Saturday, September 29, 2012
Obama’s anti-business, anti-growth, anti-jobs, anti-energy policies
Obama’s anti-business, anti-growth, anti-jobs, anti-energy policies have given us the worst recovery in history, and the worst UNEMPLOYMENT for the longest period since the Great Depression. And those lousy result have been purchased with the most massive wasted corrupt spending and nation destroying DEBT in all of history. Obama is killing our economy almost single handedly. Meantime to pay for Obama’s insanity the Federal Reserve is pumping sugar in our veins. Hundreds of billions of funny money making every dollars in every persons pocket anywhere in the world worth less. A massive Obama tax that hits the poorest Americans hardest. Yet even with the funny money pouring into the system oil prices have ceased to rise and have started to fall back even as we found out growth in Q2 wasn’t just bad it was terrible. The numbers under Obama always seem to get worse after the headlines die out. Obama is taking our nation down the path to utter economic catastrophe folks. If Obama is reelected in a year or two the 25% UNEMPLOYMENT in Spain may look good to us!
Read the whole thing
To
my friends who are self identified 47%ers: There is probably nothing I
can say or do that will convince you to vote right. I don't intend to.
My focus is to make certain the 53% who Romney identified as worthy of
his focus in this election are going to vote right this time...not
voting as many of them did last time. To vote that way is the
definition of insanity...doing the same thing again but expecting a
different result. So, Relax. I'm not coming after you. Vote whatever
you believe you can without searing your conscience any further. It is
for those who still have ears to hear...I will reach out to them.
47%?...you are not on the radar screen. Romney was right.
Because
you won't hear about any of this on CBS, NBC, ABC, CNN or MSNBC today
or tonight you need to know that recession is on the horizon...worse
than before. They are so desperate to keep Obama in the White House
they are doing whatever
they can to hide
the truth. It's pretty rough. Making up Polls is one thing, we all
laugh at them on the right. BUT keeping data like this quiet so it
won't upset the voters is criminal. BUT, now at least YOU my friends
know what is really going on. OBAMA FAILED BADLY. The economy is in the
tank and sinking. The stock market goes up because people don't know
what to do with their money.
In case you did not hear that clearly, we will transcribe it as best we can.
“Everybody in Cleveland, low minorities, got Obama phone. Keep Obama in president, you know. He gave us a phone, he gonna do more.”
The person shooting the video
“Everybody in Cleveland, low minorities, got Obama phone. Keep Obama in president, you know. He gave us a phone, he gonna do more.”
The person shooting the video
asks, How did he give you a phone? To which the woman replies: “You
sign up! If you on food stamps, you on social security, you got low
income, you disability…”
The video includes a cut at that point and picks up with the filmer asking “What’s wrong with Romney?” Without blinking, the passionate Obama supporter says:
“Romney, he sucks! Bad.”
http://youtu.be/tpAOwJvTOio
The video includes a cut at that point and picks up with the filmer asking “What’s wrong with Romney?” Without blinking, the passionate Obama supporter says:
“Romney, he sucks! Bad.”
http://youtu.be/tpAOwJvTOio
Question: Should a church be involved in
helping it's members access government programs such as food stamps,
section 8, free cell phones or any number of other governbmen services,
supports and subsidies? Is that mercy or manipulation? Are they
setting people free or intensifying bondage to the system? Church
leadership that encourages such things needs to rethink what they are
doing. WWJD seems like the question that needs to be asked. I don't
think HE would
Thinking about the teachers strike and the Refs, the essence of strikes should be:
On the workers side, if you don't pay us more we won't work. Strike
On the employers side, if you don't work, (strike) we may just fire the whole lot and start over if we think we can. Reagan and the ATC
With the Refs they proved they were that valuable. Strike ends. Labor wins.
Why did the teachers strike n
On the workers side, if you don't pay us more we won't work. Strike
On the employers side, if you don't work, (strike) we may just fire the whole lot and start over if we think we can. Reagan and the ATC
With the Refs they proved they were that valuable. Strike ends. Labor wins.
Why did the teachers strike n
ot
end with the whole bunch being fired? With the refs it was proven they
could do the job better. With the teachers in the CPS they have proven
they are far less then indispensable...yet they won. Do you suppose
that politics had anything to do with this? Just asking. If they made
me king..things would be different...chaotic, but different. I don't
guess I'll wait up for the call. LOL
Who
here has a job?’ he asked hopefully, looking around the room. Fred
Armisen, who had the honor of playing the president in seasons’ past,
raised his hand and said he was a manager at Burger King.
‘A manager at Burger King? There you go – have it your way!’ Pharoah said, then asking, ‘I bet you were behind the counter four years ago?’
Armisen glumly replied: ‘I was the vice president of Bank of America.’
‘A manager at Burger King? There you go – have it your way!’ Pharoah said, then asking, ‘I bet you were behind the counter four years ago?’
Armisen glumly replied: ‘I was the vice president of Bank of America.’
I
don't know if I would go this far. I do think there is a searing of an
otherwise tender conscience by sanctioning something you shouldn't. I
remember years ago when I was watching Moonlighting and the unmarried
characters had sex. It wa...See More
pjmedia.com
Judges’ consideration of Shari‘a when deciding cases may be the most alarming av...See More
I have been thinking about the Christian's
posture toward an enemy intent on killing you. If it's in your home and
your family is in danger, I think you have to do what you can to
protect them... If it's an assault on your community you must do what
you can to keep the outside forces out. If you nation is under attack
as Holland was during WWII you do what you can to subvert the intentions
of
the enemy. Knowing who the enemy is
and what their intentions towards you are is the most important in
deciding how you will comport yourself towards them. During the cold
war the enemy was secretive, aloof, distant. There was no
communication.
There are those intent on destroying you. Jesus said pray for your enemy. Paul said so as well. I studied this out today. I'm not sure we understand what we should or shouldn't do when someone is out to destroy you. I know we don't tolerate this in a church. If you have a destructive individual in a church, a Jezebel, a usurper, you as a leader will put that person out...then in pious rectitude "Pray" for them, probably more as David prayed for his enemies. Look it up, he started with "break their legs God". IF we don't tolerate that in a community fellowship..why do we think we can in a larger community or even in our nation?
There is a place for us to pray for individuals who might otherwise be an enemy. I knew Russians when they were considered enemies. I had many Muslim friends in Europe. I got to know some Iranians. I intentionally sought to become part of their lives. Then I could pray for them. Then I could be salt and light.
There are spirits however that take over a people. The anti Semitic Nazi spirit was evil and by no means should we pray FOR those so committed to destruction. We have the same spirit alive today. I think we must be wise.
We do not understand the difference between praying against a deception for light to come and praying for those who are trapped in the deception. I think we confuse ourselves.... Pray for your enemies as individuals. Protect your family, community and nation from the spirit the makes those individuals enemy.
