News Bites 04/27/14

April 28, 2014 at 4:40 pm | Posted in Newslinks | Leave a comment
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Palestinian leader denounces Holocaust as ‘heinous crime’,0,2695104.story

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas spoke out against the atrocities of the Holocaust and talked about having sympathy for the victims. Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu thinks that the claims were just an effort to get public opinion on his side. Abbas said that the world should “safeguard the oppressed and weak wherever they are found”. He then spoke about his own Palestinians are oppressed and “denied freedom and peace”. Abbas used the comments to continue to push for a two state solution to peace. Netanyahu said that peace will not happen while Palestinians remain connected to Hamas.

The push for a two state solution is really a pipe dream. I find it really hard to believe that Palestinians will stop with their own state. For all that has happened, I don’t think that Israel will find peace if Palestine gets their own state. I think it will just make it easier for Palestine to be a pain in Israel’s butt. As a Christian, I believe that Israel has a right to the land that God promised them. The arguments that are often made to support Palestine are weak at best. God promised Israel their land and they shouldn’t have to give it up for any reason…

Faith of others not something for Christians to judge, says Archbishop

The Roman Catholic Archibishop of Dublin stated recently that Christian faith is “a faith in a God who loves and seeks from us a response in love”. He talked about povero Christo, poor unfortunate Jesus Christ and how it refers to someone who lost all of their dignity. He also said that “the Christian should not think that he or she can judge the faith of others and judge whose faith is better than the other”. Instead, according to the Archbishop, we’re to look on everyone as a povero Christo. He then encouraged his listeners to remember the words of Pope Francis, “Who am I to judge?”

This has got to be one of the weakest understandings of the gospel I’ve heard. Granted, it is coming from a Roman Catholic Archbishop. But still, the Christian faith is much richer and deeper than a sound bite. The Christian faith is about how sinful man rebelled against God and earned hell for their sins against the perfect, holy, just Creator. And, how, even though we were sinners, He sent His Son to save those who repent and trust in Christ’s work on the cross ALONE to save them.

He says that we’re to look on everyone as a povero Christo. Really? Scripture says that I’m to see everyone as a sinner who is dead in their trespasses. While I wouldn’t consider Roman Catholicism Christian, it’s not the point of the article. The Archbishop says that Christians shouldn’t judge the faith of others. This man is a leader in the Roman Catholic church. Has he never read the scriptures? Jesus said that He is the ONLY WAY (John 14:6). Peter said that there is “no other name under heaven by which men might be saved (Acts 4:12). Because this is true, ALL OTHER RELIGIONS ARE FALSE. This is God’s judgment on false religions that have no basis in the truth. This also means that anyone who doesn’t repent and believe in Christ the way the Bible says will find themselves in hell. Why does the Archbishop not care about the final destination of these people? Could it be because his church teaches that people of other religions will go to heaven too?

Gospel story of Jesus’ resurrection a source of deep rifts in Christian religion

There is a struggle that many Christians face each Easter – was the resurrection real or just a metaphor? Can someone believe it never happened and still be a Christian? The article quotes a Barna survey that says that 42% of Americans believe the resurrection of Christ is the meaning of Easter. Only 2% recognized it as the most important holiday. It also quotes a Jesuit priest as saying that the resurrection is essential and that Easter wouldn’t exist without the resurrection.

A non-practicing Catholic professor sees the resurrection as symbolic. He claims that it symbolizes how someone can reach the lowest point of their life and find their way out again. He says that viewing the resurrection symbolically gives it more meaning and that we can come back to it again and again. There is also mention of an evangelical youth pastor who believes in the literal resurrection but still has problems with the way the resurrection is used in some ways as if it was just a common event because they talk about it all the time. He believes that it should be something churches “build to” all year. It also quotes John Shelby Spong and his denial of a physical resurrection. Spong claims that Christianity can still stand if there was no literal resurrection.

This is just sad. The Christian faith is anchored by the crucifixion, death, and resurrection of Christ. There should be no struggle with this at all. There is no symbolism in the resurrection. It is the culmination of what the entire Bible up to now points to. The resurrected Messiah gives hope to the Christian that sin and death was conquered and that this life is not all that we have. To deny that is to deny the scriptures and show a lack of understanding of the scriptures. The Apostle Paul said that if Christ didn’t rise from the dead our faith is worthless. If there is no life after this one, we are to be the most pitied of all men (1 Cor. 15:16-19). Denying a literal resurrection is to be outside the orthodoxy of Christianity and therefore to not be a Christian at all…

Jars of Clay lead says of Christian upbringing: “I’m not that way now.”

The lead singer of the band Jars of Clay has come out in support of homosexual marriage. He said his desire wasn’t to “stir things up” but to point out the fact that he couldn’t see a good reason why homosexuals shouldn’t marry. He said that he couldn’t make sense of the conservative argument; that it doesn’t hold up to “basic scrutiny”. He doesn’t see a negative effect or social break down. He says that he’s not sure of who God is or how he operates. In tweets, the lead singer expressed that he wasn’t particularly concerned with what scripture said was wrong but more about how we should treat people. He said that scripture doesn’t “clearly state much of anything regarding morality”.

Another sad article. The man professed Christianity but doesn’t know who God is or how He operates. The Bible is “clear” that homosexuality is a sin and the practice of it is an abomination. Those who are homosexuals will not enter the kingdom of heaven. To have a professing Christian state his support for the things that God clearly deems sin, because you don’t see anything wrong with it, speaks volumes about the state of one’s heart and soul. It is my hope that he will repent of his sin and put his faith in Christ…

NOTE: Here is a little clarification from Mr. Hasletine. I’ll be waiting to see what happens with all of this before I say anything else but I don’t have my hopes up:

UConn Professor Who Went Ape on Campus Evangelists: ‘I’m in Deep Trouble’

A professor at UConn who went ballistic on a group of open air preachers, tossing out profanities, getting within inches of their faces, and trying to talk over them to lead a gathering of students in a “Praise Darwin” chant, is being reprimanded by the university. James Boster tried to draw the gathered students away from the preachers. He was confrontational with them, asking them if they had “made Darwin their lord and savior”. He was very animated when one of the preachers said that there were some who believed that we descended from monkeys. The profanity in Boster’s tirade didn’t help his cause any. He told the preachers that they were ignorant and shouted at them in Polish.

Boster defended his actions saying that the preachers came with a message of hate. “They attacked my students for their sexual behavior, sexual preferences, religious beliefs, and ethnicities and condemned them to hell”. Boster said that his tirade was an effort to protect his students like a mama bear defends her cubs. He wanted to defend them from those who would call them sodomites, fornicators, and sinners condemned to hell. Boster then described his view of Darwin’s message: “Darwin’s message that all humans are our brothers and sisters, all mammals are our cousins, and all life is our kin is much closer to the loving affirmation of life found in the gospels than the hate, bigotry, and ignorance preached by these rude guests to our home”. Boster said that it was his “moral duty” to be outraged at the message of the preachers and he’s “proud to have done the duty to defend his (sic) students from attack”.

The pastors said that they never spoke specifically about sexual sin in their message. They spoke generally about how sin was passed to all and how all have sinned. “We did not focus on one person or group of people”. The university released a statement saying that, while Boster had the right to be upset, his actions were unacceptable.

I find the entire episode with James Boster somewhat laughable. This man is a professor of Anthropology at UConn and a representative of the scientific community. He is supposedly a member of the academic elite who look down their nose at Christians who believe in God as backwoods, ignorant people who are stuck in the Dark Ages. His tirade against these three men reveals the truth and gives support to the very message that he so vehemently denied. The scriptures say that the unregenerate hate God and the truth of His gospel. They don’t come to the light for fear that their evil deeds will be exposed. It’s not surprising to any Christian who has studied their Bible and been out evangelizing.

What’s also amusing is the fact that Boster doesn’t seem to know much about either Darwin or the Bible. He doesn’t seem to have made any effort to study what Christians really believe. And why should he? It’s just a myth, a fairy tale of some “God” who smites those He doesn’t like and condemns those who don’t believe in Him to hell. And herein lies one of the funniest things I continue to see in all of this. If Boster really thinks that God is just a collective figment of the imagination of generations of duped Christians, why does it bother him? If he knows God doesn’t exist, why does he get so animated when people who believe in God profess those beliefs? Why is it ok for Boster to express his beliefs (in an obnoxious, confrontational manner) but not the Christians? I think that it’s because, as much as he wants to deny it, Boster’s conscience confirms that the message of sin that he heard that day is true.

Boster also said that it was his “moral duty” to defend his students. Are they not capable of seeing through the Christian façade, if that’s really what it is? Is UConn not teaching them critical thinking and logic so that they can evaluate truth claims for their veracity? And, where did Boster get his morals from? Atheism and secular humanism/naturalism have no foundation for morals. There is no basis for right or wrong. He claims that Darwin’s message is about love, but that just shows that he really hasn’t read Origin or he’s purposefully being misleading. Darwin’s view of evolution was based on the idea that the Caucasian “race” was the pinnacle of evolution and that the Negros were the lowest rank, just barely higher than the apes they supposedly evolved from. How is that loving? Darwin saw only the “survival of the fittest” in a succession of random processes driven by death. Where is the framework for compassion or love in that? There isn’t one, and Boster knows it. But, because he starts with an apriori belief that God doesn’t exist, everything that points to Him is rejected outright and railed against.

The message of the gospel is harsh for those who are in sin, but it’s a good thing. When people hear about their sins against a holy God, they are then able to understand their need for a Savior and their total inability to do anything to save themselves. The students who heard the gospel that day weren’t condemned to hell by the preachers, they were already condemned to hell by God. They were born in sin, just like the rest of the human race, and started out condemned from conception. The preachers were just trying to show them this and explain their need for Christ to save them. That’s much different than Darwin…

Other info on this article:

Married lesbian ‘throuple’ expecting first child

Three lesbians who claim that they are “married” to each other are expecting their first child. Kitten, Brynn, and Doll Young exchanged vows in Massachusetts last August. Their “marriage” isn’t recognized in any state, but it’s real to them. Brynn and Kitten were married 2.5 years ago before Doll came into the picture. Kitten is 6 months pregnant by an unknown sperm donor and was chosen as the one to carry the baby because she’s always wanted to be a full time mother. Brynn has been “married” twice before before she and Kitten got “married”. Each member of the group has their own role with Brynn being the breadwinner, Doll doing the cooking and Kitten doing the cleaning. The three women say that they have their time together, but also that each pair nurtures their own relationship as well. Massachusetts law enforcement said they wouldn’t go after any of the women unless the third “wife” sought some kind of marital benefits.

This has got to be the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard, along with being the saddest. Three women who are so deluded by their sinful nature as to think that this agreement somehow constitutes a marriage is just evidence of how much sin can change one’s thoughts and actions. A marriage is defined as a monogamous relationship between a man and a woman. This definition comes from scripture, Genesis to be specific. Jesus confirmed this definition of marriage in the New Testament. Nothing else that man comes up with to try and fit into the idea of marriage qualifies. The sad part is that these women don’t even see how sad and ironic this is. Instead of knowing the saving grace of Christ and finding fulfillment in marriage the way that God intended, they try to mimic His intentions with a poor substitute that will only earn them more condemnation unless they repent.

Another irony is the fact that even though there are three women, they couldn’t get each other pregnant. This too is part of the purpose of marriage as defined by God. God created man and woman to “be fruitful and multiply”. This isn’t possible in the relationship of these three women and points to one of the many problems with this sin of homosexuality. It also is just another slide down the slippery slope. Who among those who support homosexuality can argue with this? Will a “monogamous homosexual relationship” now be known as “traditional homosexuality”? How will homosexuals and their defenders who find this unnatural defend their position? They can’t. The women say that they love each other and just want to have the ability to live the lifestyle that makes them feel good. This is the same argument that homosexuality uses in its quest for uber-rights. The slippery slope gets steeper and the only people who can give a consistent, loving, honest response to this are the biblical Christians who see homosexual relationships of any kind as sinful…

Leave a Comment »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Entries and comments feeds.

%d bloggers like this: