Design of the Week 01/28/09- Intelligent Designer

January 30, 2009 at 3:35 pm | Posted in Designs of the Week | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,


This week’s featured design is calledIntelligent Designer. It is commonly believed by many that the earth and everything in it couldn’t have come about by anything outside of purely natural causes. Others say that there is an intelligent designer but will not promote any one “being” as that designer. Then, there are some who believe what the Bible says about how everything came about.God, you will use whatever excuses you can to deny Him – despite what the evidence says…

The Bible says that God created everything in six 24-hour days. This includes the stars, moon, sun, planets, plants, trees, animals, dinosaurs, and man. For children, it is obvious that the world around us wasn’t created by chance. Even they can understand that it takes something more than “nature” to bring about the complex and wonderful life around us.

It can be explained pretty easily. Most of us drive cars to and from work and other places. Not one of us has seen our car being made or where it was made. Yet we know there is a maker because the car exists. The maker’s stamp is all over the car. The same can be said for creation. We can know there is a Creator because creation exists. Even though we can’t see the Creator, the creation screams that He exists. It should be really simple.

There are other arguments for the Creator that I will go into in a future blog. The truth is that if you don’t want to believe in

The voice of change? (long)

January 26, 2009 at 4:50 pm | Posted in Christianity | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I realize that there won’t be many who read this and there probably won’t be many who agree either, but this is something that I feel I need to write. Our nation is fawning over its new president, but it seems that there are few people who are listening to what he actually says. Below is a transcript of the inaugural speech given by Barack Obama as well as my response.


My fellow citizens:


I stand here today humbled by the task before us, grateful for the trust you have bestowed, mindful of the sacrifices borne by our ancestors. I thank President Bush for his service to our nation, as well as the generosity and cooperation he has shown throughout this transition.


I wonder if president Obama really understands sacrifice? Does he understand our nation’s history (not the revised version) and the trials they went through to forge this nation? Does he really understand humility? This is the same man who wrote a “private” letter to his daughters that was somehow printed in national newspapers. He thanks the former president that he spent the last two years attacking and that he will again attack in this very speech. What is that all about? Is no one paying attention to the man and not just his words?


Forty-four Americans have now taken the presidential oath. The words have been spoken during rising tides of prosperity and the still waters of peace. Yet, every so often the oath is taken amidst gathering clouds and raging storms. At these moments, America has carried on not simply because of the skill or vision of those in high office, but because We the People have remained faithful to the ideals of our forbearers, and true to our founding documents.


So it has been. So it must be with this generation of Americans.


Obama talks about peace, prosperity, and storms. I wonder if he really understands. He talks about the skill and vision of those in “high office”, but when I look around, I see the skill, vision, and morality of the “high office” dwindling at an alarming rate. It is being replaced with shallow people in vacuous positions speaking empty words. I wonder if Obama was trying to subtly refer to himself and those he’s chosen to lead our nation. He claims that “We the People” have been “faithful to the ideals of our forbears”, but the majority of “the People” don’t have any inkling of what our forbears stood for. They don’t know the history of our nation, but have instead mired themselves up to their eyeballs in the revised fairy tale that has very little relation to reality. He says that we’ve remained true to our documents. Coming from someone who is supposed to be versed in Constitutional law, it seems that our new President hasn’t read the documents he’s talking about. Our founding fathers laid out a foundation based on God and morality. They set up the government of this country to be “by the People”. All our president has to do is look at what is going on in our nation (and be honest about the very things that he himself promotes and supports) to see that we’ve fallen away from both our nation’s documents and it’s scriptural foundation. Our judicial branch no longer upholds the law it creates it. The “People” have very little to say in the way our nation is run. President Obama needs to be a little more honest and a little less naïve (or deceitful)…


That we are in the midst of crisis is now well understood. Our nation is at war, against a far-reaching network of violence and hatred. Our economy is badly weakened, a consequence of greed and irresponsibility on the part of some, but also our collective failure to make hard choices and prepare the nation for a new age. Homes have been lost; jobs shed; businesses shuttered. Our health care is too costly; our schools fail too many; and each day brings further evidence that the ways we use energy strengthen our adversaries and threaten our planet.


It would take a complete hermit or idiot to fail to see that we’re in a crisis. The problem is that while we’re in a crisis, no one seems to want to admit or express the reason we’re where we are. We are in the situation we’re in because of the sins of both nation as a whole, and the individual people in it. We are here because we’ve removed morality (Christian morality) from just about every aspect of America. We don’t teach our kids morality in schools, so they fornicate and have babies. Because we don’t teach them how precious life is, they can go down the street and kill the baby inside them. We give them ready-made excuses like they’re not ready or it would be burden to the child. If we really wanted to allow abortions, then why not be truthful about it? Allow the child to be born, clean it up, dress it in it’s first clothes, and then send the mom and/or dad into the room with a knife and tell them not to come out until they’ve aborted their baby. It’s really no different than what’s happening now, but at least this way the mom’s would be a little more honest… We neglect to teach our kids ethics or morality at home. Like the government, our response has become “throw money at it”. So we’ve created a generation of disrespectful, detached kids who are happier and feel more loved with their friends than with their families. We’ve created generations of “fathers” who can impregnate any number of women but have absolutely no idea of the responsibility they have to the lives they’ve helped bring about. We continue to promote “alternative lifestyles” like they are equal to what God has ordained. We have been everything BUT true to what our forbears believed! And we’re too prideful and self-righteous to admit it…


Our nation is at war because of what it once was, not because of what it is now. Those who hate us do so because of the Christian morals we used to have. We have fought the war against the “network of hatred” on foreign shores because we had experienced people leading us that knew that it is better to fight the war over there than it is to allow it to come over here. We no longer have that experience. Instead, we have a man who seems sympathetic to our enemies and is more than willing to sit down with them to talk. Our economy is badly weakened by greed – period. Obama seems to want to point the finger at the corporations (while still throwing them money) but I wonder if he includes the government in the “some” whose greed has caused us to be where we are. We wouldn’t need bailouts and stimulus packages if the government actually cared about, represented, and worked for the people who put them into office. Instead, they waste America’s money on ludicrous pork barrel agendas, rarely accomplish anything productive, and still manage to vote themselves a yearly raise in spite of the current economic problems. It is not our collective failure to make hard choices that has gotten us here. It is our failure to make right choices and respect God and His Word and live by it that has gotten us here. The choices really aren’t that hard, but to make them would have to mean choosing to sacrifice our greed and selfishness to see our country return to God. We shouldn’t be trying to prepare our nation for a “new age”. We should be repenting and return to doing what God says we should have been doing all along…


Many have lost homes, but it is their own fault. Many of the people who bought homes only to lose them knew they couldn’t afford them in the first place and so did the government. But, in our desire for everyone to live the “American dream”, the government completely botched the entire system and is now paying for it. Jobs have been lost because companies can’t afford the overhead to run their own businesses here anymore. The unions charge an outrageous amount. Businesses can find cheaper work overseas. It’s no one’s fault but our own… Healthcare is costly, but to be honest, I think that it is not the priority that people are making it. Our schools have failed since we’ve removed the Bible and morality from them. We no longer teach kids for them to succeed, we teach them so that our schools can get money. They are being taught by teachers who lack morality like they do. A growing number of teachers can’t pass their own subjects! The way we use energy is another red herring that we are spending too much time and money focusing on. I would love to see biofuels and “green energy”, but without morality in our country, it’s not really going to matter…


These are the indicators of crisis, subject to data and statistics. Less measurable but no less profound is a sapping of confidence across our land – a nagging fear that America’s decline is inevitable, and that the next generation must lower its sights.


I disagree with the president that the “sapping of confidence” is less measurable. It is evident that many wonder about America’s decline, but what should we expect? They lack confidence in our nation because its leaders have consistently shown in recent years that they’re untrustworthy. Worse than that, the “leaders” of our nation have removed the only true hope that America has. They’ve helped mock the One who could heal our nation and they’ve taught generations to do the same. Why should Americans trust the empty words and promises of those who say they have their best interests at heart and then act in ways that show the opposite. The next generation is almost forced to “lower its sights” because our nation has trusted in a new “god”, money, and it’s prophet man. Without something greater than what our “leaders” currently offer us, we can do nothing but decline…


Today I say to you that the challenges we face are real. They are serious and they are many. They will not be met easily or in a short span of time. But know this, America – they will be met.


Duh. The challenges have always been real, but the plans offered to deal with them are fanciful and without any backbone or understanding. The challenges have also always been serious, at least to those truly concerned about our nation. To the rest, they’ve been nuisances, or hazy events on the edges of vision, or political “causes” used to increase one’s status or reputation. America’s problems have never been easily met. President Obama says they’ll be met and that’s what bothers me. They will be met by greedy, inexperienced, shallow men and women who hate God and His Son. They will be met with the best man has to offer and those efforts will ultimately fail. In the meantime, “the People” will be told how wonderfully things are going and, sadly, many will believe it.


On this day, we gather because we have chosen hope over fear, unity of purpose over conflict and discord.


President Obama has said that he was elected because America has “chosen hope over fear”, but what hope does he offer? Unless he’s the Messiah (like some profess him to be) his talk of hope is just another example of emotionally charged drivel. If the “hope” that Barack Obama offers is not that of repentance to God and salvation through Jesus Christ so that God will heal our land; then the President doesn’t know the meaning of hope. If we are “unified” for any purpose that is not solely focused on Christ, if we are not focused on our entire nation repenting in sackcloth and ashes, then we will not be unified. The conflict and discord our country faces have come from the fact that everyone is doing what is right is his or her own eyes. We have all gone our own way and, unfortunately, we’re just doing what comes natural to sinners. The president seems to imply that he can somehow erase the conflict and discord. I doubt it…


On this day, we come to proclaim an end to the petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas, that for far too long have strangled our politics.


Who is proclaiming and end to petty grievances and false promises? The government? All of America? Forgive me for sounding skeptical Mr. President, but we’ve heard all this before from people that are much more qualified than you. Which “petty grievances, false promises, worn-out dogmas, and recriminations” are we ending? Could you be more specific? Are you including the newly made ones in this statement? It seems to me that our new president has his focus misplaced. It’s not about what’s strangling our politics. It’s about the sin that has strangled “the People”. Until this is changed, it doesn’t matter what kind of politics we have (like socialism) because it won’t fix the problem…


We remain a young nation, but in the words of Scripture, the time has come to set aside childish things. The time has come to reaffirm our enduring spirit; to choose our better history; to carry forward that precious gift, that noble idea, passed on from generation to generation: the God-given promise that all are equal, all are free, and all deserve a chance to pursue their full measure of happiness.


Up to this point, I’ve rolled my eyes a lot, but this angers me. I wonder if the president knows where his little snippet of scripture from. Ironically, it comes from 1 Corinthians 13. This is the “love” chapter. But, the love that Paul talks about is not the eros (physical) love. It’s not the “fuzzy feelings” love. It is the self-sacrificing, responsible love called agape. This love is more concerned about others than self. Obama calls us a young nation who needs to put away childish things. This sounds awfully funny coming from a man who is playing president and trying to talk tough and compare himself to Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Martin Luther King Jr. because he has no identity of his own. If Obama says we should put away childish things, then he should lead by example. He should stop acting like he knows what he’s doing. He should stop trying to sound intelligent and just admit that he’s in “above his pay grade”. He says that it’s time to reaffirm our enduring spirit. What enduring spirit? While I believe that there are those who have an enduring spirit, I believe many of them are the same people who saw the world wars… In our current time, if we aren’t instantly satisfied in our endeavors, we give up. How is this enduring?


He then says that we should choose our better history. How? You can’t choose history because it’s in the past. Unless of course he’s talking about the rewritten history of our nation and which is the best version. He then invokes God again, showing his misunderstanding. He says that all are equal, free, and deserve a “chance to pursue their full measure of happiness”. I disagree with this Mr. President. I agree, in one respect, that all are equal. We are all sinners who deserve to be sent to hell. But, we’re not all equal in the sense that those who have repented of their sins and put their faith in Christ will not go to hell. Second, we are not all free. Not one of us is free. The Bible calls us slaves and we serve one of two masters. We either serve sin or we serve God. Sadly, our nation continues to choose sin over God and I believe that the people that are coming to power in our country are part of His judgment and will encourage the nation’s sin even more. Finally, while I think that we have the opportunity to pursue happiness, that opportunity only extends as far as it doesn’t conflict with God’s law. If that pursuit of happiness includes something that God defines as sin or an abomination, then we have no “right” to pursue it although we have the ability to.


