Jesus Christ Is Lord

That every knee should bow and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father!

Posts Tagged ‘war on terror’

Christians Should Not Support The War On Terror

Posted by Job on April 1, 2011

On September 11th, Muslim men hi-jacked several airplanes and flew them into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and one of them crashed in rural Pennsylvania due to a passenger uprising that prevented it from hitting its target. This was only the second attack by Muslims on the World Trade Center, and followed a pattern of escalating violence by Muslims against our interests, such as bombing our embassies in Africa and an attack on the U.S.S. Cole.

Since these events, America has conducted military action against three Muslim nations –  Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya – while supporting military actions of other nations against some other Muslim nations, namely Ethiopia against Somalia. Further, America would have also attacked Iran by now were Iran not so strong militarily and economically, and may yet attack Iran also down the line if forced to.

So, we are in a war against Islam, correct? A thousand times no. No less than George W. Bush, Dick Cheney, Barack Obama, Bill and Hillary Clinton and a number of other people in positions of power have made it clear: this is not a war against Islam! Instead, it is a war against terrorism, or a war on terror. In other words, this is not a religious war – for the United States and its principle allies are secular – but an ideological war. So, the United States, and indeed a international community which now must necessarily include the United Nations thanks to their recent resolution authorizing military force in Libya, is committed to waging ideological warfare.

Make no mistake: the problem with Saddam Hussein, Usama bin Laden, Muammar Qadaffi, the Republic of Iran etc. is not that they are Muslims. If you want further evidence of that, witness Peter King’s hearings. Despite the claims of the liberals in the media otherwise, the target was not Muslims as a religion, or as a people or culture who are given over to this barbaric cult born of a demon who abused and entered into M0hammed. (Please note: Christians are to love our neighbors and our enemies, so the teachings of the sermon on the mount of Jesus Christ most certainly applies to our interactions with Muslims.) Instead, it was “radical” Muslims, meaning those who are “anti-American”, or “anti-western” or “anti-democracy.” (Please note: opposing Israel is just fine.)

One may wonder why Great Britain, our most reliable ally in going to warfare in the Middle East, cares about a bunch of anti-American Muslims. Or why the United Nations, which is weakening Iran with sanctions, did the same to Iraq, and now authorized military action against Libya, cares about being “anti-western.”  The answer: these things, especially being “anti-democracy”, are merely euphemisms, stand-ins, for opposing the new world order. That is why Abu Mazen, or Mahmoud Abbas, despite being a Muslim terrorist with the blood of innocent Jews on his hands and longtime member of the terrorist P.L.O., is not the target of a war on terror. This Abbas is the leader of a U.N. funded and supported Palestinian Authority, and oft states his desire to create a democracy in Palestine that will be pro-western and pro-United Nations, and a model for other Arab and Muslim regimes. That is why Abbas gets a blank check (both literally and figuratively) from the international community, and Qaddafi gets bombs. (And keep in mind: the international community, including the Bush administration, courted Qaddafi for years, including endorsing his plans to work to centralize the governments and militaries of Africa, before turning on him when he refused to step down in favor of a democratic government.)

So, if being a “terrorist” is not a function of A) your religion, B) your nationality, C) your culture, D) your own membership in a known terrorist organization that affiliates with other terror organizations and regimes and E) your own personal terrorist acts (again, all of which would indict Abbas) but is instead being one who opposes the prevailing worldly ideology, where does that leave Christians who adhere to a legitimate New Testament faith? Precisely.

Rather than going to war against Muslims, the goal is to get Muslims to join the U.N., to join NATO, to join the EU, to participate in these globalist concerns. Muslim Turkey, which persecutes Christians to the outrage of absolutely no one of influence, is very influential in the U.N., a member of NATO and will ultimately join the EU. Right now, a carrot or stick approach is being taken with the Muslim world. Join the emerging world order, and you get a carrot. Refuse, and you get a stick, and replaced with leaders who will take the carrot. Again, this is not a function of the Muslim faith, culture or proclivity to violent jihad. Instead, it is a function of the support for the coming global consensus.

As it is with Muslims, so will it soon be with Christians. Germany, who persecuted legitimate Christians during the reign of Hitler, is now jailing Christians who object to their wicked public education system. One family took their case to the EU on religious freedom grounds, and the EU sided with the German government. At least one African nation is now taking similar actions against Christian parents who homeschool, claiming that it violates the United Nation’s “rights of the child” treaty. Many other examples abound.

Make no mistake: one man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter. The day will come when being willing to publicly stand for the freedom from sin that comes from being a bondslave to Jesus Christ will cause you to be labeled a terrorist. This will not be merely because of the stands that Christianity takes against abortion, homosexuality and other moral/family issues. As the movie “The Time Changer” succinctly stated, Satan is not against good morals and values, but he is against Jesus Christ and His church, those who keep His commandments and bear His testimony.

Merely being a Christian will be a crime, whether you are a conservative culture warrior who pickets abortion clinics and hands out tracts at “gay pride” events, or a Christian who is relatively liberal on all points that do not transgress the Bible. And when that day comes, the terrorist will be the Christian, and the war will be against the Christian. These days will climax during the time of the great tribulation, when the anti-Christ will be given power to make war against the saints, and to overcome (most of) them. Many Christians will endure great tribulation, including a martyr’s death. Will you stand in those days?

So, Christian, knowing what the “war on terror” will ultimately lead to, how counterproductive is it, how worldly and revealing the lack of a mind renewed from it, would it be to support this abomination NOW? The answer is yours.

If you are not a Christian, make no mistake: being an enemy of the world and its wickedness is part of friendship with Jesus Christ. The good news is that this world and its wickedness will be destroyed and Jesus Christ and His saints will reign forever! You can be a part of this reign by repenting of your worldliness, your sins and:

Following The Three Step Salvation Plan!

Posted in abomination, anti - Christ, Bible, catholic, Christianity, church state, civil rights, endtimes, globalism, government, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Islam, Jesus Christ, Judaism, late great planet earth, Left Behind, man of sin, mark of the beast, Middle East peace process, Muslim, Muslim Brotherhood | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

The Proper Christian Response To The Nalid Malik Husan Terror Attack: Concentrate On The Gospel!

Posted by Job on November 6, 2009

With regards to the crime and tragedy of Nalid Malik Husan’s attack at Ford Hood, Texas, where he shot at least 31 people, killing at least 12 people including women and civilians while screaming Allahu Akbar (and motivated by his desire not to be deployed against Iraq (or Afghanistan) as part of a force invading a fellow Muslim and Arab nation) allow me to propose a proper Christian response.

1. Prayer. We must pray for those wounded. We must pray for the families and loved ones of the wounded and deceased. We must pray for those who witnessed or responded to this horrific event, especially police officers, firefighters, ambulance personnel, nurses and doctors. We must pray for the counselors and therapists, both Christian and non-Christian, who will aid people deal with the physical, mental and emotional aftermath of this carnage. And yes, we must pray for the loved ones of Nalid Malik Husan and – presuming that he survives – Husan himself for his conversion to Christianity. Finally, we must pray that the body of Christ responds in a wise, Biblical manner to this event. We must pray that Christians discipline those who fail to respond in such a manner, and that we reject those who respond in a manner that does not honor Jesus Christ.

2. Evangelism. This is the primary way that the New Testament teaches Christians to deal with the non-Christian world, which is sharing the faith of Jesus Christ. This terror attack may cause an increase in fear, hatred and government action. Or it may cause people’s hearts to be desensitized and grow cold. With either reaction, the appropriate Biblical response is to go out and tell as many people as we can, or more accurately as many people as God leads us to, about the kingdom of heaven. Whether Jew, Gentile, Muslim, atheist, Hindu or a person involved in a false expression of Christianity, we must tell people that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who is God, that He is the only way to heaven, that His sacrifice on the cross is the once and for all payment of sins, and there is salvation in no other. This evangelism should not be event-driven, as some attempt to exploit this event or the fear that comes as a result of it. We should not indulge in the sort of “this is why Christianity is better than Islam” triumphalism, for that is a political and cultural worldview argument engaged in by people whose heart is with this world, not those who consider themselves pilgrims, for whom the world and the evils and hardships thereof are not worthy to be compared to the glory of eternity with Jesus Christ. Also, such a message is more useful to preaching to the false Christian cultural chauvinist choir than winning any converts, whether Muslim or non-Muslim. Instead, this tragedy should serve is a reminder that this is truly a wicked, fallen world that we live in, one ruled by the evil one, the prince of the power of the air who is Satan, and that evil and death and judgment are the fate of the world and the people not redeemed from it through Jesus Christ’s blood. Events like this one, wars, famines, floods, wildfires, earthquakes, oppressive political regimes etc. should all remind us of this fact, they should remind us of the teachings of Jesus Christ in the Sermon on the Mount, the Olivet discourse, the parables on the kingdom of heaven, his teachings on last things (New Jerusalem and the lake of fire), and serve as a burning fire shut up in our bones to go forth and obey the commandment of Jesus Christ given in the great commandments, to go and make disciples of all men, baptizing them in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. If we go forth and keep this great commission commandment, then God will use us to save whom He will, and we will be as drink offerings poured out before God, and by our evangelism God will be praised, honored and glorified.

3. Resist temptation. For many, the temptation to indulge in an improper and non-Christian response will be very strong. Many quarters will use this as an excuse to fan the flames of hate against Muslims. Others will use it as an attempt to attack Biblical Christianity with its stand that Jesus Christ as the only way to heaven as well. However, for many the primary temptation will be a political and cultural one, the opportunity to assert Christianity’s superiority over Islam because of western culture and politics, because it is a superior worldview. Well, the west will come under the judgment of Jesus Christ along with the rest of the sinful world, and on that day the western cultural and political systems will be judged as part of Babylon and fall with the rest, including but not limited to the Arabic cultural and political systems. Further, even if the western worldview is superior, it is still a WORLDview, making it worldly, not holy, not of God, and not something that will last forever in New Jerusalem, but instead is something that will be consumed with this world when it is destroyed with fire. The western worldview will have no part in the new heaven and the new earth that Christians inherit. Further, incidents like this should remind Christians that true followers of Jesus Christ do not give themselves over to passions of revenge, hate, or reprisal. Christians are not to get involved in those things directly, nor in the indirect channels that the political debate allows us to. Where in the past, reprisal to incidents such as this may have been lynch mobs, the current political context allows us to simply demand a toughening and extension of the Patriot Act, profiling, immigration crackdowns, gun control, invading etc. While those issues may have their merits, the fact is that they have nothing to do with Christianity. Read the New Testament, especially the teachings of Jesus Christ. The church was never promised peace, prosperity or an easy time, but rather only conflict, warfare and persecution at the hands of the world that has rejected Jesus Christ. Christians have often forgotten that message by walking in agreement with the world. So Christians should reject the foolish idea that by taking political actions we can somehow make this country and world safe and better for Christians and the spread of the gospel. Take, for instance, the war on terrorism: it has been a disaster for Christians all throughout the Muslim wolrd, especially in Iraq.

So instead of trying to take revenge (or the offensive) against Muslims through political means, we should remember that Jesus Christ alone is to whom judgment was given, that God alone is the one capable of executing vengeance, and that Jesus Christ alone will conquer and rule the nations with a rod of iron, and that Christians cannot and should not perform judgment, vengeance, or rule in Jesus Christ’s place. (Of course, this does not preclude civil governments from doing what is necessary to punish crimes and defend its citizens from criminals and aggression from other nations, see Romans 13 with regards to that issue, but instead those actions are at best the just and necessary ones and should not be viewed as Christian in any sense.) Our job is not to pretend to be Jesus Christ and to usurp His place, but instead to obey and serve Jesus Christ so that He will act through us as His Body.

So in summary, the Christian response to this event is prayer, evangelism, and resisting temptation. Please realize that this should be the Christian response to all events. Thank you.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 12 Comments »

Christians Beware Of The FBI Muslim Terrorist Arrests!

Posted by Job on October 30, 2009

A series on persecution and suffering by the Desert Pastor’s Wife got me thinking about all of these arrests of alleged terrorists by the federal government. Let me tell you something: these arrests are shams. As a matter of fact, the whole “war on terror” thing is a sham. For instance, how can we be involved in a war on terror when Saudi Arabia, one of the world’s biggest sponsors of terrorism, is a key ally and trading partner? We have a base in Saudi Arabia, and we force our servicemen stationed there to obey shari’a law. Also, how can we be in a “war on terror” when we are pressuring Israel to give up half its land to terrorists, thereby rewarding the PLO, Hamas, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad, Iran, Syria and all those other entities for their decades of slaughtering Israelis and Americans? One does not have to be a “dispensational Christian Zionist” to recognize that madness, or to ask ourselves why a nation committed to a “war on terror” is so bent on creating a nation in such a strategically vital area that will be governed by either the P.L.O. or Hamas. And those are just a few examples.

And that brings us to these domestic “Muslim terrorist” arrests. The issue is that the people that they are arresting aren’t terrorists. Oh, of course, I am not denying that there aren’t violent Muslim terrorist sleeper cells in this country. It is that the government isn’t going after them. Instead, in order to make it LOOK like they are doing something about terrorism, they are scouring the prisons and the Internet for disaffected Muslims, sending undercover government agents to fill their heads with ideas of jihad, even supplying them with terror plots, plans, weapons and materials that these fellows would have never had the ability or initiative to come up with on their own, keep prodding and pulling them when these ne’er do wells lose interest or get cold feet, and then once these government-recruited guys take their government-provided weapons to carry out their government-provided plans, the government arrests them. And these are “investigations” that take years of planning, huge sums of money, and a boatload of manpower to carry out, all to catch people who would have never gotten anywhere near committing a terrorist act were it not for their being strung along by the government, and this does nothing but divert law enforcement (and the media and the citizenry) from real threats, which includes but is not limited to the actual trained terrorists filtering across the Mexican border. So it is not only entrapment, but politically motivated and pernicious entrapment.

The worst part is that nobody cares about our entrapping Muslims that are no threats while ignoring Muslims that are. One side, I guess you can call them conservatives, is simply glad that we are arresting Muslims. Their goal is deporting as many of the several million Muslims from this country as possible and going to war with as many of the 1 billion Muslims in the world as is necessary to preserve western civilization. So, even though they know that these arrests are sham ones that ignore actual terrorists, they figure that the media publicity generated by each arrest brings us that much closer to electing politicians willing to wage a global war against Islam. The other side is strange. Under normal circumstances, liberals would protest entrapping even people who are likely to commit crimes, but in this instance they are largely silent concerning people who lack the ability, means or motivation to become a terrorist. Perhaps their silence is due to feelings that the Obama administration’s arresting these people helps undermine the idea that Obama is a Muslim plant sent to take over our country. I do notice when I peruse the left-oriented news sites more than a little bit of “see right wingers, Obama IS dedicated to fighting the war on terror!” whenever these arrests take place. It makes one wonder:  if Obama were anything other than a Democratic president accused of being a Muslim traitor, would the left be more vocal about these “law enforcement” practices, especially those targeting (religious and racial) minorities? In any event, the result is both the right and the left being silent in the face of the pervasive misuse of government power to suit their own agendas.

An even more revealing fact is that the government is not denying that they are practicing entrapment. Now when the government does things that they shouldn’t – whether by accident or policy – they instinctively lie, obfuscate, stonewall and cover up. But in several of these cases, including this one in particular, the government all but admitted going after people not so much for their crimes as their thoughts.

Not even the prosecutors contend that Sadequee was close to committing a terrorist act or that he ever joined a terrorist organization. The trial — like that of co-defendant Syed Haris Ahmed, who was convicted in June — illustrates prosecutors are focusing on potential threats as well as real ones, lawyers said.

“The real issue in this case is where is the line between First Amendment speech, however disquieting, and real criminal activity,” said Jack Martin, who defended Ahmed and says the two cases are almost identical. “It is hard to say where that line is drawn. … There is always the issue in any conspiracy case of what is talk and what is an agreement to take action.”

U.S. Attorney David Nahmias said after Ahmed’s conviction that the case didn’t involve an imminent threat because the idea was to arrest terrorists before their attacks succeed.

“In the post-9/11 world we will not wait to disrupt terrorism-related activity until a bomb is built and ready to explode,” Nahmias said then. “The fuse that leads to an explosion of violence may be long but once it is lit — once individuals unlawfully agree to support terrorist acts at home or abroad — we will prosecute them to snuff that fuse out.”

That really is not much more than saying that this fellow was arrested for thought crimes, of having radical, violent views and inclinations. Because of the “war on terror”, it is now acceptable to bait people based solely on what they  believe – not because they pose any actual threat – and then arrest them. So what is going on here?

Realize that in this country, radical changes in government policy, including law enforcement, cannot happen quickly. (Or at least they cannot change quickly right now.) You have to spend years, decades even, laying the groundwork. So law enforcement has to be allowed to engage in a particular practice over a long period of time before it becomes accepted law enforcement procedure, and the courts similarly have to go along to establish precedents. However, the police and courts can’t do this uniformly against the general population, because A) it would cause a massive public outcry and B) the tactics would not withstand a legal challenge. Instead, the government has to use a tiny segment of the population to make certain police tactics acceptable and to establish precedents in the courts. Once that is done, they are basically free to use those tactics on the general population.

A good, recent example? Government seizure of private property. It was almost unheard of a mere few decades ago, now it is routine and goes on unchallenged. What happened? “The war on drugs.” After it became acceptable for law enforcement to routinely confiscate the private property of “suspected drug dealers” and the courts let them get away with it, now the government has wide latitude to grab or freeze land and assets. Now it is basically unconstitutional, but the crisis of drugs and drug crimes made it acceptable to set the constitution aside in order to fight the drug war, and after it was set aside with respect to suspected drug traffickers and the precedent established, it was set aside for everyone. As a result, the government can now seize or freeze mostly anyone’s property or assets at any time, and in many cases the person has no real recourse.

Now that the government has largely eliminated the existence of private property, private speech and thought are now on the agenda. We are now a few years into investigating and arresting Muslims who express hostility towards our government and its policies, and have also gotten the first batch of successful convictions. So, the “thought crime entrapment” law enforcement practices are already on their way to becoming accepted, and the successful convictions establish the precedent that despite the bill of rights,  it is acceptable to go after people solely based on their views. It will only take about a dozen or so of these convictions to be upheld on appeal for the legal and law enforcement precedents to be ironclad, and since the federal government is handling these cases from the beginning, that will make the appeals process even faster (as the cases won’t have to go from state court to federal court).

Again, once the precedents are set the targets will be no more limited to Muslims than government property and asset seizures are to drug kingpins. Instead, people with views that the government doesn’t like can easily be labeled “dangerous”, “radical”, “extremist”, “subversive”, “fundamentalist” etc. and prosecuted. How long would it take before Christians are viewed this way by the government? In order to answer that question, one only need to look at the Huffington Post’s article on the recent arrest and killing of a “suspected terrorist“:

Exactly. Anyone who thinks this behavior is limited to Muslims hasn’t looked at a newspaper lately. In our country we bend over backwards to “respect the Faith” of Evangelical Christians from the South who do precisely the same thing.

Now, if this had been a white Christian evangelist militia, would the FBI gone in, guns blazing? Have they done anything like that recently, despite the proliferation of such groups?

This guy if not identified as ” a radical black extremist Muslim” one might think he was part of the gun toting, separatist, white wing nuts who would impose a Biblical theocracy in the USA and celebrate it all at tea parties.

And those were just the comments on the first page. And this is WITHOUT the government, media and schools bombarding the nation with propaganda on how Christian ideas are evil and Christians are untrustworthy, unpatriotic, violent, a threat to national security and our freedoms etc. Personally, I don’t think that it is going to happen anytime soon. However, I am certain that it will happen. And please, no partisan/ideological nonsense. Both parties support this just like they do everything else, because both parties are part of the worldly system that rejects Jesus Christ and similarly hates the church.

Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , | 4 Comments »

Regarding Carrie Prejean, Evangelicalism And The Culture War

Posted by Job on May 12, 2009

I recall a very recent incident where I purchased my first
Christian rap CD, certain that it would provide edifying entertainment for my
very young son during our frequent automobile trips. However, when the music
began to play, my son put his hands over his ears, and began yelling for me to
turn it off, the reason being “it sounds like the devil’s music.” Now
as I was very much enjoying the CD in question, I tried to explain to the child
that it was in fact Christian music. The child replied that he would much
rather listen to one of HIS CDs. So, the Christian rap went out, and one of his
several CDs of classic hymns, Negro spirituals and similar took its place,
which included “Standing On The Promises of God.” I confess to not having
learned the lyrics to this song, but I do remember something about “standing on
the promises that cannot fail.”

And now I find myself reading Pilgrim’s Progress by John
Bunyan for the first time. I not long ago passed the section where Christian
succumbed to the temptation of one Worldly Wiseman to depart from the hard path
given to him to the Celestial City by Evangelist and instead set out for what
was promised to be the easier path over Mount Sinai to Mr. Legality and his
handsome son civility in the nice village Morality. And this reminds me of the
Carrie Prejean tempest: this where beauty pageant contestant lost the Miss
America pageant (which is owned by Donald Trump, who considers twice divorced
prosperity preacher Paula White his friend and pastor) for speaking out against
homosexual marriage.

As a result, this Miss Prejean has found herself many
supporters in the evangelical Christian community for fighting the good fight
in the culture war, having had the privilege of such experiences as being
interviewed by James Dobson, speaking at a prominent evangelical Christian
university, and being a presenter for the Dove Awards. Miss Prejean’s Christian
advocates have presented her as an example of a bold Christian woman who has
risked and suffered in warfare.

While this is certainly true, as Prejean clearly lost the
Miss America title, was very nearly stripped of the Miss California title, and
has had explicit pictures (some that she acknowledges to be real, others that
she alleges are fake) released by those seeking to force the Miss California pageant
to strip her of her crown for violating her contract, I have to ask: what battle
is it that she is fighting anyway, and is it a worthwhile one?

Again, go back to “Standing On The Promises Of God.” God’s
promises cannot fail, which means that God’s battles cannot be lost, because in
God’s battles, it is not us that are fighting, but rather God Himself that
fights for us. So as long as remain obedient and faithful to scripture and
adhere to the things that Jesus Christ commanded of us, we cannot lose. Our
success is guaranteed, predetermined, predestined.

However, when we depart from the path, leave behind the
commandments of Jesus Christ, and start seeking our own agendas, failure is
inevitable. Oh, we may win a victory or two here and there, but it is only a
temporary fleeting battle won at a huge cost – not the least a great diversion
of prayers and works by well meaning Christians – in a war that will ultimately
be lost. The person who bears witness of this best is none other than James
Dobson, the very same who interviewed Prejean. Upon retiring from his leadership
of Focus On The Family, Dobson acknowledged that he, his organization and its
fellow travelers had lost every single battle, including that against
homosexual marriage, which will become legal in many parts of the country
within a few years. And let us never forget that the great legal victory that
made homosexual marriage possible was a court decision, Lawrence versus Texas,
given to us by a Supreme Court stacked with appointees of the very conservative
Republican presidents that Dobson and his peers spent a generation getting
Christians to not only vote but contribute, volunteer, fast and pray to get
elected in the first place. What do we know from this? As Jesus Christ promised
us that so long as remain faithful to Him and do His Will that we shall not
fail, the very failure of Dobson’s efforts, shows that Dobson and those like
him were never fighting the Lord’s battle to begin with.

And consider further the supreme irony: the biggest defeats
have come from the very people aligned with Dobson! Recall that Ronald Reagan,
when given the opportunity to appoint justices that would overturn Roe v. Wade,
instead put not one but two pro – abortion judges on the court, and George H.
W. Bush, who became president due to being the vice president of Reagan thanks
in no small part to people like Dobson, appointed a third pro – abortion judge,
and yes all three of those judges cast their votes in the Lawrence versus Texas
decision to pave the way for homosexual marriage as well.

So gentle Christians, what we should learn from this is that
Jesus Christ, God’s own Word and thereby God Himself, did not come to earth as
a human to be slain on a cross to pay the debt of original sin, in order to
redeem the culture. He did not do so in order to lend political support to any specific
nation, whether the United States or Israel, or any cause. The reason is that
cultures, nations, and causes are worldly things, and the result of the death
of Jesus Christ was to create the church, which is ekklesia in Greek, and
ekklesia means “called out.” What is the church called out of? The world and
worldly things. Instead of trying to change the world in some vain, idolatrous,
blasphemous quest to transform its sin and wickedness into the image of the
holiness and righteousness of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, instead of
trying to give that which is destined to die the image of that which through
the resurrection of Jesus Christ will have eternal life, the only duty that I
have seen given through Jesus Christ and His apostles and prophets to the New
Testament church is that of saving and discipling sinners. Even the good deeds
and charitable works that Jesus Christ commanded His disciples to love our
neighbors and by this way to also love Him was towards that end; acts by which
the unsaved are reached and the saved are to learn to grow in the grace and
knowledge of our only Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Now let it be known that evangelical Christians are supposed
to be sola scriptura Protestants. After all, the term “evangelical” was taken
up as a self – descriptive one by the Protestant Reformers. So, I challenge any
sola scriptural Protestant to identify me the Bible verse that commands
Christians to put aside the work of evangelizing the world and discipling those
who by and according to the grace and prerogative of God the Father (those that
the Father gave to the Son) respond to the gospel and start working to give the
unregenerate masses the appearance of righteousness, a form of godliness that
denies the power thereof, show it to me and I will repent of this missive. If
no such verse exists – and I have never encountered it in the New Testament –
then those who continue with this behavior should cease to call themselves sola
scriptura, which means they should cease to call themselves Protestants, which
means that they should cease to call themselves evangelical, which means that
they should cease to call themselves Christians.

This is no mere doctrinal dispute. Again, Jesus Christ gave us in His Holy Spirit – inspired word promises that work done in His Name would
never fail. The end result of not only decades of the religious right but many
centuries of church – states and church – cultures has been nothing but massive
thoroughgoing failure. If you refuse to consider me to be one qualified to
speak to this matter, then heed Søren Kierkegaard; read his Attack Upon Christendom (that is if you can abide theistic existentialism long enough to). So by committing all of these
efforts to works, by fighting all of these battles, that we claim to be in the
Name of Jesus Christ, what witness does the church bear to the promises, the
veracity, the power, the faithfulness, the very Name of Jesus Christ by which
we are saved and are to overcome death, be resurrected from the dead, and
inherit the Celestial City when these things fail? When WE fail?

Because like Christian in Pilgrim’s Progress, we have abandoned
the path to the Celestial City and Mount Zion to the Morality Village, the
abode of Mr. Legality and Civility by way of Mount Sinai, that same is the way
of death. We have abandoned the counsel of the apostles, prophets and Jesus
Christ Himself for that of Worldly Wisemen politicians and hucksters, in
addition to not a few very sincere but ultimately misguided and sincere pastors
and theologians, which unfortunately included not a few of the very same
Reformers themselves, who were not long removed from the murderous yoke of the
Roman church – states themselves began drowning Anabaptists and burning
heretics. Indeed, John Bunyan himself spent twelve years in the dark prison of
a Christian nation, separated from his church and family, for the crime of preaching
the gospel.

Morality, legality and civility. Sound like “Christian
values”, “family values”, “American values”, “Judeo – Christian values”, “Judeo
– Christian heritage” and all the other buzzwords to you? It certainly sounds like
that to me. Well, those are legalism, an external righteousness of the
Pharisees, devoid of the religion of the heart that Jesus Christ gave us. It is
darkness devoid of the Light that came to this world that the darkness does not
comprehend. Of course, a person, a group, a movement, a nation can impose
morality, legality and civility for a period of time by expending no small
amount of energy or cost. Keep in mind however: such moral societies do not
have to be Christian … homosexuality, abortion, crime, divorce etc. are very
much kept under control in not a few Muslim societies, and such was also the
case in fascist regimes like those run by Pinochet and Franco. Also, a
democracy cannot maintain “moral societies” anywhere nearly as long as a
monarchy, totalitarian regime or dictatorship.

But it is only for a time. Remember Lot’s wife. Or better
yet remember the Holy Roman Empire! When Constantine allegedly converted (but in
truth began to exploit the faith for state power – including appropriating the
symbol of the Prince of Peace for warfare, a fact that we should think of when
so many evangelicals unconditionally support the war in Iraq as well as torture)
Eusebius and many other pastors and theologians of the time insisted that the
whole thing was the work of God, that Constantine’s making Christianity the
religion of the empire was part of God’s redemptive-historic plan for mankind,
and that through the Roman Empire the whole world would be subdued for Jesus
Christ. What happened? It failed. The Holy Roman Empire broke apart, falling to
the Muslims.

The reason why is that Jesus Christ did not come to earth,
conduct His ministry, die from the cross, and rise from the dead in order to
bring such things into existence. Those things are not wrapped up within the

promises of God, so they will fail. They are works of the flesh, not of the spirit, so they are vanity. You can fight it, you can delay it, but ultimately, as a dog returns to his vomit (Proverb 26:11) that which is sinful will return to sin. A system of laws and rituals can control an unregenerate person for a time, but that sinner will ultimately go back to sin just as
Pliable, Simple, Sloth, Presumption, Formalist, Hypocrisy, Mistrust, Timorous
and all the rest abandoned the true pilgrim Christian on the straight and
narrow path to the Celestial City. And as societies are by definition going to
contain large majorities of unsaved and in many instances shall be ruled by
them, they will go the same way.

This was the failure of the doctrine of the ecclesiola within
the ecclesia, the actual church within the political and cultural church-state
that was advanced in some form by Augustine (representing as he did Catholicism),
Calvin (representing church – state Protestantism) and various others, and it
is the same failure of the various modern dominionism movements -including but
certainly not limited to the religious right and some of the more robust forms
of premillennial dispensationalism and Christian Zionism – whose adherents
proclaim themselves to be taking (or taking back) cultures, nations and
ultimately the globe for Christ.

I am reminded of the words of the pastor character in Frank
Peretti’s novel The Visitation (not exactly Pilgrim’s Progress granted,
but a good read nonetheless!) who upon hearing an inexperienced and zealous
pastor state “we are taking this town for Christ” replied “not even Christ took
a town for Christ.” As Jesus Christ’s own nation, the Jews, rejected Him, what
more evidence is there that Jesus Christ did not die for a nation, a culture, a
political agenda, or any other worldly thing, but rather to redeem the church?
Now Jesus Christ’s death and resurrection did, against all odds, succeed. The
church was born, has existed for going on 2,000 years, and will live forever.
However, the failure of all of these movements proves that no matter the
sincerity, fervency, and honorable motives of many of the people who inspire
and are caught up in them, are sadly due to fail because they have no part in
Jesus Christ’s promises and thus will have no part in His resurrection.

I keep hearing Christians speak of how this can be changed
with a revival, and have taken it upon themselves to try to initiate one. They
recall how society was transformed in America and Britain through the Great
Awakenings, and long for another to happen. I remember the claims that great
outpouring of national unity and people returning to churches after September
11th 2001 may spark just such a revival, a return of this nation to
its “Christian values and heritage.” It was easy to suffer such fantasies when
George W. Bush was in office. Well, not only did George W. Bush prove to be
someone who does not believe that the Bible is literally true and the final
authority and also that Muslims and Christians (and presumably other religions
as well) all pray to the same god, but this nation is now saddled with a
president about whom no one can entertain such delusions. Alas, it was just
another failure by people who were never seeking the true Will of Jesus Christ
to begin with.

While Jonathan Edwards, George Whitefield and the other
revivalists of these awakenings may have had some state – church or state –
culture sympathies, the reason why their revivals as well as the missionary
revival started by William Carey and Adoniram Judson and before them Zinzendorf,
Spener and the Moravians succeeded was because their aim was to preach the
gospel and save souls! Their goals were not social or political but spiritual.
That was why they could not fail. They accomplished the results that they were
seeking because the results were the Lord adding to the church such as should
be saved (Acts 2:47). And yes, that verse does say THE LORD adding to the
church, not man through his own efforts doing so. Why? Because as stated
earlier … it was the Lord’s doing, the Lord’s work, the Lord’s battle to begin
with. Do the Lord’s will, and the Lord fights for you. Do your own will, and the
Lord fights against you. Do you deny this? Well then ask King Saul. His
kingdom, his portion was taken from him and given to another because he stopped
fighting the Lord’s battle the Lord’s way and started fighting his battles his
way. Instead of establishing God’s kingdom, it became about Saul’s kingdom.
When Saul’s son asked him for what cause did he seek the life of David, who had
never done any harm to Saul, King Saul cursed his son, calling him the son of a
dog, and asked “don’t you realize that as long as David lives you will never
have MY KINGDOM?” But it was never Saul’s kingdom to give. Saul and his sons
died, God’s kingdom went to David, and through the One Jesus Christ who
descended from David, it will last forever.

So, Christian, are you laboring for Mr. Legality with
Civility in the village Morality for things that, like the Holy Roman Empire,
the Reformed church – states, and Saul’s kingdom, will not last because they
are of this world and are things that Revelation 20 and 21 states will be
destroyed with fire and replaced with a new heaven and a new earth? Or are you
going to love Jesus Christ by keeping His commandments, and thereby laboring
for things that will last forever, in the Celestial City where the rust and
moth cannot destroy?

Gentle Christian, I sincerely entreat and implore you to
turn aside from all that which is pertaining to Mr. Legality, Civility, and the
village Morality … things of Sinai that will fail. Instead, join Pilgrim on the
narrow path to the Celestial City so that your works will last forever. In
closing, let me give you some words by Russell K. Carter, circa 1886.

  1. Standing on the promises of Christ
    my King,
    Through eternal ages let His praises ring,
    Glory in the highest, I will shout and sing,
    Standing on the promises of God.
  • Refrain:
    Standing, standing,
    Standing on the promises of God my Savior;
    Standing, standing,
    I’m standing on the promises of God.
  • Standing on the promises that
    cannot fail,
    When the howling storms of doubt and fear assail,
    By the living Word of God I shall prevail,
    Standing on the promises of God.
  • Standing on the promises I now can
    see
    Perfect, present cleansing in the blood for me;
    Standing in the liberty where Christ makes free,
    Standing on the promises of God.
  • Standing on the promises of Christ
    the Lord,
    Bound to Him eternally by love’s strong cord,
    Overcoming daily with the Spirit’s sword,
    Standing on the promises of God.
  • Standing on the promises I cannot
    fall,
    List’ning every moment to the Spirit’s call,
    Resting in my Savior as my all in all,
    Standing on the promises of God.
  • Posted in Christianity, Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 5 Comments »

    Mumbai Attacks: Terrorism Or Warfare?

    Posted by Job on December 1, 2008

    Now when dealing with the war on terror with respect to the United States, I always try to bring up the inconvenient issue of America’s dealings in the region, starting with our overthrow of the Iranian government because of a dispute over oil profits and continuing onto such issues as our recruitment and training of such people as Usama bin Laden to fight the Soviet Union in Afghanistan, our training, recruiting and arming Saddam Hussein to fight Soviet – aligned Iran, two wars in Iraq, various machinations with Afghanistan to protect a vital oil pipeline that runs through that nation, our military base in Saudi Arabia, and our abject failures in and subsequent withdrawals from Lebanon and Somalia. With that type of record plus our support for Israel, I really cannot blame any Muslim, Arab, or North African for thinking that we are out to get them, or at the very least will not hesitate to pursue our own agenda at their expense. Seriously, what basis do these people have for feeling otherwise? Do not claim that we had the interests of the Iraqi people in mind when we put Saddam Hussein in power and armed him to the teeth for the purposes of starting a proxy war with an Iranian regime that we put in power (because the prior regime wanted to use its own oil profits for economic development!) to fight a horrible war that dragged on for eight years. And as for freeing the Afghanis from Soviet domination: did any of us know or care about how the Afghanis were living BEFORE the Soviets invaded? Nope. It was all about the Soviets, never the Afghanis, which was why we not only had no problem with the Taliban regime that took over Afghanistan after the Soviets were driven out, but we actually had dealings with the Taliban. I have no problem with pointing out that a great many of our issues in that region are the direct result of first our Cold War actions, and then our attempts to be “the world superpower/leader/police” afterwards. Seriously, how many Americans honestly care whether or how people in Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc. live or die so long as we retain our own high and comfortable standard of living? We all know the answer to that question. You can call it liberal anti – Americanism, I call it admitting things like the fact that conservative pro – American types honestly did not care how evil Saddam was or how brutally he was treating his own people until he invaded Kuwait over his desire to increase oil prices. (Again, he wanted an increase in oil prices because his regime was broke because of the war with Iran that we put him in power and armed and funded him to fight. After the Soviet Union collapsed, we had no reason to continue funding Saddam, so he had to look after his own affairs. So, who out there is surprised that a guy that we trained and put in power to start a war reacted to his own economic and political crisis by, well, STARTING A WAR?) It is our prerogative to seek our own interests and use violence in doing so? Well fine, but if you take that belief, then you have no standing for refusing the Muslims/Arabs/North Africans that same prerogative.

    However, my “contextualization” does not apply to India. India has in fact strongly allied itself with America, Israel, and China … three nations that are involved in violent struggles against Muslims to one extent or another. (China’s problems with Islamic separatists is a spectacularly underreported story.) Of course, imperalistic Islam has taken notice of this and does not like it. However, India has no history of pursuing economic and military aggression against Muslim states. Quite the contrary, India actually treats its Muslim population comparatively well, allowing them not only religious and economic freedom but to politically organize. While London’s socialist Guardian newspaper predictably claims that India’s terror problems are due to India’s discrimination and oppression of Muslims, especially in Kashmir, the truth is that Muslims get far better treatment in India than non – Muslims can expect in any Muslim country, including moderate pro – western regimes like Jordan, Turkey and Pakistan.

    This is not to say that India is perfect: after all consider the murderous persecution against Christians in the Orissa region. However, the issue is that the discrimination, marginalization and oppression of Muslims in India is not state – sponsored or supported. Quite the contrary, conservatives such as those who opine for the Wall Street Journal have charged the Indian government with being TOO NICE to its Muslim minority!

    It is well known that Muslims in India are but one of many groups all over the world that face discrimination, marginalization and oppression. Yet how many of these put – upon groups respond to their maltreatment with sustained organized acts of violence designed to murder as many innocent defenseless civilians as possible plus to inflict widespread panic, economic collapse, and political instability? Muslims would appear to be unique in this respect. And since as stated earlier the Muslims that attack India can hardly claim themselves to be targeting a regime that has waged economic, diplomatic and military aggression against severely overmatched Muslim and Arab states, then the “self – defense” angle is not nearly plausible as it is with the United States, Britain, and Israel.

    So that leads to this conclusion: the bombings in Mumbai are not acts of terror designed to cause the India government to change their policies, as India has no policies that can be construed to be opposing Islam or Arab regimes beyond maintaining financial and diplomatic ties with nations who allegedly do, which incidentally Muslim regimes such as Syria and Iran do the same by having relations with Russia, who is subjugating Islamic Chechnya, and China who has their own aforementioned problems. In other words, there are no anti – Islamic actions on the part of India for any terror acts to change. (Please, do not raise the Kashmir canard, as the Kashmir extremists will settle nothing less for India giving up control of the region, so Muslims and liberal apologists ought to call the Kashmir dispute what it is … Muslims attempting to start a civil war and to grab land that is internationally recognized as belonging to India. In other words, what ultimately happened in Kosovo, except in that instance the Muslims had our help in their land grab scheme!)

