If someone were to ask me this 3 years ago, I would have said, "It is not a sin... show me in scripture!" I would have done what most do, and branded that person a legalist. No longer...
1. A crucial and unbiblical assumption is made BEFORE I send my child to the pagan school of humanism. It is assumed that scientific materialism is NOT a religion. Truth: ALL EDUCATION STEMS FROM A FAITH BELIEF SYSTEM. Either you will educate your child from a biblical worldview, or an unbiblical worldview. Text: Colossians
2. Would you send your child to a Mormon School, a Buddist School? Then why would you consider public school something less than a cult school? It is because you assume that public school is somehow religiously neutral. It is not. The faith of the "system" is atheistic naturalism. It is anti supernatural, and presents science, social studies, math, etc. as if God was irrelevent. THAT is a faith system. It's religious worldview is humanism (man is the ultimate decider of right / wrong).
Since I would love to say more, but someone said it already, I have copied and pasted an article from American Vision:
A Spectre is Haunting America. Don't Let itby Dr. Richard A. Jones11/12/08
Now that what some might call the “unthinkable” has actually happened, it’s certain that a vital remnant in the Church will wake up and realize that, “It’s time to start paying attention.” Had McCain won, the Christian Right likely would have given another overconfident sigh of relief, hoping that the other side would somehow not be able to advance its anti-Christian offensive in 2012. (It would have advanced anyway.) Either way, it’s folly to forget that the difference between the American Dream-killing, wealth-redistributing leftist, Obama, and the RINO McCain is negligible. A tip-off that both are operative socialists was made clear last primary season when mainstream media palmed off these two inexplicable “choices” onto us. Values voters never had a say. But that’s all spilled milk. It’s time to explore how it was that what was once essentially a Christian-leaning, U.S. voting populace was so easily set up for passive acceptance of a clear-cut socialist candidate in each party. Don’t be surprised by the major cause.
Dedication to Marxism by East Coast political, academic and media types goes back to the days of FDR and even before. But, it neared max toxicity in the 1960s with Viet Nam. By 1989 and 1990, Marxist devotion in the U.S. had not weakened in the least even though the Cold War had ended and the USSR folded. That’s because, as we’ve argued here, true socialism at its core is an intense, life-dedicated hatred of God and the Christian family. And hatred of God is ever-present. This passion is what keeps the fires of nihilism and Marxism burning on campuses nationwide (and eventually in the public schools) even though it waned (for a season) in the Soviet Motherland. Viet Nam era zealots like Bill Ayers never stopped pushing radicalism at ever-lower grade levels in the schools. So it’s no surprise that mind-programmed young voters (and plenty of church goers, per Barna polling) have slowly fallen for Washington’s “equality, compassion (and vote-buying) plan;” i.e., socialism. How did this catastrophe come to pass with nary a whimper?
Many think that a deceived Protestant Church in America was the key. It abetted the slippery slope to socialism via a century-long bad habit of effeminate pietism and its cave-in to an “it’s just about over,” irrelevance-guaranteeing, dispensationalism. (Both of which developed mainly because due to loss of the best U.S. men during the cynically contrived Civil War.) Once the shroud of pessimistic end-times resignation had smothered what de Tocqueville experienced as “pulpits aflame,” the soft undermining effect of passive church irrelevance in a fast-changing society was assured. By election time 2008, scores of feminized, liberal-leaning pulpits had been taken in by the Left’s vague slogan of “change;” a change that a “truly loving God” supposedly desires.
As 1960’s radicals like Ayers and company wormed their way into the teacher colleges, the plan was that children…especially Dr. Benjamin Spock’s permissively trained and spoiled victims…would be progressively dumbed down to accept humanistic, anti-Christian socialism. The zeitgeist of the age was one of busy Baby Boomer parents marching resolutely to the beat of “me, mine and materialism.” While both parents took two salaries in order to pay their taxes and feed a consumption mentality, the planners knew that schools would be the perfect holding tank by day for “open minded” (read “gullible”) children who were getting, if any, only minimal moral guidance at home. What was being surreptitiously taught in the mega-compliant government schools was less critical to parents than the convenience of the handy babysitting. A passive Church, meanwhile, yawned. Only Rev. Rousas J. Rushdoony, virtually alone through the 1970s and 1980s, warned about the grave threat on the near horizon should government-controlled education be allowed to prevail. Has it prevailed? Having to ask the question gives the answer.
It was during this pivotal and still feasible-for-action time frame that others besides Rushdoony should have perked up and given the alert. Pro-active response conditions were still favorable. Post-Viet Nam, as socialist fruit began growing apace in the schools, pastors and young parents alive in the 1980s and 1990s (who would have been born at a time when the Cold War’s lessons about communism’s threat were still vivid) should have paid attention. And communism, as is well known, is merely the freedom-hating socialism of Obama and McCain worked out to its inevitable conclusion. With the facts so clearly visible, why didn’t those Boomer parents and their pastors figure it out?
It wasn’t just Dr. Spock. It wasn’t just end-times misinterpretations that led to irrelevance within church leadership. Post-Viet Nam pastors had other concerns stopping them from storming pulpits and with rhetorical swords drawn, proclaiming; “Parents: Remove God’s children from the humanist schools.” With Christianity under attack on all fronts, especially media, academia, and the entertainment sectors, humanistically-deceived moderns began leaving church. With tithing and giving down, pastors had worries other than the pesky socialism threat. They caved in to financial “reality,” very often using the wholly unjustified “salt and light in the schools” pretext. Instead of “taking a chance on God” and declaring truth, they ignored the get-them-out warning. They feared backlash from parents and public school teachers among the congregants. It was and is that simple.
But there’s plenty of blame to go around. All of the best known national power ministries on radio and TV happily followed suit. They too feared jeopardizing their donations and product-sales base. True, these national voices gave occasional, random attention to the school problem, but were quick to say, as a covering mantra, that the two alternatives, home education and private schools “are not for everyone.” Result: Only a few previously pro-materialism-leaning parents were sufficiently aroused to change gears, even for their own children. From pew to pulpit to the big production ministries, the ball was dropped, and the youth contingent response in the 2008 election reflects this failure. Millions of younger voters from churched homes (and often joined by their parents) had, in fact, succumbed to school socialism-based, pro-permissive, pro-class envy, pro-homosexual, pro-green, anti-defense and anti-capitalism deception. Twenty-first-century parents and leaders must wake up. “If you forebear to deliver them that are drawn unto death, and those that are ready to be slain…. If you say, behold, we knew it not, does not he that ponders the heart consider it? And he that keeps the soul, does he not know it? And shall he not render to every man according to his works” (Proverbs 24:10-11).
“Children of the State” in World Magazine for November 1, 2008, unintentionally revealed the degree of American reluctance to grasp 40 years of brutal truth…years at least somewhat reminiscent of 1930s Germany. It stated: “If you want a classic example of how fast a whole culture can be turned on a dime, redirected by 180 degrees, try this: Just when it seemed, through the 1980s, 1990s, and even well into the past decade, that a socialist mindset had been successfully put down in the United States, back it comes- with a vengeance.” No! 2008 was not a “here it comes back,” inexplicable surprise. Exactly the opposite! Since the 1970s, youth socialism-indoctrination has been like a freight train coming. And in 2008 it arrived-with a vengeance, right on schedule and just as planned. If not addressed now, 2010 will be worse. Today’s younger voters are politically illiterate, socialist-leaning, damaged goods and much of this because of a church-wide, millstone-risking refusal to protect Christ’s “little ones” (Matt. 18:6). “For the leaders of this people cause them to err, and they that are led of them are destroyed”(Isa. 9:16).
Wiser heads in the Church; in some rare pockets of government, and we here at American Vision, know that this trend to socialism and, with it, the soon loss of our freedoms, must end. That pitiable throng of those taken in by this fairy tale must decline. Those adults-to-be of tomorrow (and already-adults of today) who would help lead us out of the trap must increase. American Vision’s specialty in the culture wars has always been to supply God-honoring materials for Christians who want to enhance their Kingdom-advancing skills. But AV’s offerings will fall increasingly on deaf ears if the adult readers of tomorrow continue “learning” in the other side’s youth training camps. Why not tell your pastor to think over the challenge? Tell him that an obedience-respecting God will honor his leadership. This is a transformational hour in history and the hour is late. As Cliff May wrote last week in National Review; “The Democrats, i.e., the Left, now have the White House, control of both houses of Congress, a majority of governors’ mansions, a majority of state legislatures, the entertainment media, the elite news media, the unions, the educational establishment, the lion’s share of the philanthropic community, and increasing power over the courts.” ACORN is on its way to OAK status. Christians need to grow trees of influence of their own, their own forests, and fast. Failure to act now guarantees that things will all only get worse, and not just in the political realm but in all of them. We ask you to join us by removing your own children and encouraging others to do the same. Set January, 2009 as your target date. We don’t have forever. Thank you.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The Height of Hypocrisy
This is a good example of where we are at today... This is put out by Associated Press, November 5, 2008 - 2 days after the election).
Exit polls on Tuesday revealed dramatic demographic gaps in the homosexual-marriage vote. While about six in 10 voters under 30 opposed the ban, about the same proportion of those 65 and older supported it. There were sharp racial discrepancies as well. Even as black voters overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama -- a homosexual-rights supporter -- in the presidential race, about seven in 10 of them voted against same-sex marriage, compared with about half of white voters.
Hello... So, because I am black I vote for Barack EVEN THOUGH I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THE ISSUES??? What do we call that?
Again, humanism leads to insanity...
See here for article: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=312706
Exit polls on Tuesday revealed dramatic demographic gaps in the homosexual-marriage vote. While about six in 10 voters under 30 opposed the ban, about the same proportion of those 65 and older supported it. There were sharp racial discrepancies as well. Even as black voters overwhelmingly backed Barack Obama -- a homosexual-rights supporter -- in the presidential race, about seven in 10 of them voted against same-sex marriage, compared with about half of white voters.
Hello... So, because I am black I vote for Barack EVEN THOUGH I DISAGREE WITH HIM ON THE ISSUES??? What do we call that?
Again, humanism leads to insanity...
See here for article: http://www.onenewsnow.com/Legal/Default.aspx?id=312706
College?
Here are some informative links
http://www.collegeplus.org/
http://www.ameprogram.com/
http://www.biblicalconcourse.com/
http://www.collegeplus.org/
http://www.ameprogram.com/
http://www.biblicalconcourse.com/
Senate Bill 08-200
I don't know what surprises me more: Homosexuals getting away with banning the bible in Colorado and outlawing boys / girls bathrooms, or Christians NOT believing that it was actually happening.
I talked to a precious loved one. I told her about Colorado's recent ban on the bible. She merely said, "No... I don't believe that... they can't do that..." It was similar to me cocking my head like a dog the first time I tried to comprehend partial birth abortion.
It is insanity to call the murder of a child "legal abortion" as long as the head is still in the birth canal when you kill the baby. If you move the baby 1 inch out of the birth canal, the doctor goes to jail as a murderer. It is insanity to make laws which allow boys to enter into girls restrooms. Humanism leads to insanity.
The specific part of this bill in qustion (SECTION 4: 24-34-601: Discrimination in places of public accommodation). It can be found on pages 7-8 at the following link. http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2008A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/BD7A295EB6F4460E872573F5005D0148?Open&file=200_01.pdf
Some will say that this bill does no such thing. The fallacy here is that quite honestly, he who defines the terms of the argument wins. When you take this bill to court, it will depend upon the interpreters of this bill (judges). If you have a liberal homosexual judge reading this bill, what definitions do you think that he will give to this bill?
I talked to a precious loved one. I told her about Colorado's recent ban on the bible. She merely said, "No... I don't believe that... they can't do that..." It was similar to me cocking my head like a dog the first time I tried to comprehend partial birth abortion.
It is insanity to call the murder of a child "legal abortion" as long as the head is still in the birth canal when you kill the baby. If you move the baby 1 inch out of the birth canal, the doctor goes to jail as a murderer. It is insanity to make laws which allow boys to enter into girls restrooms. Humanism leads to insanity.
The specific part of this bill in qustion (SECTION 4: 24-34-601: Discrimination in places of public accommodation). It can be found on pages 7-8 at the following link. http://www.leg.state.co.us/CLICS/CLICS2008A/csl.nsf/fsbillcont3/BD7A295EB6F4460E872573F5005D0148?Open&file=200_01.pdf
Some will say that this bill does no such thing. The fallacy here is that quite honestly, he who defines the terms of the argument wins. When you take this bill to court, it will depend upon the interpreters of this bill (judges). If you have a liberal homosexual judge reading this bill, what definitions do you think that he will give to this bill?
Seceding from the union? Conservatives and Libertarians
I copied this off a blogger's comments. He is an example of what the libertarians will not get, and what the Christians will not speak up about.
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible.
It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward.
Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The BibleIt is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else.
The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..." I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
See here for Iowa's. http://www2.legis.state.ia.us/GA/76GA/Legislation/HJR/00000/HJR00007/
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to.
The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible.
It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward.
Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The BibleIt is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else.
The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..." I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us
See here for Iowa's. http://www2.legis.state.ia.us/GA/76GA/Legislation/HJR/00000/HJR00007/
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to.
The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Obama, Socialism, Public School, and Marxism
The fact that Obama will not admit that his political strategy is socialistic is telling. Why is Barak afraid to admit that redistribution of the wealth is the economics of Marxism. That socialism is the economics of communism is plane to see for anyone who can google "Communist Manifesto." Surprisingly, Obama will not admit this is his idea of a good government.
More surprising is the American lack of understanding. I wonder if Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh are getting frustrated yet. They have not asked for my input... I do not think they will either. But in my humble opinion, they ought to be nailing the worldview and education issue.
The contemporary worldview is humanism. It is ingrained into the heads of all public school students. The fruit of humanism is socialism. All the conservatives who I love to listen to should be hitting this one daily! The crises is one of worldview. Obama is consistently Marxist in his ideology. I do not know why he is afraid to admit the obvious. What is wrong with being Marxist? Most university students and professors do not even seem to mind admitting it anymore.
The Humanist worldview:
This worldview judges people. Humanists hate truth. They say, "Capitalists are selfish... If you do not want the government to take your wealth and give it away, then you are bad, bad, selfish." They judge people, and hate those who will not agree with their humanism. The homosexual humanist hates the Christian, and judges him most severely. He hates anyone who will not affirm HIS beliefs. His thinking is irrational. Humanism is irrational.
But Christians, and conservatives still send their children to public schools. They continue to produce irrational children taught to think irrational thoughts like: redistributing the wealth is good... it cares about people... and anyone who disagrees must be a judgmental, selfish person.
Glenn, Shawn, Rush, and Christians especially... if you want to hit the target, expose the source. Public Schools teach humanism. The public school is involved in faith based education... the faith of relativism, humanism, socialism, atheism. All education is under girded by presuppositions. Public / Government schools presuppose that God is irrelevant. Yesterday's students are today's liberals. They have bought the lie that you can have education void of political biases. All education has a bias. All facts will be viewed from some set of predetermined lenses.
In short, public schools teach facts about the world (science, economics, sociology, etc) and tell students that they can form their own definitions, propositions, and arguments about these facts. THIS IS A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. To teach students that God is irrelevant in the interpretation of facts concerning life IS a religion. Whether you call this religion atheism, socialism, agnosticism, materialism, etc., they all are a result of a humanism worldview. Humanism is, "Man determines what is right." The opposite is Theism which says, "God determines what is right."
Christians should have consulted the Bible (Deuteronomy 6.4-10) and never sent their children to the public schools of humanism. Conservatives should recognize (as the homosexuals do) that the source to changing worldviews is teaching the children...
For further explanation on the absolute bankruptcy of socialistic economic policy, see Gina Cobb here:
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2008/10/the-horrors-of.html
More surprising is the American lack of understanding. I wonder if Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh are getting frustrated yet. They have not asked for my input... I do not think they will either. But in my humble opinion, they ought to be nailing the worldview and education issue.
The contemporary worldview is humanism. It is ingrained into the heads of all public school students. The fruit of humanism is socialism. All the conservatives who I love to listen to should be hitting this one daily! The crises is one of worldview. Obama is consistently Marxist in his ideology. I do not know why he is afraid to admit the obvious. What is wrong with being Marxist? Most university students and professors do not even seem to mind admitting it anymore.
The Humanist worldview:
- Short-term (decisions are pragmatic, or utilitarian: "What works for right now" determines what is right)
- Individual (what is right is determined by each individual)
- Consumer (each individual fights for personal rights)
This worldview judges people. Humanists hate truth. They say, "Capitalists are selfish... If you do not want the government to take your wealth and give it away, then you are bad, bad, selfish." They judge people, and hate those who will not agree with their humanism. The homosexual humanist hates the Christian, and judges him most severely. He hates anyone who will not affirm HIS beliefs. His thinking is irrational. Humanism is irrational.
But Christians, and conservatives still send their children to public schools. They continue to produce irrational children taught to think irrational thoughts like: redistributing the wealth is good... it cares about people... and anyone who disagrees must be a judgmental, selfish person.
Glenn, Shawn, Rush, and Christians especially... if you want to hit the target, expose the source. Public Schools teach humanism. The public school is involved in faith based education... the faith of relativism, humanism, socialism, atheism. All education is under girded by presuppositions. Public / Government schools presuppose that God is irrelevant. Yesterday's students are today's liberals. They have bought the lie that you can have education void of political biases. All education has a bias. All facts will be viewed from some set of predetermined lenses.
In short, public schools teach facts about the world (science, economics, sociology, etc) and tell students that they can form their own definitions, propositions, and arguments about these facts. THIS IS A RELIGIOUS BELIEF. To teach students that God is irrelevant in the interpretation of facts concerning life IS a religion. Whether you call this religion atheism, socialism, agnosticism, materialism, etc., they all are a result of a humanism worldview. Humanism is, "Man determines what is right." The opposite is Theism which says, "God determines what is right."
Christians should have consulted the Bible (Deuteronomy 6.4-10) and never sent their children to the public schools of humanism. Conservatives should recognize (as the homosexuals do) that the source to changing worldviews is teaching the children...
For further explanation on the absolute bankruptcy of socialistic economic policy, see Gina Cobb here:
http://ginacobb.typepad.com/gina_cobb/2008/10/the-horrors-of.html
Conservatives, Libertarians, and Seceding From the Union
I copied this off a blogger's comments. He is an example of what the libertarians will not get, and what the Christians will not speak up about.
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible. It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward. Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The Bible
It is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else. This sounds good, but has no foundation. The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..."
I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us See Iowa's at bottom.
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to. The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
What I’m really interested in is how to get from where I am to Liberty, and I will gladly join up with other Americans who are willing to submerge all their differences and create an organization that has one and only one aim: LIBERTY. That means Liberty for me, for you, and for everyone else. That includes people we disagree with on all sorts of issues. If we understand that Liberty means that you choose your own governance and I choose mine, exclusive of interfering with one another violently, then we can unite under this one banner: LIBERTY.
While the Libertarians climb in bed with all sorts of flea-bitten ideologues, Christians will continue to put a bushel over their lamps (Matthew 5.15). Libertarians are fond of the founding fathers of the American Republic, but, they are not particularly concerned about the source of our fore father's ideas... namely the bible. It will be interesting to watch libertarians try to come together when the major tenet of their system is: Smaller Government brings liberty. For Neo-Libertarians (Yes, my term for the contemporary Libertarian, Ron Paul types) this major tenet still springs from the same well that the socialist tenets flow from... humanism. Humanism (man can decide for himself what is right and wrong) is no foundation for moving forward. Although the founding fathers were a mixed bag of Christians, and deists, they had a common source that they used for their foundation... The Bible
It is interesting to listen to a libertarian talk. He says the same things that a pagan would say (NO, I am not saying that he is satanic... hear me out). A major tenet of the Pagan is "Do whatever you want, as long as you don't hurt anyone else." The major tenet of the Neo-Libertarian is, Liberty for all to do as they want as long as they don't hurt anyone else. This sounds good, but has no foundation. The founders of our nation built their case for liberty based upon the immutable truth of God's Word. The neo-libertines base their opinion for liberty on man's reason... a sure foundation for failure. They come about their propositions for small government the same way the liberals come about their propositions for big government... the humanistic sand box of "My opinion is..." On the contrary, The founding fathers built their defense of liberty from the perspective of "God's opinion is..."
I predict that soon there will be some rumblings for some state (or many) to secede from the union. See here for Oklahomo's version: http://64.233.169.104/search?q=cache:6XWE5iSZHPAJ:webserver1.lsb.state.ok.us/2007-08HB/HJR1089_int.rtf+ok+house+joint+resolution+1089&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=us See Iowa's at bottom.
If that ever happens, you will have pot smoking libertines dancing with conservative right wing Christian Humanists. But the moment the Christian says, "Hey, we should have prayer in school," the homosexual libertarian will say, "NO, Absolutely not!" All will be coming from the same worldview of humanism. All will be building their argument from the same premise: Big government is bad because big government limits your personal freedoms. What you do in private is your business as long as you don't hurt nobody. Therefore, government should be small and limited so that people can be free to do as they please.
This argument sounds good. Christians will jump on board. But the argument is built upon the sandy foundation of humanism... it won't work. There must be a unified guiding principle base for ALL to agree to. The Founders agreed upon the Bible... not the Mormon bible, or the Jehova's Witness bible... but the Orthodox Christian (and particularly reformed Geneva, or KJV Bible). No Bible, no common standard. No common standard, no personal restraint. No personal restraint, no liberty. Liberty cannot exist where there is no common standard. The Christian Libertarian in his newly seceded state will still proclaim homosexuality to be sinful. When that happens, the Homosexual libertarian will not be content to "keep his private actions in the closet."
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Democrats, Republicans, Bailouts... What Can I Do?
I know that I am not the only one who wants to scream when they read the headlines. It is as if the common man is the whipping boy for all the government's stupidity... and then they blame Joe The Plumber! I want to gather the troops for the big march on Washington to tell the crooked Mr. Potters in Washington, "NO, We don't want to bail out crooked thieves... I mean YOU Guys..."
But, alas... the false prophet Joel O'steen has arrived with his message of faith and hope. Surely he will refocus us on ourselves. I am starting to feel warm and fuzzy all over. But then, I feel the cold slimy hand of Mr. Potter shaking my hand, trying to make a deal with me, and I say, "NO... NO... !" I will NOT deal with the Devil.
Therefore, I did do something! I went to war! I started firing my cannons into the darkness at the enemy. I had family worship! But wait, there's more... I didn't just do family worship with our family alone. No... I wanted to increase the troops. We gathered and did family worship with 2 other families! Together, we watched REAL history about Jamestown. We all gathered in the living room and listened to Doug Philips combat revisionist history with more factual history.
I didn't have combat boots on. I wasn't holding an M-16 in my hand... actually, I was holding the remote control. I was holding that most important piece of military equipment NOT because I am a guy! Rather, because I wanted to stop, and drill the FACTS into my little warriors. It's kind of like our personalized bombs that we dropped during Operation Desert Storm. We'd write on them things like, "Greetings from America." Obviously, no one would read them. It was the personal satisfaction of knowing you were bombing the enemy (Now, Now... I am NOT advocating getting satisfaction out of bombing Iraq!). I am advocating getting satisfaction out of sending Nuclear Missiles into the future to fight the spiritual battle claiming the crown rights of Christ!
Lord willing, my great grandson will go to Jamestown one day. When the tour guide speaks revisionist history to my future progeny, by God's grace, he will refute him with facts which will drop like ICBM's from the past. On the side of those bombs, it will say, "Greetings humanist... from Legacy Baptist... from Rob Hudelson... from family worship 2008!"
I do not have the audience of thousands (that is only in my mind... delusions of grandeur). My voice is small. BUT... By God's grace, we do battle with passion and zeal! WE DO FAMILY WORSHIP! Can you here the Gladiator soundtrack in the background??? The music is rising to a great crescendo... the family has mounted their horses... we are converging upon the living room with swords in hand!!!! We sing praises to the King. We throw ourselves at the enemy! With reckless abandon we will spend the next hour with daddy preaching & teaching until he sweats! I will pound my chest, extend my arm with sword in hand, and say to the troops... "For the King and the Kingdom!!!!"
But, alas... the false prophet Joel O'steen has arrived with his message of faith and hope. Surely he will refocus us on ourselves. I am starting to feel warm and fuzzy all over. But then, I feel the cold slimy hand of Mr. Potter shaking my hand, trying to make a deal with me, and I say, "NO... NO... !" I will NOT deal with the Devil.
Therefore, I did do something! I went to war! I started firing my cannons into the darkness at the enemy. I had family worship! But wait, there's more... I didn't just do family worship with our family alone. No... I wanted to increase the troops. We gathered and did family worship with 2 other families! Together, we watched REAL history about Jamestown. We all gathered in the living room and listened to Doug Philips combat revisionist history with more factual history.
I didn't have combat boots on. I wasn't holding an M-16 in my hand... actually, I was holding the remote control. I was holding that most important piece of military equipment NOT because I am a guy! Rather, because I wanted to stop, and drill the FACTS into my little warriors. It's kind of like our personalized bombs that we dropped during Operation Desert Storm. We'd write on them things like, "Greetings from America." Obviously, no one would read them. It was the personal satisfaction of knowing you were bombing the enemy (Now, Now... I am NOT advocating getting satisfaction out of bombing Iraq!). I am advocating getting satisfaction out of sending Nuclear Missiles into the future to fight the spiritual battle claiming the crown rights of Christ!
Lord willing, my great grandson will go to Jamestown one day. When the tour guide speaks revisionist history to my future progeny, by God's grace, he will refute him with facts which will drop like ICBM's from the past. On the side of those bombs, it will say, "Greetings humanist... from Legacy Baptist... from Rob Hudelson... from family worship 2008!"
I do not have the audience of thousands (that is only in my mind... delusions of grandeur). My voice is small. BUT... By God's grace, we do battle with passion and zeal! WE DO FAMILY WORSHIP! Can you here the Gladiator soundtrack in the background??? The music is rising to a great crescendo... the family has mounted their horses... we are converging upon the living room with swords in hand!!!! We sing praises to the King. We throw ourselves at the enemy! With reckless abandon we will spend the next hour with daddy preaching & teaching until he sweats! I will pound my chest, extend my arm with sword in hand, and say to the troops... "For the King and the Kingdom!!!!"
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
Salt & Light
Israel was given land by God, and told to take possession of it in Deuteronomy & Joshua. They were told to follow God’s laws and He would bless them abundantly. When they were blessed, the surrounding pagan nations would see that Israel’s God was THE REAL God (as opposed to their worthless idols). Israel did not follow obediently, and thereby incurred God’s judgments. The surrounding pagan nations (Assyria / Babylon) carried Israel off in judgment. Their witness to the idolatrous nations was a disaster.
America is God’s land (so is Africa, Australia, etc.) which Christ claimed to have authority over (Psalm 24; Matthew 28.18-20). The Pilgrims came to America to present the gospel to pagan savages who were idolatrous. They claimed America for Christ. The gospel was the “weapons of our warfare.” The method of taking America for Christ was NOT with bows and arrows, but gospel witness, appealing to the hearts of men & women… hence, Pochohantus. Their early family lives, and governmental lives were replete with biblical narratives.
The pilgrims desired to establish their lives according to biblical law. They were blessed. We still reap the fruit of their submission to God’s law. The pagans in the nation could not stop the pilgrims from getting blessed by God. The infidels could not stop God’s blessing upon America. America was blessed because pilgrims aligned themselves according to God’s Word. “God bless America” meant something. It meant God bless America because we want to follow God’s ways. Not so today. America despises God’s ways. And I am NOT talking about the homosexuals in San Francisco!
Israel was not carried off into captivity because the Philistines rejected God’s law.... No, they were carried of because THEY had rejected God’s law. Likewise, America falls under judgment because the church refuses to acknowledge God’s law (practically & principally interpreted & applied) in every sphere of life. America does not fall under economic judgment because the pagans do not submit to God’s ways. America falls under judgment because Christians, Churches, and Christian organizations are ashamed of the gospel. We say that we should “vote ‘Yes’ for prop 101” but we WILL NOT say that marriage is between one man, and one woman BECAUSE GOD SAID SO IN HIS WORD. We are too ashamed. The church sounds more like Joel Osteen’s gospel at this point.
The typical excuse is that we could never even get a hearing in the public arena if we used the Bible as our source. In other words, “There are giants in the land, and we are like grasshoppers in our own eyes.” This is an admission that we have rejected God’s ways. Instead of being in a powerful blessed state of affairs, we are in economic crises. Instead of building upon what God wrought in our forefathers, we have lost our legacy. Legalized abortion in America is an admission that the church has rejected God, NOT that pagans have rejected God. I suspect that we want to hold on to the good life more than we want to glorify God. We want to live in a land where our children are not subjected to homosexual teachers, and socialist thieves. Yes… comforts without cost. Christians want God’s blessing, but they don’t want to stand up and say, “The Bible says.”
Before long… Babylon… or China. How’s your Mandarin Chinese?
America is God’s land (so is Africa, Australia, etc.) which Christ claimed to have authority over (Psalm 24; Matthew 28.18-20). The Pilgrims came to America to present the gospel to pagan savages who were idolatrous. They claimed America for Christ. The gospel was the “weapons of our warfare.” The method of taking America for Christ was NOT with bows and arrows, but gospel witness, appealing to the hearts of men & women… hence, Pochohantus. Their early family lives, and governmental lives were replete with biblical narratives.
The pilgrims desired to establish their lives according to biblical law. They were blessed. We still reap the fruit of their submission to God’s law. The pagans in the nation could not stop the pilgrims from getting blessed by God. The infidels could not stop God’s blessing upon America. America was blessed because pilgrims aligned themselves according to God’s Word. “God bless America” meant something. It meant God bless America because we want to follow God’s ways. Not so today. America despises God’s ways. And I am NOT talking about the homosexuals in San Francisco!
Israel was not carried off into captivity because the Philistines rejected God’s law.... No, they were carried of because THEY had rejected God’s law. Likewise, America falls under judgment because the church refuses to acknowledge God’s law (practically & principally interpreted & applied) in every sphere of life. America does not fall under economic judgment because the pagans do not submit to God’s ways. America falls under judgment because Christians, Churches, and Christian organizations are ashamed of the gospel. We say that we should “vote ‘Yes’ for prop 101” but we WILL NOT say that marriage is between one man, and one woman BECAUSE GOD SAID SO IN HIS WORD. We are too ashamed. The church sounds more like Joel Osteen’s gospel at this point.
The typical excuse is that we could never even get a hearing in the public arena if we used the Bible as our source. In other words, “There are giants in the land, and we are like grasshoppers in our own eyes.” This is an admission that we have rejected God’s ways. Instead of being in a powerful blessed state of affairs, we are in economic crises. Instead of building upon what God wrought in our forefathers, we have lost our legacy. Legalized abortion in America is an admission that the church has rejected God, NOT that pagans have rejected God. I suspect that we want to hold on to the good life more than we want to glorify God. We want to live in a land where our children are not subjected to homosexual teachers, and socialist thieves. Yes… comforts without cost. Christians want God’s blessing, but they don’t want to stand up and say, “The Bible says.”
Before long… Babylon… or China. How’s your Mandarin Chinese?
Monday, October 13, 2008
Are There Qualified Women?
My son is preparing for marriage. He has a vision for living for the King and the Kingdom. Does Grandma think he has lost his mind? Yes... well, she probably agrees with some of you. He is 14 years old.
Admittedly, we are not taking a passive stance on this issue. It is God's design for man to "take dominion of the earth." It is God's design for man to "be fruitful and multiply." If you think 14 years old is to young, you would really hate our dinner conversations. I am training my 5 week old to be a man, and get ready to take a wife. Be responsible and productive. Get ready NOW to take a wife and have children. Teach them to love Jesus, and be so productive that they can bless the poor and needy. Your life has meaning and purpose! Reject Americana Adolescent "sow your oats of humanism" garbage.
I want my precious children to know what life is REALLY about. I want my future generations to have a vision and passion for life which far outweighs the shallow Americana Churchianity Culture (John 10.10). I say to my 5 week old, "Two Kingdoms are at war. Be a man. Fight the battle. Have children, disciple them, and become mighty in the land (Psalm 127.5; Psalm 112.2)!" I talk to him like this, in hopes that I will continue to impress God's truth upon him every day of his life (Deuteronomy 6.4-10).
Ok... Rob, go decalf, right? NO! And again, I say "NO!" (well, it might be good for me to go decalf). But, Life is short (1 Peter 1.24). Reject passivity (Ephesians 6.11-18). Get a vision. Live with passion!
Therefore, as I pray, and look out at the landscape to find that woman whose price is "far above rubies," I am looking for...
Admittedly, we are not taking a passive stance on this issue. It is God's design for man to "take dominion of the earth." It is God's design for man to "be fruitful and multiply." If you think 14 years old is to young, you would really hate our dinner conversations. I am training my 5 week old to be a man, and get ready to take a wife. Be responsible and productive. Get ready NOW to take a wife and have children. Teach them to love Jesus, and be so productive that they can bless the poor and needy. Your life has meaning and purpose! Reject Americana Adolescent "sow your oats of humanism" garbage.
I want my precious children to know what life is REALLY about. I want my future generations to have a vision and passion for life which far outweighs the shallow Americana Churchianity Culture (John 10.10). I say to my 5 week old, "Two Kingdoms are at war. Be a man. Fight the battle. Have children, disciple them, and become mighty in the land (Psalm 127.5; Psalm 112.2)!" I talk to him like this, in hopes that I will continue to impress God's truth upon him every day of his life (Deuteronomy 6.4-10).
Ok... Rob, go decalf, right? NO! And again, I say "NO!" (well, it might be good for me to go decalf). But, Life is short (1 Peter 1.24). Reject passivity (Ephesians 6.11-18). Get a vision. Live with passion!
Therefore, as I pray, and look out at the landscape to find that woman whose price is "far above rubies," I am looking for...
- A woman In covenant with God (Gen. 18.18; 2 Cor. 6.14; Matthew 26.28)
- A woman with a vision for fulfilling her God ordained role as a helper to a man who takes dominion of the earth (Genesis 1.26-28)
- A woman with a vision for multigenerational faithfulness (Gen. 18.18; Psalm 78.1-7)
- A woman with a desire to bear children. (Gen. 1.2; 1 Timothy 2.15; 5.14; )
- A woman with a commitment to disciple (home school) her children (Deut 6.4-10; Proverb 1.8; 6.20; 31.1)
- A woman with an understanding of biblical submission (1 Timothy 2.9-11; Ephesians 5.22; 1 Peter 3.1)
- A woman with an understanding of biblical beauty (1 Timothy 2.9-10; 1 Peter 3.1-6)
- A woman with the practical skills and character to be a homemaker (Titus 2.5)
- A woman with a passion for industry, production, and generosity (Proverb 31)
If you are a dad who is not sitting back thinking things are just "going to happen," I am praying for you, and taking resumes.... ;)
Friday, October 10, 2008
Irrational Argument for Pragmatic Voting
Christian Humanists do not look to the Word to find qualifications for voting. They look to circumstances, and their own judgment. They counsel within themselves. That is why they confront me with my sin of voting third party. Their argument is:
A vote for third party is a vote for Obama
A vote for Obama is sin
Therefore, a vote for third party is sin
Hmm… Why is a vote for Obama sin? To which the humanist says, “Obama is pro abortion… and that is sinful.” When pressed, they FINALLY say, “the Bible says you shouldn’t murder.” At that point I want to say, “So the Bible is our standard?” Notice, however, the Bible did not come up in their argument. Their argument reveals the TRUE motive… namely one of pragmatism. McCain’s biblical qualifications never seem to come up until I bring it up! Then the defenses kick in… “Oh,” they say, “I feel McCain is biblically qualified.” NO… I don’t think you do… You already gave away your argument… You are voting for McCain, NOT because he is biblically qualified, but because Obama is NOT qualified by YOUR standards. That is like saying, I am voting for this lesbian because at least she is not an ax-murdering lesbian.
To place biblical standards on one of the candidates, but not the other, is hypocritical. Truth is, McCain doesn’t smite my Americana senses like Obama does… but what about God’s senses? Shall we not refuse our own humanistic standards, and ask God for HIS standard? If you think McCain is biblically qualified, then vote for him. (I would hate to be in your shoes trying to justify it, but that is between you and the Lord… I won’t love you any less… I have enough of my own sin to worry about). And if that is your point of view, it should not bother you that others find him unqualified and are voting for a 3rd party candidate.
The argument should be “Is this guy qualified? What are the biblical qualifications?”
A vote for third party is a vote for Obama
A vote for Obama is sin
Therefore, a vote for third party is sin
Hmm… Why is a vote for Obama sin? To which the humanist says, “Obama is pro abortion… and that is sinful.” When pressed, they FINALLY say, “the Bible says you shouldn’t murder.” At that point I want to say, “So the Bible is our standard?” Notice, however, the Bible did not come up in their argument. Their argument reveals the TRUE motive… namely one of pragmatism. McCain’s biblical qualifications never seem to come up until I bring it up! Then the defenses kick in… “Oh,” they say, “I feel McCain is biblically qualified.” NO… I don’t think you do… You already gave away your argument… You are voting for McCain, NOT because he is biblically qualified, but because Obama is NOT qualified by YOUR standards. That is like saying, I am voting for this lesbian because at least she is not an ax-murdering lesbian.
To place biblical standards on one of the candidates, but not the other, is hypocritical. Truth is, McCain doesn’t smite my Americana senses like Obama does… but what about God’s senses? Shall we not refuse our own humanistic standards, and ask God for HIS standard? If you think McCain is biblically qualified, then vote for him. (I would hate to be in your shoes trying to justify it, but that is between you and the Lord… I won’t love you any less… I have enough of my own sin to worry about). And if that is your point of view, it should not bother you that others find him unqualified and are voting for a 3rd party candidate.
The argument should be “Is this guy qualified? What are the biblical qualifications?”
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Economics, Ideologies, and ACORN
Ah... you have to love watching man's reasoning fall apart. "Why do the nations rage..." (Psalm 2). They do not think to themselves, "We hate God." But the truth is... they do. All men must choose. Will you follow God, or despise God. The economics of man will ALWAYS fail because God has given us insights into what system of economics WILL work. However, that system will not cure man's sinful greed, which will always reek havoc on any system of economics.
No, we may not find a step-by-step cook book approach addressing every particular issue of American economic policy. But we will always find guiding principles which should guide every area of life... even monetary policy. Oooohhh... this makes people rage! "We don't want to have to submit to any reasoning beyond ourselves!" To admit that God has something to say about how our economic decisions should be made is over-the-top... even if "In God We Trust" IS etched over the top of the Speaker's Rostrum in the House of Representatives.
God gave man private property, and responsibility to produce from that property. God then said that is sinful to steal. God also reserved the right to make some men rich, and others poor (Proverb 22.2). Along comes man, and says, "That is not just! It is not right for God to make some rich, and others poor!" Yes, man in his infinate wisdom stood in judgement of God. This worldview is called humanism. It is the root of Socialism, Marxism, Communism, and Barak Obaminism.
While capitalism as we know it may have many problems (especially since man's greed is envolved) it aligns itself with the private property, and personally responsibility principles that we find in God's Word. Therefore, the liberal ideology of "Every one should own his own home" reveals their faith. "Should" reveals a faith presupposition. Does the Bible say that every one "Should" own their own home? If you say that the Bible does, then at least we agree that the Bible is the standard. Then we agree that "Thou shalt not steal" also applies. Therefore, stealing from the rich to give to the poor is sinful.
The problem is that man wants to decide what is right and what is wrong. The Humanist wants to declare that all men should have equal bennies, and stealing is ok, as long as it benefits ME. The government indoctrinates humanism into the children through public schooling. The student grows up believing truth is relative and everyone gets to decide what is right and wrong. Eventually the absolute stupidity of that kind of thinking produces an economic crises. When the putrid ideology of humanistic economics finally comes home to roost, and the children have no food on the table, they will again rail at God, and the rich, and the capitalist, etc. This is why ACORN will force their religion on everyone possible. When the fruit of their humanistic philosophies is harvested, ecomomic crises will be the result. Should it surprise anyone that ACORN would be involved in voter fraud? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkZrMpv0Pss&feature=related. As far as I know, they do not claim to be adherents to a biblical worldview. If this is true, then they also do not claim to have an absolute standard for honesty. Oh, by the way, did I mention that Barack Obama used to be ACORN's lawyer, and top trainer. He spoke at their national convention last year, etc...
All of our ideologies, and philosophies are rooted in one of two systems. They WILL HAVE ROOTS IN EITHER A BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW, OR A MAN-CENTERED WORLDVIEW. In a biblical worldview, God reserves the right to make some people poor, and some rich. In a humanistic worldview, man declares that God is unjust if He doesn't make everything "fair." Oh... by the way... if we all got what was "fair..." we would all be perishing in hell...
No, we may not find a step-by-step cook book approach addressing every particular issue of American economic policy. But we will always find guiding principles which should guide every area of life... even monetary policy. Oooohhh... this makes people rage! "We don't want to have to submit to any reasoning beyond ourselves!" To admit that God has something to say about how our economic decisions should be made is over-the-top... even if "In God We Trust" IS etched over the top of the Speaker's Rostrum in the House of Representatives.
God gave man private property, and responsibility to produce from that property. God then said that is sinful to steal. God also reserved the right to make some men rich, and others poor (Proverb 22.2). Along comes man, and says, "That is not just! It is not right for God to make some rich, and others poor!" Yes, man in his infinate wisdom stood in judgement of God. This worldview is called humanism. It is the root of Socialism, Marxism, Communism, and Barak Obaminism.
While capitalism as we know it may have many problems (especially since man's greed is envolved) it aligns itself with the private property, and personally responsibility principles that we find in God's Word. Therefore, the liberal ideology of "Every one should own his own home" reveals their faith. "Should" reveals a faith presupposition. Does the Bible say that every one "Should" own their own home? If you say that the Bible does, then at least we agree that the Bible is the standard. Then we agree that "Thou shalt not steal" also applies. Therefore, stealing from the rich to give to the poor is sinful.
The problem is that man wants to decide what is right and what is wrong. The Humanist wants to declare that all men should have equal bennies, and stealing is ok, as long as it benefits ME. The government indoctrinates humanism into the children through public schooling. The student grows up believing truth is relative and everyone gets to decide what is right and wrong. Eventually the absolute stupidity of that kind of thinking produces an economic crises. When the putrid ideology of humanistic economics finally comes home to roost, and the children have no food on the table, they will again rail at God, and the rich, and the capitalist, etc. This is why ACORN will force their religion on everyone possible. When the fruit of their humanistic philosophies is harvested, ecomomic crises will be the result. Should it surprise anyone that ACORN would be involved in voter fraud? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TkZrMpv0Pss&feature=related. As far as I know, they do not claim to be adherents to a biblical worldview. If this is true, then they also do not claim to have an absolute standard for honesty. Oh, by the way, did I mention that Barack Obama used to be ACORN's lawyer, and top trainer. He spoke at their national convention last year, etc...
All of our ideologies, and philosophies are rooted in one of two systems. They WILL HAVE ROOTS IN EITHER A BIBLICAL WORLDVIEW, OR A MAN-CENTERED WORLDVIEW. In a biblical worldview, God reserves the right to make some people poor, and some rich. In a humanistic worldview, man declares that God is unjust if He doesn't make everything "fair." Oh... by the way... if we all got what was "fair..." we would all be perishing in hell...
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Dr. Dobson and Public Schools
Dr. Dobson, O, Dr. Dobson… Our captain [you] are on the deck and dying. Yes, for many in the evangelical community, Dr. Dobson carries more weight than Jesus! No, they would never say it that way. I love my brother, James Dobson. I disagree with him on those articles where he has sprouted forth fruit from a humanistic perspective. One of his dramatic disembarking errors is the self-esteem teachings, but thusly I save that for another time. The current topic at hand is a recent article concerning this question: What immediate changes would you make in junior and senior high schools to improve the learning environment there?
Had I not read it from a Focus on the Family magazine, I would have thought some pagan principal had written it. His answer to the question at hand is, “Most important, we must make schools safer for students and teachers.” This is his response as a representative of Jesus Christ. The reasoning goes: Government schools are dangerous schools. Dangerous schools should be made safe. Therefore, government schools should be made safe.
Before we jump on the Jimmy bandwagon, let’s ask a few pertinent questions. Where does the Bible tell Christians that they should prop up pagan institutions? Who are Christians to rush in and fight for the building up of a school of humanism? Does the Bible tell us to establish schools which deny the authority of Christ? When the pagans kill each other because they will not submit to God’s authoritative Word, does God want the Christians to rush to their aid? Humanism will always ultimately eat its own (John 10.10). I will offer a different solution: Proclaim the authority of Jesus Christ in every area of life.
Without the authority of the absolute rule of Jesus Christ in every area of life, protection becomes a matter of degree, and chronology. It is only a matter of time until the bully in 1st grade, who is taught that he evolved from a monkey, will grow up into an angry nihilist with a gun planning his tirade. Government schools, by nature, cannot teach something that undermines their agenda (submission to the government… and you thought it was education?). To teach alternative possibilities would be self-defeating.
Most importantly, we are called to proclaim the Kingdom of God, and extend God’s authority in every area of life through evangelism and discipleship. What should we do to save government schools? Evangelize! We should call them to repent and believe in Jesus Christ, who claims authority over their lives (not just Christians) (Matthew 28.18-20). We are not called to make schools in rebellion to God safer.
Let me address the pink elephant in the paper. Christian parents are saying, “But my child is in that school!” I ask you, where does the bible put the responsibility for teaching and training of children (Deuteronomy 6.6-9)? If a government school is humanistic in its worldview, it can only teach all of its subjects from a humanistic perspective. How can we biblically send our children to the Babylonians for their education? Please reconsider your parental duties, and values. Your children will grow up thinking from a humanistic worldview. Christians respond to life from the humanistic worldview… Dr. Dobson is.
Even if we agreed that the schools should be made safer, where would we draw up our plans to implement? How will we go about making them safer? Dr. Dobson offers, “Armed gaurds? Maybe. Metal detectors? If necessary. More expulsions? Probably. No-nonsense administrators? Definitely.” And what will we consider offensive enough for expulsion? Nakednesss? Armed robbery? Homosexual activity? What will be our standard for what is good and bad behavior. The homosexual moms certainly cannot handle your little Johnny telling their child that homosexuality is “sin.” So will we expel Johnny? The point is, there is no reference point for truth in a school which teaches that there is no reference point for truth! Duh! (word depicting a self evident truth).
In Summary, God commissioned us to evangelize the lost, and call them to surrender to the authority of Jesus Christ in the way they do schools (in this case). God did NOT commission Christians to prop up pagan institutions, rather, He told us to take dominion for His glory. When people refuse to acknowledge and honor God, they are an abomination to God. By default they will destroy each other. Christians should be salt and light, ready to offer hope in Christ, and a biblical worldview, which does not include humanistic government schools.
Had I not read it from a Focus on the Family magazine, I would have thought some pagan principal had written it. His answer to the question at hand is, “Most important, we must make schools safer for students and teachers.” This is his response as a representative of Jesus Christ. The reasoning goes: Government schools are dangerous schools. Dangerous schools should be made safe. Therefore, government schools should be made safe.
Before we jump on the Jimmy bandwagon, let’s ask a few pertinent questions. Where does the Bible tell Christians that they should prop up pagan institutions? Who are Christians to rush in and fight for the building up of a school of humanism? Does the Bible tell us to establish schools which deny the authority of Christ? When the pagans kill each other because they will not submit to God’s authoritative Word, does God want the Christians to rush to their aid? Humanism will always ultimately eat its own (John 10.10). I will offer a different solution: Proclaim the authority of Jesus Christ in every area of life.
Without the authority of the absolute rule of Jesus Christ in every area of life, protection becomes a matter of degree, and chronology. It is only a matter of time until the bully in 1st grade, who is taught that he evolved from a monkey, will grow up into an angry nihilist with a gun planning his tirade. Government schools, by nature, cannot teach something that undermines their agenda (submission to the government… and you thought it was education?). To teach alternative possibilities would be self-defeating.
Most importantly, we are called to proclaim the Kingdom of God, and extend God’s authority in every area of life through evangelism and discipleship. What should we do to save government schools? Evangelize! We should call them to repent and believe in Jesus Christ, who claims authority over their lives (not just Christians) (Matthew 28.18-20). We are not called to make schools in rebellion to God safer.
Let me address the pink elephant in the paper. Christian parents are saying, “But my child is in that school!” I ask you, where does the bible put the responsibility for teaching and training of children (Deuteronomy 6.6-9)? If a government school is humanistic in its worldview, it can only teach all of its subjects from a humanistic perspective. How can we biblically send our children to the Babylonians for their education? Please reconsider your parental duties, and values. Your children will grow up thinking from a humanistic worldview. Christians respond to life from the humanistic worldview… Dr. Dobson is.
Even if we agreed that the schools should be made safer, where would we draw up our plans to implement? How will we go about making them safer? Dr. Dobson offers, “Armed gaurds? Maybe. Metal detectors? If necessary. More expulsions? Probably. No-nonsense administrators? Definitely.” And what will we consider offensive enough for expulsion? Nakednesss? Armed robbery? Homosexual activity? What will be our standard for what is good and bad behavior. The homosexual moms certainly cannot handle your little Johnny telling their child that homosexuality is “sin.” So will we expel Johnny? The point is, there is no reference point for truth in a school which teaches that there is no reference point for truth! Duh! (word depicting a self evident truth).
In Summary, God commissioned us to evangelize the lost, and call them to surrender to the authority of Jesus Christ in the way they do schools (in this case). God did NOT commission Christians to prop up pagan institutions, rather, He told us to take dominion for His glory. When people refuse to acknowledge and honor God, they are an abomination to God. By default they will destroy each other. Christians should be salt and light, ready to offer hope in Christ, and a biblical worldview, which does not include humanistic government schools.
Biblical Economics
Scripture shows that the greed of man pushes him towards consumption. History reveals the same. Israel debased “watered down” their coinage (Isaiah 1.22). Greece debased their money, Rome debased their money, and the list goes on. It is typical that governments will water down the money supply to pay for the things that it wants (war, welfare, etc.). We are SO typical of nations throughout history… buying things that we cannot afford… selling our children into slavery… consuming the future inheritance. Again, my summary of the Humanistic Worldview is Short-term, Individualistic, Consumers… or (S.I.C.) for short. Our current economic scenario is the result of man’s greed. And our poor politicians have no anchor or compass to give a stable response. They will do what is best to win them votes… take care of the short term (leave it to our kids to pay). What will happen to the value of the dollar when that $70 billion (last estimate I knew) hits main street? Where is it going to come from… thin air, that’s where… The supply of a gazillion dollars injected into the economy will make each dollar worth less. During WWII the German marc had become so inflated that the cost of everything went through the roof. Of coarse, this is mere economic theory which has as many opinions as Baptists do about… anything. But we could learn from history. Time magazine reported, February 9th, 1923 that the German printing presses were pumping out 45 billion marks every day. By November they were pumping out 500 quadrillion a day. A single egg went from .08 marks to 80 billion marks. When you print money out of “thin air” the value will eventually plummet. You cannot rape the ground. And we know that we live in a humanistic society that is adverse to God’s ways.
Therefore… I think it would be wise to start planting a garden! Soon your veggies may well be worth their weight in gold! Lord, please show us how to become producers who are empowered by YOU to make wealth (Deuteronomy 8.18) to pass on an inheritance to our children, for the keeping of the covenant with YOU… that they might KNOW YOU, and be MIGHTY IN THE LAND, putting forth YOUR ways, calling men to repentance and life.
To the King, and the Kingdom!
Rob
P.S. I realize that economic theory is just that… theory. Many say that “fiat money” is NOT debasing the monetary supply. However, I would agree with Murray Rothbard, that our Central Banking System which creates fiat money is an inherently immoral system. For his free book download click here. Economist, I am NOT… I readily admit that. But I have not yet heard any good refutations coming from a biblical worldview. Economics may seem dry as dust. We can see how humanism has effected the nation in so many ways. Economics is just another… but it is a big one… For some good Homeschool resources concerning economics from a biblical worldview click here
Therefore… I think it would be wise to start planting a garden! Soon your veggies may well be worth their weight in gold! Lord, please show us how to become producers who are empowered by YOU to make wealth (Deuteronomy 8.18) to pass on an inheritance to our children, for the keeping of the covenant with YOU… that they might KNOW YOU, and be MIGHTY IN THE LAND, putting forth YOUR ways, calling men to repentance and life.
To the King, and the Kingdom!
Rob
P.S. I realize that economic theory is just that… theory. Many say that “fiat money” is NOT debasing the monetary supply. However, I would agree with Murray Rothbard, that our Central Banking System which creates fiat money is an inherently immoral system. For his free book download click here. Economist, I am NOT… I readily admit that. But I have not yet heard any good refutations coming from a biblical worldview. Economics may seem dry as dust. We can see how humanism has effected the nation in so many ways. Economics is just another… but it is a big one… For some good Homeschool resources concerning economics from a biblical worldview click here
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The Articles of Decla – What?
Unfortunately, after all my schooling I was left repeating my brainless mentor’s phrases who had gone before me. Since I was a member of the Fast Times at Ridgemont High society, I did exactly what the United States of Americana Socialist Republic wanted me to do! I burned up my brain cells learning wisdom from the lunacy screen. It was like holding your breath until you passed out, and we thought it was fun. The monetary price of watching such mind numbing movies is not near what it will cost you in stupidity… just ask everyone who watched Napoleon Dynamite… better yet, don’t bother. They would be the ones saying, right now, “Dude, what’s his beef against Napoleon… that was so awesome, man!!!” Ask them when the Articles of Confederation were written, and you would get the same blank stare that my governmentally brain washed face would give you.
The point is humanism and socialism want to cut us off from our past! They major on the trivial and worthless hoping to lure any unsuspecting victim into mindless dribble called amusement (literally: to “not think”). So we have squandered our inheritance which was bought for us in blood, literally. And what was the price? What have we gained? Our fore fathers died so that we could… what? Fritter away time, and liberty picking our noses in the corner like some little spoiled brat screaming, “Give me more!” “I want my MTV!” There’s a real winner for you… some real cream of the system’s crop. Hall & Slater recognize this saying, "As educators in Christian schools we need to become aware of the fact that progressive education is not educationally oriented. Progressive education is politically oriented to produce both the philosophy and the character of socialism." Slater, Rosalie J. ; Hall, Verna M.: Teaching and Learning America's Christian History. American Revolution Bicentennial ed. San Francisco : Foundation for American Christian Education, 1975, S. 91
I hear you now. You are one of those from the system. You are angry with my lack of respect for your socialistic worldview. “I was public schooled, and I know all about the Articles of Confederation.” Yes, sir, you may. But you had to swim upstream to learn, and the education you got was most likely half baked. If you look just beneath the surface of that diploma you will find the stamp of government approval. The state has thoroughly stolen years from you and made you think that facts can be interpreted without God. The biggest thing you learned is that God is irrelevant to history. Now, if you want to know the truth, you will have to go read original documents for your self… that may take too much work for an entertained person to do. So, let’s put on another round of stupidity, fuse together some more brain cells, blow another evening in mind numbing activity, and forget about the blood bought Christian American History… We are not worthy of it, anyway.
The point is humanism and socialism want to cut us off from our past! They major on the trivial and worthless hoping to lure any unsuspecting victim into mindless dribble called amusement (literally: to “not think”). So we have squandered our inheritance which was bought for us in blood, literally. And what was the price? What have we gained? Our fore fathers died so that we could… what? Fritter away time, and liberty picking our noses in the corner like some little spoiled brat screaming, “Give me more!” “I want my MTV!” There’s a real winner for you… some real cream of the system’s crop. Hall & Slater recognize this saying, "As educators in Christian schools we need to become aware of the fact that progressive education is not educationally oriented. Progressive education is politically oriented to produce both the philosophy and the character of socialism." Slater, Rosalie J. ; Hall, Verna M.: Teaching and Learning America's Christian History. American Revolution Bicentennial ed. San Francisco : Foundation for American Christian Education, 1975, S. 91
I hear you now. You are one of those from the system. You are angry with my lack of respect for your socialistic worldview. “I was public schooled, and I know all about the Articles of Confederation.” Yes, sir, you may. But you had to swim upstream to learn, and the education you got was most likely half baked. If you look just beneath the surface of that diploma you will find the stamp of government approval. The state has thoroughly stolen years from you and made you think that facts can be interpreted without God. The biggest thing you learned is that God is irrelevant to history. Now, if you want to know the truth, you will have to go read original documents for your self… that may take too much work for an entertained person to do. So, let’s put on another round of stupidity, fuse together some more brain cells, blow another evening in mind numbing activity, and forget about the blood bought Christian American History… We are not worthy of it, anyway.
The Articles of Confederation
When the Continental Congress of 1776 wrote their initial declaration of independence on July 2, 1776, they knew that they would have to communicate to the world as a united states or they would be vulnerable to any attackers. On July 4, 1776 they made that declaration as The Unanimous Declaration of the Thirteen United States of America. Within the resolution of the Continental Congress was the sentence, “… that a plan of confederation be prepared and transmitted to the respective colonies for their consideration and approbation. Hence, the plan for confederation produced The Articles of Confederation in 1781. The Articles of Confederation was our nation’s first official national governing documents. These Articles fell far short of the grand expectations which were placed upon them. The Articles of Confederation were so protective of states rights that it left the federal government impotent. The Constitution must be interpreted in light of trying to fix the failures which arose in The Articles of Confederation. Obviously, none of this matters if you take the current philosophy of law exemplified by Jack Rakove of Stanford University called “progressive justice,” which gives birth to a “Living Constitution.” This is classic relativism in black robes. It sets the stage for judges to interpret the Constitution however they like… just look at California. As America is held hostage by a few confused intelligentsia, the duped masses are whining to the state to fix things… just what the socialist agenda wanted… more state goodies offered, more state control. This is NOT what the founding fathers had in mind. Nor is it the Biblical alternative.
Principium Imprimis -- First Principles
The Patriot Post is a newsletter that contains some good information. America was founded upon Christian principles. We have memorial stones that preach to us. Our forefathers left a heritage for us concerning Jesus Christ! To let their blood go down, and their testimony of our Lord be stolen... it is shameful. The Bible is the source of truth. Truth manifested itself within the founding of this nation. Patriot Post is a good secondary source...
Patriot Post: "As a leading national advocate for individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values, The Patriot Post abides by the following Statement of Principles as our Credo. We believe that individual liberty and personal responsibility, together with limited government, free enterprise and a stalwart national defense, constitute the foundation of our national heritage. Individual liberty rapidly decays into corruption and anarchy without a meaningful commitment to personal responsibility based on our nation's Christian heritage. Traditional beliefs and values must therefore continue to serve as our touchstone and compass for the rest of the article from Patriot Post" http://patriotpost.us/main/principles.asp
Patriot Post: "As a leading national advocate for individual liberty, the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and the promotion of free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values, The Patriot Post abides by the following Statement of Principles as our Credo. We believe that individual liberty and personal responsibility, together with limited government, free enterprise and a stalwart national defense, constitute the foundation of our national heritage. Individual liberty rapidly decays into corruption and anarchy without a meaningful commitment to personal responsibility based on our nation's Christian heritage. Traditional beliefs and values must therefore continue to serve as our touchstone and compass for the rest of the article from Patriot Post" http://patriotpost.us/main/principles.asp
Pathology of the Left
Mark AlexanderFrom Patriot Post Vol. 05 No. 08; Published 25 February 2005 Print Email PDF In 2003 the American Psychological Association printed a study by a few academicians from Cal-Berkeley and the University of Maryland. The study, entitled "Political Conservatism as Motivated Social Cognition," purported to have identified some determinants that are common to those holding a "conservative" worldview. As one reads the report, it becomes readily apparent that their "norm" -- that is, their control group -- was somewhere to the left of SanFranNan Pelosi and her Ya Ya sisters, Babs Boxer and Di Feinstein -- but then, what are we to expect from Cal-Berkeley and UM, or just about any of our nation's "leading" academic institutions? The authors received more than 1.2 million of your hard-earned tax dollars from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation in order to, by their own account, "consider evidence for and against the hypotheses that political conservatism is significantly associated with (1) mental rigidity and closed-mindedness; (2) lowered self-esteem; (3) fear, anger, and aggression; (4) pessimism, disgust, and contempt; (5) loss prevention; (6) fear of death; (7) threat arising from social and economic deprivation; and (8) threat to the stability of the social system." http://patriotpost.us/alexander/edition.asp?id=295
No Moral Foundation, No Patriotism...
Without question, the founding fathers knew that without a moral foundation, there could be no e pluribus unum "out of many one." The very thing that could bind "one" together from the many was the absolute truth of scripture. As men submitted to scripture, and exhibited self control, our country would prosper. Without a common absolute truth, man is left to do what is right in his own eyes. The landmarks representing this attestation to the founders recognition of this fact are too numerous to count... Starting with self government, then proceeding to family, church, and state government, when all are submitted to the laws of Christ, there can be unity, productivity, and patriotism. "With the appearance of our Lord there was set forth the only cause for individual action which would ever produce real consideration for others. Christ Jesus in “fulfilling the law” commanded the Christian to make the law not cause—but effect—the effect of his individual, internal salvation. This is the reason why our American Republic and our American Christian Constitution cannot function from a position of law enforcement. While the Ten Commandments form a foundation for our laws they cannot compel obedience. The law cannot make a man “do that which is good”. The Christian obeys the law because he has already accepted the saving grace of Jesus Christ as his redemption from sin and lawlessness. The cause of his obedience—that which “fulfills all the law and the prophets”—is his acceptance of Christ. The effect of his salvation is expressed in the citizen who fulfills the law rather than abides by the law. This position is that of the New Testament Christian. “For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” (Romans 8:2). Thus while dealing with crowded classrooms of students the Christian Educator is actually teaching each individual student to become internally governed through his commitment to Christ. This is Christian self-government. Without Christ it would be man governing himself through relativistic moral attitudes. The great strength of our republic becomes evident when it is seen that the founders put the responsibility for local, state and national government, not upon the group but upon the integrity of individual action. Thus the cause and purpose for right action begins with individual fulfillment of the first commandment of the New Testament. If love for God and Christ becomes the dominant theme of an individual’s life then the second commandment of our Lord will follow in its rightful place and society will benefit far more than when concern for the group takes precedence over love for, and obedience to, our precious Saviour." Slater, Rosalie J. ; Hall, Verna M.: Teaching and Learning America's Christian History. American Revolution Bicentennial ed. San Francisco : Foundation for American Christian Education, 1975, S. 105 SAMUEL ADAMS There were very few whose minds could comprehend the important distinctions which were then agitated, or whose reasoning could discern the approaching events of that controversy. Mr. Adams, buoyed up by a sense of the justice and righteousness of the colonists’ demands, stood forth first in their defence, and heroically won his title—The Father of the Revolution. In 1764, he was elected to prepare the instructions of the town of Boston to their representatives in the General Assembly. The document is now in existence, and contains the first public denial of the right of the British Parliament to tax the colonies. Frank Moore*, American Eloquence: A Collection of Speeches and Addresses, by the most Eminent Orators of America; with Biographical Sketches and Illustrative Notes, New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1857, 1: 320. Let divines and philosophers, statesmen and patriots, unite their endeavors to renovate the age, by impressing the minds of men with the importance of educating their little boys and girls, of inculcating in the minds of youth the fear and love of the Deity and universal philanthropy, and, in subordination to these great principles, the love of their country; of instructing them in the art of Self-Government, without which they never can act a wise part in the government of societies, great or small; in short, of leading them in the study and practice of the exalted virtues of the Christian system. Samuel Adams*, Samuel Adams to John Adams*, 4 October, 1790, in Four Letters: Being an Interesting Correspondence Between Those Eminently Distinguished Characters, John Adams, Late President of the United States; and Samuel Adams, Late Governor of Massachusetts. On the Important Subject of Government, Boston, MA: Adams and Rhoades, 1802, 9–10. Hall, Verna M.: The Christian History of the Constitution of the United States of America, Vol. I. Christian Self-Government. Founders Edition. San Francisco : Foundation for American Christian Education, 2006, xiv
The Constitution "In the Year of our Lord." Obviously, 1787 was that year, and it was referring to Jesus Christ
The Constitution "In the Year of our Lord." Obviously, 1787 was that year, and it was referring to Jesus Christ
The Supreme Court has spoke, and its voice is the law of the land?
“A worldly or non-Christian philosophy of law is equally expressed by those people who say that the Supreme Court has spoken, and its voice is the law of the land. Whatever the government decrees, that we must do, say they.… Christian governments have no such tyrannical license. They, rather, are limited in their power and can enforce only God’s laws. All modern socialist states, which are established on the proposition that the Father of Jesus Christ is no longer God, have had to repeal the laws based upon the Ten Commandments and erect a tyrannous system whose only consistent threat is that nobody can challenge or question the power of the government. In Soviet Russia, we are told, there is no capital punishment. There is no punishment at all. One is simply eliminated for crimes against “the people” (the Communist Party) In Russia men die for crimes against the state—but not for crimes against God. “The socialist system has reverted to the most degenerate of all the forms of ancient paganism, recalling Israel’s bondage in Egypt and the savagery of Carthage. The American flyer, Francis Powers, whose trial was a vast propaganda move to establish the socialist principle of human law, was not tried as a military agent of an enemy power but as a criminal. Spying was not treated as the act of war which it is, thus deserving whatever penalty the warring power deems fit, but as a crime. The meaning of that trial was that the world was informed of the new pattern of law to be imposed upon it: that crime is an offense against world government—not against God.” Slater, Rosalie J. ; Hall, Verna M.: Teaching and Learning America's Christian History. American Revolution Bicentennial ed. San Francisco : Foundation for American Christian Education, 1975, S. 103
Max Blumenthal - Liberalism's lack of argument
The only thing worse than Max's straw men arguments, and his red herrings is the fact that he successfully gets under the skin of his conservatives that he catches off gaurd. He has nothing to say toward any argument, or as Michelle Malkin notes, "intellectual debate." His worldview can only handle materialistic, socialistic, etc. Therefore, to debate based upon principle is immpossible for him. He is left with ad hominem attacks. Too bad, though. He could become our best ally. If we would respond humbly, intellegently, and patiently, his folly would rise to the surface. It is tough to do in a world where the socialism of the day has successfully dumbed us down to the point where we think in the pathetic patterns of Napolean Dynamite. Work through this video. Outline the REAL issues. Lay out what is really being argued about. Point out for yourself and your children the fallacies that Max uses. He NEVER addresses the real issues. In fact, that does not even seem to be his point. His desire "seems" to be that he merely wants to "smear" the conservatives. Well... he did a good job. We reacted emotionally. Let us learn, and invite him back so that we can respond with Truth instead of emotions. When it comes to Truth, Max's foolish worldview has nothing to stand on. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByLqJD36F7E
Victim Mentality, and the Transfer of Responsibility
I was not clearly connecting the dots between the Liberal's victim mentality, and socialism. I still see it through the fog, like looking through a smokey room in some sleazy joint. I know from the Bible that humanists will readily seek to blame someone else instead of taking responsibility for their own actions (Genesis 3.12-13). I am beginning to see how the liberals want to transfer individual responsibility to the state. They want the state to step in and be responsible for their irresponsible sexual practices (fund abortion, welfare, etc.). They want the state to step in and parent their children (education, NEA, Teacher's unions, etc.). The humanistic worldview naturally leads to big government, and socialism. If we have no absolute foundation for what is good, right, and true, everyone does what is right in his own eyes. When he goes against the natural laws given by God governing the universe, he has to blame someone else. Instead of choosing to do right, he is the "helpless victim of his hormones and DNA." How sad! For 6,000 years people have been able to take responsibility for their own actions, but our poor helpless homosexuals, prisoners, etc. are the helpless, spineless victims of their emotions, and environment. Their chant is, "We deserve!" "It is not our fault!" "Government should do something!" To these statements I must add two things: One, The Founding Fathers of America didn't see it that way. The references to their belief in moral absolutes, and self governance are too replete to post. If you do not see those many references, it is because you do not want to. Two, moral absolutes exist because Jesus Christ rose from the grave. Jesus Christ holds all things together by the power of His will (Colossians 1.16-17). But to accept this, we must all say... "It is my fault. I have sinned." To say this requires repentance ("change of mind") which would mean the total denial of their worldview (humanism). That may be something that is just too much to bear.
The Culture of Death - Proverb 8.36
Humanism is the worldview of the left. Humanism is the culture of death (Proverb 8.36). The culture of death loves abortion and hates life. The culture of death loves spineless "macho" men who play with big boy toys instead of leading their families. They love self instead of service. The culture of death loves feminism and hates submission. The culture of death worships youth and hates the elderly. The culture of death loves socialism (victims helplessly asking the state to govern them), and hates America / capitalism (every man being morally responsible to act for the good of society). The culture of death loves homosexuality, and hates marriage. The culture of death emanates out from a worldview that excludes moral absolutes. The liberal prefers bondage of state control over exercising control over his own sinful lusts... a despicable concept to the founding fathers of America... which is why the culture of death hates REAL American history. It reminds them of a people who fought for self government... something worth dying for.
Adolescents... Myth, or Truth?
After 10 years of youth ministry, I couldn't convince any parents to leave their unbiblical ideas of adolescents behind. Here is just a taste of supporting evidence. Click here http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/cross_examination/the_invention_of_adolescence.aspx
Why Should I Vote?
This question has come up. Quite honestly, I think it is a good question, since I had really taken it for granted. So, I grab my cup o' Joe, and begin talking to Jesus about it. I put forth the following as my argument for our responsibility to vote:
Psalm 24.1; Psalm 2.1; Matthew 28.18-20
The earth is the Lord's. All men should submit to His ways of taking care of His earth. Yes, even the pagan man will be held responsible for either submitting to the Lord's ways, or rebelling against them. Dominion and the gospel means that every sphere of life should be placed under the authority of Jesus Christ. If I am the head of the County Transportation Committee, that is my goal. If I am the Fire Chief, that is my goal. Along the way, I share the gospel and call men to repent of their unwillingness to govern the earth according to God's Word. Proposition: All men should govern the earth for God's glory
Romans 13
God established the civil authorities to punish evil doers. The rod is for the house, the keys (church discipline) are for the church, and the sword is for the civil government. Proposition: Civil government is God-ordained to restrain evil.
1 Timothy 2.1-3
God has given us the responsibility to pray for our leaders, that we would enjoy certain liberties. When righteous men are put into office, people rejoice (Proverb 29.2). Prayer assumes a willingness to respond to God's will (John 15.7-8). Since we enjoy the liberty of voting for righteous men, it would seem to me to be a contradiction to pray for righteous leaders, and yet not vote for them when we get the chance. Proposition: Christians are responsible to pray for and vote for righteous candidates.
Argument:
Since God created the earth, and commissioned man to exercise dominion for His glory, we are responsible to press the authority (share the gospel) of Christ into every area of life.
Since Civil Government is established by God, it is a legitimate sphere. As Christians, we are to be salt and light in that sphere, calling men to submit to Christ's authority in that realm. This alone entails a willingness to serve in that realm, if the Lord leads (ex: Jonah 3.6; Acts 8.27, etc.).
Since a Christian's desire is to see Jesus exalted in every area of life, he should pray for the righteous to lead the nation, and serve for the glory of King Jesus, if the Lord should so lead.
Since we should pray for, and serve in that capacity, we should also vote for righteous leaders.
*** Side note. It is difficult for me to conceive of teaching my children American history without teaching them the legitimacy of the revolution. I believe our nation's founders had a biblical worldview that entailed the responsibility to establish a republic like ours. I am still learning about the reasons for the revolution. This only points out how far behind THEM we really are. For them to see biblical principle sufficient to go to war... and yet I can not see biblical principle for men to vote... hmm...
Psalm 24.1; Psalm 2.1; Matthew 28.18-20
The earth is the Lord's. All men should submit to His ways of taking care of His earth. Yes, even the pagan man will be held responsible for either submitting to the Lord's ways, or rebelling against them. Dominion and the gospel means that every sphere of life should be placed under the authority of Jesus Christ. If I am the head of the County Transportation Committee, that is my goal. If I am the Fire Chief, that is my goal. Along the way, I share the gospel and call men to repent of their unwillingness to govern the earth according to God's Word. Proposition: All men should govern the earth for God's glory
Romans 13
God established the civil authorities to punish evil doers. The rod is for the house, the keys (church discipline) are for the church, and the sword is for the civil government. Proposition: Civil government is God-ordained to restrain evil.
1 Timothy 2.1-3
God has given us the responsibility to pray for our leaders, that we would enjoy certain liberties. When righteous men are put into office, people rejoice (Proverb 29.2). Prayer assumes a willingness to respond to God's will (John 15.7-8). Since we enjoy the liberty of voting for righteous men, it would seem to me to be a contradiction to pray for righteous leaders, and yet not vote for them when we get the chance. Proposition: Christians are responsible to pray for and vote for righteous candidates.
Argument:
Since God created the earth, and commissioned man to exercise dominion for His glory, we are responsible to press the authority (share the gospel) of Christ into every area of life.
Since Civil Government is established by God, it is a legitimate sphere. As Christians, we are to be salt and light in that sphere, calling men to submit to Christ's authority in that realm. This alone entails a willingness to serve in that realm, if the Lord leads (ex: Jonah 3.6; Acts 8.27, etc.).
Since a Christian's desire is to see Jesus exalted in every area of life, he should pray for the righteous to lead the nation, and serve for the glory of King Jesus, if the Lord should so lead.
Since we should pray for, and serve in that capacity, we should also vote for righteous leaders.
*** Side note. It is difficult for me to conceive of teaching my children American history without teaching them the legitimacy of the revolution. I believe our nation's founders had a biblical worldview that entailed the responsibility to establish a republic like ours. I am still learning about the reasons for the revolution. This only points out how far behind THEM we really are. For them to see biblical principle sufficient to go to war... and yet I can not see biblical principle for men to vote... hmm...
Friday, September 5, 2008
The Poitics of Dominion
With so much going on politically in our nation, a God-fearing man's head could spin trying to keep up. Serious questions arise. Will you vote pragmatically? Will you vote as if God's word has nothing to say about females in the civil magistrate?http://forkingandkingdom.blogspot.com/2008/09/sarah-palin-and-pragmatic-christianity.html
See here for more biblical principles concerning voting:http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/
See here concerning biblically qualified candidates:http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Life.cfm
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
See here for more biblical principles concerning voting:http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/
See here concerning biblically qualified candidates:http://baldwin08.com/Pro-Life.cfm
http://www.constitutionparty.com/
"Rob... use your common sense!"
I can't tell you how many times I have heard this. Other phrases like, "That is what God gave you a brain for, isn't it?" These statements are usually told to me by well meaning friends who, at the threshold where faith meets practice, think I should suddenly resort to walking by sight.
What is the standard for dictating what qualifies as "common sense?" When your common sense is opposite of my common sense, what will be our objective standard? for more...http://74.255.56.30/blog/?p=168
What is the standard for dictating what qualifies as "common sense?" When your common sense is opposite of my common sense, what will be our objective standard? for more...http://74.255.56.30/blog/?p=168
Wednesday, September 3, 2008
Sarah Palin and Pragmatic Christianity
I come to you today in the spirit of the republican VP hopeful, Sarah Palin … that tigress… the “Barracuda”… the one who takes on corruption and good ol’ boy politics with courage and tenacity! She is the great one who finally brings character and integrity to politics. She means what she says, and says what she means. She has a spine to confront the “Mr. Potters” of the world! In short… she is everything that I would want a male politician to be (I am speaking of standing up against corruption, fraud, deception, etc.) I know very little about her, but the little I have heard and seen raises this thought… A. She does not seem to be concerned about being politically correct… she actually has something to say. B. Why can’t we find any men to do this?
Definition of “Pragmatism.” Testing the validity of all concepts by their practical results. Synonyms include: utilitarian, realistic, logical. (Webster’s New World Dictionary).
For my pragmatic voting brothers, I would think that Mrs. Palin was an excellent choice. It would seem to be a home run by the McCain camp. If our main concern is conservative issues, and winning the debate on abortion, gay marriage, etc… then McCain chose a fire cracker who might actually refuse to sell out. It seems we have a better chance to get a republican in now. Is not this a pragmatic way of thinking…
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because we will get a better chance at getting McCain in now (practical results).
OR
Voting for the Constitution party is a vote for Obama (validity of concepts) because you are dividing the Republican party (practical results).
OR
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because she will fight hard for those conservative issues (practical results).
OR
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because she is the best person for the job (practical results).
I am trying NOT to build a straw man here… I think this would be the outline of pragmatic reasoning for supporting the McCain camp. It recognizes that the Constitution party doesn’t have a chance (barring a miracle). It does not want to waste a vote. The issues of the day are too important (and they are). Therefore, since Sarah has great secular qualifications, it is incumbent upon Christians to save unborn children, and vote Republican.
Is pragmatism inherently sinful? Or, said differently, is it biblical to make a decision based upon a perceived outcome (a vote for an impossible candidate is a vote for Obama. The lesser of two evils is McCain, therefore, I vote for McCain). Really, this is the question… the rest will flow out from this point. If it is perfectly within God’s will to assess the situation and make a decision based upon the perceived outcome, then the fact that she is female, or that her daughter is unwed and pregnant, or that there will be some confusion between her husband submitting to the state and leading his house, is not an issue. She has character, virtue, and right values (just the little bit that I know).
I realized how much the Bible really does not come into play while I was talking to a relative recently. She was excited about McCain’s choice for VP. I knew from prior experience that it would be utterly stupid for me to even ask what the bible said about having women lead the country. Until we are willing to say some things (from the Bible) either qualify or disqualify a potential candidate from office… the fact that she is female is a moot point.
Oh… I better address this one so we don’t waste time with straw men… Yes, Deborah was a female political leader in Israel. But I certainly would not build an exegetical case for female leadership from that text… that’s just plain weak!
Lastly, where are the men? Sarah seems to show more courage than all the politically correct politicians in Washington. Everyone should watch “Mr. Smith goes to Washington.” Men… let us grow a spine! I realize McCain was probably being pragmatic and picked her because of the political chess game… she will get those swing votes… I think it will be funny when she confronts McCain on his own “good ol’ boy” politics if they are working together for 4 years… it may be the longest 4 years of his life! I am all for courageous and strong women (Proverb 31.25). I am just sad that we men have sold out so that a woman has to speak up for us… how pathetic. Men… be men! Control your passions! Read God’s word to your family! Study to show yourselves approved! Lead your family! Lead in the church! And if God puts us there, lead in the arena of politics, for the glory of Christ!
For biblical principles on Women in Civil Officehttp://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/should_christians_support_a_wo.aspx
For Geoffry Botkin's excellent critique http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/the_miraculous_sanctification.aspx#n2
To the King, and the Kingdom!
Rob
Definition of “Pragmatism.” Testing the validity of all concepts by their practical results. Synonyms include: utilitarian, realistic, logical. (Webster’s New World Dictionary).
For my pragmatic voting brothers, I would think that Mrs. Palin was an excellent choice. It would seem to be a home run by the McCain camp. If our main concern is conservative issues, and winning the debate on abortion, gay marriage, etc… then McCain chose a fire cracker who might actually refuse to sell out. It seems we have a better chance to get a republican in now. Is not this a pragmatic way of thinking…
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because we will get a better chance at getting McCain in now (practical results).
OR
Voting for the Constitution party is a vote for Obama (validity of concepts) because you are dividing the Republican party (practical results).
OR
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because she will fight hard for those conservative issues (practical results).
OR
Sarah Palin will make a great VP (validity of concepts) because she is the best person for the job (practical results).
I am trying NOT to build a straw man here… I think this would be the outline of pragmatic reasoning for supporting the McCain camp. It recognizes that the Constitution party doesn’t have a chance (barring a miracle). It does not want to waste a vote. The issues of the day are too important (and they are). Therefore, since Sarah has great secular qualifications, it is incumbent upon Christians to save unborn children, and vote Republican.
Is pragmatism inherently sinful? Or, said differently, is it biblical to make a decision based upon a perceived outcome (a vote for an impossible candidate is a vote for Obama. The lesser of two evils is McCain, therefore, I vote for McCain). Really, this is the question… the rest will flow out from this point. If it is perfectly within God’s will to assess the situation and make a decision based upon the perceived outcome, then the fact that she is female, or that her daughter is unwed and pregnant, or that there will be some confusion between her husband submitting to the state and leading his house, is not an issue. She has character, virtue, and right values (just the little bit that I know).
I realized how much the Bible really does not come into play while I was talking to a relative recently. She was excited about McCain’s choice for VP. I knew from prior experience that it would be utterly stupid for me to even ask what the bible said about having women lead the country. Until we are willing to say some things (from the Bible) either qualify or disqualify a potential candidate from office… the fact that she is female is a moot point.
Oh… I better address this one so we don’t waste time with straw men… Yes, Deborah was a female political leader in Israel. But I certainly would not build an exegetical case for female leadership from that text… that’s just plain weak!
Lastly, where are the men? Sarah seems to show more courage than all the politically correct politicians in Washington. Everyone should watch “Mr. Smith goes to Washington.” Men… let us grow a spine! I realize McCain was probably being pragmatic and picked her because of the political chess game… she will get those swing votes… I think it will be funny when she confronts McCain on his own “good ol’ boy” politics if they are working together for 4 years… it may be the longest 4 years of his life! I am all for courageous and strong women (Proverb 31.25). I am just sad that we men have sold out so that a woman has to speak up for us… how pathetic. Men… be men! Control your passions! Read God’s word to your family! Study to show yourselves approved! Lead your family! Lead in the church! And if God puts us there, lead in the arena of politics, for the glory of Christ!
For biblical principles on Women in Civil Officehttp://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/should_christians_support_a_wo.aspx
For Geoffry Botkin's excellent critique http://www.visionforumministries.org/issues/ballot_box/the_miraculous_sanctification.aspx#n2
To the King, and the Kingdom!
Rob
Friday, July 25, 2008
Teaching with Authority
Interesting how Jesus taught with authority.
Matthew 7:29 - 8:1 29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
Was it the way Jesus spoke with conviction? After all, He is God in the flesh. I used to think that it was merely because He was who He was... being God, He has the authority. This is true, but what about the authority that the church is then given in Matthew 18.18-19?
We too easily give away any authority that we have by trusting in man's reasoning instead of repeating what God has said. Focus on the Family would rather cite court cases and statistics than say, "Thus says the Lord," and quote the Bible. The Bible, in their view, has no authority. Why do we so readily give away our best opportunity to convict the hearts of man, and call people to repentance?
Matthew 7:29 - 8:1 29 For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes.
Was it the way Jesus spoke with conviction? After all, He is God in the flesh. I used to think that it was merely because He was who He was... being God, He has the authority. This is true, but what about the authority that the church is then given in Matthew 18.18-19?
We too easily give away any authority that we have by trusting in man's reasoning instead of repeating what God has said. Focus on the Family would rather cite court cases and statistics than say, "Thus says the Lord," and quote the Bible. The Bible, in their view, has no authority. Why do we so readily give away our best opportunity to convict the hearts of man, and call people to repentance?
Friday, July 18, 2008
The Fool Says There Is No God (Psalm 14.1)
For a fools view of epistemology, see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lm1JYYIk-pI
Before you watch, here is a quip about it... lest you are an atheist and begin to build a straw man argument, or a Christian and get blind sided by the straw man builder...
Of course we know that Robespierre was not an atheist (he was a deist, however, which I consider practical atheism), but here’s the rub: the video never claims that he was. That so many of these responders have thought it important to point out to me that Robespierre was no atheist shows me that a large number of atheist enthusiasts don’t listen very closely at all, and are apparently unable to follow a simple logical argument. Oblivious! Rather, they impute something to us that we never claimed in order to pretend they have “answered” us. This is the classic “straw man” fallacy: presenting a weak caricature of your opponent’s argument, as if it were the real thing, and then knocking down the caricature pretending you have defeated your opponent.
Before you watch, here is a quip about it... lest you are an atheist and begin to build a straw man argument, or a Christian and get blind sided by the straw man builder...
Of course we know that Robespierre was not an atheist (he was a deist, however, which I consider practical atheism), but here’s the rub: the video never claims that he was. That so many of these responders have thought it important to point out to me that Robespierre was no atheist shows me that a large number of atheist enthusiasts don’t listen very closely at all, and are apparently unable to follow a simple logical argument. Oblivious! Rather, they impute something to us that we never claimed in order to pretend they have “answered” us. This is the classic “straw man” fallacy: presenting a weak caricature of your opponent’s argument, as if it were the real thing, and then knocking down the caricature pretending you have defeated your opponent.
Americana Humanists Must Banish Memorials
For the banishment of the witness at the Washington Monument, see http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=58349
Humor helps keep you from feeling too important
For some computer humor, go here! http://data.net/Whatnot.cfm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)