In reaffirming the greatness of our nation, we understand that greatness is never a given. It must be earned. Our journey has never been one of shortcuts or settling for less. It has not been the path for the faint-hearted – for those who prefer leisure over work, or seek only the pleasures of riches and fame. Rather, it has been the risk-takers, the doers, the makers of things – some celebrated but more often men and women obscure in their labor, who have carried us up the long, rugged path towards prosperity and freedom.


For us, they packed up their few worldly possessions and traveled across oceans in search of a new life.


For us, they toiled in sweatshops and settled the West; endured the lash of the whip and plowed the hard earth.


For us, they fought and died, in places like Concord and Gettysburg; Normandy and Khe Sahn.


While I love my country, I’m honest enough to say that the greatness of our nation is not what it used to be. We can reaffirm it all we want, but that doesn’t make it true. Our nation was great because the men and women who lead our country were God-fearing and truly understood that God is the reason our nation was even in existence. Greatness is not a given but it is not earned either. God gives it. It is God who raises up kings and brings them low (Daniel 2:21), and He will NOT raise up a nation that so openly rebels against Him.


The president says that our “journey” has never been one of short cuts. I disagree. Maybe it wasn’t that way years ago, but today that’s all it’s about. In today’s American society, it’s all about getting everything we can as fast we can. It’s about finding the quickest way to fame, fortune, and your name in lights. I could use the president and his political career as an example of this. He says that our journey has not been the path for the faint-hearted who seek leisure, riches, and fame. Has the president been in hiding? I am truly amazed that he said this while a growing number of corporations are going under because their CEOs and other management have gotten a lion’s share of wealth on the backs of others. And, what’s worse is the government is bailing them out! The government is giving the CEOs more money to put in their pockets without any kind of accountability (which is something that will supposedly change…). Who is the president trying to fool?


He says that it is the doers, risk-takers, and makers that have carried us “up the long rugged path to prosperity and freedom”. Is the president that blind or is he just naïve? America as we know it today is neither prosperous nor free. Yes, there are people making money, but our nation has a debt that is trillions of dollars! It is close to the point where there is no way we will ever be able to pay it off! And yet, we seem to have billions of dollars for bailouts, etc. that will supposedly help us. Isn’t the mishandling and poor decision making concerning money one of the things that got us where we are to begin with? How is that going to help us? That’s the definition of insanity! America is no longer free either. The freedoms we once held dear are slowly fading away. They are being replaced by whatever the current government thinks will get them re-elected. Our American rights are no longer inalienable… To say that the people who came here to live did so for us is a farce and misrepresentation of the people. The people that founded our nation did so as a haven for Christians. They didn’t toil for us, they toiled because it was necessary. They understood Scripture, which says if you don’t work you don’t eat. Most today wouldn’t survive if that were implemented here. They were willing to accept the work and the toil because they could openly worship the Lord in a country that didn’t tell them how they could do it.


Time and again these men and women struggled and sacrificed and worked till their hands were raw so that we might live a better life. They saw America as bigger than the sum of our individual ambitions; greater than all the differences of birth or wealth or faction.


The men and women who built this nation saw America the way they did because they loved her. They struggled and sacrificed to make this nation what it was because they loved God. Today, those words mean nothing to most Americans. Many wouldn’t know struggle or sacrifice if they saw it. America was greater than individuals because those individuals held to Christian morals and knew that without God they would have nothing. No other religion could have done it. The people of our nation had a “better life” because they gave that life to the Lord in service, trust, and obedience.


This is the journey we continue today. We remain the most prosperous, powerful nation on Earth. Our workers are no less productive than when this crisis began. Our minds are no less inventive, our goods and services no less needed than they were last week or last month or last year. Our capacity remains undiminished. But our time of standing pat, of protecting narrow interests and putting off unpleasant decisions – that time has surely passed. Starting today, we must pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off, and begin again the work of remaking America.


Again, I have to disagree. We don’t continue the “journey” of our founders/builders. Honestly, I don’t even think we’re on the same page. Our nation is neither the most prosperous nor the most powerful. We have strong armies, sure, but armies alone don’t make a nation powerful. Our nation is filled with uneducated, immoral, unmotivated people in all levels of leadership. To say that our workers are no less productive is to ignore both the growing unemployment rate and the number of people who refuse to work. Our minds may be just as inventive, but they will not stay that way. We have multitudes of kids graduating high school who can’t even read the diploma they’ve been handed. There are clever people and inventors in America, but they aren’t enough. Our goods and services are mostly handled by the foreign countries we’ve outsourced the work to. Our companies are going out of business, people are losing their jobs and that diminishes capacity. Our president’s solution for the nation is to “remake” America. I don’t think that we need to remake America. We need to REPENT America! We don’t need to remake anything. What we need to do is return to the foundation our country was built on. All the emotional pep talk won’t fix the problem our country faces…


For everywhere we look, there is work to be done. The state of the economy calls for action, bold and swift, and we will act – not only to create new jobs, but to lay a new foundation for growth. We will build the roads and bridges, the electric grids and digital lines that feed our commerce and bind us together. We will restore science to its rightful place, and wield technology’s wonders to raise health care’s quality and lower its cost. We will harness the sun and the winds and the soil to fuel our cars and run our factories. And we will transform our schools and colleges and universities to meet the demands of a new age. All this we can do. And all this we will do.


There is always work to be done! The state of the economy and other “issues” are just symptoms of a deeper problem. Without fixing the deeper problem, the symptoms will go away for a while, but they’ll be back. Obama wants to lay a new foundation. I believe that our nation needs to restore the foundation it already has. All the talk in the world about roads, grids, technology, and health care makes for a good speech but that’s all. Obama says that we’re going to do all these things, but how? Where will we get the money? And, how will doing any of these things fix America’s real problem – sin? I also can’t help but wonder what the president thinks that science’s “rightful place” is? Basically what he seems to be saying here is that we’ll be able to snap our fingers and science and technology will somehow save us. It’s done so well so far. It’s done some great things for us like medicine but it’s also done some really ridiculous things. It’s got full-grown men spending all their time listening into space for signs of life. It’s got millions of people believing a fairy tale that we somehow came from nothing billions of years ago when there is no proof of it. I hear what the president is saying and I can’t help but shake my head. All he needs is a couple of dragons and a princess in distress and he’ll have the makings of a great story. Unfortunately, no matter how many times he says it can/will happen, that doesn’t make it so, especially if God has decided something different…


Now, there are some who question the scale of our ambitions – who suggest that our system cannot tolerate too many big plans. Their memories are short. For they have forgotten what this country has already done; what free men and women can achieve when imagination is joined to common purpose, and necessity to courage.


I don’t just question the scale of ambitions I question the ambitions themselves. It seems that the president has forgotten what our country has already done. He seems to only know history as it’s been revised or made up. Our country doesn’t need imagination (wouldn’t that be a “childish thing” that we’re supposed to give up?). What our country needs is for its people, all of them, to take responsibility for it’s sin. We need our nation to own up to the fact that man’s ways don’t work, and realize that the only thing that can save us is God. The thing is, our “system” doesn’t need “big plans”. It only needs one plan.


What the cynics fail to understand is that the ground has shifted beneath them – that the stale political arguments that have consumed us for so long no longer apply. The question we ask today is not whether our government is too big or too small, but whether it works – whether it helps families find jobs at a decent wage, care they can afford, a retirement that is dignified. Where the answer is yes, we intend to move forward. Where the answer is no, programs will end. And those of us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account – to spend wisely, reform bad habits, and do our business in the light of day – because only then can we restore the vital trust between a people and their government.


What cynics is he talking about? If he’s talking about those who are cynical of him and his ideas, I have to ask him what he expects? I’m very cynical of him and his proposals because I don’t think that there is an ounce of truth to them. I see what he’s said and see it’s empty. It’s not about stale political arguments. The ground has not “shifted” beneath anyone. The problems we face today are the same problems we’ve always faced. What’s “shifted” is how we’ve dealt with them. Before, men and women used common sense to make decisions based on the Biblical principles our nation was built on. They took responsibility for their actions and made amends for their mistakes. Today, that doesn’t happen. There is no shame. No matter what is done, no one is ashamed. People buy houses they can’t afford, blame others for their mistakes, and kill their unborn children. The president says that it’s not about whether government is “too big or too small”, but I disagree. If the government is too big, then it’s no longer “by the People”, which would mean that we’re not staying “true to our founding documents”. What the president seems to gloss over is the fact that government isn’t working. It’s not providing jobs, it’s allowing companies to go elsewhere. The wages of many are below average because of the government. The government has tried and failed numerous times to “fix” things or “bail out” companies and it’s not worked. It’s manipulated situations (like real estate) and caused many of the crises we now face. But, like I’ve said already, even if the government could create “millions of jobs” at “decent wages”, or affordable health care, or “dignified retirement” (what exactly does that mean?), it’s not going to fix America.


The president continues to push programs, but they won’t work. They haven’t yet. He then says that those of “us who manage the public’s dollars will be held to account”. Does this include the government? Will we finally get to see the government held accountable? He says that they will be held accountable to spend wisely. Really? Accountable to whom? Is this the end of pork barrel spending? Is it the end of automatic raises for members of congress? Does the government even know what it means to spend wisely? While this may sound good to some, it seems to me that, like a number of other things the president has said, he’s blowing smoke. He says they’re going to “reform bad habits” too. I think he’s lying. Look at his plans. He’s going to bail out companies who’ve shown they cannot handle money. Does that sound like a good habit? Does it sound like spending wisely? I don’t think so. Without a Biblical understanding, the country’s money problems will continue to grow. But they will pale in comparison to the other problems that we’ll face if we continue to rebel against God. If the president wants to reform things, then he’ll need to put prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments back into prominence. It will take a few generations of school kids to start showing, but it will work. The president also talks about “doing business in the light of day” and transparency. Does that mean that his life and the lives of those in Congress will be an open book? Does it mean that there will be no more secret meetings to try and pass legislation under the public’s radar? Obama wants to restore trust between the People and their government but it doesn’t make a difference what he says. Our nation is comprised of 85% Christians (I personally don’t think it’s that high) and yet the president is taking actions that go directly against what the majority of the nation professes to believe. How exactly does that earn our trust?


Nor is the question before us whether the market is a force for good or ill. Its power to generate wealth and expand freedom is unmatched, but this crisis has reminded us that without a watchful eye, the market can spin out of control – and that a nation cannot prosper long when it favors only the prosperous. The success of our economy has always depended not just on the size of our Gross Domestic Product, but on the reach of our prosperity; on our ability to extend opportunity to every willing heart – not out of charity, but because it is the surest route to our common good.


Again, we see that America’s “god” is money. The news has been dominated by the economy. I’m not sure I understand why the president is speaking about the market. Have a large number of people been arguing about it? How does the market “expand freedom”? I can’t help but wonder whose watchful eye the president is talking about? His? The person he put in charge (who had difficulties handling his own money)? Mr. Obama clearly doesn’t understand prosperity. The only way a nation can truly prosper is if it fears, reveres, and “favors” God. Scripture is filled with evidence of this. When Israel obeyed God, they prospered (just like He promised!). They were a righteous nation and God blessed them. When they disobeyed God, they suffered in many ways. You can see the same thing in America’s history. Our country was founded in 1776. For 187 years, our nation feared and revered God. The men and women who lead the nation obeyed Him and ordered their lives after His Word. God was first. He was obeyed and our nation was protected and prosperous. In 1963, God, prayer, the Bible, and the Ten Commandments were removed from our schools and many public places. In 36 years, our nation has fallen horribly from where it used to be. We lift up homosexuality as at least equal, if not better than, heterosexuality even though it’s an abomination to God and a sin. We promote the murder of unborn children by their moms as an issue of choice and rights, even though the rights of the child are completely ignored. We pay billions of dollars to produce and watch movies that are full of immorality, blasphemy, and rebellion against God. We continue to flounder and fall behind. The success of our economy has depended solely on our obedience to God, but that shouldn’t be our focus. Our focus should be on the fact that we’ve rebelled against God and that should grieve us. Unless we repent and return to God, we will continue to fall. The surest route to “our common good” is found in Scripture. Any other route is a detour and a lie.


