increased wickedness, the love of many will grow cold.
4) Reject the love, deny its author, and call it a genetic weakness. This person runs from love so as not to give up self on the throne of the heart. Sometimes this person rejects the love because of feelings of guilt and unworthiness The result is death of the spirit, leading to death of the wretched soul, and finally merciful death of the depleted body.

There may be some possibilities that I have not investigated but, in each case what a person does about Love is what they believe about God, and influences their answering of the other four big questions of life.
George Herbert understood that Love was a drawing card from God to pull humanity closer to himself when he wrote "Love bade me welcome"

Love Bade Me Welcome

Love bade me welcome, yet my soul drew back,
Guilty of dust and sin.
But quick-ey'd Love, observing me grow slack
From my first entrance in,
Drew nearer to me, sweetly questioning
If I lack'd anything.

"A guest," I answer'd, "worthy to be here";
Love said, "You shall be he."
"I, the unkind, the ungrateful? ah my dear,
I cannot look on thee."
Love took my hand and smiling did reply,
"Who made the eyes but I?"

"Truth, Lord, but I have marr'd them; let my shame
Go where it doth deserve."
"And know you not," says Love, "who bore the blame?"
"My dear, then I will serve."
"You must sit down," says Love, "and taste my meat."
So I did sit and eat.

-- George Herbert

Yes be yes, No be no

Post Modern thought works off the statement that everything is relative: nothing is truth, fact, or law, at a different given moment. The idea comes straight from the Garden of Eden when the serpent says, "...when ye eat of it ye shall be like gods...". God is the creator of all that is he has established all reality; truth, law, and fact. The attempt to deny absolutes and create and alternate reality is to deny the creator and subplant ones self as God.
Does anyone remember when Bill Clinton said, " depends on what your definition of is is"? It made me think of when Jesus said, "...let your yes be yes, and your no be no...(matt 5:33-37). Imagine the insanity of anything else, trying to change one event or princple mentally, only to be contiually smacked in the face with truth. I think of alchemist's trying to change lead into gold. How about, so called, White Witches doing evil to create good and knowing all the time that a dark price will be extracted!
Einstein once said that, "God was a good God in that the laws of physics didn't change from day to day, gravity was always the same". (my paraphrase). What a contrast to the AntiChrist who is called the Lawless one. What an insane time that will be. Laws and absolutes; spiritual, physical, and social make life liveable.
Glory to God that he is still unalterable in control!

Thursday, June 28, 2007

The End of the Constitution and Daniel Chapter 6

In Massachusetts you have just witnessed how the great Constitution of the United States and especially the First Amendment rights will be eliminated. How fitting the that the birthplace of the revolution to create a free America now has a dark shadowy rider running through the streets shouting, "the tyranny is coming".

"In November[2003], the Massachusetts high court cleared the way for lesbian and gay couples in the state to marry, ruling 4-3 that commonwealth attorneys "failed to identify any constitutionally adequate reason" to deny them the right. The November 18 ruling gave the Legislature six months to rewrite the state law to conform to the ruling." This began with Massachusetts Supreme Court Chief Justice Margret Marshall telling a lawyer friend to bring the case before the court because she, "would win that case"!
After this ruling opponents set about to change the Ma. Constitution to specifically define marriage as a union of a man and a woman. This grassroots campaign is supported by the Massachusetts State Constitution. All of the needed petitions were gathered and it went before the legislature to be voted onto the statewide popular ballot. 66,000 signatures were needed, 170,000 were gathered, 123,356 were accepted by the Secretary of the Commonwealth. Then the matter had to be passed by 2 consecutive legislative sessions. The first one passed Jan. 7, 2007. The second one was failed June 15, 2007. So now Judicial tyranny has been seconded with legislative tyranny. The Governor is in their camp too he will not be coming to the constitutional rescue.

Why does any of this matter to the Christian? One might ask, "Why not let the wheat and the weeds grow together"? Let them have their day at the harvest they will be sorted out and destroyed.
Daniel Chapter 6

The stage is being set for a Daniel 6 showdown. Gay marriage rights are a tool of legitimacy. They will now be pushing for and receiving special rights status. the right to marry here in Ma. and take "legal" marriages back to all the other states will be next. then the right to adopt children. but the real wedge will come in the form of "Hate Speech". The mere speaking against homosexuality will become a civil and legal crime. As it will "violate their civil rights"

Enter the administrators and satraps of King Darius the Mede:

Dan6:3 Now Daniel so distinguished himself among the administrators and the satraps by his exceptional qualities that the king planned to set him over the whole kingdom. 4 At this, the administrators and the satraps tried to find grounds for charges against Daniel in his conduct of government affairs, but they were unable to do so. They could find no corruption in him, because he was trustworthy and neither corrupt nor negligent. 5 Finally these men said, "We will never find any basis for charges against this man Daniel unless it has something to do with the law of his God."