There are those intent on destroying you. Jesus said pray for your enemy. Paul said so as well. I studied this out today. I'm not sure we understand what we should or shouldn't do when someone is out to destroy you. I know we don't tolerate this in a church. If you have a destructive individual in a church, a Jezebel, a usurper, you as a leader will put that person out...then in pious rectitude "Pray" for them, probably more as David prayed for his enemies. Look it up, he started with "break their legs God". IF we don't tolerate that in a community fellowship..why do we think we can in a larger community or even in our nation?
There is a place for us to pray for individuals who might otherwise be an enemy. I knew Russians when they were considered enemies. I had many Muslim friends in Europe. I got to know some Iranians. I intentionally sought to become part of their lives. Then I could pray for them. Then I could be salt and light.
There are spirits however that take over a people. The anti Semitic Nazi spirit was evil and by no means should we pray FOR those so committed to destruction. We have the same spirit alive today. I think we must be wise.
We do not understand the difference between praying against a deception for light to come and praying for those who are trapped in the deception. I think we confuse ourselves.... Pray for your enemies as individuals. Protect your family, community and nation from the spirit the makes those individuals enemy.
Thursday, September 27, 2012
Helpful in Ministering to those Trapped in the Muslim Matrix
AN HONEST LETTER FROM A MUSLIM IN AUSTRALIA ASKING
Is God Unfair to Those Raised in Other Faiths?
AN HONEST REPLY ... PLEASE TAKE TIME TO READ THIS
Hi,
I'm a Muslim and lately I have been reading many of the questions and answers on your site and thought to myself that I needed to express my thoughts and feelings too and hear what you have to say about it.
The two biggest religions in the world, Islam and Christianity both have a rule that is extremely disturbing when the two religions have so many followers and both make a lot of sense.
According to Islam, if you believe Jesus as the Son of God you go to hell, and according to Christianity if you believe that Jesus is not the Son of God you go to hell. Now living in the 21st century in Australia, how are we supposed to know what exactly happened in the Middle East 2000 years ago? Of course we cannot know, we can only believe. Lately this has been really stuck on my mind. I still believe in God but I feel very lost and insecure.
People and religions say you should love God, but I do not understand how I could love someone who would put me into hell for eternity based on what I believe about Jesus, even though God knows my situation and knows that I could never be sure about which belief is true. I do not want to lose my faith and I do not want to not have a chance of going to heaven either and so we must do what we can to try to find answers.
In one of your responses you said that no matter how much you have sinned, if you repent and believe Jesus is your savior you will still go to heaven. So on judgment day if I was to see very bad people who have repented and been saved, and if I was a very good person who always believed in God and never did bad things, only small mistakes that we all do and I go to hell being a much better person, then where is the just, merciful, understanding and loving God that I used to know and believe in? It looks as if Christianity shows an easy way out for Christians and makes it impossible for everybody else. I don't like the thought of this as it does not sound fair and at the same time it sounds scary since I am a Muslim.
If God was to toss a coin and ask you "heads or tails? If you are correct you go to heaven, but if you are wrong then you go to hell", then would you see this as a fair way of deciding who goes to heaven and hell? Of course you wouldn't but when you think about it, you have a much better chance this way since it is fifty-fifty. In real life it isn't fifty-fifty between Muslims and Christians, there are more religions too. Knowing that God has the power to do anything, both religions would be possible in terms of who Jesus really was.
I feel insecure but it is not something that can be ignored. My eternal life and all of ours is at stake. Now before you reply, instead of listing more contradictions in the Qur'an and trying to persuade me that your religion is correct, if you could just think what if YOU were born into a Muslim family and it was ME who was born into a Christian family, then who would be correct? Who would go to heaven and hell then? I was born into this game without a choice where if I win I have nothing to gain (Heaven is unneeded if one does not exist) but if I lose than I have everything to lose.
When there are so many murderers, rapists, people who do not believe in God at all, so many people who do not deserve to go to heaven, why is it that somebody who believes in God should burn for eternity just because they didn't correctly guess the right religion? People are going to be eternally punished for being unlucky.
Why should I be one of those who end ups burning forever for a reason so unreasonable and for something not in my hands (as you notice nearly all people raised in a family of a particular religion would stick to it and if I was to think about changing religions I am tossing up between a chance of guaranteed hell and a chance of guaranteed hell).
Nothing feels as bad as living blindly, knowing you might go to hell no matter how good you are as a person all because of something that is not in your hands as you can never know for sure what is right. I cannot accept something like this but cannot do anything about it. God is supposed to be fair but I do not see any fairness in this. If God understands our situation then why doesn't God forgive us for the incorrect belief of Jesus a lot of us have? (I am not saying which is right and wrong)
Thank you for reading, I really hope to get a reply from you and I really do not know what sort of reply to expect for something like what I wrote. There are so many little questions in my writing and you probably will not have the time to answer it all in detail and I do not know how helpful any reply would be keeping in mind that even the good go to hell but I would really like a reply not only for me but for all the people who visit www.comereason.org that have similar thoughts to what I have since I believe that what I wrote about is the most important and the most scariest thing of all.
If I had a choice right now to die and never come back, I would choose that than to go on with this and have a high chance of ending up in hell. Nothing is worth the risk of eternal pain. It is not our fault that there are so many religions to choose from that sound right.
Thank you for having the website to give people the opportunity to express themselves and ask questions.
Sincerely,
Omer
Hi Omer,
Thank you so much for taking the time to write and articulating your views so clearly. I really appreciate your question, as I can see you're truly seeking answers and not wanting to just debate some point. I appreciate those people who are just seeking the truth.
Let me see if I can restate what you have asked so we can take focus on each pertinent point. First we both agree on several points:
There is a God who is loving as well as just and He expects people to be responsive to Him.
There exists an eternal place of joy and an eternal place of punishment; either of which a person may be sent after this life.
People will be judged by God to determine where they will be sent once they die.
As I read your letter, your real question can be stated:
Islam and Christianity both make specific claims about who Jesus was and what he did on this earth. These claims stand in contradiction to each other.
Each religion teaches that your eternal destiny depends on what you believe about Jesus, but there is no real way to tell who's right.
So, basically, your question boils down to this "If God is a loving God as well as a just God, then how can He send people to hell just because they were born into one religious system instead of another?"
God's Standard of Accountability
First of all, I'd like to point out that the premise as it is stated above is wrong. God does not send people to hell because they don't believe in Christianity. Let me emphasize that again because it is a major point of confusion to many people. No one has been sent to hell because they don't believe in Jesus. Hell is a place of punishment and people are punished because they've done wrong. In other words, the only reason people go to hell is because they've broken God's law. It is not as you stated, "somebody who believes in God should burn for eternity just because they didn't correctly guess the right religion?"
Think about it this way. If God is holy, righteous, and just then He cannot let wrongdoing go unpunished. It would not be just to let sin pass without executing a proper judgment. Any judge who allows a crime to go unpunished is not an honorable judge - he would in fact be considered unjust and unfit for the job. God, as a totally righteous being, cannot let even one sin pass unpunished. He must be just, that is his nature. Every man will be held accountable for any act of disobedience against God's law.
