Tuesday, February 26, 2008

TTP Reclaiming the Mind Offers More Poison

TTP has yet again offered poison to Christians. While seeming to offer the "question" of the Emergent Church Movement and what its about, clues show they hardly neutral, but rather one sided.

Clue #1: Bradley Nassif, Eastern Orthodox "theologian". There is no common ground between the sister of Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, and biblical Christianity. They do not have a biblical ecclesiology as Patton seems to think. Patton says:"The greatest weakness of Evangelicalism is our ecclesiology and our “historical amnesia.” I agree."

Such an ecumenical view merely makes the point I've held to for a long time: true biblical Christianity does not share its history with Rome, her sisters, nor her daughters.

Patton goes on to encourage his readers: "Don’t forget to check out Dr. Nassif’s excellent podcast called Simply Orthodox."

Excellent? By what standard?

For a treatment of the Eastern Orthodox Church go here:

"The inclusion of pagan priests and the infiltration of Greek philosophers led the church to become seeker-friendly, or as Dr. Morey notes on pg. 20, “the first emerging church.”...With an extensive section on the Hellenization of Eastern Orthodoxy, Dr. Morey provides documented proof that is beyond refutation that from its beginning, Eastern Orthodox theology was molded and shaped by pagan doctrines and rituals. Dr. Morey describes how the worldview of Origen and those who followed him was thoroughly pagan. He illustrates how instead of Christianizing the dominant Hellenistic philosophies and religions around them, they succeeded in Hellenizing Christianity (pg. 41). "

I wonder if they will invite Dr. Robert Morey to discuss why the EOC isn't biblical--you know, to be fair and irenic?

Clue #2: Nassif pushes the Emergen Church Movement. On the same "Simply Orthodox" that Patton thinks is "excellent", Nassif teaches on the Desert Fathers of Rome. These Desert Fathers are making a comeback in ECM circles, fostering the use of Eastern Mysticism.

They were Roman Catholic monks living in the desert and were heavily into mysticism, using breath prayers, labyrinths, all of which we see in the ECM's "Contemplative prayers" and "Contemplative Spirituality" and all of which were borrowed from the pagans.

Clue #3: Nassif and McKnight are on the faculty of North Park University. This school calls itself "Christian" but it is proud to be called "ecumenical" and indeed it is: "We are a Christian university, committed to relating faith in Jesus Christ to the aims of higher education. Ours is not a conformist environment; acceptance of diversity and ecumenism is the spirit of our campus." Translation: tolerance is our middle name!

North Park University has women teaching and leading at the seminary level (this is anti-biblical and the very definitive example of feminism), as well as offering "Spiritual Formation" classes.

Clue #4 : Future Guests:

March 13 - Greg Koukl (this man denies the sufficiency of Scripture and says not all of Scripture is God-breathed) will be dialoguing with liberal C Michael Patton about the Emergent Church. Do they come from a neutral view point? No, as I already showed, their recent guest, Nassir, is part of the ECM thinking--he endorses Contemplative Prayer via his own push of the Mystic Catholic Desert Father.

But in case you still have doubts, TTP's line up cements their positive view of ECM:

March 10 Dan Kimbal - ECM leader - feminist, pro-RCC. He pushes the Easter Mystic practice of lectio divina as well as silent meditation (emptying your mind) and prayer labyrinths. More on Kimball here.

March 27 Mark Driscoll - ECM leader and one of the founders. Also known as the "Cussing Pastor". In January 2006 Driscoll distanced himself from the ECM he helped to create. It turns out he hosted the very emergent National Pastors Convention dubbed "emergence 2007" at his church.

This annual conference pushes the ECM agenda and is chock-full of ECM leaders. He's not distancing himself at all. He's still at it, joining hands with Doug Pagitt and other leaders of the ECM.Here's a list of speakers for the June conference in Seattle:Seattle: Mars Hill Church – June 1-2, 2007Host: Krista Tippett Krista's Journal Speakers: Mark Driscoll, Dan Kimball, Doug Pagitt, Karen Ward (woman "pastor")."

The 2007 NPC (of which there are women "pastors" who join) boasted: "Join us for a unique weekend conversation that will feature many of the key leaders in the emerging church movement. This event will provide you with a first-hand experience with people who are reimagining what the church can be for a post-Christian world. Come and interact with key leaders about the beliefs, practices and ways of engaging culture in the way of Jesus. "

John MacArthur also decries Driscoll's use of inappropriate language and felt. MacArthur states:"Some of the things Driscoll talks freely and frequently about involve words and subject matter I would prefer not even to mention in public, so I am not going to quote or describe the objectionable parts." Driscoll rebels against the commands in Eph. 5:3-7.

For the bridge between Driscoll and John Piper, go here.

April 3 Scot McKnight - Return guest. ECM friendly - feminist and also on faculty at North Park University with Nassif.

He’s “Friend of Emergent” – he’s got this graphic at the bottom of his homepage. This in itself should make all who read and listen to him to be cautious considering the heresy coming out of the Emergent Church Movement.

He’s got 12 links to sites on “Daily Prayers”, and most if not all, are Anglican (akin to Romanism), Eastern Orthodox (again, akin to Romanism), as well as a Celtic Prayer site (self-proclaimed “ecumenical” that is demonstrated in a “new monasticism'). One such link goes to a site about “Divine Hours": Divine hours book and suggestions. "The Divine Hours" by Phyllis Tickle. Marcus Borg (of the heretical and liberal "Jesus Seminar" group) is also on the ExploreFaith editorial board with Tickle.

Who is this author that McKnight suggests reading? “Tickle is a member of the Episcopal Church and served as a Lay Eucharistic Minister and Lay Reader as well as, from time to time, a vestry member and teacher...

There 37 links to Emergent websites on McKnight’s website.

McKnight is pro-women pastors/teachers. Of course this violates clear commands given in 1Cor. 14; Titus 2; 1Tim. 3.

McKnight perverts Mary into a feminist of his own imagination:

In a Christianity Today article, McKnight turns the Mary of Scripture into an activist for political and social justice. This is troublesome because this simply is not what Scripture declares of Mary or Jesus for that matter (Scripture commands believers to submit to their governments—Romans 13, Titus 3:1; 1Peter 2:11-18, except when they tell us to disobey God’s command).

What McKnight does is to take the Emergent Church Movement/RCC’s Liberation Theology , and twists Mary into it. Mary was neither “subversive” (Webster defines this as “a systematic attempt to overthrow or undermine a government or political system by persons working secretly from within”); rebellious, or concerned with Herod as McKnight tries to paint her. Quite the opposite: she submits to God, Joseph, and later to her son Jesus Christ at the wedding in Cana.

It is clear that TTP and Reclaiming the Mind is set out to offer deception for Truth, as if anything is optional. God demands purity in worship of HIM as well as in doctrine. This is precisly why Scripture ALONE is the sole authority for the biblical Christian, for His Word alone is pure, uncorrupted, infallible, sufficient, living and active, as well as life-giving.

Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness? 2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever? 2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

Mat 4:4 But he answered, "It is written, "'Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God.'"

Heb 4:12 For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

Psa 138:2 I bow down toward Your holy temple and give thanks to Your name for Your steadfast love and your faithfulness, for You have exalted above all things Your name and Your word.

Is. 8: 20 To the law and to the testimony! If they do not speak according to this word, they have no light of dawn.

2Ti 3:16 All Scripture is breathed out by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness, 17 that the man of God may be competent, equipped for every good work.

Joh 17:17 Sanctify them in the truth; Your word is truth.

Psychology's Demonic Origins

What are the origins of psychology?

They are humanistic and occultic. Here are a few samplings on Freud and Jung, the fathers of moder psychology.

The follow are exerpts from "The End of 'Christian Psychology" book available online:


Freud and Jung each turned his own experience into a new belief system called psychoanalysis. Freud denied the spirituality of man by identifying religion as an illusion and calling it a neurosis. Jung attempted to debase spirituality by presenting all religion as mythology and fantasy. Many contemporary psychotherapists have not moved very far from these two positions. They often present religion as an illness at worst and as a myth at best. " p. 104 -105

Freud believed that the unconscious portion of the mind, rather than the conscious, influences all of a person’s thoughts and actions. In fact, he believed that the unconscious not only influences, but determines everything an individual does. p. 126

Freud invented psychoanalysis as a method for treating mental-emotional disorders and particularly for investigating what he considered to be the unconscious.

The psychoanalytic method supposedly exposes the unconscious through the process of free association and dream analysis. In free association, the central activity in psychoanalysis, the patient reveals both his thought life and his dreams
. p. 127

Carl Jung (Jung's quotes are taken from Jung's "Memories, Dreams, Reflections")

"After Jung repudiated Christianity he became involved in idolatry and the occult. He renamed and replaced everything having to do with biblical Christianity with his own mythology of archetypes. As he developed his theories, his archetypes took shape and served him as familiar spirits. One such personal familiar spirit that helped Jung develop his theories was Philemon.18 Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, op. cit., pp. 170-199.

"Jung also participated in the occult practice of necromancy. Jung mythologized Scripture and reduced the basic doctrines of the Christian faith into esoteric gnosticism. Freud was also involved in idolatry and the occult. He collected a large number of ancient Greek, Roman, Oriental, and Egyptian artifacts, including rows of statuettes arranged on his desk and around his office. One person who knew the family said that for Freud, “The artifacts weren’t only decorative. He used some of them to help him to write.”19 One writer suggests: What Freud may have been practicing . . . was an ancient form of magic in which consecrated statues representing spirits or transpersonal powers would engage the magician in imaginal dialogues and supply him with invaluable knowledge. Such magical practices were well known in ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome, and the very statuettes that Freud owned may have been used for such practices by their contemporaries.20

Many Christians have probably never heard of C. G. Jung, but his influence in the church is vast and affects sermons, books, and activities, such as the prolific use of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). A current, popular example of Jung’s legacy can be seen in Robert Hicks’s book The Masculine Journey, which was given to 50,000 men who attended a Promise Keepers conference. Christians need to learn enough about Jung and his teachings to be warned and wary. They may incorporate his notions regarding personality types, the personal unconscious, dream analysis, and various archetypes inp. 149

Other Christians have been influenced more indirectly as they have engaged in inner healing, followed 12-step programs, or taken the MBTI, which is based on Jung’s personality types and incorporates his theories of introversion and extroversion.

As a young child Jung had difficulty distinguishing between Jesus and a monstrous figure encountered in a nightmare, which he later identified as a huge phallus.2 Besides Jung’s father being a Lutheran minister, all eight of his uncles were pastors as well.4 p. 152-153

Because Jung turned psychoanalysis into a type of religion, he is also considered to be a transpersonal psychologist as well as an analytical theorist. He delved deeply into the occult, practiced necromancy, and had daily contact with disembodied spirits, which he called archetypes. Jung describes having his whole house “crammed full of spirits” crying out to him. He said that was the beginning of writing “The Seven Sermons to the Dead,” which he says flowed out of him.24 Just prior to that experience he wrote about a fantasy of his soul flying away. He said: This was a significant event: the soul, the anima, establishes the relationship to the unconscious. (footnote 24Jung, Memories, Dreams, Reflections, op. cit., pp. 190-191)

Much of what Jung wrote was inspired by such entities. Jung had his own familiar spirit whom he called Philemon. At first he thought Philemon was part of his own psyche, but later on he found that Philemon was more than an expression of his own inner self. Jung says: "Philemon and other figures of my fantasies brought home to me the crucial insight that there are things in the psyche which I do not produce, but which produce themselves and have their own life. Philemon represented a force which was not myself. In my fantasies I held conversations with him, and he said things which I had not consciously thought. For I observed clearly that it was he who spoke, not I. . . .Psychologically, Philemon represented superior insight. He was a mysterious figure to me. At times he seemed to me quite real, as if he were a living personality. I went walking up and down the garden with him, and to me he was what the Indians call a guru."27

Jung’s exploration into what he thought was his unconscious opened him up to demonic influence, which he at first thought emanated from his own unconscious but which existed quite independently from him. He even described himself as having demonic strength and as having a demon in him. He wrote: "But there was a demonic strength in me, and from the beginning there was no doubt in my mind that I must find the meaning of what I was experiencing in these fantasies. When I endured these assaults of the unconscious I had an unswerving conviction that I was obeying a higher will, and that feeling continued to uphold me until I had mastered the task.28 There was a daimon in me, and in the end its presence proved decisive. It overpowered me, and if I was at times ruthless it was because I was in the grip of the daimon.29" p. 156-158

Inner healing

"Inner healing beliefs and techniques continue to deceive many Christians. A central belief is that we are the way we are because of past hurts that need to be healed through reliving the past and bringing Jesus into past events. This is a deceptive combination of Freudian psychology and occult visualization. The inner healer is convinced that present problems are expressions of past wounds that must be healed before the person can overcome problems of living and get on with life." (PAL V8N2 * March-April 2000 from Psycho-Heresy Awareness)

Unholy Alliance : The dangers of mixing pop psychology with Christian Truth (by Dr. Lois Chan) book review:

"Chan describes channeling as "the act of receiving communication from the spirit worlds" and says, "As virtually all Christians understand, the Bible forbids us to communicate with the spirit world (Deut. 18:10-2; 2 Chr. 33:2-6; 2 Cor. 6:14-16)" (p. 19). She therefore warns:

'When we bring psychology into the church, we risk bringing in the New Age elements of psychology. If we bring in New Age psychology, we risk bringing in demonic (channeled) teachings. In that case, the integration of Bible and psychology will turn out to be the integration of biblical teachings and demonic teachings—an unholy alliance '(p. 19)."

Regarding early childhood influences, Chan quotes Dr. Paul Meier, James Dobson, Dr. Henry Cloud and other Christian psychologists, as well as channeled spirit guides. She also shows similarities between psychological and occult teachings regarding the unconscious, dream analysis, projection, human potential, and the self-concept. (PsychoHeresy Awareness Letter, July-August 2006, Vol. 14 No. 1)

2Co 6:14 Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers. For what partnership has righteousness with lawlessness? Or what fellowship has light with darkness?

2Co 6:15 What accord has Christ with Belial? Or what portion does a believer share with an unbeliever?

2Co 6:16 What agreement has the temple of God with idols? For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, "I will make my dwelling among them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

2Co 6:17 Therefore go out from their midst, and be separate from them, says the Lord, and touch no unclean thing; then I will welcome you,

Jas 3:17 But the wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable, gentle, open to reason, full of mercy and good fruits, impartial and sincere.

1Jn 2:21 I write to you, not because you do not know the truth, but because you know it, and because no lie is of the truth.

It is an impossibility to think that we can name Christ Jesus as our Master and mix Him with demons, Truth with Error, Scripture with the occult, and be pleasing to Him in anyway. HE demands purity in doctrine and practice and He is a jealous God.

The Failure of Prozac

I saw this breaking story first in the UK papers....It seems that the US newspapers were very late on this crucial news regarding psych drugs:

The UK Independant newspaper reported:

They are among the biggest-selling drugs of all time, the "happiness pills" that supposedly lift the moods of those who suffer depression and are taken by millions of people in the UK every year.

But one of the largest studies of modern antidepressant drugs has found that they have no clinically significant effect. In other words, they don't work.

The finding will send shock waves through the medical profession and patients and raises serious questions about the regulation of the multinational pharmaceutical industry, which was accused yesterday of withholding data on the drugs.

According to the UK Guardian:

Prozac, the bestselling antidepressant taken by 40 million people worldwide, does not work and nor do similar drugs in the same class, according to a major review released today.

The study examined all available data on the drugs, including results from clinical trials that the manufacturers chose not to publish at the time. The trials compared the effect on patients taking the drugs with those given a placebo or sugar pill.

When all the data was pulled together, it appeared that patients had improved - but those on placebo improved just as much as those on the drugs.

"Given these results, there seems little reason to prescribe antidepressant medication to any but the most severely depressed patients, unless alternative treatments have failed," says Kirsch. "This study raises serious issues that need to be addressed surrounding drug licensing and how drug trial data is reported."

Newspaper The Financial Times is also running a story on this.

For more information on the horrors of psychology, I suggest going to Psychology Debunked
and Psycho-heresy Aware.

The best thing for any person who is dealing with depression or stress is to turn to Christ Jesus and repent of their sin. Only the Creator knows our deepest issues and in His Word He tells us how we are to think and do:

Php 4:6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus.

Php 4:8 Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.

If you are not Born from Above, trusting in Christ Jesus alone for salvation from your sin and God's wrath, you need to do so now. It is ONLY in Christ and through Christ that a person can fully lay down his worries, anxieties, concerns, a pain, and trust in the Sovereign God to care for him in every way. The God of Scripture is an all-wise God, knowing our secret sins and our deepest pain, but there is only one way to deal with them: trust fully in HIM. He is the God of all comfort (2Cor. 1).

Psychology will fail every time because its starting point is doctrines of demons centered on sinful and rebellious man. Truth starts with Jesus Christ who is the only Truth (John 14:6), and His Scripture which is Truth (John 17:17). Better to know the Truth and deal with the sin and pain, then to live the lies of psychology which is demonic and poisonous.

Friday, February 08, 2008

Bush Thinks the Conservatives Should Support McCain

They're at it again.

When will these guys GET IT? I'm NOT interested in their compromising politics. They can't win my vote, nor will the GOP get me back.

Today Bush said, according to Bloomberg:

``Soon we'll have a nominee who will carry a conservative banner in this election and beyond,'' Bush said at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington. ``This is an important election. Prosperity and peace are in the balance.''

Bush, in speech running almost 45 minutes, told the group that ``the American people support our points of view'' and ``share our philosophy.'' He outlined differences between Republicans and Democrats on issues such as taxes and judicial nominees."

1. McCain is not a Conservative and neither is Bush. Both are moderates and mere RINO's.

2. Saying you are Conservative and actually BEING Conservative are two different things. I'm not buying their song and dance routine. Their records, which ARE their actions, speaks for themselves. Collaborating with the Democrats means you are not Conservative. Quit lying to us and quit acting like we're a bunch of mindless moronic robots. Its because of leaders like you two that I left the GOP.

3. Money and peace isn't happening now and it won't with McCain. As long as the Moderates and Democrats claim Islam is a religion of peace, we're sunk. Nothing but white flag wavers, these guys are. When the government forces people to give up their homes for a hotel, that's no way to prosper. Bet the Founding Fathers would roll over in their graves if they saw that.

4. McCain and Bush don't share my views and I certainly don't share their philosophies of holding hands with the enemy, whether its the drunkard named Teddy Kennedy, or the head of the PLO terrorist gang. Big government, bloated budgest, big spending ---none of these are in line with the GOP platform nor with me. Then again, the GOP plateform is nothing but platitude and useless rhetoric--means nothing anymore.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

This No-Party Girl Ain't Going To Buy What McCain THINKS I Want

Sen. McCain said today that "The quote 'independent' voters and frankly the old [Ronald] Reagan Democrats will come our way because I think we will have a message that will appeal to all of them."

I'm a non-partisan voter now, fomerly a Republican, and always a conservative. The GOP left me in the dust some years back and I finally had enough and couldn't take it anymore.

It left me, I left it.

I won't stay in a party that is, in all practicle terms, no different than the Democrat party. Its a disaster. Better to have a Liberal party and Conservative party, I think.

I left the GOP precisely BECAUSE of men like McCain who are nothing but RINOS. So, nope McCain, not going to buy into your broad road blather. You have NOTHING to offer me but compromise and deceit. Trying to please all men, you ARE compromising. Period.

Have fun trying to persuade everyone else. But you won't persuade me. I must answer to Christ Jesus.

Saturday, February 02, 2008

Most Americans Don't Want A Biblical Leader As President, Contrary To Zogby

I read an article today that claimed “most Americans want a biblical leader as president” and I just refuse to believe that.

First, what the statistics claim: quote:

About six in 10 Americans likely to vote say they would be more likely to vote for a presidential candidate who speaks publicly about following the example of admirable leaders from the Bible and who uses the Bible for guidance in both public and personal matters, found a nationwide Zogby Poll conducted for the American Bible Society.

According to the survey, more than three-quarters (78 percent) of respondents – 86 percent of women and 68 percent of men – view candidates citing Scripture when explaining political positions as positive.

Out of the polled respondents aged 18-29, 84 percent said a candidate’s servant-leader attitude would impact their vote. Interestingly, only 62 percent of older respondents, 50-64 years old, said it would influence their decision. In addition to Biblical leadership qualities, many likely voters are affected by the simple question of whether the candidate believes in God.

Nearly half of likely voters indicated that they would not vote for a presidential candidate who did not believe in God, while 20 percent said they would vote for such a candidate. Another 20 percent said this factor would not affect their voteBut by far, truthfulness and integrity – characteristics often emphasized in the Bible – topped the list of qualities respondents feel are most important in a leader.

The poll was conducted Jan. 25-27 on 1,008 adult respondents from throughout the United States. Nearly all respondents (95 percent) said they have some interaction with the Bible, ranging from well aware to exploring the contents of the Bible. Close to a quarter of participants said they were born-again Christians.

End quote.

Well, according to this, they’d be peachy-keen with a Mormon, since the above is so vague, a cultist could easily agree with it.

And that’s the problem.

What they really want is a religious guy, not a BIBLICAL leader. Why? Because a biblical leader tells people what they DON’T want to hear.

A biblical leader will not compromise on essentials of The faith such as (this is not an exhaustive list, mind you): the deity of Jesus Christ and His sinlessness and physical resurrection; the inerrancy and sufficiency of Scripture; the Trinity; a literal 6-Day Creation and Hell; biblical roles for men and women (and nope, they aren’t the same); church discipline; election; predestination; believer’s baptism; salvation by grace through faith alone in Christ Jesus alone; the true Gospel of Jesus which includes the wrath of God and the sinner under His wrath (not a warm and fuzzy feel-good gospel);and also the Lordship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Remember this isn’t an exhaustive list, but these are some major doctrines not held to by most Americans, let alone most proclaiming Christians. Go here for more on how ignorant "Christians" are.

A biblical leader won’t look to the majority to decide what he will do.

A biblical leader will not use Scripture as a mere guide book as if it’s a map or text about neat suggestions; rather he will see and use Scripture as the true and living Word of God---sufficient to give wisdom in dealing with all the issues of life and full of commands that are to be obeyed by those who claim HIS name.

A biblical leader will be willing to go it alone in the face of unbiblical obsticles, even when such obsticles are labeled “biblical” or “for God’s glory”, because quite frankly, they are neither. This calls for wisdom and discernment.

A biblical leader is truly Christ-centered, not man-centered. His view of God is high and view of man is low.

A biblical leader is not pragmatic, but Scriptural.

So if most professing Christians would not either know about some of these doctrines, or outright reject them, what makes Zogby or those polled, think they want a biblical leader as president? They don’t even want one as a pastor!

Think I’m broadbrushing? Ok, but it’s the truth. I’ll tell you why.

Scripture says that the way to eternal life is narrow. Secondly, many will be deceived by false teachers who creep into local churches, sounding pretty good, but truly are rotten and dead to the core.

Mat 7:13 "Enter by the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the way is easy that leads to destruction, and those who enter by it are many. 14 For the gate is narrow and the way is hard that leads to life, and those who find it are few.

Joh 14:6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Jud 1:3 Beloved, although I was very eager to write to you about our common salvation, I found it necessary to write appealing to you to contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints. 4 For certain people have crept in unnoticed who long ago were designated for this condemnation, ungodly people, who pervert the grace of our God into sensuality and deny our only Master and Lord, Jesus Christ.

2Thes. 2: 10 and in every sort of evil that deceives those who are perishing. They perish because they refused to love the truth and so be saved.

We live in a post-Modern society that has infiltrated most, if not all, churches today. This is reflected in professing Christians’ view that Truth is not knowable, absolute truth doesn’t exist, that each individual can determine what is right in their own minds; that Scripture is not clear and we can all have our own interpretation of it; that Scripture is a good book, but not absolute Truth nor is it living and active.

These same “Christians” are feminists, pragmatists, and man-pleasers. They are spineless and without discernment, thinking that tolerance of evil, sin, and deception, is truly love. They think calling a person to repent of specific unrepentant sin (Matt. 18; Gal. 6) is judgmental and unloving.

Why else do you suppose Rick Warren sells so many copies of his books and is on t.v. so much? He appeals to the masses.

Look at the best selling books in your local “Christian” bookstore. Authors who are humanists (psychologists), modalists, Roman Catholic, and New Age abound in them. And believe me, publishers and bookstores will not put on the shelf what won’t sell well, because it’s a money- making business.

Because Truth is by its nature, exclusive, it rejects everything that is false. It is not tolerant. That is why the road to eternal life is narrow: God is the God of Truth and HIS Word is Truth. Jesus is Truth. We are sanctified by Truth and saved in Truth. Truth defines what sin is.

Those doctrines I listed above are not tolerated by most people. They don’t rejoice in the Truth, which is how Scripture defines love : 1Co 13:6 it does not rejoice at wrongdoing, but rejoices with the truth.

When faced with the biblical doctrine of women staying home and not being leaders, is there rejoicing in that truth?

When told that God hates the wicked, do “Christians” agree or do they recoil at that truth?

When confronted with church discipline, do most professing Christians embrace that as biblical and for the welfare of the sinning “brother” and the local church, or do they find it offensive?

Where is the rejoicing in Truth when “Christians” are confronted with it?

Its missing.

So do people REALLY want a biblical leader as president?

Well, they don’t even want one as a church leader. So the answer is no, they don’t.

Besides, a biblical leader would never be able to appease the masses to garner the wider audience, precisely because they hold to Truth and Truth will not change for anyone.

Fear God
Vote Biblically
Don't Compromise ©

Most of all, yearn for God's clear Truth.

Friday, February 01, 2008

Public Schools Can Expose Children to Offensive Ideas--Let's Test that Theory By Bringing in Scripture Against Homosexuality

World Net Daily is reporting here about how the appellate court in Massachusetts has upheld a judge's immoral decision to expose kindergartners to homosexuality teaching despite the protest from parents. In part the articl says:

In a case that could wind up in the U.S. Supreme Court, an appeals panel upheld dismissal of a lawsuit by Massachusetts parents seeking to prevent discussion of homosexual families in their children's elementary school classrooms. The 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals yesterday agreed with a judge's decision last year that a school can expose children to contrary ideas without violating their parents' rights to
exercise religious beliefs.

"Public schools," wrote Judge Sandra L. Lynch, "are not obliged to shield individual students from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive, particularly when the school imposes no requirement that the student agree with or affirm those ideas, or even participate in discussions about them."

Ok, then, so the next time an Atheist or Muslim decry the teaching of Christmas, Easter, Creation, Jesus Christ, Hanukkah, or biblical marriage (one man wed to one wife), we can quote from Judge Lynch. Let's see how suddenly its not applicable for conservatives and/or Christians. Let's see what happens in Mass. when a teacher or a student, brings in the Bible and reads from it regarding how homosexuality is a sin. Will they also say that the school can allow it because "the school is not obliged to shield studentds from ideas which potentially are religiously offensive"?