There you go Christians. Satan is going to use this 4% of the population who call themselves Homo or Bi-sexual. To have you sued into poverty, bibles banned (other than the homo approved TNIV version), churches closed, thrown into prison, and put to death!!

It began with Judicial tyranny in Massachusetts and ends at Armageddon

Thursday, May 24, 2007

Human Recall

Subject: Recall News...

The Maker of all human beings is recalling all units manufactured, regardless of make or year, due to a serious defect in the primary and central component of the heart. This is due to a malfunction in the original prototype units code named Adam and Eve, resulting in the reproduction of the same defect in all subsequent units. This defect has been technically termed "Sub sequential Internal Non-Morality," or more commonly known as S.I.N., as it is primarily expressed.

Some symptoms include;
1. Loss of direction
2. Foul vocal emissions
3. Amnesia of origin
4. Lack of peace and joy
5. Selfish or violent behavior
6. Depression or confusion in the mental component
7. Fearfulness
8.. Idolatry
9. Rebellion
The Manufacturer, who is neither liable nor at fault for this defect, is providing factory-authorized repair and service free of charge to correct this SIN defect. The Repair Technician, Jesus, has most generously offered to bear the entire burden of the staggering cost of these repairs. There is no additional fee required.

The number to call for repair in all areas is: 1-800 M-Y-P-R-A-Y-E-R. Once connected, please upload your burden of SIN through the REPENTANCE procedure.

Next, download ATONEMENT from the Repair Technician, Jesus, into the heart : component :
No matter how big or small the SIN defect is, Jesus will replace it with:
1. Love
2. Joy
3. Peace
4. Patience
5. Kindness
6. Goodness
7. Faithfulness
8. Gentleness
9. Self control

Please see the operating manual, the B.I.B.L.E. (Believers' Instructions Before Leaving Earth) for further details on the use of these fixes.

Continuing to operate the human being unit without correction voids any manufacturer warranties, exposing the unit to dangers and problems too numerous to list and will result in the human unit being permanently impounded.

For free emergency service, call on Jesus.


The human being units not responding to this recall action will have to be scrapped in the furnace. The SIN defect will not be permitted to enter Heaven so as to prevent contamination of that facility.

Thank you for your attention!

Please assist where possible by notifying others of this important recall notice. You may contact the manufacturer any time by "kneemail"

Please note: I am not the origional author of this post. I received it as an Email and found it to good not to spread around. The author is unknown to me!

Thursday, April 05, 2007

The Secret: Not!

For some months now there has been a book on the New York Times best seller list. The book is The Secret by Rhonda Byrne. It has been featured on "Oprah" and now has a DVD. In a sentence the book says,"If you can think it you can have/achieve it" It is the metaphysical version of "Name it, Claim it" prayer, along with reverse of Paul saying, "that which I fear will overtake me" She claims that by thinking positively one can obtain their desires. She calls it the 'law of attraction' : you attract what you think.
Paul and the Name it Claim its' know that they are dealing with spiritual forces and apply God's principles, of faith and will, to their petitions thereby assuring the outcome will by a Holy one. Byrne on the other hand creates a superstition or spiritual void that can be filled by any spirit and at a price to be named latter!
Rhonda Byrne also admits that some of the origins of her ideas came from a 1910 book the Science of Getting Rich. The real origins of this thought go all the way back to the Garden of Eden!
"In the beginning God created..." What he created was reality and truth. Along with that creation came physical and spiritual laws. Lucifer, not content with that reality, sought to be worshipped as God was. He enticed Adam and Eve with this lie (alternate reality), " you won't really die, God has just withheld a secret from you, he knows that when you eat of the fruit, you will become like GODS". Now I already quoted that God was a creator of all the is including reality, truth, and Law. That also makes him Supreme Judge.
Ever since the fall from grace, man has in the spirit of Lucifer sought to create their own reality, with their own rules, and judge others. The consequence, for these acts of self deification, is still spiritual death, followed by physical death, and judgement by God.
Rhonda's book is just an invitation from that old serpent to take a bite of the fruit we were told to leave alone. The Serpent has temporarily lent her some of his slaves, to praise and worship her, and bring offerings ($$$), and create the illusion of truth in her borrowed altered reality. In the end she will have to face, the truth that, she cannot think away death, or the face of judgement. The doubt, and expectation of ultimate judgement, she shares with, her mentor and master, Lucifer.
The Secret is not worth the price.

also check out this post on the subject