Now, it is true that by such a standard no one can survive God's wrath. We are all guilty of doing and thinking wrong things. However, God is not only a just God, He is a gracious and merciful God, too. So He provides a way that we can escape this judgment by allowing that Jesus takes our punishment for us. Jesus is like the close relative who sees you have a debt you cannot pay, so He pays the debt instead of you. Once your debt is paid, you are considered clean before God and can now have fellowship with Him. God maintains his righteousness and justice while still showing His grace and mercy.
In your letter you wrote that this kind of arrangement feels arbitrary - a kind of luck of the draw like a coin toss. You say, "People are going to be eternally punished for being unlucky."
But that again misrepresents the true nature of our salvation. It is not by luck that we stand before God guilty, it is our own actions that condemn us.
However, as I pointed out above, God does provide a way for us to escape that punishment. God must punish sin but allows Jesus to be our substitute, taking that punishment in our stead. But we are required to accept that substitution in order for it to be effective. It is like the person who has a fatal disease being offered a new vaccine that holds their cure. The patient must give permission for the doctors to administer the vaccine before it can save him from death and pain. If the patient refuses the vaccine - if he doesn't believe it will save him - he will die. Again, that is not luck, but a choice made by the patient.
Truth and The Luck of the Draw
You wrote that "Nothing feels as bad as living blindly, knowing you might go to hell no matter how good you are as a person all because of something that is not in your hands as you can never know for sure what is right." But, again, I don't think you're framing the point appropriately. What you believe is directly under your control. You are not beholden to any belief simply because you were born into a specific culture or faith tradition. Further, you are not obligated to "live blindly". God has given you at least two tools; your ability to reason and your ability to research.
You wrote, "Instead of listing more contradictions in the Qur'an and trying to persuade me that your religion is correct, if you could just think what if YOU were born into a Muslim family and it was ME who was born into a Christian family, then who would be correct?" It strikes me that you see matters of faith as wholly dependent on your cultural surroundings. The idea that Islam is true for you because you come from an Islamic culture while Christianity is true for me because I come from a Christian culture is where your error lies. Truth is always true, no matter if a specific culture recognizes it or not. Let me give you another example. Throughout most civilizations, health practitioners believed that illnesses were caused by an imbalance of what they termed "humors" in the body. They would therefore bleed patients to try and restore the balance and cure the ailment.(1)
The fact that many cultures believed in this technique in no way made it true that bloodletting was the cure for diseases. In fact, it most of the time further weakened the patient. The truth is ruthless - it never changes simply because one's culture doesn't hold to it. We can look similarly at the claims of Christianity and Islam and we recognize that both cannot be true. They stand in marked contrast to one another. It may be the case that neither is true, but it cannot be the case that both are true.
It is either true that we're sinners before a righteous God or it isn't. Both Islam and Christianity hold to this point. It is either true that God would allow us a way of escape or He wouldn't. This is where Islam and Christianity diverge. Christianity holds that not only is there a way of escape, you can know that you have escaped God's judgment. And if God allows a way of escape, then it would make sense that he would make it knowable.
Investigating Truth-Claims
You wrote near the beginning of your letter, "Now living in 21st century in Australia, how are we supposed to know what exactly happened in the Middle East 2000 years ago?" Again, this question seems to assume that we cannot know what happened, that we must just believe. However, as people who can think and who can investigate, I believe we can come to some conclusions about this question in an intelligent fashion.
First off, we do have the ability to investigate whether the accounts of Jesus' life have any historical validity. When we study the texts as a historian would, we find out that there is good evidence to show the accounts were written very close to the events they record and eyewitnesses or people who spoke to eyewitnesses wrote them.(2) We can then look at the claims that the Scriptures make about Jesus - the fact that he claimed to be the very son of God and that He rose from the dead - and see if these claims are supported or contradicted by the evidence we have. A great start in this would be the book by Dr. Gary R. Habermas entitled The Historic Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Lastly, we can examine the claims that the Qur'an makes about Jesus and we can determine whether those fit the evidence we have.
You see, a doctor can tell his patient about a treatment that will cure his illness, but other practitioners may offer alternate cures. Some may offer bloodletting, some may offer snake oil, and some may offer shark cartilage or other cures. But it is the patient's responsibility to look into the healing claims of each and see if they have the evidence to support their claims. I hold that Christianity is true, and it has the evidence to be justified as a true belief. You have been given a great opportunity in the fact that you are not exposed only to the teachings of your culture of origin, but you may investigate many other belief systems. That's why you wrote me to begin with. That's a great gift!
I pray we can at least agree that the truth is the truth, regardless of who holds it and that at least some truths can be investigated and known. If you agree to that, then the idea of a just God punishing sinners isn't such a stretch. And if God is God, and God is merciful as well as just, the He would provide a way to escape that judgment. Christianity gives a satisfying response to how all those things can be true at the same time.
Please let me know what you think of these ideas. I'd love to hear more from you as you continue to seek out truth.
http://www.comereason.org/
Is God Unfair to Those Raised in Other Faiths?
AN HONEST REPLY ... PLEASE TAKE TIME TO READ THIS
Hi,
I'm a Muslim and lately I have been reading many of the questions and answers on your site and thought to myself that I needed to express my thoughts and feelings too and hear what you have to say about it.
The two biggest religions in the world, Islam and Christianity both have a rule that is extremely disturbing when the two religions have so many followers and both make a lot of sense.
According to Islam, if you believe Jesus as the Son of God you go to hell, and according to Christianity if you believe that Jesus is not the Son of God you go to hell. Now living in the 21st century in Australia, how are we supposed to know what exactly happened in the Middle East 2000 years ago? Of course we cannot know, we can only believe. Lately this has been really stuck on my mind. I still believe in God but I feel very lost and insecure.
People and religions say you should love God, but I do not understand how I could love someone who would put me into hell for eternity based on what I believe about Jesus, even though God knows my situation and knows that I could never be sure about which belief is true. I do not want to lose my faith and I do not want to not have a chance of going to heaven either and so we must do what we can to try to find answers.
In one of your responses you said that no matter how much you have sinned, if you repent and believe Jesus is your savior you will still go to heaven. So on judgment day if I was to see very bad people who have repented and been saved, and if I was a very good person who always believed in God and never did bad things, only small mistakes that we all do and I go to hell being a much better person, then where is the just, merciful, understanding and loving God that I used to know and believe in? It looks as if Christianity shows an easy way out for Christians and makes it impossible for everybody else. I don't like the thought of this as it does not sound fair and at the same time it sounds scary since I am a Muslim.
If God was to toss a coin and ask you "heads or tails? If you are correct you go to heaven, but if you are wrong then you go to hell", then would you see this as a fair way of deciding who goes to heaven and hell? Of course you wouldn't but when you think about it, you have a much better chance this way since it is fifty-fifty. In real life it isn't fifty-fifty between Muslims and Christians, there are more religions too. Knowing that God has the power to do anything, both religions would be possible in terms of who Jesus really was.
I feel insecure but it is not something that can be ignored. My eternal life and all of ours is at stake. Now before you reply, instead of listing more contradictions in the Qur'an and trying to persuade me that your religion is correct, if you could just think what if YOU were born into a Muslim family and it was ME who was born into a Christian family, then who would be correct? Who would go to heaven and hell then? I was born into this game without a choice where if I win I have nothing to gain (Heaven is unneeded if one does not exist) but if I lose than I have everything to lose.
