“It is not scientific doubt, not atheism, not pantheism, not agnosticism, that in our day and in this land is likely to quench the light of the gospel. It is a proud, sensuous, selfish, luxurious, church-going, hollow-hearted prosperity.” Frederic D. Huntington 1890
Feb 04
Are they Pro-Choice or Pro-Abortion?
Though no one has yet to see it, the Tim Tebow Pro-Choice commercial will air during the Superbowl. No I didn’t mean to say Pro-Life commercial and that is what I think has got the Pro-Abortion movement so upset. For decades the Pro-Abortion movement has proclaimed that they are for a women’s right to choose hence the phrase, we are Pro-choice. The truth however has become more and more obvious, that the only choice they seem to be in approval of, is a womens choice to abort life.
Apparently in the Tebow ad, Heisman Trophy winner Tim Tebow, son of Pam Tebow, will say that when his mother became pregnant with her fifth child in 1987, she became seriously ill while in the Philippines on a mission trip. Therefore doctors advised her to abort the child. She chose not to abort Tim – she chose life. That choice was to not to kill Tim Tebow. Now he is able to declare that if mom had chosen abortion, that it was more than a glob of tissue she was getting rid of, rather it was me that she chose not to kill. This put’s a face to a fetus if you will. Then Tebow will I’m sure express thanks that he is here and certainly thankful that his mom chose life. So why are the Pro-choice feminist so upset with a Pro-choice message like that, even before the commercial airs. Well because the truth comes out, their movement is not Pro-choice it is Pro-Abortion.
Brother Scott ><>
Here is a link to an article by sports columnist Sally Jenkins in the Washington Post.
A 1989 video where different football stars talk about abortion.
Feb 02
Abstinence-only programs might work, study says
Attached is a link to a Washington Post story I read today titled, ”Abstinence-only programs might work, study says”.
The truth is Abstinence-only, by it’s very definition, “does work”, every time – when followed. Brother Scott ><>
Washington Post story - Abstinence-only programs might work, study says
Jan 31
Is the preservation of earth our primary task?
It serves to remind me that the God who miraculously, meticulously, and gloriously created a magnificent, lush, beautiful planet… that great God who created exnihlo that is created everything from nothing. That glorious God, is not first an environmentalist – one who seeks to save the earth… but rather is willing to twice destroy that which he has created in order to display his sovereignty over all of creation as well as destroy all who deny him and do not repent and turn toward him.
What am I saying = God is more concerned with the heart and soul of wayward man and his justice – than he is with the entire realm of created material universe… including… this place we call earth.
God is more of an anthropologist than he is an environmentalist…
Christians should exercise good stewardship over the earth that’s biblical - BUT the preservation of the earth is not our chief concern – for it will eventually be re-destroyed and re-created.
One day the Lord is going to destroy it all and create a new heaven and a new earth.
We have a responsibility to care for the environment–we ought to care for every resource God has provided for us.
But today’s environmentalist is more consumed with trying to preserve the planet forever. When that is not even God’s plan.
Honestly we are living on a disposable planet–The earth we inhabit is not a permanent planet. It’s only been around about six thousand years or so–that’s all–and it may only last a few thousand more.
AND LISTEN if you think man is causing Global warming wait till you see what God is going to do. If you think humanity is wrecking the planet, wait until they see what Jesus does to it.
Peter says God is going to literally turn it in on itself in an atomic implosion and whole universe will go out of existence (2 Peter 3:7-13).
This earth was never intended to be a permanent planet–it is not eternal.
ONLY GOD and your SOUL is ETERNAL.
Proper credit to John MacArthur for 2006 article entitled
Evangelicalism and the Environmental Movement
“So I believe we are charged to treat responsibly all the wonderful resources God has given us. But that, in fact, has very little to do with the environmental movement. The environmental movement is consumed with trying to preserve the planet forever. But we know that isn’t in God’s plan.
The earth we inhabit is not a permanent planet. It is, frankly, a disposable planet – it is going to have a very short life. It’s been around six thousand years or so – that’s all – and it may last a few thousand more. And then the Lord is going to destroy it.
I’ve told environmentalists that if they think humanity is wrecking the planet, wait until they see what Jesus does to it. Peter says God is going to literally turn it in on itself in an atomic implosion so that the whole universe goes out of existence (2 Peter 3:7-13).
This earth was never ever intended to be a permanent planet – it is not eternal. We do not have to worry about it being around tens of thousands, or millions, of years from now because God is going to create a new heaven and a new earth. Understanding those things is important to holding in balance our freedom to use, and responsibility to maintain, the earth.
Just a footnote. Though this earth is our temporary home, do take time to enjoy God’s beauty. Take care of your yard. Stop to smell the flowers. Enjoy the forests. God placed those rich resources on this planet for our comfort and His enjoyment. Let us be thankful to Him for that.”
© 2006 by John MacArthur. All rights reserved.
For entire MacArthur article click here
Additional commentary from Albert Mohler on Ecology vs. Theology
Jan 29
Praying for the sick
The bible instruct us to pray for the sick…
“Is anyone among you sick? Then he must call for the elders of the church and they are to pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord; and the prayer offered in faith will restore the one who is sick, and the Lord will raise him up, and if he has committed sins, they will be forgiven him. Therefore, confess your sins to one another, and pray for one another so that you may be healed.” James 5:14-16
It is clear that if one is sick among us we are to call for the elders of the church and then anointing them with oil in the name of the Lord, we pray for their healing.
What about the oil? The oil itself carries no special supernatural powers, but often was used in anointing to symbolize the out-pouring of God’s Spirit. Oil was a common method of healing by natural means. It is documented in scripture several times, most notably, the Good Samaritan.
The phrase, in the name of the Lord, points to the real source of healing.
The point is this anointing though it conveys not supernatural power it is both properly symbolical and biblically appropriate to anoint one who is sick with oil and pray for them in the name of the lord.
So gathering elders, anointing with oil, praying reverently and righteously is biblical; yet it does not obligate God to heal, nor does it mean the person will be healed.
It is of the will of God and not the will of man of whom and when and to what degree the Lord chooses to heals.
If we offer a prayer of faith in JESUS NAME… then we are essentially asking for healing also according to his will.
See ultimately the Lord does as He wills and it is always for the best.
The word sick means “to be weak” or to be ”without strength” It could be a physical or spiritual sickness.
James says additionally we are to…
Confess our sins to one another, and to pray for one another so that you may be healed.
Often people will say I prayed that God would heal, but he did not. Why?
I think it might do good to think for just a moment about the source or cause of sickness and the reality of divine healing; so Let’s consider a few points…
First of all, Christians should all agree that all sickness and suffering, in a general way, is the result of sin in the world. For If sin had never entered, there would be no sickness.
At times sickness is a direct result of sin in a person’s life. In 1 Corinthians 11:30, we read of certain Corinthians who were sick because they participated in the Lord’s Supper without judging sin in their lives, – without confessing and forsaking it.
Some sins do lead to a persons sickness. Drug abuse, sexual sins, overeating. But ALL sickness is not a direct result of a persons sins.
– Job was sick in and yet he was a righteous man
- The man born blind was suffering for sins he had not committed.
At other times sickness is a result of satanic activity.
- Satan had caused Job’s body to be covered with boils.
- Satan who crippled a woman in “This woman … whom Satan has bound; think of it… for eighteen years”
- Satan sent Pauls “thorn in the flesh” … he called it a messenger of Satan to buffet me” (2 Cor. 12:7).
Next realize that in a very real sense, all healing is divine. We should acknowledge God in every case of healing.
- It is clear from the Bible that God uses different means in healing.
- Sometimes He heals through natural bodily processes. He has placed in the human body tremendous power to self heal.
- At times God heals through medicine.
- He often heals through physicians and surgeons. Jesus taught that sick people need a physician which certainly recognizes the need of doctors among Christians.
- God uses doctors in the ministry of healing. It is said, “The surgeon dresses the wound; God heals it.”
As Christians we acknowledge that God also heals miraculously. The Gospels contain many illustrations of this. There is nothing in the Bible to discourage us from believing that God continues to heal miraculously in the present age.
However, we must also conclude that it is not always Gods will to heal. Consider this – if it were always God’s will to heal, we would never grow old or die!
It is not true that failure to be healed indicates a lack of faith.
A prayer offered in faith by a man of faith is a powerful and effective prayer – one that is honored by God
See not all praying is effective.
- According to Psalm 66:18, God does not listen to the prayer of one who is cherishing sin in their hearts.
- According to Matthew 6:5, those who pray only to be seen by men will not receive the reward of answered prayer, because their reward was to be seen by men.
- According to James 1:7, those who waver in faith should not expect to receive an answer to prayer.
- And according to James 4:3, those praying for things out of selfish desires will not receive what they ask for.
James wants us to know however that, “the prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.”
The effective prayer of a righteous man can accomplish much.
James then gives an example…
Elijah was a man with a nature like ours, and he prayed earnestly that it would not rain, and it did not rain on the earth for three years and six months. Then he prayed again, and the sky poured rain and the earth produced its fruit. James 5:17-18
Other examples…
- Moses prayed and God spared Israel from judgment.
- Joshua prayed and God caused the sun to stand still.
- Samson prayed…and God gave him back his strength.
- Hannah prayed and God gave her child – the prophet Samuel
- Solomon prayed and God gave him wisdom.
- Jonah prayed and God brought him out of the belly of the whale.
- Paul and Silas prayed and sang praises to God…and the prison shook and the jailer got saved!
- The thief on the cross prayed, and God gave him eternal life.
- Elijah prayed…and it didn’t rain for 3 1/2 years… he prayed again…and it rained.
In summary…
- We acknowledge the bible instructs us to pray for the sick.
- It is proper to gather the elders and anoint the sick with oil.
- Our sin hinders our prayers.
- We pray for healing according to God’s will (in the name of Jesus).
- It is not always God’s will to heal the one who is sick.
- All healing is divine.
- God is still in the miracle business.
In Christ’s name and for his sake, Brother Scott ><>
Jan 27
An atheist convention – why?
The consistent evolutionist must admit that life has no meaning or purpose. Actually the concept of a “consistent evolutionist” is pretty problematic itself ! ><>
“I had motive for not wanting the world to have a meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption. The philosopher who finds no meaning in the world is not concerned exclusively with a problem in pure metaphysics, he is also concerned to prove that there is no valid reason why he personally should not do as he wants to do, or why his friends should not seize political power and govern in the way that they find most advantageous to themselves. … For myself, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation, sexual and political.” (Aldous Huxley [evolutionist, leftist, and grandson of T.H. Huxley, known as "Darwin's bulldog"]: Ends and Means, pp. 270 ff.)
Follow the fun with Ken Ham at Answers In Genesis
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/01/13/a-meaningless-atheist-convention/
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/01/16/meaningless-atheism-hits-a-touchy-spot/
http://blogs.answersingenesis.org/blogs/ken-ham/2010/01/18/atheists-responding-to-meaningless-atheism