Statement of Purpose

For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come. Hebrews 11:16




Sunday, November 30, 2008

Jesus Just Wants to Give You a Hug?

by Todd Friel

Over thirty years ago, the great philosopher Paul McCartney asked, “What’s wrong with silly love songs?” Having given this over three decades of serious consideration (OK, at least several months), I have Sir McCartney’s answer.

It depends.

If you want to fill the world with silly love songs, there’s nothing wrong with that. But if you want to fill the church with them, I say, “Stop it!”

Tune into your “get you through your day” Christian music station and you will hear grown men, whining like love sick puppies, “Nothing else can take your place, or feel the warmth of your embrace.” Who are they singing to? The One who holds the universe together by the power of His word, or a chick?

Take the Quiz

Here are six phrases from six contemporary songs. Can you pick which phrases belong to secular songs and which to the sacred?

1. All I need to do is just be me, being in love with you.
2. My world stops spinning round, without you.
3. I never want to leave; I want to stay in your warm embrace.
4. I’m lost in love.
5. Now and forever, together and all that I feel, here's my love for you.
6. You say you love me just as I am.

The first three are from a popular Christian band called Big Daddy Weave, the second half are from Air Supply.

More and more of our Christian music is sounding one note: Jesus loves you soooooo much. Do I doubt for a second that Jesus loves His children? Nope, but it depends on what your definition of “love” is.

God “agape” loves His children. Agape love is not an emotions based, warm and fuzzy kind of love. Agape love is a self sacrificing, “I will help you despite how I feel” love.

William Tyndale was the first translator to use the word “love” for agape. Prior to the 16th century, the word “charity” best described agape. Leaving that debate aside, since Tyndale’s time, the English definition for love has expanded. Our modern day use of love ranges from a love for an object to physical love/sex (eros love). I love that new car. I love that girl. I love that God. That God loves me.

Not only do we use “love” in romantic ways to sing about God, we have added other romantic phrases to our Christian music repertoire: hold me, embrace me, feel you, need you. This criticism is not new, in fact, it has existed since Godly men began endeavoring to sing anything but the Psalms.

John Wesley considered an “amatory phrase” to be language that was more feelings based love than self-sacrificing agape love. John deleted “Jesus, Lover of My Soul” from one of his brother Charles’ collections because it was too romantic sounding.

Amatory Phrasing

Not only are musicians guilty of writing amatory phrases, but they are singing with amatory phrasing. Christian men sing with such romantic longing and neediness it makes me want to scream, “Man up!” Christian women are singing with such throaty breathiness you would think they had just run from their home to the studio. To whom exactly are they singing? Brad Pitt or the Savior?

There are two consequences to this “Jesus is my boyfriend/girlfriend” music. Needy, emotional women continue to need more counseling, self help books and conferences where they can spread their wings and soar. Men simply are not showing up for church. It is my belief they simply can’t stand the mood manipulating worship times designed to help them “feel the Lord’s embrace.”

Musical Mermaids

Without theology in music, we are offering fluff that will not comfort when bridges collapse and test reports are negative. Songwriters could provide true hope if they would write about the sovereignty of God rather than crying about “how safe I feel when Jesus is holding me.”

Charles Spurgeon had the same criticism of “Hymns for Heart and Voice” published in 1855. He condemned the hymns as being “little better than mermaids, nice to look at but dangerous because they cannot deliver what they promise.”

Is there anything wrong with being reminded that our God is our help from ages past? Of course not, the Psalms are loaded with promises of God’s comfort. But unlike the Psalms (and theology based hymns), contemporary music is void of the reason why we should not worry. We do not worry because someone purrs that we shouldn’t fret, but because God is our shelter in the stormy blast and our eternal home. Our comfort comes from knowledge, not caterwauling.

If you enjoy a silly love song now and then, knock yourself out. But leave them where they belong, in the world or in the bedroom, not in the church.

Wednesday, November 26, 2008

A Prayer by Billy Graham

'Heavenly Father, we come before you today to ask your forgiveness and to seek your direction and guidance. We know Your Word says, 'Woe to those who call evil good,' but that is exactly what we have done. We have lost our spiritual equilibrium and reversed our values. We have exploited the poor and called it the lottery. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare. We have killed our unborn and called it choice. We have shot abortionists and called it justifiable. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self esteem. We have abused power and called it politics. We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it ambition. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment. Search us, Oh God, and know our hearts today; cleanse us from every sin and Set us free. Amen!'

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

Born Gay

from Born Gay or a Gay Basher? No Excuse by Frank Turek

After my last column, I got an e-mail from retired FBI agent Bob Hamer. Bob’s the author of a riveting new book that takes you undercover with him into the world of drug bosses, hit men, and his last assignment, the North American Man Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). After I sent him a copy of my new book on same-sex marriage, he wrote back:

“Thanks so much for sharing your book. It was powerful and I need to re-read it because it said so much. It actually brought back memories of the NAMBLA conferences I attended. I listened to men justify oral sex on 18 month olds. How often I listened to men claim their pedophilia was an inborn trait; it was natural, ‘this is the way God made me.’”

This “born that way” argument is fueling the case for same-sex marriage in California. Is it a good argument?

I know this is a difficult and emotional issue for many people, but I think the reasonable answer is no. Not only is the evidence for being “born that way” questionable, even if it were true, it should have no impact on our marriage laws.

First, after many years of intense research, a genetic component to homosexual desires has not been discovered. Twin studies show that identical twins do not consistently have the same sexual orientation. In fact, genetics probably explains very little about homosexual desires. How would a homosexual “gene” be passed on? Homosexuals don’t pass on anything because they don’t reproduce.

Second, the “born-that-way” claim is an argument from design— “since God designed me with these desires, I ought to act on them.” But the people who say this overlook something more obvious— they were also born with a specific gender. This raises the question: Why are you following your desires but not your gender? After all, we’re not sure if your desires were designed or the result of your upbringing, but we are certain that your anatomy is designed. So why not follow your anatomy rather than your desires? Ignoring your desires may be uncomfortable, but ignoring the natural design of your body is often fatal.

Third, even if desires are not a choice, sexual behavior always is. So even if a person honestly believes that he’s been born with homosexual desires, he is certainly capable of controlling his sexual behavior. If you claim that he is not—that sexual behavior is somehow uncontrollable—then you have made the absurd contention that no one can be morally responsible for any sexual crime, including rape, incest, and child molestation.

Fourth, being born a certain way is irrelevant to what the law should be. Laws are concerned with behaviors not desires, and we all have desires we ought not act on. In fact, all of us were born with an “orientation” to bad behavior, but those desires don’t justify the behaviors. For example, if you are born with a genetic predisposition to alcohol, does that mean God wants you to be an alcoholic? If someone has a genetic attraction to children, does that mean God wants you to be a pedophile? (According to pedophiles it does!) What homosexual activist would say that a genetic predisposition to anger justifies gay-bashing? (Born gay? What if the gay basher was born mean?)