When there are so many murderers, rapists, people who do not believe in God at all, so many people who do not deserve to go to heaven, why is it that somebody who believes in God should burn for eternity just because they didn't correctly guess the right religion? People are going to be eternally punished for being unlucky.
Why should I be one of those who end ups burning forever for a reason so unreasonable and for something not in my hands (as you notice nearly all people raised in a family of a particular religion would stick to it and if I was to think about changing religions I am tossing up between a chance of guaranteed hell and a chance of guaranteed hell).
Nothing feels as bad as living blindly, knowing you might go to hell no matter how good you are as a person all because of something that is not in your hands as you can never know for sure what is right. I cannot accept something like this but cannot do anything about it. God is supposed to be fair but I do not see any fairness in this. If God understands our situation then why doesn't God forgive us for the incorrect belief of Jesus a lot of us have? (I am not saying which is right and wrong)
Thank you for reading, I really hope to get a reply from you and I really do not know what sort of reply to expect for something like what I wrote. There are so many little questions in my writing and you probably will not have the time to answer it all in detail and I do not know how helpful any reply would be keeping in mind that even the good go to hell but I would really like a reply not only for me but for all the people who visit www.comereason.org that have similar thoughts to what I have since I believe that what I wrote about is the most important and the most scariest thing of all.
If I had a choice right now to die and never come back, I would choose that than to go on with this and have a high chance of ending up in hell. Nothing is worth the risk of eternal pain. It is not our fault that there are so many religions to choose from that sound right.
Thank you for having the website to give people the opportunity to express themselves and ask questions.
Sincerely,
Omer
Hi Omer,
Thank you so much for taking the time to write and articulating your views so clearly. I really appreciate your question, as I can see you're truly seeking answers and not wanting to just debate some point. I appreciate those people who are just seeking the truth.
Let me see if I can restate what you have asked so we can take focus on each pertinent point. First we both agree on several points:
There is a God who is loving as well as just and He expects people to be responsive to Him.
There exists an eternal place of joy and an eternal place of punishment; either of which a person may be sent after this life.
People will be judged by God to determine where they will be sent once they die.
As I read your letter, your real question can be stated:
Islam and Christianity both make specific claims about who Jesus was and what he did on this earth. These claims stand in contradiction to each other.
Each religion teaches that your eternal destiny depends on what you believe about Jesus, but there is no real way to tell who's right.
So, basically, your question boils down to this "If God is a loving God as well as a just God, then how can He send people to hell just because they were born into one religious system instead of another?"
God's Standard of Accountability
First of all, I'd like to point out that the premise as it is stated above is wrong. God does not send people to hell because they don't believe in Christianity. Let me emphasize that again because it is a major point of confusion to many people. No one has been sent to hell because they don't believe in Jesus. Hell is a place of punishment and people are punished because they've done wrong. In other words, the only reason people go to hell is because they've broken God's law. It is not as you stated, "somebody who believes in God should burn for eternity just because they didn't correctly guess the right religion?"
Think about it this way. If God is holy, righteous, and just then He cannot let wrongdoing go unpunished. It would not be just to let sin pass without executing a proper judgment. Any judge who allows a crime to go unpunished is not an honorable judge - he would in fact be considered unjust and unfit for the job. God, as a totally righteous being, cannot let even one sin pass unpunished. He must be just, that is his nature. Every man will be held accountable for any act of disobedience against God's law.
Now, it is true that by such a standard no one can survive God's wrath. We are all guilty of doing and thinking wrong things. However, God is not only a just God, He is a gracious and merciful God, too. So He provides a way that we can escape this judgment by allowing that Jesus takes our punishment for us. Jesus is like the close relative who sees you have a debt you cannot pay, so He pays the debt instead of you. Once your debt is paid, you are considered clean before God and can now have fellowship with Him. God maintains his righteousness and justice while still showing His grace and mercy.
In your letter you wrote that this kind of arrangement feels arbitrary - a kind of luck of the draw like a coin toss. You say, "People are going to be eternally punished for being unlucky."
But that again misrepresents the true nature of our salvation. It is not by luck that we stand before God guilty, it is our own actions that condemn us.
However, as I pointed out above, God does provide a way for us to escape that punishment. God must punish sin but allows Jesus to be our substitute, taking that punishment in our stead. But we are required to accept that substitution in order for it to be effective. It is like the person who has a fatal disease being offered a new vaccine that holds their cure. The patient must give permission for the doctors to administer the vaccine before it can save him from death and pain. If the patient refuses the vaccine - if he doesn't believe it will save him - he will die. Again, that is not luck, but a choice made by the patient.
Truth and The Luck of the Draw
You wrote that "Nothing feels as bad as living blindly, knowing you might go to hell no matter how good you are as a person all because of something that is not in your hands as you can never know for sure what is right." But, again, I don't think you're framing the point appropriately. What you believe is directly under your control. You are not beholden to any belief simply because you were born into a specific culture or faith tradition. Further, you are not obligated to "live blindly". God has given you at least two tools; your ability to reason and your ability to research.
You wrote, "Instead of listing more contradictions in the Qur'an and trying to persuade me that your religion is correct, if you could just think what if YOU were born into a Muslim family and it was ME who was born into a Christian family, then who would be correct?" It strikes me that you see matters of faith as wholly dependent on your cultural surroundings. The idea that Islam is true for you because you come from an Islamic culture while Christianity is true for me because I come from a Christian culture is where your error lies. Truth is always true, no matter if a specific culture recognizes it or not. Let me give you another example. Throughout most civilizations, health practitioners believed that illnesses were caused by an imbalance of what they termed "humors" in the body. They would therefore bleed patients to try and restore the balance and cure the ailment.(1)
The fact that many cultures believed in this technique in no way made it true that bloodletting was the cure for diseases. In fact, it most of the time further weakened the patient. The truth is ruthless - it never changes simply because one's culture doesn't hold to it. We can look similarly at the claims of Christianity and Islam and we recognize that both cannot be true. They stand in marked contrast to one another. It may be the case that neither is true, but it cannot be the case that both are true.
It is either true that we're sinners before a righteous God or it isn't. Both Islam and Christianity hold to this point. It is either true that God would allow us a way of escape or He wouldn't. This is where Islam and Christianity diverge. Christianity holds that not only is there a way of escape, you can know that you have escaped God's judgment. And if God allows a way of escape, then it would make sense that he would make it knowable.
Investigating Truth-Claims
You wrote near the beginning of your letter, "Now living in 21st century in Australia, how are we supposed to know what exactly happened in the Middle East 2000 years ago?" Again, this question seems to assume that we cannot know what happened, that we must just believe. However, as people who can think and who can investigate, I believe we can come to some conclusions about this question in an intelligent fashion.
First off, we do have the ability to investigate whether the accounts of Jesus' life have any historical validity. When we study the texts as a historian would, we find out that there is good evidence to show the accounts were written very close to the events they record and eyewitnesses or people who spoke to eyewitnesses wrote them.(2) We can then look at the claims that the Scriptures make about Jesus - the fact that he claimed to be the very son of God and that He rose from the dead - and see if these claims are supported or contradicted by the evidence we have. A great start in this would be the book by Dr. Gary R. Habermas entitled The Historic Jesus: Ancient Evidence for the Life of Christ. Lastly, we can examine the claims that the Qur'an makes about Jesus and we can determine whether those fit the evidence we have.
You see, a doctor can tell his patient about a treatment that will cure his illness, but other practitioners may offer alternate cures. Some may offer bloodletting, some may offer snake oil, and some may offer shark cartilage or other cures. But it is the patient's responsibility to look into the healing claims of each and see if they have the evidence to support their claims. I hold that Christianity is true, and it has the evidence to be justified as a true belief. You have been given a great opportunity in the fact that you are not exposed only to the teachings of your culture of origin, but you may investigate many other belief systems. That's why you wrote me to begin with. That's a great gift!
I pray we can at least agree that the truth is the truth, regardless of who holds it and that at least some truths can be investigated and known. If you agree to that, then the idea of a just God punishing sinners isn't such a stretch. And if God is God, and God is merciful as well as just, the He would provide a way to escape that judgment. Christianity gives a satisfying response to how all those things can be true at the same time.
Please let me know what you think of these ideas. I'd love to hear more from you as you continue to seek out truth.
http://www.comereason.org/
Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Why Illinois stays in the Economic Doldrums...these attitudes are the reason
I am offering my Accents in RED. I am not convinced you can succeed if you harbor these opinions.
From this Website.
* A strong majority of Illinoisans believe that corruption is widespread in Illinois business, according to the latest Paul Simon Public Policy Institute poll…
More than six respondents in ten (62.3 percent) agreed that corruption is widespread in Illinois business.
* The Institute asked some other class-related questions…
Which of these statements comes closer to your own view - even if neither is exactly right.
Do you feel that the distribution of money and wealth in this country today is fair, or do you feel that the money and wealth in this country should be more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people?
Fair now 34.5%
Should be more even 57.8%
Other/Don’t know 7.7%
Do you think the federal government should or should not pursue policies that try to reduce the gap between wealthy and less well-off Americans?
Should 52.1%
Should not 41.1%
Other/Don’t know 6.8%
From this Website.
* A strong majority of Illinoisans believe that corruption is widespread in Illinois business, according to the latest Paul Simon Public Policy Institute poll…
More than six respondents in ten (62.3 percent) agreed that corruption is widespread in Illinois business.
• Black (73.4 percent) and Hispanic respondents (65.9 percent) were more likely than whites (57.6 percent) to say corruption in Illinois business is widespread
• Respondents in households with incomes lower than $50,000 (70.8 percent) were also more likely than average to say corruption in Illinois business is widespread.
* The Institute asked some other class-related questions…
Which of these statements comes closer to your own view - even if neither is exactly right.
Most rich people today are wealthy mainly because of their own hard work, ambition or education 40.4%
Most rich people today are wealthy mainly because they know the right people or are born into wealthy families 46.9%
Neither (VOL) 2.2%
Both equally (VOL) 7.8%
Other/don’t know 2.7%
Do you feel that the distribution of money and wealth in this country today is fair, or do you feel that the money and wealth in this country should be more evenly distributed among a larger percentage of the people?
Fair now 34.5%
Should be more even 57.8%
Other/Don’t know 7.7%
Do you think the federal government should or should not pursue policies that try to reduce the gap between wealthy and less well-off Americans?
Should 52.1%
Should not 41.1%
Other/Don’t know 6.8%
Monday, September 24, 2012
Why I can't vote for Obama by Huntley Brown
Dear Friends, A few months ago I was asked for my perspective on Obama,
I sent out an email with a few points. With the election just around
the corner I decided to complete my perspective. Those of you on my
e-list have seen some of this before but it's worth repeating...
First I must say whoever wins the election will have my prayer support. Obama needs to be commended for his accomplishments but I need to explain why I will not be voting for him.
Many of my friends process their identity through their blackness. I process my identity through Christ. Being a Christian (a Christ follower) means He leads I follow. I can't dictate the terms He does because He is the leader.
I can't vote black because I am black; I have to vote Christian because that's who I am. Christian first, black second. Neither should anyone from the other ethnic groups vote because of ethnicity. 200 years from now I won't be asked if I was black or white. I will be asked if I knew Jesus and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.
In an election there are many issues to consider but when a society gets abortion, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning to name a few, wrong economic concerns will soon not matter.
We need to follow Martin Luther King's words, don't judge someone by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I don't know Obama so all I can go off is his voting record. His voting record earned him the title of the most liberal senator in the US Senate in 2007.
NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)
To beat Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton as the most liberal senator, takes some doing. Obama accomplished this feat in 2 short years. I wonder what would happen to America if he had four years to work with.
There is a reason Planned Parenthood gives him a 100 % rating. There is a reason the homosexual community supports him. There is a reason Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Hamas etc. love him. There is a reason he said he would nominate liberal judges to the Supreme Court. There is a reason he voted against the infanticide bill. There is a reason he voted No on the constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. There is a reason he voted No on banning partial birth abortion. There is a reason he voted No on confirming Justices Roberts and Alito. These two judges are conservatives and they have since overturned partial birth abortion. The same practice Obama wanted to continue.
Let's take a look at the practice he wanted to continue
The 5 Step Partial Birth Abortion procedures:
A. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. (Remember this is a live baby) B. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal. C. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head. D. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole. E. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.
God help him. There is a reason Obama opposed the parental notification law.
Think about this: You can't give a kid an aspirin without parental notification but that same kid can have an abortion without parental notification. This is insane.
There is a reason he went to Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years.
Obama tells us he has good judgment but he sat under Jeremiah Wright teaching for 20 years. Now he is condemning Wright's sermons. I wonder why now?
Obama said Jeremiah Wright led him to the Lord and discipled him. A disciple is one in training. Jesus told us in Matthew 28:19 - 20 'Go and make disciples of all nations.' This means reproduce yourself. Teach people to think like you, walk like you; talk like you believe what you believe etc. The question I have is what did Jeremiah Wright teach him?
Would you support a White President who went to a church which has tenets that said they have a ...
1. Commitment to the White Community 2. Commitment to the White Family 3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic 4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the White Community. 5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions 6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System 7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.
Would you support a President who went to a church like that?
Just change the word from white to black and you have the tenets of Obama's former church. If President Bush was a member of a church like this, he would be called a racist. Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton would have been marching outside.
This kind of church is a racist church. Obama did not wake up after 20 years and just discovered he went to a racist church. The church can't be about race. Jesus did not come for any particular race. He came for the whole world.
A church can't have a value system based on race. The churches value system has to be based on biblical mandate. It does not matter if itʼs a white church or a black church it's still wrong. Anyone from either race that attends a church like this would never get my vote.
Obama's former Pastor Jeremiah Wright is a disciple of liberal theologian James Cone, author of the 1970 book A Black Theology of Liberation. Cone once wrote: 'Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
Cone is the man Obama's mentor looks up to. Does Obama believe this?
So what does all this mean for the nation?
In the past when the Lord brought someone with the beliefs of Obama to lead a nation it meant one thing - judgment.
Read 1 Samuel 8 when Israel asked for a king. First God says in 1 Samuel 1:9 'Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.'
Then God says
1 Samuel 1:18 ' When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.' 19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. 'No!' they said. 'We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.' 21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, 'Listen to them and give them a king.'
Here is what we know for sure.
God is not schizophrenic
He would not tell one person to vote for Obama and one to vote for McCain. As the scripture says, a city divided against itself cannot stand, so obviously many people are not hearing from God.
Maybe I am the one not hearing but I know God does not change and Obama contradicts many things I read in scripture so I doubt it.
For all my friends who are voting for Obama can you really look God in the face and say; Father based on your word, I am voting for Obama even though I know he will continue the genocidal practice of partial birth abortion. He might have to nominate three or four Supreme Court justices, and I am sure he will be nominating liberal judges who will be making laws that are against you. I also know he will continue to push for homosexual rights, even though you destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for this. I know I can look the other way because of the economy.
I could not see Jesus agreeing with many of Obama's positions. Finally I have two questions for all my liberal friends.
Since we know someone's value system has to be placed on the nation,
1. Whose value system should be placed on the nation.
2. Who should determine that this is the right value system for the nation?
Blessings, Huntley Brown
First I must say whoever wins the election will have my prayer support. Obama needs to be commended for his accomplishments but I need to explain why I will not be voting for him.
Many of my friends process their identity through their blackness. I process my identity through Christ. Being a Christian (a Christ follower) means He leads I follow. I can't dictate the terms He does because He is the leader.
I can't vote black because I am black; I have to vote Christian because that's who I am. Christian first, black second. Neither should anyone from the other ethnic groups vote because of ethnicity. 200 years from now I won't be asked if I was black or white. I will be asked if I knew Jesus and accepted Him as Lord and Savior.
In an election there are many issues to consider but when a society gets abortion, same-sex marriage, embryonic stem-cell research, human cloning to name a few, wrong economic concerns will soon not matter.
We need to follow Martin Luther King's words, don't judge someone by the color of their skin but by the content of their character. I don't know Obama so all I can go off is his voting record. His voting record earned him the title of the most liberal senator in the US Senate in 2007.
NATIONAL JOURNAL: Obama: Most Liberal Senator in 2007 (01/31/2008)
To beat Ted Kennedy and Hillary Clinton as the most liberal senator, takes some doing. Obama accomplished this feat in 2 short years. I wonder what would happen to America if he had four years to work with.
There is a reason Planned Parenthood gives him a 100 % rating. There is a reason the homosexual community supports him. There is a reason Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, Hamas etc. love him. There is a reason he said he would nominate liberal judges to the Supreme Court. There is a reason he voted against the infanticide bill. There is a reason he voted No on the constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. There is a reason he voted No on banning partial birth abortion. There is a reason he voted No on confirming Justices Roberts and Alito. These two judges are conservatives and they have since overturned partial birth abortion. The same practice Obama wanted to continue.
Let's take a look at the practice he wanted to continue
The 5 Step Partial Birth Abortion procedures:
A. Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's leg with forceps. (Remember this is a live baby) B. The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal. C. The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head. D. The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the hole. E. The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.
God help him. There is a reason Obama opposed the parental notification law.
Think about this: You can't give a kid an aspirin without parental notification but that same kid can have an abortion without parental notification. This is insane.
There is a reason he went to Jeremiah Wright's church for 20 years.
Obama tells us he has good judgment but he sat under Jeremiah Wright teaching for 20 years. Now he is condemning Wright's sermons. I wonder why now?
Obama said Jeremiah Wright led him to the Lord and discipled him. A disciple is one in training. Jesus told us in Matthew 28:19 - 20 'Go and make disciples of all nations.' This means reproduce yourself. Teach people to think like you, walk like you; talk like you believe what you believe etc. The question I have is what did Jeremiah Wright teach him?
Would you support a White President who went to a church which has tenets that said they have a ...
1. Commitment to the White Community 2. Commitment to the White Family 3. Adherence to the White Work Ethic 4. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the White Community. 5. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting White Institutions 6. Pledge allegiance to all White leadership who espouse and embrace the White Value System 7. Personal commitment to embracement of the White Value System.
Would you support a President who went to a church like that?
Just change the word from white to black and you have the tenets of Obama's former church. If President Bush was a member of a church like this, he would be called a racist. Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton would have been marching outside.
This kind of church is a racist church. Obama did not wake up after 20 years and just discovered he went to a racist church. The church can't be about race. Jesus did not come for any particular race. He came for the whole world.
A church can't have a value system based on race. The churches value system has to be based on biblical mandate. It does not matter if itʼs a white church or a black church it's still wrong. Anyone from either race that attends a church like this would never get my vote.
Obama's former Pastor Jeremiah Wright is a disciple of liberal theologian James Cone, author of the 1970 book A Black Theology of Liberation. Cone once wrote: 'Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
Cone is the man Obama's mentor looks up to. Does Obama believe this?
So what does all this mean for the nation?
In the past when the Lord brought someone with the beliefs of Obama to lead a nation it meant one thing - judgment.
Read 1 Samuel 8 when Israel asked for a king. First God says in 1 Samuel 1:9 'Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do.'
Then God says
1 Samuel 1:18 ' When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day.' 19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. 'No!' they said. 'We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.' 21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD. 22 The LORD answered, 'Listen to them and give them a king.'
Here is what we know for sure.
God is not schizophrenic
He would not tell one person to vote for Obama and one to vote for McCain. As the scripture says, a city divided against itself cannot stand, so obviously many people are not hearing from God.
Maybe I am the one not hearing but I know God does not change and Obama contradicts many things I read in scripture so I doubt it.
For all my friends who are voting for Obama can you really look God in the face and say; Father based on your word, I am voting for Obama even though I know he will continue the genocidal practice of partial birth abortion. He might have to nominate three or four Supreme Court justices, and I am sure he will be nominating liberal judges who will be making laws that are against you. I also know he will continue to push for homosexual rights, even though you destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah for this. I know I can look the other way because of the economy.
I could not see Jesus agreeing with many of Obama's positions. Finally I have two questions for all my liberal friends.
Since we know someone's value system has to be placed on the nation,
1. Whose value system should be placed on the nation.
2. Who should determine that this is the right value system for the nation?
Blessings, Huntley Brown
The section of Mitt Romney’s “gaffe” tape you haven’t heard
the former head of Goldman Sachs, John Whitehead, was also the former head of the New York Federal Reserve. And I met with him, and he said as soon as the Fed stops buying all the debt that we’re issuing—which they’ve been doing, the Fed’s buying like three-quarters of the debt that America issues. He said, once that’s over, he said we’re going to have a failed Treasury auction, interest rates are going to have to go up. We’re living in this borrowed fantasy world, where the government keeps on borrowing money. You know, we borrow this extra trillion a year, we wonder who’s loaning us the trillion? The Chinese aren’t loaning us anymore. The Russians aren’t loaning it to us anymore. So who’s giving us the trillion? And the answer is we’re just making it up. The Federal Reserve is just taking it and saying, “Here, we’re giving it.’ It’s just made up money, and this does not augur well for our economic future.
The section of Mitt Romney’s “gaffe” tape you haven’t heard – Glenn Beck
The section of Mitt Romney’s “gaffe” tape you haven’t heard – Glenn Beck
Top 10 bad economic signs for Obama
Here are the top 10 economic indicators that Obama doesn’t want you to pay attention to:
1. Unemployment rate
Despite his promise that the nearly $1 trillion 2009 economic stimulus would get America working again, the unemployment rate has been above 8 percent for 43 straight months. The current 8.1 percent jobless rate woefully understates the reality of problem. When taking into account people working part-time who want a full-time job and those who have given up looking for work, the rate is over 15 percent. Add in recent college graduates working at McDonald’s at the rate tops 18 percent.
2. Job creation
At the Democratic convention, Obama was quick to praise himself for having presided over the creation of 4.5 million jobs “over the last three and a half years.” The only problem is that he doesn’t include the jobs lost in the recession earlier in his term. A true reading of job creation under Obama shows a net gain of only several hundred thousand and he has the worst record on growing employment of any president since World War II.
3. Economic growth
Remember the “recovery summer” that Joe Biden promised in 2010? Or how Obama’s stimulus package was going to get the economy moving with all those “shovel-ready” jobs? The latest GDP report showed anemic 1.7 percent growth in the second quarter as any short-term benefit from Obama’s fiscal shot-in-the-arm has faded and now the nation is facing the possibility of a double-dip recession.
the rest HERE
Top 10 bad economic signs for Obama - Conservative News
1. Unemployment rate
Despite his promise that the nearly $1 trillion 2009 economic stimulus would get America working again, the unemployment rate has been above 8 percent for 43 straight months. The current 8.1 percent jobless rate woefully understates the reality of problem. When taking into account people working part-time who want a full-time job and those who have given up looking for work, the rate is over 15 percent. Add in recent college graduates working at McDonald’s at the rate tops 18 percent.
2. Job creation
At the Democratic convention, Obama was quick to praise himself for having presided over the creation of 4.5 million jobs “over the last three and a half years.” The only problem is that he doesn’t include the jobs lost in the recession earlier in his term. A true reading of job creation under Obama shows a net gain of only several hundred thousand and he has the worst record on growing employment of any president since World War II.
3. Economic growth
Remember the “recovery summer” that Joe Biden promised in 2010? Or how Obama’s stimulus package was going to get the economy moving with all those “shovel-ready” jobs? The latest GDP report showed anemic 1.7 percent growth in the second quarter as any short-term benefit from Obama’s fiscal shot-in-the-arm has faded and now the nation is facing the possibility of a double-dip recession.
the rest HERE
Top 10 bad economic signs for Obama - Conservative News
Sunday, September 23, 2012
Mitt Romney Did Not Hit It Hard Enough
A sweet serendipity for all the above is that they can use their empty
days to protest and agitate and attend rallies demanding even more from
us producers.
Of course they can also count on Lamestream 'news' media to self-righteously preach even more redistribution and to attack people like Romney.....even though we are far more charitable in our voluntary giving and service than preening liberals like newspaper editors and other preachy liberals.
IF you are a Christian and even THINK about voting for OBAMA... you need to see this
Obama is Openly Hostile Toward Christians and People of Christian Faith:
April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”
February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, (Like Abortion) and fully implements the plan in February 2011. August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.
April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican ; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three.
April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.
November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.
November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech.
Obama is Stripping Christianity from our Military
June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery
August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).
September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans
February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point dis-invites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian.
Obama is Overtly Pro Abortion and Pro the Homosexual Agenda
January 2009 – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations.
March 2009 – The Obama administration shut out pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit.
March 2009 – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA, the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations.
May 2009 – The White House budget eliminates all funding for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive” sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies and abortions. He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets.
May 2009 – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use racism in their “criminal” activities.
September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”
July 2010 – The Obama administration uses federal funds in violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution to include abortion.
February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
March 2011 – The Obama administration refuses to investigate videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers get abortions for victimized underage girls.
July 2011 – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military, reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778.
October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion.
Obama is Overtly Supportive of Islam at the Expense of Christians
May 2009 – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan.
April 2010 – Christian leader Franklin Graham is dis-invited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer Event because of complaints from the Muslim community.
April 2010 – The Obama administration requires rewriting of government documents and a change in administration vocabulary to remove terms that are deemed offensive to Muslims, including jihad, jihadists, terrorists, radical Islamic, etc.
August 2010 – Obama went to great lengths to speak out on multiple occasions on behalf of building an Islamic mosque at Ground Zero, while at the same time he was silent about a Christian church being denied permission to rebuild at that location.
2010 – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.
February 2012 – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do.
IF you are a Christian and in view of these things can vote for Obama you are going to answer before a Just God someday for your vote
April 2008 – Obama speaks disrespectfully of Christians, saying they “cling to guns or religion” and have an “antipathy to people who aren’t like them.”
February 2009 – Obama announces plans to revoke conscience protection for health workers who refuse to participate in medical activities that go against their beliefs, (Like Abortion) and fully implements the plan in February 2011. August 2011 – The Obama administration releases its new health care rules that override religious conscience protections for medical workers in the areas of abortion and contraception.
April 2009 – In a deliberate act of disrespect, Obama nominated three pro-abortion ambassadors to the Vatican ; of course, the pro-life Vatican rejected all three.
April 2011 – For the first time in American history, Obama urges passage of a non-discrimination law that does not contain hiring protections for religious groups, forcing religious organizations to hire according to federal mandates without regard to the dictates of their own faith, thus eliminating conscience protection in hiring.
November 2011 – Obama opposes inclusion of President Franklin Roosevelt’s famous D-Day Prayer in the WWII Memorial.
November 2011 – Unlike previous presidents, Obama studiously avoids any religious references in his Thanksgiving speech.
Obama is Stripping Christianity from our Military
June 2011 – The Department of Veterans Affairs forbids references to God and Jesus during burial ceremonies at Houston National Cemetery
August 2011 – The Air Force stops teaching the Just War theory to officers in California because the course is taught by chaplains and is based on a philosophy introduced by St. Augustine in the third century AD – a theory long taught by civilized nations across the world (except America).
September 2011 – The Army issues guidelines for Walter Reed Medical Center stipulating that “No religious items (i.e. Bibles, reading materials and/or facts) are allowed to be given away or used during a visit.”
November 2011 – The Air Force Academy pays $80,000 to add a Stonehenge-like worship center for pagans, druids, witches and Wiccans
February 2012 – The U. S. Military Academy at West Point dis-invites three star Army general and decorated war hero Lieutenant General William G. (“Jerry”) Boykin (retired) from speaking at an event because he is an outspoken Christian.
Obama is Overtly Pro Abortion and Pro the Homosexual Agenda
January 2009 – Obama lifts restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, forcing taxpayers to fund pro-abortion groups that either promote or perform abortions in other nations.
March 2009 – The Obama administration shut out pro-life groups from attending a White House-sponsored health care summit.
March 2009 – Obama gave $50 million for the UNFPA, the UN population agency that promotes abortion and works closely with Chinese population control officials who use forced abortions and involuntary sterilizations.
May 2009 – The White House budget eliminates all funding for abstinence-only education and replaces it with “comprehensive” sexual education, repeatedly proven to increase teen pregnancies and abortions. He continues the deletion in subsequent budgets.
May 2009 – Obama officials assemble a terrorism dictionary calling pro-life advocates violent and charging that they use racism in their “criminal” activities.
September 16, 2009 – The Obama administration appoints as EEOC Commissioner Chai Feldblum, who asserts that society should “not tolerate” any “private beliefs,” including religious beliefs, if they may negatively affect homosexual “equality.”
July 2010 – The Obama administration uses federal funds in violation of federal law to get Kenya to change its constitution to include abortion.
February 2011 – Obama directs the Justice Department to stop defending the federal Defense of Marriage Act.
March 2011 – The Obama administration refuses to investigate videos showing Planned Parenthood helping alleged sex traffickers get abortions for victimized underage girls.
July 2011 – Obama allows homosexuals to serve openly in the military, reversing a policy originally instituted by George Washington in March 1778.
October 2011 – The Obama administration eliminates federal grants to the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops for their extensive programs that aid victims of human trafficking because the Catholic Church is anti-abortion.
Obama is Overtly Supportive of Islam at the Expense of Christians
May 2009 – While Obama does not host any National Day of Prayer event at the White House, he does host White House Iftar dinners in honor of Ramadan.
April 2010 – Christian leader Franklin Graham is dis-invited from the Pentagon’s National Day of Prayer Event because of complaints from the Muslim community.
April 2010 – The Obama administration requires rewriting of government documents and a change in administration vocabulary to remove terms that are deemed offensive to Muslims, including jihad, jihadists, terrorists, radical Islamic, etc.
August 2010 – Obama went to great lengths to speak out on multiple occasions on behalf of building an Islamic mosque at Ground Zero, while at the same time he was silent about a Christian church being denied permission to rebuild at that location.
2010 – While every White House traditionally issues hundreds of official proclamations and statements on numerous occasions, this White House avoids traditional Biblical holidays and events but regularly recognizes major Muslim holidays, as evidenced by its 2010 statements on Ramadan, Eid-ul-Fitr, Hajj, and Eid-ul-Adha.
February 2012 – The Obama administration makes effulgent apologies for Korans being burned by the U. S. military, but when Bibles were burned by the military, numerous reasons were offered why it was the right thing to do.
IF you are a Christian and in view of these things can vote for Obama you are going to answer before a Just God someday for your vote
Professor's early call may be too early
This professor claims to have accurately predicted the last 7 presidential elections:
I have modified his claims because of recent events...let's see if it holds or not. MY COMMENTS IN ALL CAPS
In 2005, Lichtman also hit a home run when he said that the political stage was looking so bad for Republicans that Democrats could pick a name out of the phone book and win in 2008, the year a little known first-term senator became the first African-American to win the presidency.
Now Lichtman’s predicting a repeat performance by Obama.
Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama.
I have modified his claims because of recent events...let's see if it holds or not. MY COMMENTS IN ALL CAPS
In 2005, Lichtman also hit a home run when he said that the political stage was looking so bad for Republicans that Democrats could pick a name out of the phone book and win in 2008, the year a little known first-term senator became the first African-American to win the presidency.
Now Lichtman’s predicting a repeat performance by Obama.
Below are each of the keys and how it falls for Obama.
- Party mandate: After the midterm elections, the incumbent party holds more seats in the U.S. House of Representatives than it did after the previous midterm elections. Says Lichtman, “Even back in January 2010 when I first released my predictions, I was already counting on a significant loss.” Obama loses this key. AGREED
- Contest: There is no serious contest for the incumbent party nomination. Says Lichtman on Obama’s unchallenged status, “I never thought there would be any serious contest against Barack Obama in the Democratic primary.” Obama wins this key. AGREED
- Incumbency: The incumbent party candidate is the sitting president. Easy win here for Obama. AGREED
- Third Party: There is no significant third party challenge. Obama wins this point. AGREED
- Short term economy: The economy is not in recession during the election campaign. Here Lichtman declares an “undecided.” AGREED
- Long-term economy: Real per capita economic growth during the term equals or exceeds mean growth during the previous two terms. Says Lichtman, “I discounted long term economy against Obama. Clearly we are in a recession.” Obama loses this key. [Read: Seven Ways Obama Can Gain Credibility on Jobs.] AGREED
- Policy change: The incumbent administration effects major changes in national policy. “There have been major policy changes in this administration. We’ve seen the biggest stimulus in history and an complete overhaul of the healthcare system so I gave him policy change,” says the scholar. Another win for Obama. DISAGREE, OBAMACARE AND MANY OF HIS POLICIES ARE VERY UNPOPULAR AND A REASON TO VOTE AGAINST HIM.
- Social unrest: There is no sustained social unrest during the term. Says Lichtman, “There wasn’t any social unrest when I made my predictions for 2012 and there still isn’t.” Obama wins a fifth key here. DISAGREE...OBAMA 2016 AND OTHER THINGS IS STIRRING PEOPLE...AND THE OCCUPY PEOPLE ARE ALIVE AND WELL.
- Scandal: The incumbent administration is untainted by major scandal. “This administration has been squeaky clean. There’s nothing on scandal,” says Lichtman. Another Obama win. RELUCTANTLY AGREE...ALTHOUGH I THINK HE IS CORRUPT BEYOND BELIEF
- Foreign/military failure: The incumbent administration suffers no major failure in foreign or military affairs. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any major failure that resembles something like the Bay of Pigs and don’t foresee anything.” Obama wins again. WHAT ABOUT THE MIDDLE EAST IN FLAMES? DISAGREE
- Foreign/military success: The incumbent administration achieves a major success in foreign or military affairs. “Since Osama bin Laden was found and killed, I think Obama has achieved military success.” Obama wins his eighth key. MAYBE..BUT NOT SO MUCH
- Incumbent charisma: The incumbent party candidate is charismatic or a national hero. Explains Lichtman, “I did not give President Obama the incumbent charisma key. I counted it against him. He’s really led from behind. He didn’t really take the lead in the healthcare debate, he didn’t use his speaking ability to move the American people during the recession. He’s lost his ability to connect since the 2008 election.” Obama loses this key. [See political cartoons about President Obama.] AGREED
- Challenger charisma: The challenging party candidate is not charismatic or a national hero. Says Lichtman, “We haven’t seen any candidate in the GOP who meets this criteria and probably won’t.” Obama wins, bringing his total to nine keys, three more than needed to win reelection. AGREED
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)