As for our common defense, we reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals. Our Founding Fathers, faced with perils we can scarcely imagine, drafted a charter to assure the rule of law and the rights of man, a charter expanded by the blood of generations. Those ideals still light the world, and we will not give them up for expedience’s sake. And so to all other peoples and governments who are watching today, from the grandest capitals to the small village where my father was born: know that America is a friend of each nation and every man, woman, and child who seeks a future of peace and dignity, and that we are ready to lead once more.


I wonder who said that we have to choose between safety and ideals? In all honesty, our safety will be determined by our ideals. Our founding fathers were faced with perils we can’t imagine (yet), but there are two major differences between them and us. First, the majority of the problems they faced were due to a government that had too much hand in their personal lives. The problems they faced were not of their own making. Today, our problems are totally our own making. Second, the founding fathers trusted in God. They believed in Him and obeyed Him. They understood sacrifice because they understood the cross. They actually knew what agape meant. They “drafted a charter” to assure the rule of God’s law and the rights of man (even the unborn ones). Only the blood of those who understood what they did and believed the same way has expanded this charter. I disagree that the ideals the founding fathers still light the world. To be honest, I believe that they are dimming even in this nation. The ideals that the founding fathers held to were Christian ones. The majority of the world hates God and those who truly follow Him (although they seem to like the squishy compromisers). Even in America, where 85% are supposedly Christian, those ideals are hard to recognize in the “believers”. To make a blanket statement about peace and dignity seems a little proud and presumptuous (at least he’s consistent). America is not, and shouldn’t be, the friend of all those who seek peace for a very good reason. All who seek peace do not do so the same way. Muslims seek peace through the submission of all to the will of Allah. Are we ok with that? I fear that the majority might be, as long as it’s not Christianity… Others seek peace through the death of Christians. Are we friends to them? I wonder how many would still profess Christ if it came down to their lives? Also, the idea that we “are ready to lead once more” is ridiculous. Our nation can’t even handle the majority of the issues in our own borders, how can we lead other nations, especially when many of those nations already have a low view of America?


Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.


The president talks about how others faced down communism while he tries to bring it into our borders! The things that our nations “faced down” were done because of the enduring convictions based on Christianity. Our “power” is nothing. It is more of a hindrance than a benefit. I say this because we look to our power as a nation as some sort of indication of how great we are. It supposedly represents how “great” we are. We have ignored the fact that it is God and He alone that gives us strength and protects us. Our power alone is worth nothing. It is God’s power that protects us. And if we continue to rebel against God, that power that once protected us will be brought to bear against us. Our power doesn’t grow because of anything that we do. God grows our power as we continue to humble ourselves before Him and to order our lives and our nation according to His Word. Also, our security comes from God. Our justness of cause is relative unless it’s based on Scripture. If it’s not, then justice will change depending on the whim of those in charge. For instance, it will soon be ok to kill your child because it’s an inconvenience, unless of course it’s already born (well, unless it’s just partially born). It will soon be ok to live a homosexual lifestyle. Many would see this as justice. It’s not, but that’s how many will see this.


I wonder what kind of force the president is talking about? And what example? The example of rebellion against God? How forceful can our example be when it diametrically opposes the will of God? I find it ironic that the president talks about humility here but has built his campaign on how he is the agent of change and will bring about the change that America needs. Is that humility? Is walking in humility telling someone that disagrees with you that you won and that will “trump him or her any day”? And who will restrain the president? “the People”? Will they be given the opportunity?


We are the keepers of this legacy. Guided by these principles once more, we can meet those new threats that demand even greater effort – even greater cooperation and understanding between nations. We will begin to responsibly leave Iraq to its people, and forge a hard-earned peace in Afghanistan. With old friends and former foes, we will work tirelessly to lessen the nuclear threat, and roll back the specter of a warming planet. We will not apologize for our way of life, nor will we waver in its defense, and for those who seek to advance their aims by inducing terror and slaughtering innocents, we say to you now that our spirit is stronger and cannot be broken; you cannot outlast us, and we will defeat you.


All you have to do is look at our recent history to see that we’ve failed to keep the legacy of those who have come before. We have not been guided by the principles of our forefathers because we’ve ignored them! He talks about greater cooperation and understanding between nations, but many of these nations want to see America destroyed. He talks about old friends and former foes, but what indication do we have that this will be the case? Many of our “old friends” have abandoned us in Iraq and many of our “former foes” still don’t hold us in high regard. Again, the president talks about the nuclear threat and global warming (which is still unproven and unlikely). But he has nothing to show that he’s able to handle these conflicts.


What really amazes me is what the president said next. He talks about how we won’t apologize for the way we live (even though it is a stench in God’s nostrils) nor waver in it’s defense. But how will we defend ourselves against God? What will we do when He has finally had enough? Where will the president and the government be when this happens? What kind of measures with they take against the God of the universe? Then, the president has the unmitigated gall to say that those who advance their aims by the slaughtering of innocents will be defeated. I think that the president is right, but I don’t think that he realizes that he’s talking about America… He says that our spirit is stronger, but is it really? We can’t even fight an ongoing war without a majority of people whining about it. We don’t have the spirit, the stomach, or the guts to follow through with what needs to be done and other countries know this. How we will defeat those who are doing the same thing we’re doing (on a lesser scale than we are) is beyond me. Many talk about our war losses. We’ve lost about 4,000 people in 5+ years in Iraq. We kill that many babies in a single day in America. If we’re talking about “innocents”, there can be no one more innocent…


For we know that our patchwork heritage is a strength, not a weakness. We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus – and non-believers. We are shaped by every language and culture, drawn from every end of this Earth; and because we have tasted the bitter swill of civil war and segregation, and emerged from that dark chapter stronger and more united, we cannot help but believe that the old hatreds shall someday pass; that the lines of tribe shall soon dissolve; that as the world grows smaller, our common humanity shall reveal itself; and that America must play its role in ushering in a new era of peace.


We may have a “patchwork heritage” but until recently, we’ve not had a patchwork foundation. We were once built solely on Christian principles. Now, we’re trying to “remake” our foundation to include conflicting ideas. While we may be a nation of numerous religious and ethnic heritages, we are (by the founders view) a Christian nation. If we change this, then we are doomed. We may see things (inventions, etc.) from people of other religions, but we have been shaped by Christ and Christian doctrine. It is because we were founded on Christianity that other religions have been able to practice their belief system (or lack thereof) freely. No other belief allows this. During the civil war we were led by a president who fully stood firmly on Christian principles. We were still a country that feared God. We are that no longer. During the times of segregation, we still had leaders that feared God and followed Him. We have that no longer. What the president fails to understand is that “old hatreds” have never ceased and, according to Scripture, they won’t. He doesn’t seem to understand that the Bible has already dissolved the “lines of tribe” (although I’m not quite sure I understand the point that he’s trying to make with this statement) by claiming that we are “one blood” (Acts 17:26). And, if the president were to actually pay attention to himself and others on the planet, he would see that our “common humanity” has also been revealed. Scripture says that there is none that is good and that we are all sinners. This is our common humanity and the result of that “common humanity” is death and hell. America can only play a role in a “new era” of peace if it follows the Prince of Peace. This new era of peace will never be global and will not be easy. It will only be permanent when Christ returns to judge the world in righteousness and destroy the enemies of God. To think that we can somehow bring peace without God is a delusion of the highest order and one that the new president prides himself on. I wonder what role the president thinks that America should play to “usher in a new era of peace”?


To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect.


I am not surprised at this statement at all. I would suspect that even though the president is trying to be all things to all people, he knows that this is a lie. There is nothing common between Islam and Christianity (although this may not be a problem with the America of today). Christians and Muslims don’t have mutual interest or respect for each other and Christian nations should hold the same view for Muslim ones. This will grate on the nerves of many people, but it’s the truth. I’ve already written about why Christianity and Islam are incompatible, but suffice it to say that there is no common ground between people who believe that Jesus is the Son of God and those who deny Him.


To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society’s ills on the West – know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy. To those who cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent, know that you are on the wrong side of history; but that we will extend a hand if you are willing to unclench your fist.


What does he mean when he says that the people will judge their leaders on “what you can build not what you destroy”? Those who sow conflict will not care how their people judge them. To point a finger at those who “cling to power through corruption and deceit and the silencing of dissent” when the leaders of this nation do the very same is hypocrisy. To say that they are on the wrong side of history doesn’t make any sense. Is there a side of history? Which side of history is the right one? The one that agrees with you? How does the president determine this? How is he sure that America isn’t on the “wrong side of history”? History is not the determining factor of wrong and right. History is (supposed to be) just a record of what man has already done. The determining factor of right and wrong is God’s truth. If you do not comply with God’s truth, then you are wrong. If you do, you are right. It’s that simple. Also, where is the line drawn that will decide when we “extend a hand” to those who cling to power? What will it take for us to reach out to them? How are we to recognize when they’ve unclenched their fists and who will decide what will be done with the relinquished power? Not only that, but how much silencing of dissention will be done in respect to our new president? How many will be viewed as racist for disagreeing with him?


To the people of poor nations, we pledge to work alongside you to make your farms flourish and let clean waters flow; to nourish starved bodies and feed hungry minds. And to those nations like ours that enjoy relative plenty, we say we can no longer afford indifference to suffering outside our borders; nor can we consume the world’s resources without regard to effect. For the world has changed, and we must change with it.


Again, I can’t help but wonder why the people of “poor nations” would believe our offers of help when we can’t even help ourselves? Will we teach them to throw money at their problems even when they don’t have it? It’s great that we want to help those who some would consider poor, but unless we do it with the right attitude (the Christian one), it means nothing. What will we be feeding the hungry minds? Will it be the same poor material that our children are taught in public schools? Will we try to remove the scriptural foundation that other “poor” countries may have due to the work of Christian missionaries? I wonder whom the president is talking to when he talks about “indifference to suffering”? Unless I’m mistaken, Christians are still the ones who are doing the most to take care of those who are suffering inside and outside our borders. I adamantly disagree with the idea that we need to change with the world. We need to change when and how God tells us to. The world is not going to change that way. The world is not going to change according to God’s will and if we decide to change “with the world” instead of according to the will of God, we will suffer with the world. We need to stand for absolute truth and that’s something that the world will never accept.


As we consider the road that unfolds before us, we remember with humble gratitude those brave Americans who, at this very hour, patrol far-off deserts and distant mountains. They have something to tell us today, just as the fallen heroes who lie in Arlington whisper through the ages.


The majority of those who lie in Arlington feared God and I believe that the majority of those who protect our nation today also fear God. They tell us that the only real sacrifice was seen on the cross, and those who have given their lives as sacrifices for our nation are just a reflection of that which was shown on the cross.


We honor them not only because they are guardians of our liberty, but because they embody the spirit of service; a willingness to find meaning in something greater than themselves. And yet, at this moment – a moment that will define a generation – it is precisely this spirit that must inhabit us all.


Jesus gave us the example of service when the Son of God knelt down before the sinful men He would eventually die for and washed their feet. This is service. When the One who had all authority disregarded His position and gave Himself for those who hated Him, it wasn’t about finding meaning in “something greater” because there was nothing greater. It was about self-sacrifice. It was about selflessness. Those who founded the nation didn’t have the “spirit of service” they had the Spirit of God. This is the Spirit that must inhabit us if we are to be anything other than more of the world.


For as much as government can do and must do, it is ultimately the faith and determination of the American people upon which this nation relies. It is the kindness to take in a stranger when the levees break, the selflessness of workers who would rather cut their hours than see a friend lose their job, which sees us through our darkest hours. It is the firefighter’s courage to storm a stairway filled with smoke, but also a parent’s willingness to nurture a child, that finally decides our fate.


But whose faith are we talking about? The faith of the Jews? The faith of the Muslims? The “faith” of the atheists? Or is it the faith of the Biblical Christians? We cannot put our faith in the government. We must put our faith in the God of the Bible and in Him alone. It doesn’t matter how determined we are, if we are against God, we are wrong. The kindness that “takes in a stranger when the levees break” (?) and the selflessness that the president is talking about only come from a Christian worldview. Without the Christian worldview, you won’t have these things. Looking at our nation today, these things are fading and it’s because those who hate God are eroding the foundation that our nation was built on. Without restoring that foundation, we won’t have kindness, selflessness or anything else that we take for granted. It is not courage or willingness to nurture that decide our fate. What decides our fate is whether or not we will choose to fear, respect, and obey God. If we will choose to fear, respect, and obey God then He will keep His promise to protect and help us. He will deliver us from the trials and tribulations that we now face. If we choose not to fear, respect, and obey God then He will keep His promise to bring plagues, disease, and judgment to our nation. THAT is what decides our fate.


Our challenges may be new. The instruments with which we meet them may be new. But those values upon which our success depends – hard work and honesty, courage and fair play, tolerance and curiosity, loyalty and patriotism – these things are old. These things are true. They have been the quiet force of progress throughout our history. What is demanded then is a return to these truths. What is required of us now is a new era of responsibility – a recognition, on the part of every American, that we have duties to ourselves, our nation, and the world, duties that we do not grudgingly accept but rather seize gladly, firm in the knowledge that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit, so defining of our character, than giving our all to a difficult task.


This is the price and the promise of citizenship.


Our challenges are far from new. The “instruments” that we meet them with shouldn’t be either. If we truly want to overcome these challenges, then we will return to Scripture for our answers. I just realized that the president has only talked about meeting the challenges. Anyone can meet the challenges, but so what? The president says that the values of hard work, honesty, courage, fair play (who determines what is fair play?), tolerance (according to whose definition?), curiosity (?), loyalty (to whom?), and patriotism are old. This is somewhat confusing. What he is saying is that he wants a new America based on old Christian values. How exactly does this work? He says they are the truth. But, according to whom? How does he define tolerance? He says that our success depends on these values, but why doesn’t our success depend on the source of those values? He says that we must return to these truths, but how can we without returning to the source of these truths? The president says that a new era of responsibility is required of us. What does that mean? If he’s calling us to take responsibility for our actions then I agree. But how does he define the duties of each American? Where does he draw the line between the person and the government? He says that there is nothing so satisfying to the spirit as giving our all to a difficult task. Is that so? Has the president never shared the gospel with someone? Has he never preached the truth of the gospel to someone else? I say that there is nothing so satisfying as preaching the truth and witnessing to someone who is lost. Again, I have to say, it doesn’t matter how much we “give our all” to a task. If the work that we give our all to is work that goes against God, then we may be satisfied in our sorry human emotion and think that it defines our character (which it does, but not how we think), but we deceive ourselves into thinking that we are what we are not. We delude ourselves into thinking that we are somehow accomplishing the things that are most uplifting and righteous because they feel good, when they are most reprehensible to the Lord that sees it all.


This is the source of our confidence – the knowledge that God calls on us to shape an uncertain destiny.


THIS is the source of our confidence? The source of whose confidence? It isn’t the source of my confidence. He says that the source of his confidence is that God has called him to shape an uncertain destiny. If he were a Biblical Christian, then the source of his confidence would be different. The source of confidence for a Christian is the fact that even though they are a filthy sinner they have been saved by a wonderful God who has every right to send them straight to hell but instead showed mercy to them and died for their sins. God doesn’t “call us to shape an uncertain destiny”. He calls us to repent of our sins before Him humbly. He commands us to tell others the same. God is the only one that shapes “destiny” and for Him it is not uncertain. The source of our confidence could also be the fact that while things are falling down around us (due to our rebellion against God) God is still willing to heal our land and restore us if we are willing to repent of our sins.


This is the meaning of our liberty and our creed – why men and women and children of every race and every faith can join in celebration across this magnificent mall, and why a man whose father less than sixty years ago might not have been served at a local restaurant can now stand before you to take a most sacred oath.


It was only a matter of time before the president played the race card. It’s great that men and women and children of every race and faith can join together in celebration, but it’s not the answer. It’s great that Barack Obama can take a “most sacred oath” when his father might not have been served at a local restaurant. But, what does this have to do with whether or not he will be able to lead the nation? What does this have to do with whether or not God will once again look on this nation with something other than anger and judgment? What does a number of different people that believe a number of different things coming together in celebration have to do with whether or not this nation will repent and turn back to God? Nothing.


So let us mark this day with remembrance, of who we are and how far we have traveled. In the year of America’s birth, in the coldest of months, a small band of patriots huddled by dying campfires on the shores of an icy river. The capital was abandoned. The enemy was advancing. The snow was stained with blood. At a moment when the outcome of our revolution was most in doubt, the father of our nation ordered these words be read to the people:


“Let it be told to the future world…that in the depth of winter, when nothing but hope and virtue could survive…that the city and the country, alarmed at one common danger, came forth to meet [it].”


If we’re going to remember who we are and how far we’ve traveled, then how about we remember it the way it actually happened? He compares himself to George Washington leading the nation back from the brink of destruction. George Washington was a great Christian man who took the Scripture seriously and ordered his life according to it. Washington’s hope was in Jesus Christ. That is why hope could survive. They came forth to meet the danger of the nation under the hand of God. They knew that they would win if God allowed it. The reason they were united is because they believed in the same God and had the same moral values. They held God in high esteem (like they should have) and they desired to “forge” a nation that was solely dependent on Him. I can’t help but ask why the day of Barack Obama’s inauguration should be marked as a day of remembrance? What makes his inauguration a special day of remembrance? I may be a little jaded but it sounds like the new president is saying that he is the standard bearer for leading us back to a new era… The problem is the new president is not a Christian and doesn’t hold to the same values as the founding fathers did. He doesn’t hold God in high esteem. He doesn’t fear God or obey Him. Why does he think that he will somehow change America for the best? Why does he think that God will use him to restore America when his life and values oppose Him? Unless the president repents and leads this nation to a place of repentance, he will be another in a long line of men who have tried to lead this nation under their own strength. He will be a carbon copy of the Bill Clintons and Jimmy Carters. He will be another man who will do nothing of any significance and America will have wasted another four years putting its hope in man instead of in God.



America. In the face of our common dangers, in this winter of our hardship, let us remember these timeless words. With hope and virtue, let us brave once more the icy currents, and endure what storms may come. Let it be said by our children’s children that when we were tested we refused to let this journey end, that we did not turn back nor did we falter; and with eyes fixed on the horizon and God’s grace upon us, we carried forth that great gift of freedom and delivered it safely to future generations.


We have “common dangers” because we are a nation. We have a “winter of hardship” because we are sinful and rebellious toward God. The “timeless words” that we are urged to remember are those spoken by a God fearing man who knew that it was only on his knees in prayer that he could stand and lead our nation. It is an attitude long missing from our leadership and our nation at large. We are a nation of complacent sheep who love to be entertained. We have people who play sports, race cars, or pretend to be something other than what they are in movies that make millions of dollars while our nation’s economy continues to fail. We dole out unheard of amounts of money for “childish things” while the things that our country needs continue to go by the way side. We continue to shake our fist at God because He’s not blessing us, instead of weeping because He’s judging us. We look to weak-willed men who have little backbone and no faith to lead our nation back to where it once was when they don’t even know the way. Our country is filled with “Christians” and non-Christians who walk the broad path to destruction and ignore the few voices who still preach the truth. They block out the echoes of sins past by singing their “worship” and following their unimportant and sorry causes. They save animals while they kill their children. They support abominable lifestyles and can’t figure out why their sins are killing them. Our leaders are not leading. They are selfish, self-centered men and women who couldn’t make change for a dollar much less make change for a nation. They hide behind their sturdy oak doors so that the people they are supposed to care about can’t see their latest greed driven debacle. All the while they forget that their sins are laid out before the eyes of the just Judge.


There is very little that our nation has to be proud of anymore. We are rewriting our history to erase God at the whim of a few dysfunctional, attention-seeking atheists who have nothing better to do than ridicule and attack those they see as unreasonable and unintelligent. Our country is filled with “churches” that preach lies and deceit to their growing congregations. They entertain their attendees and feed them line after line of doctrines of demons to keep them coming back and giving money. They despise the gospel, mock the death of the One they call Lord, and ignore the warning that God has given them. They teach that all roads lead to heaven, even though the Bible says otherwise. We have little to be proud of, but we have a lot to be ashamed of.


It might seem that I don’t like America very much because of the things that I’ve said. On the contrary, it’s because I love my country that I’ve said the things that I have. Unless we start talking honestly, we will never begin to move in the right direction. I’m not proud of where my nation is today. This becomes even more profound when I look at where are nation started from. I still believe that we can see our nation change through repentance, but Barack Obama is not the one to do it. The only One that can help our nation now is God.  The president tells us to keep our eyes “fixed on the horizon”. The Bible says that we should keep our eyes fixed on Jesus, the author and finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2). The president tells us that God’s grace is on us, but the Bible says that God resists the proud and gives grace to the humble (James 4:6).


I will pray for the president. I will do it not because I like him, or because I agree with anything he says, but because God tells me to. I pray that our nation would stop its decent into sin and darkness. I pray that we would start to offer ourselves as living sacrifices to God and lift up the chains of our bondage to the Lord that He might, in His great and gracious mercy break those chains. I would rather have our children say that this generation was the one that turned fully and whole-heartedly back to the Lord. It is not about us and until America realizes that and understands that it only through God and Him alone that we will ever see our country truly change, we are only fooling ourselves. Jesus is our only hope…

A New You?

January 26, 2009 at 6:30 am | Posted in Christianity | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s a new year again and that means two things:


A large number of people will resolve to lose weight


A large number of people will break the 9th commandment by the end of February.


This is the time of year when advertisers focus on looks, weight loss, and self esteem. They try to convince people that they need to use their products, weight machines, and other materials to lose weight, feel better, and get ready for the spring/summer season. We are made to feel bad about how we look when we don’t measure up to the ideal presented to us by Hollywood and the media.


Looks are a major concern for a growing number of people. Many are being conditioned from a young age to think that they have to look a certain way to be “acceptable”. They have become a major factor in a number of decisions from jobs to material things to presidential elections. Shows like “American Idol” promote this, especially when those who have more talent are passed up for others who may have a “better” look.


Obesity is becoming a growing problem (pun intended) in our nation. More and more children and adults are less active and not eating healthy. We are so “busy” that we don’t take the time to do the things that we need to do. Obesity has been linked to a number of health conditions and problems, and even though we know this, we continue to eat our way into an early grave.


Self-esteem is the most crippling of all. Our society has been told that it’s all about how you feel. If the lifestyle you live feels good to you, then that’s all that matters. If someone says something or does something and you don’t “feel” that you need to do or say it, then you don’t. As human beings, we love to feel good about ourselves and think that we are doing good. We love to see ourselves as good people who are trying to live our best life and impacting those around us for the better.


All of this really amazes me. We will raise our self-esteem by deceiving ourselves and telling ourselves that we’re doing really good. We will look at the junk coming from Hollywood and try to measure up to it in order to feel better. And when we don’t measure up to the standard that they set for us, we feel horrible and strive to change. Why will we do this for Hollywood, which is basically man at his worst, and not for God? I’m talking to Christians too! Why will we let ourselves watch and listen to things that God would be angry at, spend our time and money to get the right shape, and boost our self-esteem by ignoring what’s wrong with us? What about God? Why won’t we do this for Him?


God has a standard as well. But when we don’t measure up to it, we don’t feel bad we just blow it off. We don’t feel burdened because our lives have been in direct opposition to God or that it is our sin that nailed Jesus to the cross. We just go on about our daily lives and continue to chase the Hollywood ideal. There is a major problem with this attitude that will affect our lives in ways that we can’t even fathom. See, if we don’t measure up to the Hollywood ideal, then we may not be the most attractive person in the world. But, that is something that many of us could live with if we looked at things from outside the vanity. If we don’t measure up to God’s standard, we are in much deeper and lasting trouble. God is the judge of the universe and if we fail to meet His standard, we will spend eternity in hell. Amazingly, this doesn’t seem to bother many people. They are more concerned about the fact that their butt looks too big (or not big enough), their lips aren’t full enough, or their paycheck isn’t big enough.


This is because we have failed as a church to tell people the truth. Today, there are churches and “Christians” (Brian McLaren, Rob Bell, Tony Jones) who say that everyone will get to heaven whether or not they believe in Christ and repent of their sins. We have told them the things that they wanted to hear so that they fill our churches and give us money. Meanwhile, we are insulating them to the fires of hell and helping them get there more comfortably. If we told people the truth, they would understand that they don’t measure up to God’s standard and that without payment for their sins, they will go to hell. If we were to do this, we would help people separate the truth from the lie.


So, I’ve come up with a proposal for a lasting “new you”. I am not a doctor or physician, so take this advice knowing this. If you want to change your looks, start by abstaining from the appearance of evil (1 Thess. 5:22). Then, start living out the fruit of the Spirit (love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, and temperance – Gal. 5:22-3). While doing this, be an imitator of God like a little child (Eph. 5:1-13) and walk worthy of your calling (Eph. 4:1-3). Finally, let your light shine before all men instead of hiding it under a basket (Matt. 5:16). If you would like to lose weight, remove the encumbrance of your sin (Heb. 12:1-2), remove the yoke from your midst (Is. 58:6-11), and don’t let sin reign in your mortal body (Romans 6:12-14). Finally, if you want to work on your self-esteem then start with the fact that we are all sinners (Romans 3:23) and that there is no one who is good (Romans 3:10/Ps. 14:1-3). You may be wondering how this will help your self-esteem. Well, it won’t. If you understand the Bible, you know that you shouldn’t be esteeming yourself. You should be giving all the glory to God. If you ignore that you’re evil, it won’t help you. But, if you understand it and realize that you’re a sinner, it will help you immensely in a few ways. First, if you’ve been trying to work your way to heaven, you will realize that you cannot do it and it will remove a heavy burden from your life. It will also help you to recognize your position in relation to God. It will help you recognize the judgment you deserve based on that position, and it will help you to receive the gift of salvation, a clean conscience, and a new position. All things will become new (2 Cor. 5:17), you will no longer be destined for hell, you will be one of God’s children and He will love you, you will be given great and precious promises, and you can tell others about Christ and help them become new too.


If you do this, you will have a lasting new you. You may not be the best looking. You may still have health problems. You will not have any self-esteem, but instead will trust God with your life. You will be able to weather every storm because you will know where your salvation comes from and no matter what you go through, you will be able to hold onto the truth that you will find yourself in heaven because your are a horrible sinner whose been forgiven by a gloriously wonderful God. That is truly a new you…

Design of the Week – Crossover – Varigated Fritillary

January 21, 2009 at 6:30 am | Posted in Designs of the Week | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

This month’s crossover design comes from Spencer photos. The photo that I have chosen is the Variegated Fritillary. While I had a hard time choosing which photo to blog about (I really like the shark and tiger ones too…), I chose this photo for a number or reasons. I don’t know a whole lot about photography, but I do know a little. This photo has a lot of great characteristics.


The subject of the photo is the focus without overwhelming the shot. It is a beautiful butterfly that has great colors and interesting features. The image also has a great depth with the background blurring to bring more focus on the main subject. I love the colors as well. The bright, vibrant pinks and yellows of the zinnias are a great contrast to the earthy tones of the subject. They also bring the picture together by tying in the background and the foreground.


This photo is just one of many images that Spencer photos has to choose from and all of them are just as well done as the Variegated Fritillary. If you are looking for quality photos on a variety of products, I would definitely suggest picking up a few things from Spencer photos!



The Dream

January 20, 2009 at 4:48 pm | Posted in Christianity | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

On August 28th, 1963, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. gave a speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, D.C. This speech brought to the attention of the world the struggles and trials of our nation as some Americans were not treated like others were. As he stood in the shadow of Abraham Lincoln’s statue, Dr. King expressed the plight of African-Americans in our nation. Parts of his speech are known by millions, but it seems that many leaders and others today have forgotten what Dr. King really said. Today, many people use Dr. King and his message to support their agendas and causes without any care for the fact that Dr. King would never support their cause. To be honest, I can’t say that it surprises me…


In the 50’s and 60’s Dr. King, who was a Baptist minister (with a backbone and a Biblical understanding), spent much of his time striving to bring equality to the forefront of the nation’s mind. He didn’t cause riots or aggressively attack people. Instead, Dr. King and those who stood with him did things peacefully. They marched and prayed. They fasted and spoke up. They spent time in jail. They didn’t attack those who disagreed with them. By the time Dr. King stood on the steps of the nation, people around the globe were listening. Dr. King spoke clearly and concisely about where his heart was. It was in the Bible. Dr. King knew that God was in control and that He ultimately holds everything in His hands. He was aware of what he could do. If Dr. King wanted, he could have roused thousands of people into riots. He didn’t. He made his voice heard and spoke to the conscience of America. He called on those he fought for to act in dignity and discipline. He challenged them to step up and take the high road. He continued to encourage them to believe that things would be different and that they should go home knowing this. Dr. King continued to call on our leaders to change the country and they did.


Dr. King’s dream was that one day, blacks and whites would walk hand in hand and that there wouldn’t be any segregation. His dream was that everyone would be judged by the content of their character and not by the color of their skin. He said that if America were to become a great nation, segregation would have to end. Blacks and whites would have to be equal to each other. They would have to be equal in the eyes of the law and in the eyes of each other. Both blacks and whites would have to realize that they are one blood just like the Bible says (Acts 17:26).


Today, homosexuals are using Dr. King as a supporter for their agenda. They compare the “struggles” they’re going through to those faced by blacks in the 50’s and 60’s. They claim that they are being discriminated against and their rights are being trampled on. This is a ludicrous idea even at its foundation. Homosexuals are not going through the same trials and tribulations that blacks faced back then. No one can choose his or her skin color. Homosexuality is a choice. God created people to have the genetics for a variety of skin colors. He didn’t make anyone homosexual. He made Adam and Eve, man and woman. God wouldn’t make anyone in direct opposition to His character. He made man and woman heterosexual. They were the only two people and there was no other way for them to reproduce. Homosexuals are not having dogs sicced on them or being segregated from heterosexuals. They claim that their rights are being denied, but that’s not true. They have the same rights as heterosexuals. They can get jobs just like heterosexuals, go to schools just like heterosexuals, eat at the same places that heterosexuals do, and can even get married if they choose to do it according to its definition. If they don’t do any of these things, it’s not because they can’t but because they choose not to. But, because they can’t do exactly what they want, when they want, and how they want, they whine and attack those who don’t support them. They have beaten up Christians who believe that they are living in sin. They basically have nothing in common with Dr. King or his dream. To use a Baptist minister and his vision of racial equality to try and show support for their own cause is extremely shady.


Today our nation will inaugurate a new president. This new president (who may or may not be black or American) has taken great pains to try and connect himself to Dr. King and other powerful leaders who have impacted our nation (e.g., Abraham Lincoln). He talks about how he and “his people” have fought greatly to come to where they are. He has stood on a platform of change, desiring to change the nation for the better. This same man who professes to have the power to change the nation promotes things that Dr. King would never stand for. He openly supports abortion and is poised to sign the Freedom of Choice Act as one of his first acts as president. This Act will allow women to have the free choice to kill their unborn child for any reason. This is in direct opposition to Dr. King’s dream. When Dr. King spoke of his dream, he often mentioned children. His concern for equality wasn’t just for himself and those who stood with him (black and white) but for the children that followed after him (black and white). Barack Obama also openly supports homosexuality. Dr. King was a Baptist minister who knew the scripture and stood on it and under it. He knew that the Bible said that homosexuality was condemned in both the Old and New Testaments as an abomination, an unnatural act, and means of going to hell. Barack Obama’s idea of change is nothing close to what Dr. King would have supported. But there are a number of “black leaders” who push this, if they don’t push him as some sort of Messiah. I find it an offense that he would imply anything of the sort. Barack Obama is taking the whole burden of change upon himself like he’s the only one who can make this change. Dr. King knew that he couldn’t do it alone. He knew that it would take all of us to make the changes and make them lasting. For Dr. King, it wasn’t about being an icon, but being willing to stand up for what is right and show others. There’s a huge difference between Dr. King and Obama…


On Martin Luther King Day, we celebrate a man who made an amazing effort to bring our nation together. He strove to help others see truth according to scriptures. He made his life an example of faith in action. He acted according to what he preached. He gave all of us (of any color) another example of a godly man who feared Him and strove to pattern his life according to what he read in scripture. Today, if you’re going to do any celebrating of the life of Dr. Martin Luther King, please celebrate the man for what he was, what he did, and the dream that he held. Please don’t try to make him out to be something or someone he’s not…

The Bubble Syndrome

January 14, 2009 at 4:23 pm | Posted in Christianity | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The more I see on the news and hear on the radio, the more concerned I get.


Most people have heard the stories of the people who are forced to live their lives in bubbles because of serious medical conditions. These bubbles protect them and help them to enjoy, as much of what life has to offer as they safely can. But, they haven’t put themselves in the bubble.


America has put itself in a bubble. The American people have put themselves in a bubble and it is starting to show. We have elected a president who lacks experience in a number of places that we need someone in his position to know about. We are so self-centered that we care more about what Brad and Angelina are doing than we care about what those who like to destroy our country are doing. We can no longer differentiate between enemies and friends. We turn our backs on those who have supported and stood by us, even making plans to divide their country. At the same time, we pander to nations who have made it clear that they wish to destroy this nation, even allowing their megalomaniacal leaders to speak at our universities like they were someone we could learn from. We have forgotten our past numerous times over and are on the verge of repeating it. We have turned our backs on the Christian heritage that founded this country and made it a haven for Christians to worship the way they should. Instead, we’re allowing the true history to be erased or revised to remove God and Christian values when we need them the most. We have allowed our courts to write the law instead of upholding it. We have called evil good and good evil, condoning murder and sexually immoral acts as “normal” and “natural”. We bail out multimillion-dollar corporations (I thought that this was a capitalistic nation?) with taxpayer money so that their CEOs can get another 2 million dollar bonus and the people that work for them can struggle to make ends meet. We have deluded ourselves into thinking that our nation is invulnerable and that everyone loves us. We hang on every word of scientists, lawmakers, and politicians who stand on thin ice promoting ideas and theories that are valueless. We laud comics for speaking out against all that is good, give awards to actors, singers, and other “entertainers” who blaspheme the name of God and live lifestyles that would make those in Sodom and Gomorrah look like saints. We push anti-God agendas that teach our school-age kids everything but morality, and yet, we wonder why our nation is suffering like it is right now…


As sickening as this is, it’s not the worst part. While America has put itself in a bubble, the church has done so as well. It has surrounded itself with a false idea of what the church is, what is expected of it, and what it needs to be doing. It spends more time entertaining those that attend and cheerleading for the people to be happy and feel good about themselves than telling them the truth about their lives and sin. The church in America has encased itself in a bubble and has no idea what really goes on outside the nation. By drawing ourselves into a bubble, we have lost contact with sinners. We have forgotten that we are the ones that should be shouting from the rooftops that Jesus is coming back. We are to be the watchmen on the walls telling others of the impending dangers. Instead we sit inside our little fortress of religion and false doctrine, warming our hands by the hearth of false godliness, singing our uplifting songs of “worship”, and working as hard as we can to stay oblivious to the plight of those who are outside going to hell. Our weapons sit off in the corner rusty and dull from lack of use. Our armor stands in the hall dusty and covered with cobwebs while we tell stories about the “good ole days” back when real Christians preached fire and brimstone sermons that brought the fear of God and caused people to tremble with the thought of eternal punishment. The scriptures are almost unrecognizable, having been cut up and pieced together with scotch tape to say things that we’re comfortable with. We have even gone to the point of compromising what little truth we’ve decided to hang on to in order to try and get people to join our congregations so that we can rejoice over new “decisions”. Then, when the new (false) converts decide to go back to their former lives (because the world is a lot more fun), we call them backsliders. What we don’t seem to realize is that part of the reason that they are back in the world is because we haven’t told them the truth to begin with! We’ve deluded ourselves into thinking that our bubble is necessary because we are to be separate from the world. We seem to think that God wants us to be in the bubble, even though scripture says He doesn’t. We have deceived ourselves into thinking that what takes place on Sundays and Wednesdays is exactly what God wants, when it does very little to teach those who believe what they’re supposed to be doing and those who don’t believe what their fate is without having their sins paid for.


What are we doing? Why have we put ourselves into a bubble? It’s made us unable to see ourselves for what we are. It’s made us unable to reach out and actually connect with the unsaved to see God change their lives. It’s time for us to pop the bubble that we’ve put ourselves in. It’s time that we stopped mocking the God we profess to follow and cast off the trappings of the worldly church. It’s time that we got to work and started preaching the truth in our nation. It’s time we started actually caring for the lost enough to tell them they will go to hell whether they end up liking us or not. It’s time we actually got a backbone and started telling people they’re wrong. It’s time that we started using scripture to defend what we believe. It’s time that we actually learned how to defend what we believe according to the scriptures. It’s time that we popped the bubble around America and showed the nation the depth of its sins. It is time that the church started restoring the foundation of our nation. It’s time that we stood up and stopped allowing our rights to be taken away. It’s time that we started speaking boldly against sin and stopped cringing in fear.


It’s time church…

Design of the Week 01/07/09 – Boldness

January 7, 2009 at 4:06 pm | Posted in Designs of the Week | 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

This week’s design is called Boldness. It is a characteristic that all Christians need to have. It is a characteristic that all Christians should have. Boldness is what will make us preach the truth to those around us in spite of our fears. It is what helps us to overcome the fear of rejection. It helps us to stand strong against false doctrines. It is boldness that gives us the ability to do things that we may not think possible.


It is boldness that helps us convert our passion for the lost into action. It is boldness that allows us to tell the most rabid atheist about sin, hell, and salvation. But, what brings boldness? Proverbs 28:1 says, “The wicked flees when no man pursues, but the righteous are as bold as a lion”. Righteousness provides boldness. But it goes deeper. Ultimately, our boldness comes from the hope that we have in Jesus Christ. That hope comes from the knowledge that He died for our sins and, because we’ve repented of those sins, we have everlasting life. It is this hope that should push us on to reach out to everyone around us because we know if they die without their sins paid for they will go to hell.


If you haven’t repented, please compare your life to the Ten Commandments. They are the standard by which God will judge all of us. If you break God’s law, you are guilty and will find yourself sent to hell if you don’t have your sins paid for. If you will repent of your sins (turn from your sins and stop doing them) and put your trust in Christ, He will save you from your sins and from hell.


If you have repented and you don’t feel that you have the boldness you desire, look to Christ. He will give you the strength and the hope. Remember what He’s done for you and then think about what will happen to those who die without Him. That should move you to run out in the streets and plead with everyone you meet. Don’t be afraid of what man might do or say. Instead, fear what God will do if you don’t…

Response to Newsweek

January 5, 2009 at 5:15 pm | Posted in Christianity | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Recently, Newsweek magazine published a cover article promoting and defending same-sex marriage. The article’s author, Lisa Miller, gives her view of what Scripture says about marriage. Her condescending attitude of Scripture and her lack of knowledge of what the Bible says is telling. To shore up her weak argument for same-sex marriage, she quotes people that are so-called Bible scholars. Unfortunately, these “scholars” seem to share her weak, anti-God hermeneutic. What follows is my response to her article, which basically comprises the same tired arguments that have always been given.


With her first sentence, the author shows her contempt for the Bible and for those who choose to take it as the authority over anything else. She says that she wants to “take the religious conservatives at their word and define marriage as the Bible does” and then, instead of giving that definition, mistakenly asks which “bible hero” we should look to for that definition. To find the definition of marriage, instead of looking at the men who did or didn’t follow that definition, we should look to the One who instituted marriage from the beginning. When God made humans, He first made man. After He made man and put him in the garden, He gave him the task of naming all of the animals. As Adam named the animals, he began to notice how different he was. God then caused Adam to sleep and removed a rib from his side. God fashioned the rib into a female helper for Adam. When Adam saw her, he called her woman. At the end of Genesis 2, the institution of marriage is started. It is between Adam and Eve. From the beginning, God could have created two men or women to use to institute marriage, but He didn’t. He made a man and a woman. Despite the fact that a man and a woman are needed to reproduce, the main reason that a marriage is defined as one man and one woman is because THAT’S THE WAY THAT GOD DEFINED IT! Over and over in today’s society, people seem to think that they can redefine things because they feel that they should be changed. They believe that they can redefine things when they have no authority to do so! God defined marriage in the beginning and never changed His definition. The next argument is that we can look at the fact that Abraham, Jacob, David, Solomon, and others had more than one wife. Miller then tries to confuse the issue by asking her readers whom we should look to for the correct Biblical definition of marriage. This seems ridiculous. It also shows Ms. Miller’s complete lack of understanding concerning Scripture. First, Hagar was not Abraham’s wife. She was the maid of Abraham’s wife. The birth of Ishmael was due to Sarah and Abraham taking the birth of a son into their own hands instead of trusting in God’s promise. Marriage was defined by God and regardless of whether David, Solomon, or the others stood by that definition or not, it didn’t change the definition of marriage.


Second, Miller neglects the history of man from Adam to Jacob. In the long list of ancestors in Genesis 5, we are given no indication that any of these men had more than one wife. In Genesis 6, we see Noah and his sons, all who have one wife. We also don’t see any indication that any of those listed in the genealogies in Numbers or Chronicles/Kings as having more than one wife. But, as I said above, regardless of whether or not any of these men had one wife or more than one, it still doesn’t change the definition of marriage that God made.


The funny thing is that Miller seems to ignore the Old Testament instances where God specifically condemns the practice of homosexuality. He calls homosexuality an abomination (Leviticus 18:22). She also seems to forget that God punished the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah because of the sin of homosexuality, which He called exceedingly grave. When Abraham is told about God’s plans to punish the cities for their sin, Abraham asks God if He will punish the righteous with the wicked. Because God defined homosexuality as an abomination and exceedingly grave sin, that’s what it is, regardless of what anyone else wants it to be. Why do Ms. Miller and those who try to use the Bible to promote gay marriage think that God will bless something that He has already defined as an exceedingly grave sin and an abomination? She also claims that all of the kings of Israel and Judah had more than one wife, even though there is no indication of this. Where it even lists their family members, there aren’t any that have more than one wife.


She then tries to take the argument to the New Testament by saying that the example of marriage given in the NT is no better. She goes right for the Lord and says that He was single and preached an indifference to earthly attachments including family. Unfortunately, she neglects to give any Scriptural references for this argument (or any others for that matter). This, again, shows ignorance of the Lord and the Scriptures. Jesus did say that we should love God more than we love our family. When He said that those who follow Him should hate their father and mother (Luke 14:26), He was using hyperbole to compare the love that we should have for Him to the love that we have for our parents. We are given no indication that anything other than the God-given definition of marriage was the norm during the time of the New Testament writings. To say that Jesus was single somehow implies that He advocated that being married is unholy or not right is to add something to Scripture. What bearing does Jesus’ singleness have on the definition of marriage, especially when Jesus confirmed Genesis 2 as what marriage is (Matt. 19:5/Mar. 10:7)? For some reason, Miller tries to say that because Jesus was single, heterosexual marriage isn’t the only form of marriage or the only one that God condones. That makes absolutely no sense.


It’s the same with Paul. Miller says that Paul, who was single, only looked at marriage as a last resort to contain animal lust. Of course, once again, Miller gives no references to this so that her readers might actually read what Paul said in context and gain a correct understanding. And, once again, Miller neglects what Paul said about homosexuality. In Romans 1, Paul calls homosexuality a “degrading passion” (v.26), an “unnatural function” (v.27), and an “indecent act” (v.27). Paul also talks about homosexuality in 1 Corinthians 6 (the chapter before the one she quoted). He says that those who practice homosexuality will not inherit the kingdom of God (v. 9). At the end of this chapter, Paul warns the Corinthians to flee immorality and glorify God with their bodies. Chapter 7 is a continuation of this idea, with Paul talking about how it is better for the gospel if people can be single and focus on doing the work of the gospel. But, Paul says that it is better that someone gets married than to burn with immoral passion and fornicate. Verse 9 of 1 Corinthians 7 is what Miller calls “the most lukewarm endorsement of a treasured institution”. Even when she does quote Scripture, she misquotes it. Paul says that if someone cannot remain unmarried:


But if they do not have self-control, let them marry; for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.


What’s interesting is that Miller forgot to mention the fact that when Paul talked about marriage, he said that each husband should have his own wife and that they should fulfill their duties to each other. Miller also seems to miss what a heterosexual marriage reflects. In Ephesians 5, Paul gives commands to a husband and wife:


Eph 5:25  Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her,

Eph 5:26  so that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word,

Eph 5:27  that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless.

Eph 5:28  So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself;

Eph 5:29  for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also does the church,

Eph 5:30  because we are members of His body.


Eph 5:32  This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church.

Eph 5:33  Nevertheless, each individual among you also is to love his own wife even as himself, and the wife must see to it that she respects her husband.


The institution of marriage is a reflection of Christ and the church. The husband steps into the role of Christ and is to love her with the same self-sacrificing love that Christ has for the church. The wife is to play the role of the church and respect her husband. He then quotes Genesis 2:23-24 as the pattern for marriage. Sadly, the idea of “gay marriage” completely destroys this image.


She also seems to miss the apostle Peter’s instructions to those who are married (emphasis mine):


1Pe 3:1  In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives,

1Pe 3:2  as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.

1Pe 3:3  Your adornment must not be merely external–braiding the hair, and wearing gold jewelry, or putting on dresses;

1Pe 3:4  but let it be the hidden person of the heart, with the imperishable quality of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is precious in the sight of God.

1Pe 3:5  For in this way in former times the holy women also, who hoped in God, used to adorn themselves, being submissive to their own husbands;

1Pe 3:6  just as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord, and you have become her children if you do what is right without being frightened by any fear.

1Pe 3:7  You husbands in the same way, live with your wives in an understanding way, as with someone weaker, since she is a woman; and show her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers will not be hindered.


What’s ironic about all of this is that Miller calls marriage a “treasured institution” and then spends the rest of her time trying to redefine it and tear it down. Not to mention the fact that there is nothing preventing homosexuals from getting married. All they have to do is stop living a sinful lifestyle and then marry someone of the opposite sex. She tries to make her ideas appeal to her readers by implying that those who share them are “contemporary” and that those who hold to the Scriptural definition of marriage are primitive and backward. By doing this, she neglects the thousands upon thousands of heterosexual married couples who DO use the Bible as a how-to script to very satisfying and God-glorifying ends.


Miller also seems confused about what kind of issue this is. She claims that this is a civil issue, while the opponents of it are all religious conservatives. In truth, this issue is a moral issue whose opponents are living in rebellion against God and desire to put themselves in authority over Him. She then falls back on the same old canard of comparing the “plight” of homosexuals desiring to live an unscriptural, immoral lifestyle to the troubles that African-Americans had concerning slavery. The two issues are nothing alike. Skin color is something that the person has no choice about. Sexual orientation is a choice. There have been many homosexuals who have chosen to leave the homosexual lifestyle and live lifestyles that glorify and please God. She claims that the sides of the same-sex marriage argument are unevenly matched because all of the opponents of “gay marriage” are the ones that use Scriptures as the basis for their objections. To be honest, this may be the only point that we agree on. The sides are unevenly matched. All of those who support “gay marriage”, whether practicing homosexual or “Christian”, have decided to pick up a fight against the Lord Himself. Meanwhile, Miller paints the fact that Christians against “gay marriage” use Scripture for the basis of their objections as some sort of tragedy, like having a set of absolute moral values is something to be ashamed of.


Miller says that there are two responses to the Christian view of the issue. The first, she says, is the fact that even though the Bible and Jesus say “many important things about marriage and family”, neither defines marriage as between a man and a woman. This is just a blatant ignoring of Scripture. Genesis 2:23-4 is the institution of marriage between the first man and woman. In the next chapter, when Eve finally decides to eat the fruit, the Bible says (emphasis mine):


Gen 3:6  When the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate; and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate.


Later, when God punishes them for their sin, God says that the woman’s desire would be for her husband. Both Jesus and Paul look to Genesis 2:24 as the beginning of marriage and both confirm that it is between a man and a woman. So for Miller to say that the Bible, Jesus, or Paul don’t see marriage the way that Christians are defining it today is ludicrous.


Her second response to the Biblical Christian view of marriage is that no “sensible, modern person wants marriage – theirs or anyone else’s – to look in its particulars anything like what the Bible describes”. So what this means is that she sees those who hold the Biblical Christian view as primative and lacking sense. She also ignores a couple important and obvious facts. She claims that “modern, sensible” person wants a Biblical marriage. If this is the case, why is “gay marriage” still an issue? If the majority of people hold her view, then why did California amend their constitution to prohibit “gay marriage”? Why did Prop 8 succeed if the majority of “modern, sensible” people hold the same view she does? She then says that marriage in America is a “messy conflation(?)” of a religious institution and a civil one. What she fails to realize is that there is no way to separate the two and that the Christian foundation of marriage is most important. Without it, the institution of marriage loses its purpose and definition. She tries to say that marriage is important because it provides civil benefits to both partners (contractual rights having to do with taxes; insurance; the care and custody of children; visitation rights; and inheritance). What she fails to mention is that the majority of the listed “rights” would not apply to those involved in “gay marriage” anyway. A homosexual couple cannot have children. That means that the marital provisions for the care and custody of children, visitation rights, and inheritance would be meaningless unless one of the “partners” has children from a previous heterosexual marriage (which has a ton of implications of its own…). She then says that marriage as a religious institution is about “a commitment by both people before God to love, honor, and cherish each other – in sickness and in health, for richer or poorer – in accordance with God’s will”. Why try to invoke God’s will when it’s convenient, even though you are trying to rebel against it by trying to change His definition of what marriage is? She then, weakly, says, “the Bible is a living document, powerful for more than 2,000 years because its truths speak to us even as we change through history”. I’m wondering how Ms. Miller would define truth to fit her ideals. If the Bible is true, then homosexuality is an abomination and, therefore, homosexual marriage cannot exist because it goes against the Biblical definition. Which is it? Despite this, Miller says that there is no good Biblical reason that gays and lesbians cannot be “married” and many why they should.


She then returns to her first premise, that Biblical examples of traditional marriage are “scarce”. As I said above, this is just blatant ignorance of what Scripture says. She then puts forth that marriage was “critical” to “pass on tradition and history”. Does she have any proof of this or is this just what she believes marriage is for? She offers no evidence for this other than a so-called “bible scholar” who just so happens to support her view (and openly disagrees with the Bible). She also says that marriage was important to “maintain the Jew’s precious and fragile monotheism”. Precious and fragile? Seriously, Ms. Miller is supposed to be a religion editor for Newsweek. Does she know anything about Biblical Christianity or does she just take what she’s told by those who share her view on the issues? Abraham is the first person to be called a Hebrew (not long after God called him away from his family). He held so closely to the One, True God that he was willing to kill his son in obedience to Him. He passed this strong faith in God to his children as well. To see this, all you have to do is actually study the book of Genesis. Isaac, Jacob, Joseph; they all believed in just one God and all of the people around them knew it and feared them because of it. This is hardly a fragile faith. The millions of Jews in bondage in Egypt cried out to Yahweh for salvation and no one else. Even through the times when many Israelites forsook God and followed after false gods, there were many who held firm to their faith in Yahweh. I don’t see how this affects the definition of marriage though…Marriage was instituted and ordained by God, not to pass down tradition or history, not to maintain a fragile monotheism, but to be the building block for the stability of His chosen people.


One of Ms. Miller’s “Biblical scholars” (Alan Segal) says that marriage was “between a man and as many women as he could pay for”. Unfortunately for the “Biblical scholar”, there is no scriptural support for this as the norm (as already shown above). Miller says that “social” conservatives (I thought that we were religious conservatives?) would point to Genesis 2:24 (which I’ve already done). Her “Biblical scholar” says that “if you believe that the Bible was written by men and not handed down in its leather bindings by God, then that verse was written by people for whom polygamy was the way of the world”. Does the “Biblical scholar” realize that Biblical Christians believe that men wrote the Bible too? The difference is that we believe that they were inspired by God to write what He desired them to. Not only that, but if you don’t believe that God inspired the Bible, then how can you be a Biblical Christian? Or, why would you offer it in defense of your point of view? I wonder if he also realizes that Genesis 2:24 took place while Adam and Eve were still in the garden? This would mean that polygamy couldn’t be a way of life because Adam and Eve were the only two people in existence! If he cannot even comprehend simple things that most elementary Sunday school classes know, why should I trust him on more difficult issues?


Miller brings up the idea of a homosexual couple’s inability to procreate as a biblical objection, and it is. But it’s not the point. Regardless of whether or not they can procreate, or whether the Bible authors could have imagined international adoption and new technology, it doesn’t change God’s definition of marriage. She also tries to defend her position by saying that infertile heterosexual couples cannot procreate, but they can get married. What she fails to see is that they are still heterosexual couples. They still abide by the definition of marriage set forth by God in Scripture. The fact that they, or those beyond the age of reproducing, cannot have children has no bearing on whether or not they abide by how God defined marriage.


Miller then questions the Lord and His view of both family and marriage. Again she tries to somehow imply that because Jesus was unmarried it shows His support for homosexuality and “gay marriage”. She then talks about the “community of believers” and defines them as a radical kind of family whose bond in God superceds all blood ties. What I don’t understand is how she gets confused about what a believer is. A believer, according to the Bible, is someone who not only believes that God exists but that repents of their sins and puts their trust in Jesus Christ. I agree that the “community of believers” is a radical family, but it does NOT include everyone who says they are a Christian. She says that this community shares a bond in God. God sees homosexuality as an exceedingly grave sin. How can homosexuals see themselves as part of this community, claiming that they share a bond in God, when they live in open rebellion to Him and His Word. What does the fact that there is no marriage have to do with whether God is ok with “gay marriage”? How is the fact that Jesus doesn’t mention homosexuality an argument from silence for something that God explicity is against? What about where Jesus confirms the definition of marriage by quoting Genesis 2:24? Ms. Miller’s hermeneutic is horrible and hardly sound.


In her next paragraph, Miller shows a severe lack of understanding of any part of the Bible. She claims that neither Jesus nor Paul had any interest in matters of the flesh. There isn’t a part of the New Testament that doesn’t deal in some way with the matters of the flesh. What about sin? Sin is the ultimate matter of the flesh! It is the reason that Jesus came to earth in the first place! To say that Jesus didn’t care about matters of the flesh is to dilute the Scriptures down to the point of being unrecognizable to anyone. Jesus told a number of people to “go and sin no more”. Paul also talks extensively about sin (especially in Romans) and immorality. He never once condones homosexuality (in fact, he condemns it: see Romans 1:26-32 and 1 Corinthians 6:9). When he does talk about marriage, it is always a husband and wife. Paul does say that it was his desire that Christians be celibate if possible, because it allowed them to focus on the things of God. Miller says that Paul considered family stability is the best alternative. If this is true, then why would he support something that God didn’t ordain for the family? Also, what does the fact that he told those who get married to not get divorced have to do with “gay marriage”? Nothing. It seems that Ms. Miller is trying to say that the Bible says that divorce is wrong but people still do it, so that means that even though the Bible says that homosexuality and “gay marriage” is wrong, it can still be done. This is just sad. The fact that people get divorced doesn’t change the authority of God or the definition of marriage. It just means that there are people that disobey God.


Laughably, her next argument for “gay marriage” is that the phrase itself is not in there at all. The phrases “email”, “computer”, “dinosaur”, and “supersonic jet” aren’t in the Bible either. What does this have to do with whether or not the Bible condones “gay marriage”? She fails to understand that when the Bible explicitly defines what marriage is it does speak about “gay marriage”. Because the Bible says that marriage is between a man and a woman, it means that any other “marriage”(whether it is “gay marriage” or polygamy or anything else) is unbiblical and not something that God desires.


She then tries to divert attention from the true crux of the issue by saying that the main reason most Christians are against this is because of the idea of sex between men. The main reason that any true Christian is against “gay marriage” is because the Bible forbids it, regardless of whether or not Ms. Miller actually agrees with it or not. She says that sex between women has never been a big deal, even in Biblical times, but she gives no indication of this from Scripture. She also neglects that Paul says that those who turn their backs on God and “exchange the truth for a lie” include women who exchange the “natural function of women for that which is unnatural” (Romans 1:26). She may try to deny that this denotes sex between women, but the very next verse talks about sex between men as the same type of act. Regardless of what a Bible dictionary or “Biblical scholar” says, the Bible itself clearly condemns homosexuality as a sin and rebellion against God. She says that Leviticus is “throwaway” but ignores the New Testament. Because she cannot make the New Testament say what she wants it to, she turns to a “scholar” who supports her position (meaning they had to twist and contort scripture) hoping that she can argue from “authority”. The unfortunate thing for Ms. Miller is that no matter how high her authority might seem to be in her own eyes or the eyes of those blinded by the world, it’s never going to be higher than God. God makes it clear that homosexuality is a sin and abomination. That is something that God will never bless in any form. She says that most of us no longer heed Leviticus, and I agree but I would go further. This entire issue stems from the fact that we don’t heed any of Scripture because we think we can do what is right in our own eyes! Our “modern” world has only surpassed the prescriptions of the scriptural strawmen that Miller and “gay marriage” supporters set up in hopes that a majority will buy into their sorry misrepresentation of the God of the Bible. Obviously, it didn’t work…Miller would also have us ignore homosexuality and focus on how much to pay for a slave because she claims that the Bible gives more focus to that. I would be interested in seeing what scriptures she’s using to glean her copious “advice”. In the 98 verses that I looked at concerning slaves, none of them talked about the “best price to pay for a slave”. Regardless of whether or not the Bible talks about the “best price” for a slave doesn’t change the fact that God sees homosexuality as a sin and abomination…


In her next paragraph, Miller starts out with “Paul was tough on homosexuality” even though she said above that Paul showed a complete lack of interest in matters of the flesh. So, which is it? Either he was tough on homosexuality or he didn’t care but it can’t be both! The truth is, Paul saw homosexuality the same way God sees it. Because she knows this, Miller again looks to a compromising “scholar” to strengthen her view, trusting that those reading the article won’t actually check for themselves. Her “scholars” are labeled “progressive”. Are they truly trustworthy? Just judging by the short number of quotes Miller uses, I would say that they definitely are not. Her “scholars” say that what Biblical Christians see as Paul being tough on homosexuality is actually Paul “critiquing the worst kind of wickedness: self-delusion, violence, promiscuity and debauchery”. While I disagree with this on many levels (most of all is that it turns a blind eye to what the scriptures actually say), I can’t help but laugh at the fact that this seems to perfectly describe many of the people that Miller is trying to support. She then tries to use her scholars to explain away the condemnation of homosexuality by saying that Paul was actually talking about the habits of the Roman emperors and not about “what we call homosexuality”. Are her scholars trying to change the definition of homosexuality now so that they can claim that the Bible doesn’t condemn it? Read what Paul writes in Romans 1:26-27 (emphasis mine):


Rom 1:26  For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural,

Rom 1:27  and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error.


Honestly, unless you are actively trying to deny what the scriptures say so that you can live the lifestyle that you want to live, how much clearer could Paul make it? Again, it’s not about what the “scholars” say, it’s about what God has already said. He has said that homosexuality is a sin. Period. What amazes me is that the “scholar” that she quotes claims that the men that Paul is talking about meet their end and are judged by God. The horrible tragedy is that this is equally true for those who compromise the His Word in order to make it say what they want. Miller then tries to throw up the divorce distraction again. It’s not about divorce. We know that God hates divorce (Malachi 3) and that many Christians get divorced. That doesn’t change the fact that God sees homosexuality as a sin though. Miller again tries to say that “because some Christians disregard the teaching on divorce, it’s ok to disregard the one on homosexuality too”. This completely misses the point. The people divorcing (or not divorcing) don’t make something true. It is true whether or not people are divorcing!


She then says that the objections to “gay marriage” are not rooted in the Bible but in “tradition and custom”. She says this mainly because she has to ignore the clear teaching of scripture and all of those who proclaim it in order to have any sort of argument at all. She then runs back to the canard of “homosexuality is just like slavery/skin color”. She even quotes Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. when he said, “The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice.” While that’s true, I don’t think that Ms. Miller and those who camp on her side of the issue see far enough or just how the arc bends. The Bible says that it is appointed unto man once to die and then the judgment (Hebrews 9:27). At this time, each of us will give an account of our lives before God. If we die in our sins (including homosexuality), then we will be given the justice of a holy and righteous God and be sent to hell for eternity. Sadly, instead of helping to warn those in sin, Ms. Miller has tried to make the trip to hell more comfortable for them…She then talks about how the Bible endorses slavery, but doesn’t seem to notice that it’s not the same type of slavery practiced here in America. And it still doesn’t change how God sees homosexuality. She says that it is impossible for the rules of the Bible to apply to our world at face value. That’s funny, isn’t our justice system based on the “rules” of the Bible, including many Old Testament ones? Why do we not see Miller crying out against a number of other issues that we seem to apply the Bible to at face value on a daily basis (or are those upcoming Newsweek articles)? Not to mention the fact that every issue that America faces has a corresponding answer to be found in the Bible. She claims that the “mature” view of scriptural authority is to move beyond literalism, like we have in the past. I wonder if Miller would say this if a literl view of scripture supported her side of the issue…This may be one of the most aggravating parts of the entire argument for me. Miller and others like her seem to think that their view of scripture is more “mature” and “modern”, when in reality it’s just convenience. Instead, I would argue that the mature view of scripture is to understand that God knew what He was talking about (He is the Creator of the Universe and is omniscient) and that, because I have a finite, sin-affected mind, I should give God “the honor of being more learned than myself”.


She says that marriage has evolved so that it would be unrecognizable to Abraham or Jacob. Is she sure about that? How can she know for sure? Does she have any scriptural evidence for this? Again, tries to argue from ignorance and claims the minority of examples to be the general rule. This is hardly the case. She then claims that a Newsweek poll says that 55% of those polled say that they are more objectionable to an adulterous heterosexual marriage than a “committed gay marriage”. I feel like a broken record as I type this, but that doesn’t change how God sees homosexuality. The Newsweek poll doesn’t define marriage. Christians don’t define marriage. God has already defined marriage between a man and a woman. She throws in a few other stats to try and strengthen her weak argument and then cites “modern” changes in wedding ceremonies as if that somehow gives the entire issue credibility (it doesn’t).

She says that we “cannot look to the Bible as a marriage manual” but that we can read it for “universal truths” as we “struggle toward a more just future”. I just have a few questions for Ms. Miller. Who decides which “universal truths” are actually true? If she does, then that means that many of the things that scripture says (including the ones against homosexuality) are wrong. If I do, then what if she disagrees with me? How could they be universal truths then? If we can’t look to the Bible as a marriage manual, then how can we trust any of the other truths in it? She doesn’t seem to get that the Bible is either all true or it’s not. The Bible claims to be, and is, the inspired Word of the God of the universe. What authority does Miller have (other than what she’s already given herself) to determine which verses we can pick and choose (which Christians are often accused of doing due to ignorance of both Christian beliefs and scriptural context)? And, who exactly is “struggling” with toward a more just future? I could just as easily (if not more so) say that it is Christians who are having their liberties taken away at every turn because they hate the message of the gospel. She then says that the Bible offers inspiration and warning on many things, and it does, but we cannot read into the scriptures what we wish to see there. She points out that it “speaks eloquently” about the role of families, but seeks to change how it defines those families because it doesn’t suit her. The Bible never once talks about the type of family that those pushing “gay marriage” are striving to make possible. It is not about “binding ourselves in loving pairs” but about humbly obeying the Word of God and living out our lives the way that He’s told us to live them.

As if all of her blasphemy and poor hermeneutics wasn’t enough, she then throws out the idea (it’s not new) that Jonathan and David were lovers. She says that this (false) story is a favorite among gay men. She correctly says that conservatives see this as a platonic friendship. But, then she tries to say that it was actually more than that because the two men “stood up for each other in turbulent times, through violent war and the disapproval of a powerful parent”. How does this prove that they were homosexual? It doesn’t. What it shows is Miller’s willingness to read into scripture (eisigesis) whatever she needs to to make it support her position. Unfortunately, Miller, like many in the world today seem to take every instance of love (whether in the Bible or not) and automatically assume it to be an erotic or physical love. This is ridiculous and tragic. There is no indication in scripture that the relationship between David and Jonathan and that is where the issue stops. It is both disrespectful and poor for to imply anything else or leave anything to “history and our own imaginations”.

Miller then bounces back (she might have a touch of ADHD) to the Biblical marriages that didn’t fit the definition, probably thinking that we had forgotten that she already mentioned all of this. She tries to paint the marriages, which were once used to try and prove that the Biblical definition as wrong, as beneficial to the “greater community”. She still doesn’t seem to understand that the fact that the examples given happened in no way changes the definition God made. Not to mention the fact that there was actually more than one tribe (twelve to be exact). Again, Miller resorts to quotes from “scholars” who support her position. This time, it’s a Rabbi who says that Judaism “thrives through diversity and inclusion”. He says that he believes that Judaism doesn’t want to leave anyone “outside of the religious process”. But, if we’re going by the Jewish religious process, that would mean that all of those Old Testament laws would apply. That would mean that homosexuals could be stoned for their lifestyle, wouldn’t it? Sadly, I don’t think that the Rabbi understands his own religion…If, instead, we’re talking about the Christian religious process, then why would she quote a Rabbi?

I wish that Ms. Miller would actually show some evidence for her statements regarding the Bible instead of just spouting things that she thinks will fly under the radar. She fails to show how Mary and Joseph’s marriage was unorthodox. Yes, Mary was pregnant and it wasn’t by Joseph. God took care of that when He came to Joseph in a dream. Joseph took Mary as his wife and their marriage went along as planned. But again, Miller points to a specific and in this case very unique situation and tries to paint all marriages like this. Then, in a bout of unadulterated blasphemy she spews: “The boy needed two human parents, after all”. The boy? The boy? That boy, madam, is the Savior of the world. He is the only way to heaven and unless you repent of your sins you will not go. Your contentious view of Jesus comes from the fact that you hate the message the He preaches (if you’ve ever actually heard the true gospel). If you’re trying to endear yourself to Biblical Christians, it’s not working. If you’re trying to poke us in the eye, then understand that it’s not us you mock, but the just Judge of the universe. That’s not a place that I would put myself if I were you…

The rest of the article is the main point for Miller, et. Al. She claims that the message of Christianity is acceptance for all and that Christianity is all about inclusivity. She talks about how Jesus reached out to everyone and brought the “whole Christian community” into His embrace. Unfortunately for Miller, she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. The Jesus she talks about is not the One to be found in scripture. The Jesus of scripture is NOT all inclusive. He is the One who said: “I am the way, the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but by me” (John 14:6). That’s hardly inclusive. In this one statement, Jesus said that all other religious belief systems are wrong. Not only that, He is the same Jesus who said that “unless you repent, you will perish” (Luke 13:3). She then cites a Jesuit priest who says that the story of the woman at the well (John 4) is evidence of Christ’s “all-encompassing love”. Does either the priest or Miller realize all that happened that day at the well? Does the story show the love of Jesus? Of course. Does it show that He condoned her lifestyle? Nope. Does it show that He supported homosexuality? Nope. Miller seems to pick and choose her stories while she neglects the number of others that can’t be twisted to support her side. She then quotes a “scholar” from Columbia who looks to Paul for support of “gay marriage”. The “scholar” quotes Galatians 3:28 and says that the argument for “gay marriage” isn’t made from specific texts but with the “general conviction that the Bible is bent toward inclusiveness”. I think that I am going to write Columbia and ask them to make me an emeritus professor there. I can spew any number of verses out of context to support any issue at any time. This is sad to be honest. Galatians 3:28 says:

Gal 3:28 There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

The key words in this scripture are in Christ Jesus. You cannot be in Jesus if you are in sin. It doesn’t matter what a “scholar” thinks. That’s the truth. If you do not repent of your sins and continue in a lifestyle that God abhors, it doesn’t matter what you call yourself or how many “scholars” you can get to back you up. You are not a Christian. Therefore, you are not in Christ Jesus. The Bible is not inclusive. To say that it is is to ignore both the Old and New Testaments. In the Old Testament, God’s chosen people was Israel. There was never a time when that changed. They are still God’s chosen people. In the New Testament when the Christian church was born, it was (and still is) made up of those who repented of their sins and put their trust in Jesus Christ. This was evidenced by the fact that they were obedient to the scriptures. Those who are not born again will not inherit the kingdom of God (John 3). Those who are not saved are sons of disobedience and the wrath of God abides on them. That is not inclusive at all.  Nothing found in the Bible argues for “gay marriage”. Those who wish to make the Bible say something it doesn’t can do so, but that doesn’t change the truth. Getting “pastors”, “preachers”, and “scholars” to argue your point of view doesn’t change the fact that God has defined marriage as a covenant between a man and a woman. If there is a “pastor” or “preacher” who is “blessing” any of the “holy unions”, then they are in direct opposition to the will and Word of God and are not Christians. They are calling evil good and good evil and have set themselves against God.

Miller points out that very few Jewish or Christian denominations officially endorse “gay marriage” while some will bless “unions” and others openly support “gay marriage”. She says that she believes that homosexual couples should be allowed to marry in the same sense that heterosexual couples can. The truth is that they can. All they have to do is stop living a lifestyle of sin, repent, find someone of the opposite sex that they can love and then get married. Miller argues that “if we are all God’s children, made in his likeness and image” then “denying access to any sacrament based on sexuality is the same as denying it based on skin color”. Miller can argue that til she’s blue in the face but that doesn’t make it a valid argument or a good one. The truth is that we are not all God’s children. Ephesians says that the wrath of God is on the sons of disobedience. Jesus said that His sheep hear His voice. They are the ones that obey what He says. He also gave many parables of two different types of people, those that obey and those that don’t. This was illustrated by wheat and tares and good fish and bad fish. In 1 John, the apostle John says that there are two types of children, the children of God and the children of the devil and that they are obvious. The children of the devil do not practice righteousness. Homosexuality is a sin in God’s eyes and therefore cannot be righteous. Those who practice homosexuality, therefore, cannot be practicing righteousness and cannot be children of God. Miller mistakenly thinks that the level of seriousness you have about your argument is directly related to the truth of your argument. This is not true either. There have been many, many people who have been extremely serious about the beliefs that they hold (Paul is a good example) and have ben seriously wrong about those beliefs. It’s not about whether or not you are serious but whether what you are saying is true. She quotes a “reverend” who said, “Being with one another in community is how you love God”. That’s not what the Bible says. The Bible quotes Jesus as saying that if we truly love Him then we will keep His commandments (John 14:15, 21, 23-24). Marriage is about love, I don’t deny that. But it is only a marriage when it follows the definition of marriage given by God in the Bible. It is not a marriage any other way, no matter who tries to redefine it.  Human need also doesn’t redefine what a marriage is. There are many things that humans feel they need that are called sin in the Bible. It is not about what humans need. It’s not about the things that we want. It’s about what is true. There is nothing preventing homosexuals from getting married or growing old surrounded by friends, if they’re willing to do it all God’s way. If not, then they won’t have those things, but that’s not God’s fault, it’s not Christianity’s fault, and it’s not a reason to try and define marriage. Jesus didn’t teach us to love one another for our own good (can Miller provide any Bible verses at all?). He taught us to love God first with all our mind, heart, soul, and strength. Then, we are to love our neighbor as ourselves. It has nothing to do with us. She says that she wants children to grow up in stable homes. If this is truly the case, then she will support traditional marriage and Biblical Christian values. She ends her article with another quote from James Martin who says that he believes Psalm 139:14 supports homosexuality:

Psa 139:14  I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well.


I can’t help but wonder if Mr. Martin takes any other parts of the Psalm out of context in regards to homosexuality, like this part:


Psa 139:19  O that You would slay the wicked, O God; Depart from me, therefore, men of bloodshed.

Psa 139:20  For they speak against You wickedly, And Your enemies take Your name in vain.

Psa 139:21  Do I not hate those who hate You, O LORD? And do I not loathe those who rise up against You?

Psa 139:22  I hate them with the utmost hatred; They have become my enemies.



Martin then says that in his heart (which, according to Jeremiah 17:9, is deceitful above all things and desparately wicked), he believes that Jesus would reach out to the homosexuals among us if He were hear today because “Jesus doesn’t want people to be lonely or sad”.  I think that Jesus would reach out to the homosexuals today too, and would tell them the same thing that He preached to everyone else while He was here on earth:

(Mat 3:2)  Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”


(Mat 4:17)  From that time Jesus began to preach and say, Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”


(Mar 1:15)  and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”


(Mar 6:12)  They went out and preached that men should repent.


(Luk 13:3)  “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.


(Luk 13:5)  “I tell you, no, but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish.”


Instead of worrying about the priest’s prayer, I think that we need to worry about God’s wrath… 

Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: