Recently I posted a reply to a discussion board in a Reformed Christian group on Facebook.com.
The topic of discussion dealt with in light of a Reformed Christian context, who we were going to vote for in the upcoming primaries. One girl made a comment that there was no biblical command for Christians to form a Christian nation. This was my reply:
[Her quote]"There is no biblical evidence that the United States is in any way akin to ancient Israel or that the Lord has commanded Christians to try to form a so-called Christian nation."
Lori,
I agree with you for the most part. However, we are commanded to obey every ordinance of man. The supreme ordinances of our nation are found in the Constitution. Our nation is founded on the principle of the rule of law. All rulers in the Executive, Legislative and Judicial are subject to those laws. No Christian should feel comfortable voting for someone who has proven they do not respect the Supreme Law, or has promised to do things contrary to that Law.
Also, I do believe we have every obligation to honor the intent of those who founded this great nation.
John Adams said, “ The general principles upon which the Fathers achieved independence were the general principals of Christianity… I will avow that I believed and now believe that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.”
John Quincy Adams in a Fourth of July speech said, "“Why is it that, next to the birthday of the Savior of the world, your most joyous and most venerated festival returns on this day [the Fourth of July]?" “Is it not that, in the chain of human events, the birthday of the nation is indissolubly linked with the birthday of the Savior? That it forms a leading event in the progress of the Gospel dispensation? Is it not that the Declaration of Independence first organized the social compact on the foundation of the Redeemer's mission upon earth? That it laid the cornerstone of human government upon the first precepts of Christianity?"
Charles Carroll, signer of the Declaration of Independence said, " Without morals a republic cannot subsist any length of time; they therefore who are decrying the Christian religion, whose morality is so sublime and pure...are undermining the solid foundation of morals, the best security for the duration of free governments."
So, it may not be required for Christians to form a Christian nation, but the principle taught in the Commandment to honor our father and mother applies to all authority, especially our Founding Fathers. As such we have an obligation to carry forth the tradition of a Christian nation as set up over 200 years ago by godly men. To do any less would be patricide.
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Lake Michigan Ron Paul 2008 Meetup Group
It is time to get on board this train. If you are reading this, and you live in the Muskegon area, and you support Ron Paul for President in 2008, then you need to join this meetup group. I just joined, and I hope to be at a sign waving party at the corner of Holton Rd. and Whitehall Rd. this afternoon. Get together with other Ron Paul supporters and learn how to better promote his campaign!
Saturday, December 29, 2007
FOX Excludes Ron Paul From NH Forum
This just in. FOX News has chosen to exclude Rep. Ron Paul from the Candidate Forum to be held on Jan 6 (just two days before the NH primary) at St. Anselm College in NH. This is nothing more than blatant censorship by the Neo-Conservatives at FOX of the one candidate they truly fear. Considering that Ron Paul is now running third in some polls in Iowa, he raised over $6 million in one day, has raised more than any other candidate in the fourth quarter, and the media gets email bombed every time they talk about him, clearly shows that Ron Paul is a viable candidate, and deserves to be on that platform with the other candidates, some of whom are running behind Congressman Paul in the polls. Even if you are not a Ron Paul supporter, it should bother you that the news network that proclaims itself to be "fair and balanced" has chosen to censor the one voice that is different than all the rest. Ron Paul stands for liberty, freedom, limited government and a humble foreign policy. Please email FOX News and voice your opposition to their censorship (yourcomments@foxnews.com). Also, go to St. Anselm's website and ask their Public Relations dept. why they as the host would allow this censoring of the one candidate who has based his foreign policy on the traditional Just War Theory.
Thursday, December 27, 2007
Religious Hucksters and the First Amendment
I guess freedom of religion does have its limits, as far as Senator Grassley from Iowa is concerned. Sen. Grassley is going after six Christian television ministries because their message of health, and especially wealth, has carried over to the ministers living lavish lifestyles. Well, let's think about this. If I am a televangelist and I preach that God will make you rich if you have enough faith, then what would it look like if I am driving a Yugo and live in a rented flat? Are you going to believe my message? Of course not. In the secular world, one of the mantras preached far and wide is, "don't take financial advice from someone worse off than you are". These TV evangelists are just following the code.
Now don't get me wrong, those TV evangelists are nothing but snake oil salesmen (and women), promising magical and wondrous results for just $50 (or $500 if you REALLY want to be blessed). Their message is a distortion of the truth, has led many astray, and is a blatant exploitation of the poor. They are scoundrels, and the Bible labels them as false teachers that should be avoided. But when I read the evangelists were subjects of a Congressional investigation, it raised the hairs on the back of my neck.
In case Sen. Grassley has forgotten, I would encourage him to run down to the gift shop there at the Capitol building and pick up a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Now Senator, scan down the page to the First Amendment. It goes something like this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF(emphasis mine). That means that Congress has no business in what these televangelists preach or practice, no matter how offensive it may be. Our Government is not to be the judge of good or bad religion. That is exactly what our Founding Fathers were trying to prevent when they wrote the First Amendment. These TV evangelists make no bones about their message. "Send me money, have faith, and God will richly bless you. Just look at me. I wear Armani, drive a Bentley, and fly around in a private jet to go on $100,000 shopping sprees." If I am watching a so-called minister beg me for money while wearing a Mr. T starter kit, I am pretty sure where at least part of that money is going. Let the parishioner beware.
I know, it is unfair for them to take advantage of people like they do, and I can hear you saying, "Somebody has to do something about them." I agree with you. Somebody does. It is the proper place of the Church to proclaim the truth, and mark and avoid. Follow the biblical steps of Church discipline with them. If they refuse to repent, proclaim them to be outside of the faith. "What is bound on earth is already bound in heaven". Then truly mark them as false teachers. Let the preachers of the true Gospel stand up and proclaim their doctrines of health and wealth to be the doctrines of devils. Make sure to avoid them. Write your cable and satellite TV providers to drop their networks. If they refuse, cancel your subscriptions. In the end though, we must understand that those who have "itching ears" will be carried away by these false messengers. Pray that our Lord will keep us safe from the enticements of strange doctrines.
Now don't get me wrong, those TV evangelists are nothing but snake oil salesmen (and women), promising magical and wondrous results for just $50 (or $500 if you REALLY want to be blessed). Their message is a distortion of the truth, has led many astray, and is a blatant exploitation of the poor. They are scoundrels, and the Bible labels them as false teachers that should be avoided. But when I read the evangelists were subjects of a Congressional investigation, it raised the hairs on the back of my neck.
In case Sen. Grassley has forgotten, I would encourage him to run down to the gift shop there at the Capitol building and pick up a copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Now Senator, scan down the page to the First Amendment. It goes something like this: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR PROHIBITING THE FREE EXERCISE THEREOF(emphasis mine). That means that Congress has no business in what these televangelists preach or practice, no matter how offensive it may be. Our Government is not to be the judge of good or bad religion. That is exactly what our Founding Fathers were trying to prevent when they wrote the First Amendment. These TV evangelists make no bones about their message. "Send me money, have faith, and God will richly bless you. Just look at me. I wear Armani, drive a Bentley, and fly around in a private jet to go on $100,000 shopping sprees." If I am watching a so-called minister beg me for money while wearing a Mr. T starter kit, I am pretty sure where at least part of that money is going. Let the parishioner beware.
I know, it is unfair for them to take advantage of people like they do, and I can hear you saying, "Somebody has to do something about them." I agree with you. Somebody does. It is the proper place of the Church to proclaim the truth, and mark and avoid. Follow the biblical steps of Church discipline with them. If they refuse to repent, proclaim them to be outside of the faith. "What is bound on earth is already bound in heaven". Then truly mark them as false teachers. Let the preachers of the true Gospel stand up and proclaim their doctrines of health and wealth to be the doctrines of devils. Make sure to avoid them. Write your cable and satellite TV providers to drop their networks. If they refuse, cancel your subscriptions. In the end though, we must understand that those who have "itching ears" will be carried away by these false messengers. Pray that our Lord will keep us safe from the enticements of strange doctrines.
Saturday, December 22, 2007
Give Me Liberty...
I have pondered these words (and the following statement) lately, and I wonder. Would I have the courage of Patrick Henry to choose death over tyranny? I think today most Americans would be willing to trade liberty for a couple gallons of gas for their SUV. OK, maybe that is an exaggeration, but there definitely is a trend to trade freedom for a false sense of security. Why do our lawmakers try to ban guns? They tell us it is for our own good. Less guns = less crime. Why, you don't want to return to the days of the Old West, do you? If no one had guns, our children would be safer.
And speaking of safety, the national ID card is being promoted in the interests of safety and national security. If all people in the U.S. were required to carry ID issued (or categorized) by the Federal Government, then it would be easier to spot the terrorists when they try to sneak in. By the way, did they stop putting that statement on your Social Security card that your SS number is NOT to be used for identification other than for SSI benefits? I guess the Patriot Act officially sounded the death knell for that assurance, since all banks are required to have a Federal ID number tied to every account. But remember, it keeps drug cartels and terrorists from laundering money.
And speaking of laundering money, did you know that you can't just walk around with large amounts of (gasp!) cash? If you get stopped with a large amount of money, there is a good chance you could have it seized by law enforcement. And what law are they enforcing? Well, that law that says that people that walk (or drive) around with large amounts of cash are probably criminals. Oh, but it is OK, because if you can prove you have a good reason for having so much cash, they may give it back to you in a couple of years after the hearing. Besides, you should have put all that cash in your bank account. Of course, if it was REALLY a lot of money ($10,000 or more), your bank would have been required to notify the IRS immediately that you deposited all that cash in your account. You know, that account that has your Federal ID number attached to it. Am I noticing a trend here?
Can you imagine if Patrick Henry were alive today and you tried to explain all this to him? I am sure he would find it quite ironic that Congress passed a bill called the Patriot Act that tramples on the very freedoms his generation fought to protect. Now, throw in Eminent Domain, government regulation of private property, and the infringement on the First Amendment regarding religious speech, and I would be willing to wager Mr. Henry would be dusting off his "assault musket" and be pushing for the reissue of the Declaration of Independence.
And speaking of safety, the national ID card is being promoted in the interests of safety and national security. If all people in the U.S. were required to carry ID issued (or categorized) by the Federal Government, then it would be easier to spot the terrorists when they try to sneak in. By the way, did they stop putting that statement on your Social Security card that your SS number is NOT to be used for identification other than for SSI benefits? I guess the Patriot Act officially sounded the death knell for that assurance, since all banks are required to have a Federal ID number tied to every account. But remember, it keeps drug cartels and terrorists from laundering money.
And speaking of laundering money, did you know that you can't just walk around with large amounts of (gasp!) cash? If you get stopped with a large amount of money, there is a good chance you could have it seized by law enforcement. And what law are they enforcing? Well, that law that says that people that walk (or drive) around with large amounts of cash are probably criminals. Oh, but it is OK, because if you can prove you have a good reason for having so much cash, they may give it back to you in a couple of years after the hearing. Besides, you should have put all that cash in your bank account. Of course, if it was REALLY a lot of money ($10,000 or more), your bank would have been required to notify the IRS immediately that you deposited all that cash in your account. You know, that account that has your Federal ID number attached to it. Am I noticing a trend here?
Can you imagine if Patrick Henry were alive today and you tried to explain all this to him? I am sure he would find it quite ironic that Congress passed a bill called the Patriot Act that tramples on the very freedoms his generation fought to protect. Now, throw in Eminent Domain, government regulation of private property, and the infringement on the First Amendment regarding religious speech, and I would be willing to wager Mr. Henry would be dusting off his "assault musket" and be pushing for the reissue of the Declaration of Independence.
Friday, November 2, 2007
Do Right Until the Stars Fall!
As a former student of Bob Jones University, occasionally I will find myself in a situation that will remind me of the pithy truisms found printed at the front of just about every classroom at the school. Many of these nuggets of truth proclaimed and lauded the virtue of standing for what is right, and not giving in to compromise. So, it was with dismay and sadness that I learned that Dr. Bob III had announced his endorsement of Mitt Romney for President. In the article, Dr. Bob III states that "supporting Romney is critical to make sure former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani doesn't win the GOP nomination and that Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Rodham Clinton doesn't win the election." "If it turns out to be Giuliani and Hillary we've got two pro-choice candidates, and that would be a disaster."
Now, I know that Romney is a Mormon, and Dr. Bob has called Mormonism a cult; but that is not what surprised me regarding the Chancellor's endorsement. Let us not forget that there is no religious test required for eligibility for President. And Mormons in general do hold to many of the same traditional pro-family values espoused by conservative Christians. But Mr. Romney is a new convert to the pro-life stance, having run all his previous campaigns on a pro-abortion platform, seemingly in direct opposition to Mormon church doctrine. Mr. Romney also continued to fund abortions in his state health care plan after his supposed conversion.
As Chuck Baldwin pointed out in his article accusing Dr. Bob III of dancing with the devil, our choice for President should not be the candidate that best represents Conservative American beliefs, but the candidate that truly upholds and defends the beliefs found in our Constitution. Mr. Romney is not a true Constitutional Conservative. His stance on gun-control, NAFTA and Council on Foreign Relations belies a misunderstanding of the intent of our Founding Fathers when they wrote our great Constitution. During the debate in Dearborn, MI, when Romney was asked if he would consult Congress before attacking Iran, he stated that lawyers should decide if authorization is needed before attacking. As Rep. Ron Paul pointed out, maybe Gov. Romney should just open the Constitution and read it to get his answer.
What I see by Dr. Bob III's endorsement of Gov. Romney for President is a compromise to hopefully get the "lesser of the evils" elected. Certainly there are better choices out of the candidates that have proven themselves to be pro-life, small government, and fiscally conservative (when comparing his record to Giuliani, Romney increased spending by 2.2 - 8%, depending upon if you believe Romney's or Giuliani's numbers). But Dr. Bob III must feel they are not viable candidates. Better to endorse a candidate whose record of flip-flopping makes Hillary Clinton look like the Rock of Gibraltar, but whose numbers are close to the frontrunner, than truly stand for principle and endorse a solid, moral, Constitutional Conservative that is not doing as well in the polls.
It is time for Dr. Bob III to stroll through the Alumni Building (is it still called that?) and read some of the signs on the wall in the classrooms. Some of the quotes of his grandfather ring very true concerning this very election:
"You and God make a majority in your community."
"It is never right to do wrong in order to get a chance to do right."
"Don't sacrifice the permanent on the altar of the immediate."
"The two biggest little words in the English language are the two little words 'do right.' "
"A man is a fool who leans on the arm of flesh when he can be supported by the arm of Omnipotence"
"DO RIGHT UNTIL THE STARS FALL!"
Dr. Bob, I pray you may heed these words.
Now, I know that Romney is a Mormon, and Dr. Bob has called Mormonism a cult; but that is not what surprised me regarding the Chancellor's endorsement. Let us not forget that there is no religious test required for eligibility for President. And Mormons in general do hold to many of the same traditional pro-family values espoused by conservative Christians. But Mr. Romney is a new convert to the pro-life stance, having run all his previous campaigns on a pro-abortion platform, seemingly in direct opposition to Mormon church doctrine. Mr. Romney also continued to fund abortions in his state health care plan after his supposed conversion.
As Chuck Baldwin pointed out in his article accusing Dr. Bob III of dancing with the devil, our choice for President should not be the candidate that best represents Conservative American beliefs, but the candidate that truly upholds and defends the beliefs found in our Constitution. Mr. Romney is not a true Constitutional Conservative. His stance on gun-control, NAFTA and Council on Foreign Relations belies a misunderstanding of the intent of our Founding Fathers when they wrote our great Constitution. During the debate in Dearborn, MI, when Romney was asked if he would consult Congress before attacking Iran, he stated that lawyers should decide if authorization is needed before attacking. As Rep. Ron Paul pointed out, maybe Gov. Romney should just open the Constitution and read it to get his answer.
What I see by Dr. Bob III's endorsement of Gov. Romney for President is a compromise to hopefully get the "lesser of the evils" elected. Certainly there are better choices out of the candidates that have proven themselves to be pro-life, small government, and fiscally conservative (when comparing his record to Giuliani, Romney increased spending by 2.2 - 8%, depending upon if you believe Romney's or Giuliani's numbers). But Dr. Bob III must feel they are not viable candidates. Better to endorse a candidate whose record of flip-flopping makes Hillary Clinton look like the Rock of Gibraltar, but whose numbers are close to the frontrunner, than truly stand for principle and endorse a solid, moral, Constitutional Conservative that is not doing as well in the polls.
It is time for Dr. Bob III to stroll through the Alumni Building (is it still called that?) and read some of the signs on the wall in the classrooms. Some of the quotes of his grandfather ring very true concerning this very election:
"You and God make a majority in your community."
"It is never right to do wrong in order to get a chance to do right."
"Don't sacrifice the permanent on the altar of the immediate."
"The two biggest little words in the English language are the two little words 'do right.' "
"A man is a fool who leans on the arm of flesh when he can be supported by the arm of Omnipotence"
"DO RIGHT UNTIL THE STARS FALL!"
Dr. Bob, I pray you may heed these words.
Thursday, July 5, 2007
New Beginnings
I began this blog in December 2006, but I have decided to delete all previous posts and start over. It is sometimes difficult to leave behind the past, but in some cases it is for the better.
So, I struggle as to what direction, if any, I want to take my new journey in the world of blog. For now, I shall meander along any rabbit trail that crosses my path, not caring to create an agenda, or define a specific purpose. Not a good way to live your life, but not harmful in the act of putting words on paper, in a virtual sense.
So, I struggle as to what direction, if any, I want to take my new journey in the world of blog. For now, I shall meander along any rabbit trail that crosses my path, not caring to create an agenda, or define a specific purpose. Not a good way to live your life, but not harmful in the act of putting words on paper, in a virtual sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
