Archive for April 7th, 2009

“Where ‘Tolerance’ Leads” by Janet Porter

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

You’ve seen the headlines. They read like the book of Revelation:

  • the deliberate destruction of the dollar;
  • the hostile government takeover of banks and businesses;
  • bowing in submission to the Muslim king of Saudi Arabia;
  • praising Europe as the world’s leader;
  • chopping our national defense while promising to rid the world of nuclear arms;
  • the movement toward a global government and the now openly promoted New World Order.
  • the assault on human life using “the least of these our brothers” for spare parts;
  • tyrannical judges desecrating the institution of marriage, not just in Massachusetts and Connecticut but now in our heartland of Iowa.

The news is bad. The giants are big and they occupy our land because, well, because we elected them. Elections have consequences, and sometimes they’re devastating. And, as I’ve mentioned about prophetic warnings in past articles, sometimes they usher in the judgment of God.

Yet so many are skipping merrily along oblivious of what is now happening on our watch and what it will cost our country, our family and our friends. My advice to those who feel overwhelmed by the nightly news is to look up. Then look around. The way I see it, we have one chance as a nation. One chance as individuals. It is to repent and turn to Jesus Christ, the One who bled on the cross on a Friday we call “good.” And rose from the dead three days later.

But “tolerance” is such a lovely word – except when it comes at the expense of truth, it has cataclysmic results. I wrote a little poem for everyone clinging to “tolerance” over truth, and all of those who are sinning in silence.

    Where ‘Tolerance’ Leads

    When we disagreed while watching the news,
    You chose to ignore my misguided views.
    When I fell for the lie “my body, my choice,”
    Fear of offending me silenced your voice.

    When the courts destroyed marriage, you bit your lip,
    You were too afraid that you wouldn’t look “hip.”
    I wore a “Christian label” but was it not strange,
    When I cast my vote for “hope” and for “change”?

    You never mentioned, when we talked till the a.m.
    To follow Christ means I have to “obey him?”
    I know that was hard, it seemed so “uncouth,”
    “Tolerance” was easier than speaking the truth.

    You didn’t tell me Jesus was the ONLY way,
    After all, that’s what He had to say.
    To forgive us and save us, that’s why He was sent,
    But I never knew of my need to repent.

    My sins were paid for by a God who loved me,
    You could have explained it so I could see.
    You called it “tolerance,” but it was not love,
    And now it’s too late – who were you thinking of?

    I trusted you and thought you were my friend,
    But rather than speak up, you chose to stand by and pretend.
    And for the first time, I can now tell,
    With a warm, pleasant smile, you let me go to hell.

As Easter approaches, there’s something more important than all that’s happening in the world. Something more important than politics and policy. The most important thing is where we’re going to spend eternity. And for the family and friends whom I love, who think “being good” is going to get you to heaven, I cannot keep quiet. There’s a question that everyone must answer.

QUESTION: If Jesus were to ask you, “Why should I let you into heaven?” What would you say?

ANSWER: Being a “good person” won’t get you there, since the Bible says, “We are all infected and impure with sin. When we display our righteous deeds, they are nothing but filthy rags. …” (Isaiah 64:6 NLT) Belief in God won’t cut it – even the devil believes in God, and he’s not going to heaven. Simply believing in God isn’t enough. Being pro-life or Republican won’t get you in. To be assured of your Salvation, each of us must:

  • Recognize that you’re a sinner. “There is no one righteous, not even one” (Romans 3:10). We can’t make excuses or blame others or our circumstances for our actions, “for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23).
  • Recognize that Jesus died on the cross for your sins. “But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Romans 5:8). “For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 6:23).
  • Repent of your sins. Repent means to change direction. “Repent, then, and turn to God, so that your sins may be wiped out, that times of refreshing may come from the Lord” (Acts 3:19). God commands us to repent and turn away from things that displease Him.
  • Receive Jesus as your Savior. Don’t try to clean up your life first. Come to Jesus just as you are and allow Him to change your life. “Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12). Jesus said, “All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away” (John 6:37).
  • Pray: “Dear Lord Jesus, I know that I am a sinner and am in need of forgiveness. I know that you died on the cross to give me that forgiveness. I accept the ultimate gift you gave to pay the penalty for my sins. I invite you to be my Savior and the Lord of my life. I trust you and will follow your way all the days of my life. In Jesus’ name, Amen.”

When you feel overwhelmed by all that’s happening, remember, things looked pretty bleak on Friday. But Easter’s coming. Repent, and cry out for God’s mercy, and we just may get it.

Original Link.

“Attacking The Tea Party Movement” by Lorie Byrd

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

Message to the Federal Government – Don’t Tread on Me (Click Here to Learn More)

Those on the left have spent so much time over the past eight years bashing George Bush that they are having trouble shifting gears. Instead of enjoying their big win in 2008 and going positive, following their leader Obama’s “hope and change” message, they are still tearing down anyone who doesn’t agree with them. The latest attack from the left is not aimed at the Republican party or Michael Steele or Rush Limbaugh, but at Democrat, Republican and Independent Americans across the country who have dared to organize “tea parties” to oppose rising taxes, more government control over private enterprise and less individual liberty.

The Tea Party Movement has caught fire and spread from one end of the country to the other. It has captured the imagination of the conservative grassroots and has taken hold. So far the reaction from the national media has been to downplay or ignore the tea party rallies. Reaction from many on the left most recently is to ridicule and openly attack tea party participants.

According to Michelle Malkin, “Bob Beckel appeared on Fox News this morning to sneer at the nationwide event. He derided tax revolters in Montana, joking that ‘It was a good thing it wasn’t a vodka party, because I guarantee you they all had guns.’Bigoted Beltway jerk. Beckel also claimed the Tea Parties were ‘nothing new’ and recycled the debunked Playboy website report (deleted from the site) spreading false and illogical rumors that the grass-roots movement is directed from the GOP, national tax groups, and CNBC.”

I have been a registered Republican and a conservative for over 25 years and I have never seen a grass roots movement that was even remotely as widespread and successful as the Tea Party movement. The closest thing I have seen would have to be the election of 1994 when the public revolted against the liberal agenda of President Clinton’s first two years in office. There were no widespread protests preceding it, just lots of Americans who woke up to realize the moderate, New Democrat, “end welfare as we know it” message Bill Clinton used to get elected did not match the liberal policies he tried to enact as President. Talk about déjà vu all over again – today’s scenario is incredibly similar.

In just three months the man who attacked George Bush’s deficit spending has introduced us to projected deficits that make Bush’s look miniscule by comparison. The man who attacked John McCain for his associations with lobbyists and vowed to not hire lobbyists took about 24 hours to break his own executive order preventing lobbyists from working in his administration. The man who denied being the most liberal member of the United States Senate has demanded the resignation of Rick Wagoner, chairman and CEO of General Motors, and even told Americans the government would back their car warranties. The man who attacked Joe the Plumber when he warned America about his plans to “spread the wealth around” has engaged in class warfare and promised higher taxes for the highest income earners.

Read the rest of the article here.

“Is Obama Afraid of the J-Word?” by Chuck Norris

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

According to a new national survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 11 percent of Americans still believe President Barack Obama is a Muslim. Seven percent of Democrats believe it. And nearly 20 percent of evangelicals do.

What I find fascinating is that the same study shows only 55 percent of Democrats know or believe Obama is a Christian, even after Obama spent nearly two years on the presidential campaign trail spouting his views and beliefs on everything under the sun.

Moreover, about 1 in 3 people don’t have any idea what his religious convictions are. Should the percentages be that high? Religion might be a private choice, but should it be a secret one, too, even for leaders?

While those stats say something about Obama’s neutrality and respect for representing our nation’s religious melting pot, they also say something about the politically correct climate across our land, in which people are afraid to stand up for their convictions so as not to be branded as intolerant or bigots. We have become a nation that fears opinion. Even Holy Week, once celebrated in the corridors of the Capitol, is now a clandestine commemoration full of holy hesitations.

America’s Founders built this nation upon religious freedom. They valued denominational pluralism. They were unified in their diversity. They all believed in a Creator. And they were almost all vocal about their Christian beliefs. They certainly weren’t ashamed. And neither should we be, especially during this week.

I believe in God, just as our Founders did. As Benjamin Franklin noted in his 1787 pamphlet for those in Europe thinking of relocating to America: “To this may be truly added, that serious religion, under its various denominations, is not only tolerated but respected and practiced. Atheism is unknown there.”

I also believe in the First Amendment, which reads: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” The American Civil Liberties Union and like-minded groups are not preserving First Amendment rights; they are perverting the meaning of the Establishment Clause (which was to prevent the creation of a national church, such as the Church of England) to deny the Free Exercise Clause (which preserves our right to worship as we want, privately and publicly). Both clauses were intended to safeguard religious liberty, not to circumscribe its practice. The Framers were seeking to guarantee a freedom of religion, not a freedom from religion.

I agree with John Jay — the first chief justice of the United States, appointed by George Washington — who wrote to Jedidiah Morse Feb. 28, 1797 (the same year the Treaty of Tripoli was ratified): “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers. And it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers.” I believe that we should not fear religious diversity, but we never should forget we were born a Christian nation.

Under Article VI, Section 3 of the new Constitution, denominational tests for public office were prohibited, but the idea that Judeo-Christian ideas and practices must be kept separate from government would have struck our Founders as ridiculous because the very basis for the Founders’ ideas were rights that were endowed upon all of us by our Creator.

Read the rest of the article here.

“Atheism Versus the Resurrection” by Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

In recent years, it has become fashionable among secular journals to mark Easter week by publishing articles denying that Jesus Christ was literally resurrected from the tomb. It seems they can always find someone with the credentials of a Christian minister to assert that the resurrection was metaphorical, not literal.

I almost got through last week without encountering such an article. Almost. Late in the week, while surfing financial and political sites on the web, I saw a link to an article titled, “Jesus, Entombed in Heaven,” by Rev. William Alberts, Ph.D., a Methodist and Unitarian Universalist minister. Intrigued by the title, I clicked on the link. My “reward” was this unequivocal repudiation of Scripture: “Contrary to the New Testament record, no resurrected Jesus appeared to his disciples shortly after his crucifixion.” Clearly, the gospel according to Rev. Dr. Alberts is the not same as the gospel according to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

On the positive side, perhaps we Americans—Christian and non-Christian—should be grateful to live in a country where people don’t have to fear for their lives for questioning the accuracy of Holy Scripture. For Christians around the world, however, the phenomenon of a clergyman publicly denying the foundational event of Christianity—the resurrection of Jesus Christ—demonstrates how deeply disbelief has penetrated contemporary Christendom.

The essence of such disbelief is the atheism of matter: The resurrection is not physically possible, the logic goes, so therefore it couldn’t have happened. Thus, by this reasoning, the laws of matter are supreme and the existence of God, Spirit (John 4:24), is dubious, if not impossible. According to the laws of physics, chemistry, and biology, a human body can’t walk on water, a woman can’t conceive without a sperm cell, a person can’t change water into wine or instantaneously heal all manner of diseases and deformities, and no one can be raised from the dead through prayer. Yet all these events are recorded in the Bible. (In fact, the prayers of Elijah, Elisha, Peter, and Paul, as well as those of Jesus, raised the dead, and such occurrences continued for several generations after Jesus, according to records left by the Jewish historian Josephus.) Either these extraordinary events happened and atheism is an error, or they didn’t happen and the Bible is just a collection of stories comparable to Aesop’s fables or Virgil’s “Aeneid.”

The linchpin of all Christian doctrine is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. As Paul plainly wrote to the Corinthians, “if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith also is vain.” (I Cor. 15:14) So, the atheistic/Christian divide boils down to whether Jesus truly was resurrected from the grave.

The atheists have the unenviable challenge of trying to prove a negative—that the resurrection didn’t happen. At the same time, I don’t know how to prove to them that it did happen. Those who claim that the apostles fabricated Jesus’ resurrection and ascension have a logically weak case. Jesus’ apostles were persecuted and one by one executed, and yet they persisted to preach the risen Savior, willingly sacrificing their human lives in His service. How can anyone really believe that they were willing to suffer all this just to perpetuate a hoax?

This argument, however, is merely inferential. Ultimately, the question of the literal truth of the resurrection has to be resolved in one’s own conscience, as has happened to millions of people over the centuries. Here is how it transpired with me: I became an agnostic at age 12—a skeptic who insisted that if I were to believe in God, I required proof. That proof came the month I turned 22, when the prayers of a deeply committed Christian healed me instantaneously of a chronic medical condition that neither surgery nor drugs had been able to help. What ineffable grace, that I, a long-time skeptic, should receive the blessing of Christ’s healing touch.

Having experienced first-hand something that is “physically impossible,” I was impelled to the unshakable conclusion that God, Spirit, does indeed exist, and that His law is a higher law that trumps all material “laws,” and that physically impossible events, such as the Virgin Birth and bodily resurrection of Jesus, are entirely within the realm of God’s supreme capabilities.

I respect a person’s right not to believe in God if he or she hasn’t yet experienced God directly. I would gently encourage such individuals to try to be humble about their disbelief, though—and to refrain from asserting that, just because they haven’t experienced God, it is impossible that others have done so. I would also invite them to reach out for God if they should ever find themselves in a bad situation for which there is no material solution. To each of you individually, I say, you may not believe in God, but He believes in you.

Original Link.

Iowa Supreme Court Enters Judicial Activism Hall of Shame: Invents “Right” to “Gay” Marriage

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

Des Moines, IA – Matt Barber, Director of Cultural Affairs with both Liberty Counsel and Liberty Alliance Action, and Associate Dean with Liberty University School of Law, released the following statement today in response to news that the Iowa Supreme Court has issued an opinion imagining a “fundamental” constitutional right to “same-sex marriage”:

“Here we go again,” said Barber. “While citing the specter of ‘equal protection,’ the Iowa Supreme Court today has unanimously joined a leftist gaggle of ideologically driven judges in California, Massachusetts and Connecticut, creating, from thin air, a phantom ‘right’ to the ridiculous, oxymoronic and postmodern ‘gay’ marriage counterfeit.

“Although, not controlling here” continued Barber, “the U.S. Supreme Court long ago rejected the untenable notion that ‘equal protection’ requires two biologically incompatible persons to be permitted to ‘marry.’ Marriage, of course, by its very spiritual, historical and biological nature, requires binary compatibility. It is no more discriminatory to disallow two men from marrying each other, than it is to prohibit a man from marrying his house plant.

In Baker v. Nelson, our nation’s high court rightfully observed: “The institution of marriage as a union of man and woman, uniquely involving the procreation and rearing of children within a family, is as old as the book of Genesis. … Marriage and procreation are fundamental to the very existence and survival of the race.”

“Taking its solemn vow seriously in Baker,” said Barber, “the Supreme Court exercised judicial restraint; properly holding that to rule otherwise would constitute an unconstitutional exercise of ‘judicial legislation.’

“What a contrast. Today, the Iowa Supreme Court cast aside any semblance of judicial restraint doing exactly that which the U.S. Supreme Court detested. It unequivocally engaged in ‘judicial legislation,’ unconstitutionally manufacturing law from the bench. No one in his right mind would suggest that the framers of the Iowa Constitution could have ever imagined the silly and incongruous notion of ‘same sex marriage,’ much less considered it a ‘fundamental right.’

“The Iowa Supreme Court has earned its rightful place in the judicial activism hall of shame. It has infected the wholesome heartland with the same malady eating away at natural marriage, family and morality at our nation’s coastal and ideological fringes.

“If you think you saw a fight in California to restore natural marriage with the successful passage of Proposition 8, then hold on to your hats. Something tells me the fine folks of Iowa don’t cotton to seven black robed autocrats supplanting mid-western values with San Francisco vice.”


Note from Mike: Haven’t I read of something like this being a sign associated with the biblical last days? Yes, I’m sure of it!

Original Link.