    No, make no mistake, this is war. The Muslim world is at war with India. It is no less than an imperialistic war of aggression, because as stated before India has done nothing to Muslims either outside of or within its borders to provoke such a war. The Muslim world is trying to exert violent and economic pressure from without and within in order to bring about the collapse of the secular Indian government and replace it with an Islamic one. Of course, when that happens, such a government will go about forcing its Hindu population (as well as its other religions, including but not limited to Christianity) to either convert or leave. (That is assuming that they even allow anyone to leave, as they certainly did not give the Christians in Sudan that option, it was either convert or be killed or made a slave.) So, the Muslim world is waging an imperialistic war with India in order to make it into a Muslim land, just as Islam set about doing shortly after the religion was founded, just as the Koran commands Muslims to do.

    Again, I am not convinced by the notion that all of these are internal problems with internal Muslims. First, even though everyone including the Indian government is falling backwards over themselves to implicate first the Kashmir situation and then Pakistan, and that a local obscure group has claimed responsibility, and that Al Qaeda has distanced themselves from the attack, we cannot ignore that this attack has Al Qaeda’s fingerprints all over it. There was the nature of the attack, a spectacular coordinated event. There was also the goal of attacking economic centers to cause financial turmoil (please note Al Qaeda’s recent claims that our current financial problems were caused by 9/11). It fits the methods, goals and ideologies of bin Laden. Also, what evidence is there that the obscure India militant group had the resources and expertise to carry out such an attack?

    So, you might ask, why would Al Qaeda deny involvement and allow a local front group to take credit? For P.R. purposes. Al Qaeda’s support is based on the notion that they are defending Muslim victims of aggression. As India does nothing to harm Muslims within its borders or without, for Al Qaeda to target India turns them from freedom fighters to aggressors in the eyes of Muslims and other people in the region. Add that to the huge number of innocent Muslims that Al Qaeda has killed in Iraq, it is something that their image could ill afford right now. But rest assured (according to my theory anyway) let the Indian government take violent action, a military or police crackdown against these murderous criminals, against this army attempting to overthrow its government, and we will very shortly see a tape from Al Qaeda declaring jihad against India for its crimes of aggression against Islam.

    And as for the Kashmir situation … that is even more evidence that this is an international Islamic war on India. After all, who denies that Muslims from other countries haven’t been smuggling arms and fighters into the Kashmir region that ultimately filter down into other parts of India for years? Kashmir merely serves as a front, an opening, an excuse just as “Palestine” serves the same purpose to funnel arms and extremists in through the Syrian, Egyptian, Lebanese etc. borders. Kashmir is merely what the Muslim world is using as the entry point, their home base for their war with India, and were India ever to grant “independence” to Kashmir, a) Muslims would then merely claim for themselves other places in northern India and B) Kashmir would be the launchingpad for military and terror campaigns in India. For Muslims do not merely want Kashmir. They do not merely want northern India. They want the whole country.

    So, if the Muslim world is attempting to conquer India for Islam, what makes you think that they will stop there? And if they succeed in conquering India, who’s next? That is the first question that must be asked. However, the second and most important question that must be asked: what should the proper Christian response be to Muslim designs for global domination? Christian imperialism in turn? Globalism? The new world order? Mandatory religious pluralism, where all religions are forced to deny that their religion is the only way to salvation? I dare say that none of those are solutions that the New Testament would endorse.

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 11 Comments »

    Apparently Buying Five Billion Dollars Worth Of Arms From Israel Since 2002 Made India A Terror Target!

    Posted by Job on November 29, 2008

    Officials: India mishandled hostage situation

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , | 15 Comments »

    Richard Holbrooke Would Lead Obama Administration Into War With Iran Just Like McCain!

    Posted by Job on September 29, 2008

    Iran: And the Beat Goes On The beating of war drums, that is

     

    In a last-ditch, all-out effort to pave the way for war with Iran,Israel’s lobby in the U.S. has inaugurated a new front group: United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI). What, “another” neocon front group – why is this important? With Richard Holbrooke, Obama’s most prominent foreign policy advisor – and a likely Secretary of State or National Security Advisor in the Obama administration – joining neocon nutcase James R. Woolsey in the top leadership of this new group, the signal is clear: UANI represents a bipartisan call for war.

    In an op ed piece for what else but the War Street Journal, the four horsemen of the apocalypse – Holbrooke, Woolsey, Dennis Ross, the Israel Lobby’s ace-in-the-hole in the Obama camp (please note: Ross is a former George H. W. Bush official who also served in the same capacity under Bill Clinton and trained Condi Rice), and Mark D. Wallace, formerly U.S. representative to the U.N. for management and reform – mirror the joint statement of Obama and McCain on the economic crisis. This is “not a partisan matter” – the War Party is the only party that really matters. “We may have different political allegiances and worldviews, ” they aver,

    “Yet we share a common concern – Iran’s drive to be a nuclear state. We believe that Iran’s desire for nuclear weapons is one of the most urgent issues facing America today, because even the most conservative estimates tell us that they could have nuclear weapons soon.

    “A nuclear-armed Iran would likely destabilize an already dangerous region that includes Israel, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan, and pose a direct threat to America’s national security,” etc., etc., etc…

    I suppose it’s just a coincidence that the list of threatened countries starts with Israel and ends with the United States, but I wonder…

    Leaving the realm of speculation, and entering the region of hard facts: our own National Intelligence Estimate on Iran and its alleged nuclear weapons program shows that the Iranians had a weapons program that they abandoned: “We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program.” While keeping the option open, the Iranian regime has not restarted its nuclear program, according to our spooks, and probably could not iron out all the technical problems and hoarding of nuclear materials until at least 2015 – and even then there is no evidence Tehran has any such intention.

    The NIE was issued last year around this time, and afterward Robert Gates spoke to the New York Times Magazine:

    “One afternoon in late November, Defense Secretary Robert Gates was flying back to Washington from the Army base at Fort Hood, Tex., where he had spoken with soldiers and spouses about the future of Iraq. Sitting across from him at his desk in the back of the Pentagon’s jet, I asked him about the possibility of another military conflict: U.S. air strikes on Iran. ‘The last thing the Middle East needs now is another war,’ he said quietly. ‘We have to keep all options on the table,’ he went on, reciting the standard caveat. ‘But if Iraq has shown us anything, it’s the unpredictability of war. Once a conflict starts, the statesmen lose control.'”

    This was supposed to signal that the much-anticipated U.S. strike on Iran – the imminence of which was predicted with near certainty by a number of commentators, including this one – has been successfully aborted. There was a collective and well-nigh audible sigh of relief, from Tehran to Terre Haute, but some of us were not convinced by this display of official caution. After all, the statesmen have lost control before….

    If the NIE was supposed to blast the neocon war campaign out of the water, then its authors did not take into account the persistence – indeed, fanaticism – of the United for War With Iran crowd. The sheer relentlessness of the effort suggests its essential character as a lobbying campaign on behalf of a special interest – in this case, a very special interest. Corporate and professional lobbyists are notably impervious to facts, and tend to cherry-pick according to the interests of their clients, and foreign lobbyists certainly fall into this category. Yet the latter have a certain edge to them, lacking in the others – and Israel’s lobby has the sharpest edge of all.

    No one even pretends anymore that the Israel lobby isn’t behind the effort to drag us into another Middle Eastern war. You don’t have to be me, or Mearsheimer and Walt, to make this case: you have only to listen to the public pronouncements of Israel’s leaders, who areopenly demanding that either we strike, or else they will – perhaps, as has been suggested by Benny Morris, with nuclear weapons.

    In the U.S., AIPAC, the scandal-rocked central command of Israel’s amen corner, has come out of the shadows, where they remainedduring the run-up to the Iraq war, and taken the lead in calling for harsh sanctions and a military blockade of Iranian ports. Now we have this bipartisan ad hoc committee taking out full page newspaper ads and speaking in the implied names of both major party presidential candidates.

    I had to laugh when I read, in the Journal op ed piece, that “Tehran’s development of a nuclear bomb could serve as the ‘starter’s gun’ in a new and potentially deadly arms race in the most volatile region of the world. Many believe that Iran’s neighbors would feel forced to pursue the bomb if it goes nuclear.” Methinks the starter gun went off long off – sometime in the early 1960s, Israel having earlier procured the technology to make the Bomb from the French.

    “Iran,” say the four horsemen, “is a deadly and irresponsible world actor, employing terrorist organizations including Hezbollah and Hamas to undermine existing regimes and to foment conflict. Emboldened by the bomb, Iran will become more inclined to sponsor terror, threaten our allies, and support the most deadly elements of the Iraqi insurgency.” One has only to insert “Israel” where Iran sits in those sentences, and the pot-kettle-black aspect of this whole issue is underscored, as is the ridiculous double standard. After all, Israel has surely been emboldened by its possession of nukes, lo these many years, and acted in a manner that could reasonably called irresponsible – and even deadly, now that you mention it. Yet Israel is not only given a pass, but the defining factor of the Middle Eastern strategic environment – Israel’s nuclear arsenal – goes unmentioned by these worthies.

    They are full of laughable pronouncements imbued with the solemnity that usually accompanies the argument from authority:

    “The world rightfully doubts Tehran’s assertion that it needs nuclear energy and is enriching nuclear materials for strictly peaceful purposes. Iran has vast supplies of inexpensive oil and natural gas, and its construction of nuclear reactors and attempts to perfect the nuclear fuel cycle are exceedingly costly. There is no legitimate economic reason for Iran to pursue nuclear energy.”

    Aside from the propriety of assuming to speak for “the world,” one has to ask where the war propagandists have been hiding out lately: haven’t they read about those gas lines in Iran? Sanctions and official corruption have contributed to the country’s shortage, while rationing ensured it would continue. Indeed, the more tireless Iran-ophobes were at one point speculating that the resulting riots might well spell the end for the mullahs.

    And I’m surprised they raised the following accusation, considering the context in which it is hurled:

    “By continuing to act in open defiance of its treaty obligations under the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, Iran rejects the inspections mandated by the IAEA and flouts multiple U.N. Security Council resolutions and sanctions.”

    Iran is fully within its rights, under the terms of the treaty, to develop a nuclear energy program, which is what they say they are doing – and, as those gas lines attest, they have a real need for it. At any rate, at least Iran has signed the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, unlike a certain country whose interests seem to be at the heart of the signers’ argument:

    At the same time, Iranian leaders declare that Israel is illegitimate and should not exist. President Ahmadinejad specifically calls for Israel to be ‘wiped off from the map,’ while seeking the weapons to do so. Such behavior casts Iran as an international outlier. No one can reasonably suggest that a nuclear-armed Iran will suddenly honor international treaty obligations, acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, or cease efforts to undermine the Arab-Israeli peace process.”

    That old canard about wiping Israel off the map has been debunked so many times as a mis-translation of what Ahmadinejad really said – which was something more akin to predicting that Israel would be washed away by the tides of history and demography – yet it keeps bouncing right back. Just like all the other lies spread far and wide by the War Party’s propagandists. Remember that one aboutMohammed Atta meeting a top Iraqi intelligence official at the Prague airport? That one didn’t die until well after the invasion. I wonder how many people still believe Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 terrorist attacks? A lie, repeated relentlessly, becomes enmeshed in the public consciousness, and rooting it out is a major operation, with a problematic success rate.

    That’s what we do, here at Antiwar.com – root out the lies, and set the record straight. We did it in the run-up to the last war, and we’redoing the same thing when it comes to the Iranian issue. The chances that we’ll succeed, this time, in stopping the rush to war are better now, perhaps, but I wouldn’t bet the farm on it. The forces pushing for war, led by the Israel lobby, are marshalling their supporters for a final push. Even if they don’t pull it off before the election, the Holbrooke-Woolsey Pact will go down in history as the turning point, politically, the crucial juncture when the American elite made the decision to go to war because the Lobby demanded it.

    Our political elites speak in unison: accept the bailout, pay trillions to the plutocrats – accept the coming war with Iran – and pay with the lives of your children. Our leaders, their system in crisis, have closed ranks around the slogan of Big Government at home, and progressively bigger wars abroad. If it were one crisis, or the other, Americans might remain impassive. In this case, however, with the economy imploding and the threat of war looming simultaneously, the Washington crowd that thought it could ride out the turbulence is finding it’s a bit more of a bumpy ride than they or anyone else imagined. The people are awakening, but there is a danger in this: without leaders of their own, their rebellion is bound to be inchoate, undirected, and perhaps even violent. As Garet Garrett put it, anticipating this moment some sixty odd years ago:

    “No doubt the people know they can have their Republic back if they want it enough to fight for it and to pay the price. The only point is that no leader has yet appeared with the courage to make them choose.”

    ~ Justin Raimondo

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments »

    While $700 Billion Bailout Is Being Negotiated The Cost Of Iraq War Is $550 Billion And Rising At $12 Billion A Month!

    Posted by Job on September 28, 2008

    Predictions vs. Reality in Iraq

    by Ron Paul

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

    Leading Charismatic J. Lee Grady Claiming That Sarah Palin Is A Prophet Chosen By God To Lead Christians Into Holy War!

    Posted by Job on September 10, 2008

    I know, I know, yet another political article. I promise to do better, but how can I ignore things like this? Brother PJ Miller tipped me off to this fromJ. Lee Gray, editor of the influential Charisma Magazine. Now similar to Christianity Today and Roman Catholics with evangelical Christians, Charisma Magazine should have been rejected by Pentecostals and charismatics once they started accepting oneness pentecostal anti – Trinitarian heretics among their midst. Here it is in black and white from J. Lee Grady’s pen:

    2. Trinitarians must embrace our Oneness brothers. I know people in the Assemblies of God who were taught all their lives that the Jesus worshiped by Oneness Pentecostals is “another Jesus.” The Lord told us to love one another, but we have avoided this by declaring that our brothers aren’t really in the family.

    So what excuse is there for calling Charisma Magazine anything but what it is, which is apostate? Even better:

    It all sounds like pointless doctrinal hair-splitting to us younger types. After all, who can explain the mystery of God’s triune nature? Instead of fussing about terms or reducing the gospel to a baptismal formula, why can’t we rally around our common belief that the Father sent His Son to save the world?

    Excuse me, but what vital Christian doctrine CANNOT that be said about? Creationism? It is too hard to understand. Baptism? It is too hard to obey. The incarnation? Can’t believe it. The resurrection? Can’t accept it. Salvation only through the cross? Can’t put up with it. Eternal damnation in the lake of fire for sinners? Can’t conceive it. Adulterers, liars, thieves, necromancers, occultists, homosexuals, and apostates in the pulpit? Judge not, touch not mine anointed and do my prophet no harm! Look, A FALSE GOSPEL CANNOT SAVE!

    But enough of that digression. J. Lee Grady claims that Sarah Palin has the Deborah anointing. Now my position is that all of these various spirits that Pentecostals and charismatics speak of do not exist, as there is one Lord who has one spirit, the Holy Spirit. Also, the word “anointing” means “choosing”, when one is “anointed by God”, it means that a person was given a calling by God to a specific calling or ministry in service to the Lord and His people. So I would discourage Christians from going around saying that someone has “a David anointing” or “a Hezekiah anointing” or “Paul’s spirit”, but I will go ahead and say that it is a crude and possibly incorrect but still understandable way of saying that someone has the same office, calling, or task as another Christian.

    On J. Lee Grady’s part, this is very problematic for two reasons. First, the Bible commands us to “lay hands quickly on no man.” That is 1 Timothy 5:22. Now the best context for this verse was the practice of the church laying hands on people when they choose officers for the church. Please recall that when Stephen the martyr and Philip, Procorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas were appointed as deacons in Acts 6:1-6. Verse 6 states that after the church selected them, the apostles laid hands on them after praying for them. Though laying hands on people was part of the ritual or process of actually choosing and placing people in the position of service, it became a shorthanded reference for the act of choosing and installing a person into Christian service itself. But please note Acts 6:1-6 and interpret it with 1 Timothy 5:16-25. In both cases, it is obvious that a person should not be laid hands upon, or chosen, or anointed, unless the person had demonstrated their worthiness for the position by their fruits: excellent reputations, spiritual maturity, strong knowledge of and adherence to the Word of God in the eyes of the local congregation.

    Now unless Grady has some extensive past history with Sarah Palin that he for some reason chooses not to reveal in his column, he has NO BASIS for claiming under New Testament church standards that God has called this woman to leadership or anything else. If he has been in longtime Christian fellowship with Palin, he should have let us know this. Otherwise, we can presume that like 99.9% of America, he was so ignorant of this woman’s existence that he could not have picked her out of a lineup until now.

    So claiming that Palin was appointed by God to anything is irresponsible, reckless, and dangerous because it causes Christians to presume that she is generally acting and leading according to God’s desires and even non – Christians that respect our faith to presume that she is basically honest and moral. Such claims also damage how Christians view church doctrines and practice. Talk like this hinders people from knowing that being called by God or even elected to service by the church MEANS SOMETHING. That there are STANDARDS that these people must adhere to in order to be eligible for their appointment (in the case of a deacon) and AFTER their appointment (in the case of church appointed deacons and God – called everything else). That people keep throwing around  “I have an anointing, he has an anointing, I feel a great anointing and move of the Holy Spirit in this place” with the same level of care and discernment as they would use to say “boy that was a mighty fine and tasty bowl of oatmeal” is a great reason why we allow anyone – especially if he is a Christian – do whatever they want with no accountability whatsoever. 

    So what is Grady’s basis for alleging that Palin has a call on her life? Her politics. Her values. Her culture. Her family. Her actions as mayor and governor. And keep in mind: he knows NONE of these first hand! He only knows them by their reports from people who have a motive to portray Palin in the best possible light for worldly reasons, and of course Grady is ignoring all of  the people with opposing views of this woman’s performance and character. They’re just liberals who reject the Bible, right? Now if they were “Jesus Christ was born again in hell” Word of Faith teachers, “Jesus Christ was rich” prosperity doctrine teachers, or “God the Father suffered and died on the cross” United (oneness) Pentecostals, they’d be good credible people, right? 

    This is replacing true Christianity, which is of the spirit, with a works – based religion of the flesh. Of the circumcision. And you know what? It is a very shallow one at that. Islam, Judaism, Hinduism … do you know what those religions require before a person is declared worthy, a lifetime process of rigorous spiritual, religious, and personal demands? Muslims according in particular to their belief system have no assurance of their salvation when they die (unless they perish in a holy war) no matter their dedication to Islam during their lives. But Grady – and those like him – are willing to say that just because we like what we KNOW of her church (its denomination is similar to mine), her culture (small town self – reliant Alaska outdoorsmen are more holy and sanctified than those inner city welfare mothers?), her lifestyle (a married mother of five is more holy than, you know, a married mother of two or a single mother of any amount?) and her political beliefs?

    The last one is key. Because she shares my values, her daughter being pregnant out of wedlock is fine. It is covered by, you know, grace. But since Jamie Lynn Spears and her family does not share my values, it is horrible. No grace for you! And as for Obama, we can dismiss him by saying that if it was his daughter he would have forced her to have an abortion, convicting him in advance for something that he hasn’t even done yet and we have no idea whether he would! The opposite of grace for you! Never mind the fact that pro – abortion people who have unwanted pregnancies choose to have the baby all the time. Never mind the fact that pro – life people who have unwanted pregnancies have abortions all the time. (Studies assert that evangelicals have the same abortion rate as the national average, some claim that it is even higher.)

    Now, THIS is where the 30 years of James Dobson Focus on the Family religious right mindset of conferring righteousness on people based on their lifestyles, cultures, affiliations, and political beliefs has gotten us. And we really are entering a sort of danger zone here. Where J. Lee Grady has generally not been one given to trying to influence politics, he goes and calls this woman God’s prophet. And Albert Mohler, usually a no – nonsense figure who also avoids religious right politics and is no supporter of Pentecostalism, has basically endorsed Palin, something that I can find no evidence whatsoever that he did for Mike Huckabee, a leader of his own denomination. If this is not Phariseeism as expressed in the political and cultural context, what is?