Some will say, “But homosexual sex is about love.” One can say that, but what’s loving about sexual activity that creates numerous health problems, increases medical costs to everyone, and reduces the lifespan of homosexuals by 8-20 years? (A homosexual friend of mine fared even worse—he died at age 36 from AIDS.) Yes, I know—people of the same sex love one another. But if the sex act is medically dangerous, the best way to love the other person is not to have sex with him. In fact, most of our loving relationships are non-sexual.

Finally, even if we someday discover a genetic contribution to homosexual desires, that would not mean that the behavior is something the government should endorse. Yet that’s exactly what government-backed same-sex marriage would do— it would endorse and thus promote the false idea that marriage between a man and a woman is no better for children or society than marriage between same-sex partners.

As I’ve shown in “Gay Marriage: Even Liberals Know it’s Bad,” legally equating the two types of relationships breaks the link between marriage and childbearing which leads to higher illegitimacy and a chain of negative effects that fall like dominoes—illegitimacy leads to poverty, crime, and higher welfare costs which lead to bigger government, higher taxes, and a slower economy. It also will result in homosexuality being imposed against the will of the people in our schools, businesses, and charities as it has in Massachusetts (click on that link if you doubt me). So even if you think there is nothing morally wrong with homosexual behavior, there is every reason to oppose same-sex marriage.

The bottom line is that desires, whatever their source, do not justify behaviors. In fact, there’s a word we use to describe the disciplined restraint of destructive behaviors– it’s called civilization. For any civilization to survive, quite a lot of restraint is going to be necessary.

The push for same-sex marriage does the opposite. Instead of restraining negative behaviors, homosexual activists are asking us not just to tolerate, but to endorse them. For the sake of civilization, we all need to restrain our destructive behaviors. At the very least we should not be demanding that the government endorse them—even if we think we were “born that way.”

Monday, November 24, 2008

Three to Four Billion Barrels of Oil in North Dakota and Montana

3 to 4.3 Billion Barrels of Technically Recoverable Oil Assessed in North Dakota and Montana’s Bakken Formation—25 Times More Than 1995 Estimate—
Released: 4/10/2008 2:25:36 PM

Contact Information:
U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey
Office of Communication
119 National Center
Reston, VA 20192 Geology Energy Program


Reston, VA - North Dakota and Montana have an estimated 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of undiscovered, technically recoverable oil in an area known as the Bakken Formation.

A U.S. Geological Survey assessment, released April 10, shows a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered compared to the agency's 1995 estimate of 151million barrels of oil.

Technically recoverable oil resources are those producible using currently available technology and industry practices. USGS is the only provider of publicly available estimates of undiscovered technically recoverable oil and gas resources.

New geologic models applied to the Bakken Formation, advances in drilling and production technologies, and recent oil discoveries have resulted in these substantially larger technically recoverable oil volumes. About 105 million barrels of oil were produced from the Bakken Formation by the end of 2007.

The USGS Bakken study was undertaken as part of a nationwide project assessing domestic petroleum basins using standardized methodology and protocol as required by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 2000.

The Bakken Formation estimate is larger than all other current USGS oil assessments of the lower 48 states and is the largest "continuous" oil accumulation ever assessed by the USGS. A "continuous" oil accumulation means that the oil resource is dispersed throughout a geologic formation rather than existing as discrete, localized occurrences. The next largest "continuous" oil accumulation in the U.S. is in the Austin Chalk of Texas and Louisiana, with an undiscovered estimate of 1.0 billions of barrels of technically recoverable oil.

"It is clear that the Bakken formation contains a significant amount of oil - the question is how much of that oil is recoverable using today's technology?" said Senator Byron Dorgan, of North Dakota. "To get an answer to this important question, I requested that the U.S. Geological Survey complete this study, which will provide an up-to-date estimate on the amount of technically recoverable oil resources in the Bakken Shale formation."

The USGS estimate of 3.0 to 4.3 billion barrels of technically recoverable oil has a mean value of 3.65 billion barrels. Scientists conducted detailed studies in stratigraphy and structural geology and the modeling of petroleum geochemistry. They also combined their findings with historical exploration and production analyses to determine the undiscovered, technically recoverable oil estimates.

USGS worked with the North Dakota Geological Survey, a number of petroleum industry companies and independents, universities and other experts to develop a geological understanding of the Bakken Formation. These groups provided critical information and feedback on geological and engineering concepts important to building the geologic and production models used in the assessment.

Five continuous assessment units (AU) were identified and assessed in the Bakken Formation of North Dakota and Montana - the Elm Coulee-Billings Nose AU, the Central Basin-Poplar Dome AU, the Nesson-Little Knife Structural AU, the Eastern Expulsion Threshold AU, and the Northwest Expulsion Threshold AU.

At the time of the assessment, a limited number of wells have produced oil from three of the assessments units in Central Basin-Poplar Dome, Eastern Expulsion Threshold, and Northwest Expulsion Threshold.
The Elm Coulee oil field in Montana, discovered in 2000, has produced about 65 million barrels of the 105 million barrels of oil recovered from the Bakken Formation.

Results of the assessment can be found at http://energy.usgs.gov.

For a podcast interview with scientists about the Bakken Formation, listen to episode 38 of CoreCast at http://www.usgs.gov/corecast/.

Sunday, November 23, 2008

They Like Themselves

by Albert Mohler

USA Today is out with a report on a new research project that deserves our attention. It seems that high school graduates surveyed in 2006 consider themselves much more likely to succeed in life when compared to the self-assessment offered by graduates in 1975.

Researchers Jean Twenge and W. Keith Campbell are worried that these young people are showing signs of excessive self-esteem, which may set them up for disappointments later in life.

As USA Today reports:

Compared with the Baby Boomers who were seniors in 1975, 12th-graders surveyed in 2006 were much more confident they'd be "very good" employees, mates and parents, and they were more self-satisfied overall, say Twenge and co-author W. Keith Campbell of the University of Georgia. Between half and two-thirds of the Gen Y teens gave themselves top ratings, compared with less than half in their parents' generation. The report is in 'Psychological Science.'

Boomer parents "are more likely than their parents were to praise children — and maybe over praise them," Twenge says. This can foster great expectations or perhaps even smugness about one's chances of reaching "the stars" at work and in family life, she adds. "Their narcissism could be a recipe for depression later when things don't work out as well as they expected."

All this reminds me of Garrison Keillor's fictional community of Lake Woebegon, where all of the kids are "above average." That simply isn't possible, but there is good reason to believe that many current parenting strategies imply that it is.

In recent years, some observers have warned that children are not well served when parents lavish them with inordinate praise or with unrealistic assessments. The culture of earned recognition has given way to sports teams that award a trophy to every player and to contests in which every participant wins.

As they grow older, some children turn cynical about all this. They just begin to discount what their parents, educators, or other authorities tell them. Eventually, reality intrudes in the form of college admissions, athletic scholarships, or other dimensions of merited recognition. It may be that every player on the 8th grade team gets the same trophy, regardless of performance on the field. All that changes when it comes time for college athletic scholarships, however. Those are not passed out without regard for performance.

Other children bask in the glory of unmerited praise. Educators talk of children who insist that they should receive an "A" on a paper or test because "I am an 'A' person." Some children reach young adulthood with no real help from parents in understanding their place in the world -- or about what it might take for them to get where they want to go.

Roy Baumeister of Florida State University states his concern memorably:

"Many people who grew up in the '50s say, 'Nothing I did was ever good enough for my parents.' Now we're seeing the pendulum swing, and you hear from coaches and teachers who have been at it a while that kids have become more fragile. They don't take criticism well," he says.

"Thinking you're God's gift to the world is nice for you. It's a little harder for everyone else around you."

Every child is special. And we certainly hope that these children exceed all expectations about their future excellence in all areas of life. Nevertheless, a little reality might help, and some honesty as well.

When secular observers express this kind of concern, Christian parents should take particular notice. We should encourage our children to excellence in all things -- not so much for their self-esteem but for the glory of God. And, we must be honest with them about what this excellence would mean and what this standard will require.

That kind of reality therapy will be as good for the parents as for the children. As the Apostle Paul reminds us:

For by the grace given to me I say to everyone among you not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think, but to think with sober judgment, each according to the measure of faith that God has assigned. [Romans 12:3]

Saturday, November 22, 2008

Why Rick Warren Has Critics

by Chris Carmichael

Like it or not, all of us have to judge people by how much we can clearly assess and delineate their convictions; and even if we don’t necessarily agree with their stated positions, at least it is preferable to those who remain vague or unsure of themselves, especially when they seem more concerned about being liked by everyone than being true to their principles.

In light of this truth, it should come as no surprise that Rick Warren has cultivated many critics within Christianity who are coming to see that his inconsistent teachings are an indication of a double-minded man. Truly the Saddleback pastor has exhibited strong signs of being a Christian flip-flopper on many occasions, and this has made many discerning Christians rightfully wary of him, especially considering the prominence and influence of his ministry.


FLIP-FLOP #1: WARREN PROMOTES KEN BLANCHARD AS A CHRISTIAN LEADER, THEN HE DOESN’T, AND THEN HE DOES AGAIN. In Abanes’ book Rick Warren and the Purpose that Drives Him, Warren admits that Ken Blanchard is “not a deep Christian,” and that Blanchard did not have the spiritual discernment to know whether The Celestine Prophecy was a heretical book or not. Yet despite all this, in 2003 Warren openly promoted Blanchard in his pulpit as someone who could train Christian leaders. So which is it? Is Blanchard truly called to train Christian leaders, or is he a person who started a ministry before he had gained the spiritual maturity to do so? Based on Warren’s own words and other solid evidence, critics have real cause to question Warren’s discernment in this matter.


FLIP-FLOP #2: WARREN DENIES ANY CONNECTION WITH THE NEW AGE, YET HE SOMETIMES AFFILIATES WITH NEW AGE PROPONENTS AND THEIR TEACHINGS. It has been documented that Warren recently joined with the John Templeton Foundation, an organization which promotes spiritual humanism, to be a judge in their “Power of Purpose” Essay Contest. The winning essay, for which Warren cast his vote, was written by August Turak, a false teacher in New Age “Self Knowledge” who claims a “divine spark” within every person.


FLIP-FLOP # 3: WARREN CLAIMS A COMMITMENT TO THE AUTHORITY OF SCRIPTURE, BUT MANIPULATES IT TO FIT HIS TEACHING. In The Purpose Driven Life, Warren makes the wonderful statement that “the Bible must always have the first and last word in my life” (pg. 187). Earlier in the book, however, Warren proves that he likes the first word, but not always the last. Case in point, on page 53, Warren claims to fully quote Proverbs 16:4 by citing it as such, and yet only provides the reader with the first half of the verse which reads, “The Lord has made everything for his own purposes.” Strangely, Warren leaves off the last part of the verse which adds ominously, “even the wicked for punishment.”

The question any good Berean would ask is, why would Warren edit this verse? But of course there can only be one reason: if Warren revealed the whole verse then it would completely undermine his skewed teaching that everyone is made by God for only a positive, self-affirming purpose.


FLIP-FLOP #4: WARREN CONDEMNS SYNCRETISM, BUT IMPLEMENTS IT IN HIS MINISTRY AND TEACHINGS. In his book defending Warren, Abanes maintains that because Warren has specifically condemned syncretism (the mixing of God’s truth with other religions and philosophies) at Saddleback, then critics have no cause to say otherwise (pg. 91). Yet what are discerning Christians to think when Warren expresses “self-esteem” pop-psychology in the March 2005 article for Ladies Home Journal? Or what about his advocacy of personality testing (based on Carl Jung’s occult-inspired teachings) to find out how Christians are gifted for church service? And what are we to think about Warren’s utilization within the church of Peter Drucker’s human management theories which come, not from God’s word, but from secular humanism and other man-centered philosophies?


FLIP-FLOP #5: WARREN HAS BROKEN TIES WITH SCHULLER, BUT STILL MIRRORS MUCH OF HIS SELF-ESTEEM TEACHINGS. Warren disavowed any theological ties to Schuller, yet recently wrote an article for Ladies Home Journal on self-esteem, which reads like a condensed version of Schuller’s book, Self-Esteem: The New Reformation. Considering that self-esteem has no place in Christian theology whatsoever, is it any wonder that critics of Warren find this common teaching on loving yourself to be very telling?


This is not to say, of course, that Warren is the Devil incarnate or a raging heretic. But it is well within our Christian responsibility to raise objections when a prominent Christian leader like Warren is inconsistent and displays a certain lack of biblical integrity in both his teaching and in his behavior. And until such time as Warren is willing to acknowledge these major lapses in judgment, openly repent of them, and display some biblical consistency in the future, then he will continue to see godly objections to his ministry, and rightly so.

Rick Warren undoubtedly will always have critics, but if he truly desires to eliminate the bulk of legitimate biblical criticism against him, he must do one thing first: stop being a Christian flip-flopper.
- Source: Discerning a Christian Flip-Flopper: Why Rick Warren Has Critics, by Chris Carmichael, Christian Unplugged

Thursday, November 20, 2008

The Progression of a Fool

Notes from Adrian Rogers' sermon:

"How long, O simple ones, will you love being simple? How long will scoffers delight in their scoffing and fools hate knowledge?
Proverbs 1:22
Level One

The identifying marks of being simple (naïve):
• He loves simplicity
• He lacks understanding
• He is led easily
• He is living in danger

A child loves simplicity and living his lifestyle. Who can blame him if he isn’t taught differently? Proverbs 1:22 “How long, O Simple ones, will you love being simple? He doesn’t want any restrictions put on him. He also lacks understanding: Proverbs 9:4-6: “Whoever is simple, let him turn in here!" To him who lacks sense she (wisdom) says, come, eat of my bread and drink of the wine I have mixed. Leave your simple ways, and live, and walk in the way of insight.” He is led easily. Proverbs 14:15 “The simple believes every word.” Madison Avenue loves the teenager, because they believe anything and are easily led. The Hebrew word for simple means “open”. If grown people feel a strong compulsion to conform, how much more will your teenager do it? They are living in danger: Proverbs 22:3 “The prudent sees danger and hides himself, but the simple go on and suffer for it.” If you give a young teenager the keys of your car without warning him and instructing him and praying for him, he will take the keys of your car, get a friend and go get beer and get drunk and go through town at 80 miles per hour and get into an accident. They do not have the ability to see the danger that is down the road. He thinks he is going to live forever. He doesn’t understand and he doesn’t see the problems that are out there. Sound familiar? You were like that when you were a teenager.

Level Two

The identifying marks of being a scoffer (smart aleck):
• He delights in his scorning
• He defies instructions
• He despises the one who corrects him
• He is destined for destruction and damnation

He delights in his scorning. Proverbs 1:22 “How long will scoffers delight in scoffing?” It gives him a feeling of superiority. He defies instruction: Proverbs 13:1: “A wise son hears his father’s instruction, but a scorner hears not rebuke.” You can’t tell a smart aleck anything…he already knows everything. You might as well be talking to a brick wall; he will tune you out. He despises the good and the godly. Proverbs 15:12 “A fool despises his father’s instruction.” You correct a scorner and he may not open his mouth, but he will look at you with his eyes he’ll be saying “I hate your guts.” Proverbs 9:7, 8 “Whoever corrects a scoffer get himself abuse, and he who reproves a wicked man incurs injury. Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you; reprove a wise man, and he will love you.” Tell him what is right, and he will insult you to your face. He is destined for destruction. Proverbs 13:1, 13 “A wise son hears his father’s instruction, but a scorner hears not rebuke.” “Whoever despises the words shall be destroyed.” He can laugh his way to hell, but he can’t laugh his way out. He is destined for destruction, but you can’t tell him anything…when you talk to him, it is like pouring water on a rock. At one time, he was gullable, naïve and open. But now he’s not that way.

Level Three

The identifying marks of being a fool (rebel):
• He rejects wisdom
• He ridicules righteousness
• He rejoices in sin
• He is reserved for hell

He rejects wisdom. Proverbs 1:22 “fools hate knowledge”. The other two are known by what they love; the fool is known by what he hates. He literally hates knowledge. Proverbs 1:7 “The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” He ridicules righteousness. Proverbs 14:9 “Fools mock at sin.” Anything that is holy they put down, anything that is unholy they laugh at. He rejoices in sin. Proverbs 10:1”A wise son makes a glad father, but a foolish son is the grief of his mother. Folly is a joy to him” Isaiah 5:20 “Who unto them who call evil good and good evil, that put darkness for light and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” He is reserved for hell. Proverbs 17:10 “A rebuke is more effective for a wise man than a hundred blows for a fool.” The problem is his moral sense has been destroyed and his conscience has been perverted. You take a fool and beat him, you won’t change him. Lock him up in prison and he’ll come out a worse criminal. Take away his privileges; he’ll just hate you more and more. He is SET. There is hardly (if any) hope for a fool according to scriptures. But God is merciful.

The difference between a godly man and a fool is the difference between David and Pharoh. When David sinned, Nathan rebuked him and he repented. But when Pharoh sinned, and Moses rebuked him, the bible says he hardened his heart all the more. And as the plagues got worse, Pharoh got further and further away from God. The more the stripes were laid on his back, the harder the fool called Pharoh went deeper and deeper into sin.

Wednesday, November 19, 2008

John MacArthur on the Doctrine of Election

"My own struggle with the doctrine of election comes from my emotion. It comes from the influences of my fallen heart. It comes from my expectation that everybody ought to have a right to make a choice. And it also comes from the early years of my Christian experience when I didn’t understand what it meant to be depraved. As a young Christian, I didn’t understand how really dead the sinner is. That is the bottom line issue here. Salvation has to be all of God if you understand the doctrine of human depravity. If you understand what it means to be utterly unable to do right, unable to know God, dead in trespasses and sin in the most profound kind of unalterable death about which you can do nothing, and if you understand there is no human merit, there is no human effort, there is nothing we can do to alter that situation or to please God. Out of the doctrine of what I call utter human inability comes the doctrine of election. It was when I understood the sinfulness of man and the total inability of the sinner to do anything about his condition that I was left with nothing but the doctrine of election to solve that problem. That doesn’t, of course, as we said today, solve all of the tensions...we’ll have to wait for heaven to come to a full understanding of that."

Tuesday, November 18, 2008

Our Hope is in Heaven


And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.

And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.

And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. Revelations 21:1,2 and 5


In 2001, my parents built a beautiful new home, with every detail to their specifications. I remember walking through that home in awe of the sparkling marble countertops, the pristine cabinets and the perfectly polished wood floors. It was hard to imagine a time when this house would be anything but spectacular. My parents diligently continue to take great pride and effort in keeping it in top condition, and yet, in fifty years, this house will show signs of wear and tear, depending on the level of attention it is given by its caretaker.

Just think of this: HEAVEN WILL NEVER WEAR DOWN. Everything there will ALWAYS be new, always be clean, always sparkle like a bride prepared for her groom. In times when there are many people who are discouraged and disillusioned, we all need to rememberthat our hope is not here on this earth. God tells us that: “Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.” Just imagine…NO ONE has even thought of the things that God has prepared for you in heaven! No one! Be encouraged to endure to the end, dear Christian!

Saturday, November 15, 2008

Why I Don't Evangelize

by Erik Raymond

There have been periods of my Christian life where I have, by God’s grace, enjoyed fervent zeal towards evangelism. However, there are other spells of indifference and flat out negligence. To be honest, I really hate the way this fluxes.

I have tried different things to rev myself up and stimulate faithfulness, but at the end of the day it comes down to two things: 1) my view of God, and 2) my view of others

My View of God
When I think about evangelism as proclaiming “the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light” (1 Peter 2.9) I begin calibrating my heart with the reality of the message proclaimed. For in the gospel, we speak of the most God-exalting truth available, and the most effective truth available; for it (the gospel) is the power of God for salvation (Rom. 1.16).

I need to spend more time at my Master’s feet, learning to pray like a Christian, for it is indeed the instruction of Jesus that his disciples pray with a God-centered zeal, “Hallowed by your name”. Yes, I must truly want this. I must truly desire to see the name of my God exalted. Lord, make your name hallowed, make it holy, for it is being disregarded, vindicate yourself through the proclamation of the gospel.

This is good for me spiritually. It is good to find myself seeing the disparity between my will and my Father’s. And it is good to run back to him for a healthy calibration! In evangelism we are proclaiming the glory of God by declaring his excellencies, knowing that this brings God pleasure, honor and glory, regardless of whether or not the individual is converted.

My View of Others
On the other hand I am convicted by my own lack of love for others. This is really an outflow of the first, for if I do not love God rightly how can I love my neighbor?!

So here I am walking the planet with a pharisaical mindset, ignoring the greatest need for people. What is wrong with me? I can talk to them about the weather, sports, politics, food or whatever, but Jesus? This is not on my tongue.

Why? Why can I walk by the man or woman who has been beaten by the affects of sin and not open my mouth? There they sit, ever afflicted by the beatings, like the young man voyaging from Jerusalem to Jericho who fell upon robbers (Luke 10.30-34) and I am like the Levite or the preist who just walked on by. I have a medicine cabinet strapped to my back and I ignore them like they are not even there? Why? I do not love them. Perhaps you can relate?

One thing that has been particularly helpful relative to loving others with the gospel is to look into people’s eyes. No I did not just go off the deep end. We live in a society where we fly by one another without even noticing each other, and when we look for more than the accepted 2.8 seconds, suddenly we are psychotic. What I am advocating is to look at people. Watch them, pray for them, look into their eyes as they speak to you. Hear their heart cry for relief. When you are filled with divine love for the glory of God and fueled for a love for your neighbor, a good healthy look into a person’s eyes will convict you to the quick to evangelize and cease from meaningless dialogue about such futile things as the weather, the news or other distractions.

In this vein I was struck by Alex Montoya’s words in his helpful book, Preaching with Passion. Montoya is a professor at The Master’s Seminary in Sun Valley, CA. Montoya writing in the context of loosing compassion for people:

“That is when I retreat to a small taco stand in the barrio of East Los Angeles, to a place where real people live. I order a cup of coffee and sit with my back against the wall. Then I watch, I observe, I read, and I listen intently for the heart cry.

A group of gang-bangers come in for a snack—one in four will die before the age of eighteen; two of the others will end up in prison. All are doomed to a hard life. A young mother comes in with her brood of youngsters. It is obvious they are poor. They share drinks. They live in poverty; some will never see a forest or snow. An old drunk staggers in, begging for a meal. He is quickly thrown out. That was somebody’s baby boy. A mother at one time cradled that man and nursed him….I look, I listen until I hear their cries, until their souls cry out to me, “Please help, I’m perishing!” until the tears pour forth from my melted heart! I am in love with humanity once again.”

Perhaps you can relate to my tension. If you struggle like I do, I’d encourage you to pray to God that you might love him more, more along the lines with which he loves himself. And likewise that he would be kind to cause you to love others more, more along the lines with which he loves others. Pray that God would let you hear folks’ hearts cry and that would open your mouth to speak the words of eternal life, joy and grace. We do know why we do not evangelize and this fact should bring us back to the reason why we must.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Why Do Christians Suffer?

by Bill Bright

Without warning, something can happen that will change your life forever:

A loved one is disabled by an accident or illness.
A promising career is cut short by an injury.
A child is born disabled or sick, or dies.
A marriage crumbles; children choose not to follow Christ.
A fire, flood, or earthquake destroys your home or business.
A loved one is killed in battle, by terrorists, a gang, or by thieves.

How do you react? Do you fall apart? Do you become bitter? Do you question God?

Life is filled with suffering because we live in a world that has been corrupted by sin. Each of us will experience some measure of agony during our lifetime. Its form and duration will vary, but it will come. At times, you may feel overpowered by seeming tidal waves of adversity. You may find yourself flailing in an ocean of pain, anguish, or despair.

In the midst of such difficulties, your mind may scream questions like, “Why did this happen to me?” or “God, where are You?”

A dear friend, at age 17, entered into a lifetime of severe suffering. As Joni Eareckson dove into a bay, she broke her neck and had to be pulled from the water. Since then, Joni has been unable to feel or move her arms and legs. The suffering she experiences is more than most of us will ever be able to understand. In her sorrow, Joni asked a question that I am sure all of us have pondered when going through great difficulty or tragedy: “What possible good can come out of what I am now going through?” She also asked, “Why me?”

How many times have you had something happen to you and asked that same question—a question that seems to be the universal cry of those who suffer? “The suffering and pain,” Joni explains, “have helped me mature emotionally, mentally, and spiritually. Pain and suffering have purpose. I believe God was working in my life to create grace and wisdom out of the chaos of pain and depression.”


Esteemed Oxford scholar and author C.S. Lewis said, “God whispers to us in our pleasures, speaks in our conscience, but shouts in our pains: it is His megaphone to rouse a deaf world.”1

Suffering is a catalyst that produces spiritual change. God intends suffering to draw you into His loving arms. Satan (a very real foe), however, tries to use hardship as a wedge to pry you away from God. As a result, whenever a crisis enters your life, so does the temptation to doubt God’s love, goodness, and faithfulness. You are then faced with a crucial, daily decision. Will you trust God to work in your circumstances or turn your back on Him as you seek relief or comfort in other ways? Your faith in God and attitude toward Him ultimately determine whether your trials will make you a better person or serve as tools for your destruction.

Jesus explains, “The thief’s purpose is to steal and kill and destroy. My purpose is to give life in all its fullness” (John 10:10). God loves you and has a great plan for your life. However, that plan for your good includes suffering.

It is often during times of suffering that we learn to refocus our lives on God. David confessed in Psalm 119:71, “The suffering You sent was good for me, for it taught me to pay attention to Your principles.” God has a purpose for every difficulty you encounter. Although this purpose is seldom obvious at the time, you must always remember that God does not want to destroy you through adversity. Rather, He wants to shape you for His glory and to conform you to the image of Christ. He does not send suffering to crush you; He wants you to triumph through suffering.

Let us consider seven benefits God brings out of adversity. You can remember them by the acrostic TRIUMPH. God uses suffering to produce…TRIUMPH

Training in obedience
Refinement of your character
Intimacy with your compassionate God and Savior
Understanding of the hurts of others
Maturity for ministering to others
Perseverance in difficult times
Hope for the future

(for the rest of this wonderful article, see the link (to the left) under Questions Corner "Why Do Christians Suffer?"

Tuesday, November 11, 2008

Take This Quiz


1. A preacher and his wife are very, very poor. They already have 14 kids. Now she finds out she’s pregnant with the 15th. They’re living in tremendous poverty. Considering their poverty and the excessive world population, would you consider recommending she get an abortion?

2. The father is sick with sniffles, the mother has TB. Of their four children, the first is blind, the second has died, the third is deaf, the fourth has TB. She finds she’s pregnant again. Given this extreme situation, would you consider recommending abortion?

3. A white man raped a 13-year-old black girl and she’s now pregnant. If you were her parents, would you consider recommending abortion?

4. A teenage girl is pregnant. She’s not married. Her fiancé is not the father of the baby, and he’s upset. Would you recommend abortion?

In the first case, you would have killed John Wesley, one of the great evangelists in the 19th century. In the second case, you would have killed Beethoven. In the third case, you would have killed Ethel Waters, the great black gospel singer. If you said yes to the fourth case, you would have declared the murder of Jesus Christ!

God is the author of life, and He has givenevery single individual supreme value. Each life—whether inside or outside the womb—should therefore be valued by us. God knows the plans He has for each individual and has written in His book all the days ordained for us before one of them came to be. When we presume to know better than God who should be given life, we are putting ourselves in the place of God and are guilty of idolatry.

The Titanic


by Ray Comfort

The story of the Titanic has incredibly close parallels to the biblical plan of salvation. Just as the great pleasure ship struck an iceberg and sank, this great world—with all its inhabitants—is slowly sinking into the cold grip of death. As with the Titanic, where only those passengers who believed that they were in impending danger looked to the lifeboats, so only those who believe that they are in mortal danger will look to the Lifeboat of the Savior, Jesus Christ. The great “iceberg” that will take the world to an icy grave is the Moral Law—the Ten Commandments.

Here is the evidence that we are sinking: Jesus said that if we look with lust, we commit adultery in our heart. No one who has had sex outside of marriage, or any liar, or any thief will enter heaven. The Bible says that if we hate someone, we are guilty of murder. We fail to put God first. We make a god in our image. We break all the Commandments. If we stay with the “ship,” we will perish on the Day of Judgment, when all of our sins come out as evidence of our guilt. God, however, is rich in mercy and doesn’t want anyone to go to hell. He made a way for us to be saved. Jesus Christ, the One whom the Bible calls the “Captain of our salvation,” gave His life so that we could have a place in the lifeboat. He took our punishment upon Himself, suffering on the cross for us. We broke God’s Law, but He paid our fine. Then He rose from the dead, defeating death. The moment we repent and trust in Him alone for our eternal salvation, God will forgive us and grant us the gift of eternal life.

Don’t hesitate. You may wait until it’s too late! It was reported that some of the lifeboats that left the Titanic early were only half full. Many more on board could have been saved, but they refused to believe that the great “unsinkable” ship was sinking. They perished because their faith was misguided. Don’t be like them. Believe the gospel. Repent and trust Jesus Christ today ...and God will never let you down.

Monday, November 10, 2008

Taxpayers Will Fund Abortions -- Obama's Claim to "Govern from the Center" and "Find Common Ground" Null and Void


by Steven Ertelt
LifeNews.com Editor


Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- Members of the team Barack Obama has put together confirmed over the weekend that the incoming president will immediately overturn executive orders President Bush put in place as soon as possible after he takes office. The Bush orders have protected taxpayers on key pro-life issues.

The advisors confirm the concerns pro-life advocates had during the presidential election campaign.

They indicated Obama would overturn a Bush policy that prevents forcing taxpayers to fund groups that perform or promote abortions in other countries. Known as the Mexico City Policy and first instituted during the Reagan administration, President Bush expanded the policy to make sure no State Department funding goes to the pro-abortion groups.

Obama would also overturn President Bush's policy against funding any new embryonic stem cell research.

Put in place in August 2001, the policy prevents taxpayers from paying for new embryonic research that involves the destruction of human life. Bush directed most of the public funding for the science to adult stem cells, which are more ethical and have proven more effective than their embryonic counterparts.

Embryonic stem cells, in addition to including the destruction of days-old unborn children, has yet to work in humans because of significant problems after they are injected into the body -- ranging from the growth of tumors to immune system rejection issues.

The Washington Post reports that the transition team members are working with top special interest groups and leading pro-abortion members of Congress on prioritizing the executive orders that Obama will reverse.

President Bill Clinton overturned the Mexico City Policy on his first day in office and the reports indicated Obama will too.

Cecile Richards, the president of Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion business, told the Post that she expects Obama to rescind the protections on taxpayer-funded abortions and abortion counseling immediately after his inauguration.

"We have been communicating with his transition staff" almost daily, Richards said. "We expect to see a real change."

The Post also indicates that Rep. Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat who has been one of the primary members of Congress pushing for embryonic stem cell research funding, prodded Obama during the campaign to make it a priority.

She told the newspaper that supporters of funding the destructive and unproven research have already drafted language for an executive order that Obama can use.

Responding to the news, Patrick J. Mahoney of the Christian Defense Coalition told LifeNews.com that Obama's making taxpayers fund abortion takes away from his claims to want to govern from the center and find common ground on abortion.

Mahoney said "it would greatly increase abortions around the world. It would also create a scenario in which American evangelicals and Catholics would be paying for abortion referrals through their tax dollars."

"If President-elect Obama reverses this policy, it would show a complete and blatant disregard for the faith values of millions of American Christians as well as expanding the violence and tragedy of abortion worldwide. America should be exporting justice and human rights, not brutality and violence," he said.

Sunday, November 9, 2008

What if my Leaders Are Wolves?

by Pastor Anton Bosch


Are you convinced that the leaders of your church are wolves in sheep’s clothing?

If so what should you do?

The answer to that question is not very easy because there is a chance that your assessment may be wrong. The various characteristics Jesus lists in Matthew 23, and that we have discussed over the past few weeks, could be very difficult to measure in absolute terms. The line between a strong leader and an abusive one often runs very thin.

So get advice. Speak to another pastor, elder or experienced brother and ask them to confirm or allay your fears. Please note that I am not encouraging gossip. Do not discuss your concerns with just anyone. Preferably seek the counsel of someone who can be trusted, who is not in your church, and who has experience in these matters. Even then, it is very easy to exaggerate the bad and underemphasize the good. So, try to be as objective and as honest in your report as possible.

Once the advisor makes the judgment, then abide by it. Don’t go around looking for advice that will suit your agenda. Unfortunately, those who find themselves in abusive situations are often isolated from any outside ministry and it would be hard for them to find good counsel, but it is important nonetheless to get good advice.

(The reason I advocate getting outside counsel is because if the leaders are abusive and indeed wolves, they will simply deny the charge and convince/intimidate you into believing that what they are doing is right.)

Should you discover that your leaders are indeed abusive, then what should you do?

Well, the Scripture is clear – go to the one with whom you have the problem and tell him his fault alone. (Matthew 18:15). His response will go a long way to confirm or deny your fear. If he is a godly man he will respond in a godly way but if his response is one of anger, vindication, victimization - or in any way negative – then your hunch has been confirmed. If you are satisfied with the response of the brother, then try to build on that and see if there is a change in him, or in your attitude. A true shepherd will leave you without any doubt that he is a true shepherd.

If, however, his response is negative then you have a real problem because the next step is to take witnesses with you. (Matthew 18:16, 1Timothy 5:19). The first problem is that in an abusive situation, most folk will be so intimidated that they will not be willing to testify. And the second problem is that most believers do not have what it takes to confront a wolf who is entrenched in leadership. This leaves you with only one option: run for your life.

Too many people remain in churches where the leader is a wolf because they feel that they can fix the situation. Do not be deceived. Someone who is not in a very powerful position in leadership themselves will never be able to change a situation where the leaders are wolves. I do not know of a single example where those under the domination of an abusive leader have ever been able to bring about significant change. Have you ever noticed, that Jesus never even tried to convert the scribes and Pharisees, except for the two who came to him (Nicodemus and Joseph)? Why do you think He did not try to transform the synagogues with their system of scribes, rabbis and lawyers?

Jesus warned: “Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy.” (Luke 12:1). And in Matthew 16:11&12 He says: “How is it you do not understand that I did not speak to you concerning bread? – but to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.”

Thus Jesus refers to both the hypocrisy and the doctrine of these leaders as leaven. Why did he not refer to it as dirt or weakness or some other analogy? Why is it leaven? Because there is a cure for filth, weakness, a lack of understanding and even sin, but there is no cure for leaven.

Once a little leaven gets into the lump of dough, it will penetrate at a microscopic level until the whole lump is infected with the yeast. (1Corinthians 5:6, Galatians 5:9). Paul says the only way to purge leaven out is to make a clean break with the source of the leaven and to have a new lump of dough. (1Corinthians 5:7). If the source of leaven is one of the believers, it is relatively easy to put him out of the church (after following Matthew 18), but if the source is a/the leader, it becomes almost impossible to deal with. Either way, distance has to be put between you and the source of the leaven.

One of the popular errors propagated by abusive leaders is that as long as the believers are in submission to the leaders, the Lord will reward those believers for their submission but the leaders will be judged for the error. Thus they tell you not to worry too much about where the church is going – that is up to the leadership and even if the whole church is led astray, the followers will be fine because they are being obedient and it is not their task to discern right from wrong.

This is a sure sign of a church that is already deep into heresy. “Each of us shall give account of himself to God.” (Romans 14:12). Even in the Old Testament it was established that “all souls are Mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is Mine; the soul who sins shall die.” (Ezekiel 18:4). And “each one will receive his own reward according to his own labor” (1Corinthians 3:8). Each one of us is responsible before the Lord and, while shepherds will give an account for the flock, the sheep will never be able to blame their failure on the shepherd.

In Revelation 2:18-23, Jesus speaks about Jezebel (a symbolic name for an actual person in the church of Thyatira) “who calls herself a prophetess (who) teach(es) and seduce(s) My servants to commit sexual immorality and eat things sacrificed to idols.” (verse 20). While He pronounces a severe judgment on her, He judges the church for allowing her to continue her evil work, but even more startling, Jesus says that He will also “kill her children with (eternal) death” (verse 23). This means that those who are followers of false prophets will be judged with the same judgment as the false prophets! So don’t think you can continue following false shepherds and not be contaminated with their error, or worse, be condemned with the same judgment.

To those who find themselves in a false religious system God says: “Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues” (Revelation 18:4

Saturday, November 8, 2008

America Cries "Give Us A King!"


by Jan Markell

There is a story in II Samuel 8 where we see Israel demanding a king. God was not sufficient for them, so they asked for a "real king." They got an evil one -- Saul.

America has been in a similar mood. We want a "king" to solve our many problems starting with the economy. So Israel said to Samuel, "Now appoint a king to lead us such as all the other nations have" (II Samuel 8:5). But all the other nations had pagan kings.

God lamented to Samuel and said, "Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."

Two years ago came a charismatic man named Barack Obama who was engulfed in a cult-like atmosphere. Some actually called him "the messiah." Shrines were built to him. A Web site said, "Obama is god." There has been a messianic fervor, adoration and a worship-like atmosphere surrounding him. At some rallies people fainted at the sight of him. Young children recorded on YouTube sang songs to him stating he would change the world.

The intrigue with this man is global. Newsweek magazine had a headline recently titled, "The World Hopes for its First President." Imagine, a world president! Newsweek states, "In country after country, polls show a record-high fascination with the outcome of the U.S. elections."

Newsweek basically said "The international audience really cared less about John McCain, Sarah Palin, or Joe Biden. Somewhere along the road to the White House, Obama became the world's candidate."

Even for those with proper eschatology this sounds alarming. But on the positive side, a barometer as to how late the hour is has been revealed. Newsweek continues, "Obama is a 21st century man with whom the whole world can identify."

In Obama's speech in Berlin, Obama said that we are all citizens of the world! Talk about a message on globalism. Will he establish the one-world system?

America longs for a king to take care of us. We demanded change and change we will get! There are YouTube clips of people jumping for joy that Obama will take care of them. As one says, "Obama will pay my mortgage and buy my gas." The entitlement mentality reigns and it is cross-cultural.

As Jack Kinsella says in his recent Omega Intelligence Digest, "In October capitalism passed away after a long illness." He is right. Socialism now is very appealing and being implemented in America. The government is buying up many industries and turning them over to a new Socialist president!

None of the candidates who ran in "Campaign 2008" can save us! Only the Lord God of Israel can do that! But as in Samuel's day, God is not good enough for America. Thus, I believe He has allowed "strong delusion" to filter across the nation and around the world. It says in Isaiah 66:4, "I will choose their delusions." Thus, all has happened for a reason. God removes kings and establishes kings for His own purposes. (Daniel 2:21)

Here's what we do know for sure. In spite of troubling and even perilous times, the Bible still has all the answers, the Holy Spirit is still active, God will still inhabit the praises of His people, there will still be room at the cross, Jesus will still save the lost, and Jesus will still return to the holy city of Jerusalem to establish perfect government: A Theocracy for 1000 years.

"For unto us a Child is born, unto us a Son is given; and the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of His government and peace there will be no end...."(Isaiah 9:6-7).

Friday, November 7, 2008

Experiential Faith


Our faith isn’t intellectual; it is experiential. We don’t know about God, we know Him. At the University of Chicago Divinity School, each year they have what is called “Baptist Day.” It is a day when the school invites all the Baptists in the area to the school because they want the Baptist dollars to keep coming in.

On this day each one is to bring a lunch to be eaten outdoors in a grassy picnic area. Every “Baptist Day” the school would invite one of the greatest minds to lecture in the theological education center. One year they invited Dr. Paul Tillich. Dr. Tillich spoke for two-and-a-half hours proving that the resurrection of Jesus was false. He quoted scholar after scholar and book after book. He concluded that since there was no such thing as the historical resurrection, the religious tradition of the Church was groundless, emotional mumbo-jumbo, because it was based on a relationship with a risen Jesus, who, in fact, never rose from the dead in any literal sense. He then asked if there were any questions.

After about 30 seconds, an old preacher with a head of short-cropped, woolly white hair stood up in the back of the auditorium. “Docta Tillich, I got one question,” he said as all eyes turned toward him. He reached into his lunch sack and pulled out an apple and began eating it. “Docta Tillich (crunch, munch), my question is a simple one (crunch, munch). Now, I ain’t never read them books you read (crunch, munch), and I can’t recite the Scriptures in the original Greek (crunch, munch). I don’t know nothin’ about Niebuhr and Heidegger (crunch, munch).” He finished the apple. “All I wanna know is: This apple I just ate—was it bitter or sweet?”

Dr. Tillich paused for a moment and answered in exemplary scholarly fashion: “I cannot possibly answer that question, for I haven’t tasted your apple.” The white-haired preacher dropped the apple core into his crumpled paper bag, looked up at Dr. Tillich and said calmly, “Neither have you tasted my Jesus.”

The 1,000-plus in attendance could not contain themselves. The auditorium erupted with applause and cheers. Dr. Tillich thanked his audience and promptly left the platform. “Taste and see that the Lord is good: blessed is the man that trusts in him” (Psalm 34:8). It has been well said, “The man with an experience is not at the mercy of a man with an argument.”

Thursday, November 6, 2008

Gnostic Education


by Thomas E. Brewton

Social justice is a doctrine of the secular religion of socialism.
And as Eric Voegelin demonstrated, socialism is a variety of modern-
day gnosticism.

Voegelin in his 1959 “Science, Politics & Gnosticism” describes the
salient characteristics of gnosticism, all of which apply to the
doctrines of American liberalism and the concept of social justice as
attainment of atheistic social perfection. These gnostic
characteristics correspond closely to the attitudes described in
Phyllis Schlafly's article.

They also are the underlying foundation of Senator Obama's appeal to dissatisfaction with American society and his message that he is the one possessed of special knowledge that can bring us together and create a near perfect world.

First, the gnostic liberal is dissatisfied with the world as he finds
it. He rejects the evidence of history that there always will be
strife, wars, inequalities in ability and station, and some degree of
poverty. And he is confident that he has the knowledge (gnosis) to
make things perfect, which he defines as equality in all things.

Second, the gnostic-liberal attributes the problems of human life to
poor organization of the economic and political realms. Evil and
hardship must therefore arise from some identifiable source
(capitalism? ownership of private property?) that deforms the proper
structure of society.

Third, the gnostic-liberal has a deep faith that earthly salvation
from the world’s tribulations is attainable, a trait markedly evident
in the theoretical models of Soviet Russia and Franklin Roosevelt’s
New Deal, as well as in the campaign rhetoric of Senator Obama.

Fourth, the gnostic-liberal believes that this salvation is
attainable through the process of history (which , of course, he
uniquely understands). Auguste Comte’s 1820s gnosis was his
discovery of the “immutable law of history,” according to which there
are three ages of human social development, the third stage in the
19th century being the new scientific, socialistic age into which
only knowledgeable intellectuals could lead the masses.

The same three-phase philosophy of history reappears in Hegel and
Marx. Note that Hitler’s National Socialism was consciously called
the Third Reich to identify it with the gnostic millennium of earthly
harmony and peace.

Note also that the nature of gnosis is that its secret knowledge is
available and comprehensible only to a select few. This has always
implied in socialism a vulnerability to dictatorial concentration of
power in the collectivized state. In Italy and Germany of the 1920s
and 1930s it was expressed as the Leader Principle – Il Duce and Der
Fuhrer. Senator Obama is notoriously self-identified as The One in
whom human hopes and aspirations are to be realized.

Fifth, the gnostic-liberal believes that, having discovered the
secret meaning of history, he can implement and control the process
of history by political and economic means, i. e., via socialism.

And, finally, the gnostic-liberal’s core belief is that salvation,
the perfection of social relations and human conduct, is attainable
via human action, here on earth. This is the source of Lenin’s
mystical concept of the dictatorship of the proletariat that would
bring peace and harmony to the people and would lead to a gradual
withering away of formal government, leaving the Soviet people living
in a modern Garden of Eden – from each according to ability, to each
according to need.

We see the manifestation of this mystical, gnostic vision every day
in liberal politicians’ belief that individuals are incapable of
fending for themselves, that only the national political state can do
the job. There is always something wrong with society and always a
politician confident that one more set of regulations or one more
welfare-state program will make everything OK.

People want to believe that a body of secret knowledge will free them
from Christianity’s stern admonitions to work hard, save for a rainy
day, abjure hedonism, and recognize that perfection of human life is
impossible in the earthly realm. It’s so much easier to eat, drink,
be merry, and let the government take care of us.

Tuesday, November 4, 2008

Obama's Abortion Extremism



Barack Obama is the most extreme pro-abortion candidate ever to seek the office of President of the United States. He is the most extreme pro-abortion member of the United States Senate. Indeed, he is the most extreme pro-abortion legislator ever to serve in either house of the United States Congress.

1. Barack Obama supports legislation that would repeal the Hyde Amendment, which protects pro-life citizens from having to pay for abortions that are not necessary to save the life of the mother and are not the result of rape or incest.

2. He has promised that "the first thing I'd do as President is sign the Freedom of Choice Act" (known as FOCA). This proposed legislation would create a federally guaranteed "fundamental right" to abortion through all nine months of pregnancy, including "a right to abort a fully developed child in the final weeks for undefined 'health' reasons." In essence, FOCA would abolish virtually every existing state and federal limitation on abortion, including parental consent and notification laws for minors, state and federal funding restrictions on abortion, and conscience protections for pro-life citizens working in the health-care industry-protections against being forced to participate in the practice of abortion or else lose their jobs.

3. Obama, unlike even many "pro-choice" legislators, opposed the ban on partial-birth abortions when he served in the Illinois legislature and condemned the Supreme Court decision that upheld legislation banning this heinous practice.

4. He has referred to a baby conceived inadvertently by a young woman as a "punishment" that she should not endure. He has stated that women's equality requires access to abortion on demand. Appallingly, he wishes to strip federal funding from pro-life crisis pregnancy centers that provide alternatives to abortion for pregnant women in need. There is certainly nothing "pro-choice" about that.

5. Senator Obama, despite the urging of pro-life members of his own party, has not endorsed or offered support for the Pregnant Women Support Act, the signature bill of Democrats for Life, meant to reduce abortions by providing assistance for women facing crisis pregnancies. In fact, Obama has opposed key provisions of the Act, including providing coverage of unborn children in the State Children's Health Insurance Program (S-CHIP), and informed consent for women about the effects of abortion and the gestational age of their child. This legislation would not make a single abortion illegal. It simply seeks to make it easier for pregnant women to make the choice not to abort their babies. (Here is a concrete test of whether Obama is "pro-choice" rather than pro-abortion. Even Senator Edward Kennedy voted to include coverage of unborn children in S-CHIP. But Barack Obama stood resolutely with the most stalwart abortion advocates in opposing it.)

5. As an Illinois state senator Obama opposed legislation to protect children who are born alive, either as a result of an abortionist's unsuccessful effort to kill them in the womb, or by the deliberate delivery of the baby prior to viability. This legislation would not have banned any abortions. For him, a child marked for abortion gets no protection-even ordinary medical or comfort care-even if she is born alive and entirely separated from her mother. So Obama has favored protecting what is literally a form of infanticide.

6. He has co-sponsored a bill-strongly opposed by McCain-that would authorize the large-scale industrial production of human embryos for use in biomedical research in which they would be killed. In fact, the bill Obama co-sponsored would effectively require the killing of human beings in the embryonic stage that were produced by cloning. It would make it a federal crime for a woman to save an embryo by agreeing to have the tiny developing human being implanted in her womb so that he or she could be brought to term.

Barack Obama and John McCain differ on many important issues about which reasonable people of goodwill, including pro-life Americans of every faith, disagree: how best to fight international terrorism, how to restore economic growth and prosperity, how to distribute the tax burden and reduce poverty, etc. But on abortion and the industrial creation of embryos for destructive research, there is a profound difference of moral principle, not just prudence.

Over the next four to eight years, as many as five or even six U.S. Supreme Court justices could retire. Obama enthusiastically supports Roe v. Wade and would appoint judges who would protect that morally and constitutionally disastrous decision and even expand its scope. Indeed, in an interview in Glamour magazine, he made it clear that he would apply a litmus test for Supreme Court nominations: jurists who do not support Roe will not be considered for appointment by Obama. John McCain, by contrast, opposes Roe and would appoint judges likely to overturn it.

Voting for the most extreme pro-abortion political candidate in American history is not the way to save unborn babies.