    As I said of Grady, if Mohler has some pre – existing relationship with this woman that causes him to regard her as being worthy of his endorsement based largely on her being a Christian (or should I again say a Christian with the “right” cultural markers … where in the Bible does it say that shooting bears, eating mooseburgers, living in the frontier, and having 5 kids places you closer to the kingdom of heaven or is evidence of the inner workings of the fruits of the Holy Spirit?), then he should let us know. Otherwise, it is AT BEST reckless and irresponsible. At worst, it is showing much more respect than he ever would to even another professed Christian that came in different packaging. Would Grady and Mohler be as effusive over a Methodist from Chicago or Episcopal from Baltimore, especially if they were Democrats, even if they were right on the doctrinal issues and the political ones directly related to them (i.e. abortion and homosexuality)?You know the answer to that question and so do they. 

    And that is just the first part. The second concern is not nearly as lengthy but even more important. Go back to the book of Judges, chapter 4 in particular for this “Deborah anointing” issue. What was the situation? The children of Israel were at war with an enemy that, oh well, could be compared to the Muslims of today without being too far off. What did God choose Deborah to be? His prophetess through whom He spoke His Word. Again, why did God raise up prophets and judges in those days? TO USE THEM TO LEAD ISRAEL IN BATTLE AGAINST THE ENEMY. And what happened? Though Barak was the judge and the leader of the army, THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF, he would not go into battle against the ancestors of today’s MUSLIMS, in particular THE PALESTINIANS, without God’s prophetess Deborah on the battlefield leading him. Why? Because though Barak had been called by God to lead the army, because of his weak character and faith he was unwilling to do so without a woman of stronger character and faith at his side.

    So here we are in America in a war against terror against a Muslim ideology. And – if their electoral hopes and dreams are fulfilled as I think they will be – the commander in chief will be another Barak, a man who professes Christian faith (raised Episcopal but now Southern Baptist evangelical) but does not wear it on his sleeve in the appropriate manner or keep company with the right and proper powerbrokers in the evangelical world (as a matter of fact Palin is his third try at short circuit people like Dobson and also the more Baptist – oriented evangelicals for lesser known Pentecostal figures like John Hagee and Rod Parsley) and is not sufficiently socially conservative in his beliefs.

    So where Barak fell short in his true faith, McCain similarly falls short in this new universalist pluralist ecumenical dual covenant (or truthfully many covenant!) works based religion that serves the aims of the religious right. Again, never forget that the preferred candidate of most of this crowd was Mormon Mitt Romney, who fit their “culture and views” requirements precisely and the fellow’s actual religious doctrines (as well as his basic honesty and integrity or more accurately his complete lack thereof) was of no consequence. (Extending this a bit, this also explains J. Lee Grady’s embrace of oneness pentecostal heretics, whose beliefs are totally wrong, but who nonetheless have been a part of the Pentecostal religious scene since 1916, are growing in prominence and influence especially in music and with famous preachers/televangelists and their many theologians in Pentecostal seminaries and Bible colleges, so they must be accepted.)

    So the morally flawed less than faithful Barak – McCain needs the pure and faithful prophetess Deborah – Palin at his side to fight the Lord’s battle and win against the Philistines – Muslims. (Please note: correlating Philistines and Muslims is not so coincidental when you consider that the term Palestine, or PALESTINIAN, is what the Roman Empire came up with to denote the Philistines, and they named Israel Palestine after their ancient enemies to spite and mock the Jews.)

    I suppose that in this imagination, their first Muslim conquest will be on election day against Barack HUSSEIN “McCain has not made in issue of my Muslim faith/I still remember the Muslim call to prayer at my madrassa, one of the most beautiful sounds in the world” Obama. That is fine. What then? Will the prophetess Deborah – Palin tell Barak – McCain to put every Muslim in Iraq, Iran, Indonesia, Somalia, Chechnya, Turkey, Kosovo, Kenya, PALESTINE, etc. to death with the sword? Or more accurately WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS? I don’t know Mr. Grady, that sounds more like McCain anti – Christ Palin false prophet to me! (So you folks thinking that Obama is the anti – Christ may have the right time but the wrong candidate!) Maybe your interpretation of scripture is different. Then again, it would have to be for you to claim that we are brothers with people who blatantly deny scripture by rejecting Trinity, not to mention those who preach the false prosperity and Word of Faith doctrines.

    You might say that Grady did not have a militaristic – eschatological intent in calling Palin “Deborah”, that he was only looking for a woman in a leadership position. First of all, even if that were the case, the guy is still wrong. Do you know why? Because words mean things. Especially words from the Bible. We can’t just go around throwing Bible terms and references around because they sound nice, make us feel good, and help us advance or win arguments (or elections). God raised up Deborah to a specific office to perform a specific task. Claiming that a woman that is being appointed to run a college or a bank or even a church ministry is bad enough because of the context. But saying the same of a woman who actually would be the advisor to a commander in chief to a nation that is at war is making a direct parallel between McCain and Palin and the actual Barak and Deborah of the Bible that cannot be ignored!

    Also, this paragraph by J. Lee Grady proves that he is not merely applying a Biblical female leadership analogy, even in poor context:

    When McCain announced that he had chosen Palin as his running mate, I was reminded of the biblical story of Deborah, the Old Testament prophet who rallied God’s people to victory at a time when ancient Israel was being terrorized by foreign invaders. Deborah’s gender didn’t stop her from amassing an army; she inspired the people in a way no man could. She and her defense minister, Barak, headed to the front lines and watched God do a miracle on the battlefield. In her song in Judges 5:7, Deborah declares: “The peasantry ceased, they ceased in Israel, until I, Deborah, arose, until I arose, a mother in Israel” (NASB). Sometimes it takes a true mother to rally the troops.

    Seriously, what else am I supposed to think when I read something like that? So in less than 30 years Christians have gone from cheering when Ronald Reagan largely endorsed the claims of Mormon founder Joseph Smith in declaring America to be New Jerusalem in his “we are the shining city on a hill” speech (which basically gave salvation to all who earned it by agreeing with Reagan culturally and politically, and condemned all dissenters to the lake of fire … hey didn’t Palin’s pastor do largely the same in alluding that Bush critics and Kerry voters are going to the lake of fire?) to claiming that God will use Palin to raise up his army? 

    This is where the religious right and the false doctrines surrounding it is taking Christanity, people. (The religious left is no better, so don’t even try it.) If you wish to make your calling and election in Jesus Christ sure, you had best repent yourself of it and love the next world and not this one.

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

    George Bush, Condi Rice, Mike Mukasky Tried To Stop Texas From Executing Illegal Immigrant!

    Posted by Job on August 6, 2008

    According to this link http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/595018/ and various others:

    U.S. Attorney General Michael Mukasey and Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice have written Governor Perry asking him to stop the execution of Jose Medellin on Aug 5 in order to protect Americans abroad. So, the Bush administration does not care about how our classifying enemy soldiers shooting at our soldiers on the field of battle as “illegal combatants”, denying them rights under the Geneva Convention, and holing them up at Guantanamo Bay for years without trial (as if being a soldier is illegal in the first place) may cause other nations to treat our soldiers. But he so cares about how our execution of an illegal immigrant that participated in the brutal gang rape and murder of two teenage girls will cause our travelers to be treated overseas?

    Now there are issues of international law here. It is a gray area, but some assert that it is illegal to execute foreign nationals if their countries oppose the practice. But we all know that the Bush administration has run roughshod over so many laws – domestic and international – that their true concern is not the rule of law. No, their only concern is maintaining good relations with Mexico. Maintaining good relations with Mexico – and thereby promoting open borders, globalism, the further integration of our government and economy and erosion of our sovereignty – is more important to this lawless bunch than protecting our soldiers – who the Bush administration really couldn’t care two cents about – or justice for these two American citizens. Of course, Bush cares not for justice in the cause of protecting the unborn, so who is surprised that he disregards justice in other areas? And just like everything else, the Christians who support Bush because they have so bought into the notion of “we must support the lesser of two evils” merely shrug, just as the supporters of whoever wins between Obama and McCain will do the same.

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 4 Comments »

    Joe Chavalia Kills Unarmed Indigent Single Mother In Her Own Bedroom! Why Was It Not Murder? BECAUSE HE WORKS FOR THE STATE!

    Posted by Job on August 5, 2008

    Please see link below on how the state’s power is ever increasing. And no, people, this is not about race. This is about the unchecked growth of state power and the total lack of accountability. Today, the state goes after the poor. Tomorrow, the state – and big business – will come after everybody else. Christians, what are you going to do when the anti – Christ state declares you its enemy and comes after you? Or are you so conformed to this world and its ways and so lukewarm in your witness and testimony through the life that you lead that the state will not consider you an enemy but rather a friend and hence will have no reason to come after you? 

    By the way: make no mistake the state is able to get away with this only because this “drug raid” policy targets poor people. If these same tactics targeted the rich or even the upper class, such persons would not put up with it for a second. They would leave and take their ability to create wealth, businesses, and jobs (not to mention pay the taxes!) and go to some place where the possibility of a crime being committed in their home does not result in someone dead. Now be honest: if SWAT teams were busting into upscale rave parties with guns blazing or shooting embezzlers, tax cheats, and going after the MANY affluent drug users that we have in our society, you could imagine the outrage and calls for reform. How do I know this? Do any of you remember Randy Weaver? He was a fellow that decided that our government was illegitimate because it afforded equal rights to black people. There were other reasons, mind you, but make no mistake, Weaver was primarily motivated by his white separatism. Weaver also decided to acquire himself a huge stash of weapons, and to ILLEGALLY sell those weapons to his white separatist brethren. Well, it just so happened that Weaver sold a sawed off shotgun to a federal agent that he believed was a fellow traveler. What did this person want the weapon for? To kill a police officer, or maybe any black person that had the gall to be found in the area? Weaver didn’t know or care. In any event, the fellow quite predictably refused to respond to summons to court to stand trial for his crime. So, when the authorities came to arrest Weaver, a standoff and shootout ensued that resulted in the death of Weaver’s wife. 

    Now this should come as no shock to anyone. Armed criminals tend to resist capture, and the result of this resistance often results in injury or death. Except that “conservatives”, the very same types of people that are now cheering the acquittal in this instance, rushed to Randy Weaver’s defense. The government action was “a setup.” The law that Weaver broke was “illegitimate because it infringes on our Second Amendment rights.” Weaver was “targeted because of his politically incorrect beliefs.” Rather than bringing it on herself for living with a criminal, Weaver’s wife – also shot while holding her child – was “murdered by the state.” Now the blogosphere did not exist back then, but talk radio and the conservative magazines ate it up and made Weaver a hero. He was feted on Capitol Hill, speaking before a congressional committee on the need of the ATF to change its tactics and be reformed as the personal star guest of the Republican Congress. He received a huge settlement from the government. And he never saw a day in jail for his original crime of trafficking in illegal weapons OR firing on the government officials that rightfully came to arrest him. 

    So Weaver is a hero and victim of government aggression, while Wilson “deserved it” because of her immoral and illegal life choices. What is the difference in the eyes of a conservative? We all know: class, race, and culture. Well, it is precisely the sort of classism, racism, and cultural chauvinism that allows the power of the unjust anti – Christ state to grow by leaps and bounds. , as the very “big government watchdogs” that swung into action to defend a man who was trying to kill law enforcement officials (remember G. Gordon Liddy selling “ATF agent” crosshair targets?) fully support this action. Both Ms. Weaver and Tarika Wilson died after being shot by government agents while holding their children in their arms. The difference is that the former happened because her husband was shooting back! In the Wilson case, the only shots fired were by the state. It is also ever more ironic that so many of the very conservatives that wanted to monitor and curb state power in the Weaver instance now support the Patriot Act, FISA, and virtually everything the state claims that it needs or wants to fight the war on terror. 

    news.aol.com/article/officer-acquitted-of-killing-unarmed-mom/106750?icid=100214839x1206860443x1200353710

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 3 Comments »

    Fundamentalist Christians If They Treat You Like Omar Khadr One Day Will You Renounce The Faith?

    Posted by Job on July 16, 2008

    Please read the story below. And do not pretend that America and the world is not slowly becoming a place where what is done to this Canadian teenager will not be done to Christians. As a matter of fact, in some places in the world, Christians get this treatment – and worse – already! Keep Christians that are enduring nightmares like this in mind whenever you hear the seductive doctrines of a prosperity/Word of Faith Christian, or a Christian who correlates piety and godliness with western wealth and power. Jesus Christ is coming back one day to overthrow this Babylon one day, true, but before that day happens, many sorrows are yet to come to pass! That is why I ask of and challenge you today with the question: are you ready?

    The Unending Torture of Omar Khadr

    Incidentally, the godless communists came up with these tactics that our government is using:

    Communist Coercive Methods for Eliciting Individual Compliance “Coercive Management Techniques”

    Posted in Christianity | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 10 Comments »

    WHAT BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA SPENDING FATHER’S DAY AT AN APOSTOLIC CHURCH OF GOD MEANS!

    Posted by Job on June 14, 2008

    All Hussein Obama needs to do to win this thing is to start talking about black illegitimacy and cultural dysfunction in a serious way. Seriously, THAT IT ALL HE HAS TO DO. Funny that the Wall Street Journal, a major organ of the globalist elite – which really has not attacked Obama in any serious way, which is curious as even Fox News’ “attacks” on Obama have been silly stuff like “terrorist fist jab” and “Michelle Obama is Barack’s baby mama” that are more likely to make people vote FOR the guy than AGAINST him – has not attacked the fellow either. But what has the Wall Street Journal done? Well Juan Williams, who like Barack HUSSEIN Obama whose ancestors are not from America and JUST HAPPENS TO BE THE LONGTIME TOKEN BLACK LIBERAL VOICE ON FOX NEWS, has penned this Father’s  Day piece bemoaning the illegitimacy problem, including in the black community: The Tragedy of America’s Disappearing Fathers

    One day, in a juvenile facility near his home in Jersey City, a 15-year-old black boy pulled him aside for a whispered question: Why did he write in “Somewhere in the Darkness” about a boy not meeting his father because the father was in jail? Mr. Myers, a 70-year-old black man, did not answer. He waited. And sure enough, the boy, eyes down, mumbled that he had yet to meet his own father, who was in jail.

    Obama family at new Chicago church for Fathers Day. First time out since quitting Trinity United Church of Christ

    WASHINGTON–The Obama family has a tradiiton of going to church on Fathers Day; that’s what Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.), the presumptive Democratic nominee told Jimmy Kimmel when he taped an interview with the talk show host on Friday. But the Obama family quit Trinity United Church of Christ a week ago, in the wake of divisive comments by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Father Michael Pfleger. Where to go? This Sunday, the Obamas leave their Kenwood home on a landmark block on Chicago’s South Side to attend church at the nearby Apostolic Church of God, 6320 Dorchester Ave.

    But Obama will have to work on Fathers Day. Obama will “speak about the responsibilities we have as fathers and parents to help our children achieve their dreams,” his campaign said. Parental responsibility is a theme Obama has sounded before.

    Last February, in Beaumont,Texas, Obama drew wild cheers as he told a mostly African-American crowd that parents need to shape up, turn off the TV, help their kids with their homework and stop letting them grow fat eating Popeyes chicken for breakfast.

    “It’s not good enough for you to say to your child, ‘Do good in school,’ and then when that child comes home, you got the TV set on, you got the radio on, you don’t check their homework, there is not a book in the house, you’ve got the video game playing,” said Obama.

    FOOTNOTE: Dr. Byron Brazier, a minister at the Apostolic Church of God, ran as an Obama delegate from the seventh congressional district in Illinois.

    LINK to Lynn Sweet column about Obama using bully pulpit in Texas telling parents to shape up and cut out the Popeyes.

    I always felt that all Al Gore had to do in order to beat George W. Bush in 2000 was to talk about illegitimacy. A lot of people do not remember this about Gore, but the guy was a “conservative family values Democrat” along the lines of Gary Condit during most of his career in the House and Senate … the Gores are the ones responsible for the little parental advisory stickers on rock and rap music CDs. Just like all John Kerry had to do to beat George W. Bush in 2004 was talk about Bush’s connections to Saudi Arabia OR challenge him on getting Usama bin Laden. The fact that neither Gore or Kerry did EITHER made me question whether either guy really wanted to win – or was supposed to win. If Obama does not start talking about black illegitimacy, all it will mean is that McCain was the guy selected by the various groups that both candidates AND Hillary Clinton are meeting with (Bilderbergs, Rothschilds, Soros, CFR, et al) to occupy the White House. My current theory: if these folks choose McCain, it will be to continue the warfare against CERTAIN MUSLIMS in the Middle East, Asia, and Africa for the next four years. If these folks choose Obama, it will mean that they have decided to be conciliatory towards CERTAIN MUSLIMS. Of course, that means that Obama will be used to wage POLITICAL and CULTURAL war against CERTAIN CHRISTIANS. What sort am I speaking of? Brother IndependentConservative has one example: Legal Persecution of Christians in the West Has Begun.. Sword At The Ready has another: Biblical message now criminalized – Penalties created for those who criticize homosexuality. And I recall one of my first posts on this site when it was created last year: Here It Comes: The First Law To LEGALLY ENCODE CHRISTIAN PERSECUTION IN AMERICA

    Please keep in mind that there is NO WAY that Turkey would be considering joining the EU had the European Union not totally cast off its Christian heritage and culture. Not that I advocate making Christianity worldly through heritage and culture, but still for outsiders that know nothing of the true spiritual nature of Christianity and HAVE BEEN LED BY THOUSANDS OF YEARS EVERYONE RANGING FROM POPES TO CRUSADERS TO RELIGIOUS RIGHT DOMINIONISTS INTO FALSELY EQUATING CHRISTIANITY WITH GOVERNMENT AND CULTURE BECAUSE MIXING GOVERNMENT AND CULTURE IS A KEY FEATURE OF OTHER RELIGIONS I.E. ISLAM, JUDAISM, AND HINDUISM AS WELL AS OTHER IDEOLOGIES LIKE DEMOCRACY AND MARXISM, the “Christian nation” thing is offputting. But you know that the rest of the world associates Christianity with white people, capitalism, imperialism/colonialism, and traditional European culture and values. Electing the son of a Kenyan Muslim whose false Jesus Christ promoted abortion, homosexuality, Marxism, and universalism would fulfill the dreams of the Harlem renaissance writer that rejected Christianity for Marxism Langston Hughes. This fellow wrote “Goodbye Jesus Christ” (see a commentary at John Piper’s SeeingGod.org on the fellow and his departure from Jesus Christ for black history month), and then penned this Marxist vision for America: Let America Be America Again. (Please realize that like all of W.E.B. Du Bois “Harlem Renaissance” cronies, Hughes was a mere Marxist propagandist, a fact that you will never hear in public schools or in the mainstream media.)

    So, Obama’s visiting theologically conservative black churches – including that of James Meeks and Byron Brazier … the media lumps him into the same category of Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pfleger despite the fact that Meeks is actually a conservative evangelical – may be laying the groundwork for HUSSEIN Obama to stake out socially and culturally conservative positions for the black community similar to those of Bill Cosby that will please all but the most extreme elements of the left. And if the extreme elements of the left, the “a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle” and the “marriage oppresses women and children” crowd (yes these people actually do exist … see

    Father’s Day really is the most disgusting thing imaginable. Mother’s Day started out as a women’s anti-War protest, but there is no even slightly justifiable reason for Father’s Day, other than stuffing more commodities that no one wants down the exhausted and overstretched maw of the American people. Hideous! Lets all work for and look forward to the destruction of the Family, Private Property and Irrational Religion.

      on this post) and Obama will actually appear moderate, which is what he needs to win the election. It would be his, well, “Sister Souljah moment.” So keep an eye on the campaign. If this does not happen, then McCain will win and Christians can expect the U.S. to fight directly and by proxy more wars in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and around the world which will result not only in more violence but more inflation, poverty, and economic insecurity. But if it does happen, Obama will win, and a full push to make Biblical Christianity basically illegal will commence. That is why I say that Christians should vote for NEITHER, because the result would be voting for Stalin or Hitler.  

    Posted in Jesus Christ | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

     
    %d bloggers like this: