This blog has moved to Facebook!

Are government regulations, entitlement programs and HMOs are leading us down the road to socialized medicine?

Does belief in the Pre-Tribulation Rapture hold to THREE Returns of Christ? (Rapture, Return pre/post Millennium?)

http://twitpic.com/b4qmg

What Ever Happened to Separation of Church and State?

The state should have no business in the affairs of a sacred institution like marriage.

Part 2— Does Any State Constitution Give “Couples” A Right to do Anything?

Does Any State Constitution Give “Couples” A Right to do Anything?

On November 4th, Californians again will vote on whether to keep marriage defined between one man and one woman. If Prop. 8 fails, California will follow the State of Connecticut granting gay couples (plural) the right (singular) to marry. And my question is this, I thought state constitutions granted rights to individuals and not couples? Does any state constitution give “couples” a right to do anything? I'm no law expert by any means so please educate me.

However, I believe those that wish Prop. 8 to fail (a "NO" vote), the basis then of demanding that every "couple" be given the same right to marry is a loaded one. How could they possibly believe that a prohibition on SAME-FAMILY marriage or poligamy be constitutional?

And in regards to marriage rights, where in the Constitution--state or federal-- guarantees the right for everyone to marry anyone? Doesn't it only guarantee that the definition of marriage decided on by the people, will be applied to every person equally? The "Seperate but Not Equal" term (Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka May 17, 1954) is totally irrelavant in this case of Same-Sex Marriage. The color of skin you were born with does not compare to one's choice of sexual orientation. There isn't enough scientific data to prove it either. But let's leave that topic for another day.

So, where does this "right to marry" come from? To quote from William J Federer, on his article, "Three Secular Reasons Why America Should be Under God", he makes the following points,

"Why is marriage so significant in the eye of the individual and the state? These ideas have origins. And they just didn’t pop into existence when the Constitution of the United States was drafted. Let’s go back a bit further, the Declaration states "all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights... That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men." In other words, rights come from God and government's job is to protect your rights. In his Inaugural Address, 1961, President John F. Kennedy put it this way: "The rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God." But if there is no God, where can the rights come from except from the "generosity of the State." The State, then, becomes the new god. And what the State "giveth," the State can "taketh awayeth."

And to add, Christians in favor of marriage rights for same-sex couples, really need to read their copy of the scriptures. Specifically the following scripture, 1 Corinthians 6:9,

"Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders,".

Bigotry? Intolerance, by all means no! For one, on the surface, it's a matter of survival. As Justice Peter T. Zarella, a Conneticut judge who was in the minority in recent 4-to-3 decision, suggested in his dissenting opinion, “The ancient definition of marriage as the union of one man and one woman has its basis in biology, not bigotry,"

What do you say? Thank you for reading. God bless. (Excuse any grammatical errors. It's late here on the West Coast!)

"This" Generation or "That" Generation? What Did Jesus Really Mean?

Continuing with the topic of

IDENTIFYING THE TIME: "THIS GENERATION" (Matt 24:1-34)

Gary DeMar writes in "Is Jesus Coming Soon?" page 20, "Like all of Scripture, Matthew 24 cannot be understood fully without surveying it's context which flows from chapter 23." He continues, "Furthermore, the prophetic words Jesus spoke in chapter 24 are directly related to the events describe in chapter 23". Just to note, this is how Matt 24:34 reads using the ESV translation,

"Truly, I say to you, [His Disciples] this generation will not pass away until all these things take place." ("things": temple destruction, signs leading up to the end of the age [of old covenant], persecution, etc.)

And this is the way traditional evangelical dispensational churches read Matt 24:34,

"THE generation that 'sees' these things will not pass till all is fulfilled."

Here are some problems when it's read that way; "First, projecting this passage into a future fulfillment ignores its clear, literal interpretation. Jesus said, 'this generation will not pass away until all these things take place.' Some try to get around the clear meaning of the phrase by claiming that there was a partial fulfillment in A.D. 70 but there will be a greater or secondary fulfillment sometime in our future.

"This is not the plain and literal reading of the text."

'All these things' were clearly to take place within the 'this generation' time frame. The text does not support the interpretation that there is a gap between the A.D. 70 events and some future events two thousand years from the time when Jesus first made the prophecy. ' This generation' and 'all these things' are tied together. There is nothing in the Olivet Discourse to lead us to believe in some type of 'double fulfillment' where these events repeat themselves in a future tribulation period with a rebuilt temple."

And to add, many of my pre-trib, dispensational brothers like to quote this fortune-cookie theology,

"If the literal sense makes good sense, seek no other sense lest you come up with nonsense."

I then ask them, "Then why don't you apply that to your own literal reading of the Scriptures? Especially when it comes to Matthew 24, Ezekiel 38 & 39."

Let scripture interpret scripture. What do you say? Thanks for reading. God Bless.

Did Jesus say, "This Generation" or "That Generation"?

Getting back to the subject of the book, "Is Jesus Coming Soon?" by Gary DeMar, he asserts what many in the church assume in Matthew 24 1-34 about "End Times", especially Dispensationalists. On page 20 it begins, "Chapt 24 begins with, 'Jesus came out from the temple and was going away when His disciples came up to point out the temple building to Him' (24:1). So then, the 'house' that would be left 'desolate' was the first-century temple that had been rebuilt under the direction of Herod the Great."

• Page 21 continues, "Truly I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation (23:36). Jesus and His disciples were discussing questions related to the time and signs of Jerusalem's destruction since that was the topic of discussion."

Furthermore, page 22 reads, 

• "Truly I say to you, all these things will com upon this generation." (23:36)
• "Truly I say to you, this generation will not pass away until all these things take place (24:34)

What things? The things Jesus was speaking of about the false prophets, wars and rumors of wars, earthquakes in various places and the temple being left "desolate". All this was sandwiched between the two time texts listed above. Like, as Gary puts it, "eschatological bookends".

Lastly, on page 23, Mr. DeMar asserts, "Dispensationalists do not believe that the phrase 'this generation' refers to the generation to whom Jesus was speaking but rather to some future generation. There are a number of problems with this position."

I will list those in future posts. Stay tuned!

Why Should I Pray?

I'm taking a quick time-out from the blog topic of Eschatology for this: The first Thursday of May, the nation acknowledges a "National Day of Prayer". The mission is to communicate with every individual the need for personal repentance and prayer, mobilizing the Christian community to intercede for America and its leadership in the seven centers of power: Government, Military, Media, Business, Education, Church and Family.

And I'm encouraged to hear that ALL 50 Governors issued National Day of Prayer Proclamations. Proclamations publicly acknowledge there is a day designated for Americans to unite in prayer. Each state’s proclamation and constitution will be read during a prayer event at each state capitol.

What is Prayer? Prayer is the practice of the presence of God. It is the place where pride is abandoned, hope is lifted, and supplication is made. Prayer is the place of admitting our need, of adopting humility, and claiming dependence upon God.

James 4:8 says, "Draw near to God and He will draw near to you." "Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, shall guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus," (Phil. 4:6-7).

Pray for your country and our service men and women overseas. No matter what our political stance is, I'm sure they'll appreciate your prayers today, tomorrow and further in the future should the Lord tarry. Also, pray for our upcoming election. Know this, whomever wins the office of our American Presidency, God has already ordained it (Romans 13).

Pray on!

Is Jesus Coming Soon?

Over this past weekend, I finally received my copy of "Is Jesus Coming Soon," by Gary DeMar (Americanvision.org). The book is fairly an easy read. Only about 63 pages, big type and a few church art history drawings and paintings scattered throughout the book. I was intrigued right from the start. I couldn't keep it down. I even took it to church with me on Sunday and read some of the introduction as church was starting. Anyway, at the beginning of the book, there is a great chapter entitled, "A 10 Minute Guide to Bible Prophecy". It's a basic intro to eschatology mostly on Matthew 24. This book is in total contrast to the soap-opera style "Left Behind" madness and sensationalism that unfortunately dominates end-times teaching these days. In the weeks to come, I will be posting quotes that I've highlighted throughout the book. Like the one below:

"Why doesn't soon mean soon when Jesus promised to return before that first-century generation passed away nearly 2000 years ago (Matt 24:34)? When the Bible uses words like 'near,' 'shortly,' 'quickly,' and 'at hand,' they refer to times and events that are proximate to that contemporary audience." (page 2)

Even the controversial philosopher, and atheist, Princeton professor Peter Singer, asserted in a recent debate* vs Dinesh D'souza (Is God Great?), said something to the fact that Jesus Christ seemed to have made false prophecies. That, according to Matt 24, He promised His own disciples that He was coming back soon..."And He never did".

Sounds like Professor Singer has taken the traditional dispensational interpretation of Matthew 24 that has saturated most evangelical churches instead of the actual Biblical view. D'souza could of corrected him on this issue, but he had to unfortunately stick with his apologetic approach of "I'm going to reason logically without the use of the Bible"; clearly biblical humanism, but that is a post for another day.

*April 25th, 2008, "Is God Great" debate vs Dinesh D'Souza at BIOLA University

Note: To my unbelieving readers, this is mainly an "in-house" debate, however you are free to comment. But you may not understand the hermeneutic of eschatology without having some in-depth study in it first.

When Your at Work, Who's Bullying Your Child?

Campaign targets MTV's, BET's music video 'assault' on children

"A new report from the Parents Television Council finds that daytime music video programming on Black Entertainment Television and MTV features sexual, violent, profane or obscene content once every 38 seconds. Deep concerns are being expressed over the influence that is having on young children. READ MORE

Richard Dawkins Raps? Yes, Dick Does Rap. Watch!

Is Evolution Science or Religious?

In anticipation of the movie opening of Ben Stein's "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed", this Friday, many atheists and humanists in the academia mafia and blogland are defending the sacred cow of Evolution. They are outraged, angered, and disgusted that such a movie is getting so much ballyhoo. What nerve people have to question the white coat wearing smug priests of today, Secular Scientists. French Philosopher and former Jesuit Priest, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, asserted, "that even if all the specific content of the evolutionary explanation of life were to be demolished, evolution would still have to be taken as our fundamental vision; defenders of evolution, must never let themselves be detected into secondary discussions of the scientific 'hows' and the metaphysical 'whys. The Vision of the Past, trans. J.M. Cohen (New York: Harper and Row, 1967), p. 123 (italics added). In other words, evolution says, "you dare not have any other gods in before me." Philosopher, W.T. Jones, a non-christian, said that scientists had "elevated Darwinism to the level of a religious dogma." It takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution which asserts everything you see in nature today came from nothing. As a Christian, I believe there is a God who created the universe. Evolution is a religion not science.  Romans 1:22, 23 states, "Claiming to be wise, they [unbelievers] became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images resembling mortal man and birds and animals and creeping things." (ESV).

“Ok class, does anyone know why big secular science finds this upcoming movie so intimidating? Anyone? Anyone?"

SCIENCE TEACHER: "American school science curricula introduced the theory of ...anyone? anyone? the theory of Evolution as early as... anyone?... the 1840s. “Old earth” opinions from the, anyone? ... the European scientific community led many American writers to advance long-age views of geology in school textbooks. However, even when this was done, most writers made the extra effort to harmonize the long time periods with the biblical account of creation. The...anyone? anyone know what book?...the Bible was still applicable to all subjects, but now it was not to be taken literally in all cases. With the popularization of...anyone?... biological macroevolution by, anyone?...anyone know who the father of evolution is? Anyone?...Darwin’s Origin of Species, American textbook authors had mixed responses. Some accepted Darwin’s hypothesis readily; others rejected it outright. According to historian Edward...anyone? Lar——son, by the 1890s and 1900s, ...anyone know what theory?, the theory of evolution was thoroughly embedded in the science curricula and treated as...anyone? anyone?...fact." (source: Answers In Genesis. The "anyone? anyone?" phrase was added for humor- Phrase made popular from Ben Stein's role in Ferris Buhler's Day Off .) 

Fast forward to today, sadly, if a public school science teacher questions Darwinism, he or she will be in danger of being EXPELLED! So why is the Academia Mafia community so up in arms about this movie? 

What If Ultimately, Atheists Are Wrong?

Below is a video clip of the Christian rottweiler, as I like to call him, Dinesh D'Souza debating Daniel Dennett on the Existence of God. It's so obvious throughout the debate that Dinesh schools Prof Dennett and his following of students during thq Q & A afterwards. In this particular video below, Dr. Dennett was asked by a student at 4:50 into the video, "What if you are wrong?" He avoids answering the question by implying that secular science asks this of themselves all the time while "religious" people don't. That somehow believers are rigid about raising such questions of doubt about their faith. Apparently Dr. Dennett hasn't read John 20:26-28 about Doubting Thomas. Jesus Christ never rebuked Thomas for his doubt. He simply told him, see, look and touch, "It's really me Thomas. Stop doubting and believe." (my paraphrase). Dr Denntt needs to stop looking at the moral wrongs of "religious" people, but instead, to look to the example of Jesus Christ.



Back on March 2nd, 2008, I posted a blog entitled, "How do you intend to answer the problem of good in a world without God?" Dr. Dennet was also featured in that article.

If Christians assert that morality can’t come from an atheist universe, then they must explain why God allows slavery in the Bible.

(click on image to enlarge to read text). Gary DeMar, President of American Vision writes wrote a great article about this on National Atheists Day, 4/1/08: (pardon the quote marks) "Atheists cannot account for morality given atheistic/evolutionary assumptions. This does not mean that atheists don’t do moral things; it only means that if they were consistent, they could never say that any action is either moral or immoral. The premise of evolution is the “struggle of favored races,” as Darwin put it. David Stove calls this “Darwinism’s Dilemma”: “If Darwin’s theory of evolution were true, there would be in every species a constant and ruthless competition to survive: a competition in which only a few in any generation can be winners.”7 Thomas Huxley argued that human beings lived in “the savage state.” Each man “appropriated whatever took his fancy and killed whomsoever opposed him, if he could.”8 Huxley was describing the process of evolution that made us what we are as a species today. At what point in time did this “red in tooth and claw” evolutionary advancement stop to become altruistic so that the infirm are protected, asylums are built for imbeciles, and vaccines are developed to perpetuate the lives of the physically weak? Consider Darwin’s own comments...." READ MORE

Why is it that fundamentalist Christians are so non-Christian in their attitudes toward others?

Doubting Thomas made this comment in response to my post on April Fools Day. Well, Mr. Thomas, when a group of "New Atheists" attack and belittle my Faith by writing such books...which should be in every gas station restroom...as toilet paper, I cannot stay silent. Today's post is not really a post. Just a quick response to Doubting Thomas.

The Bible says, "There is no God"...

Don't get too excited my biblically ignorant atheist friends...actually, in context, this is how it reads, "The fool says in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, their deeds are vile; there is no one who does good." Psalm 14:1. Today is April Fools Day or as I like to call it, National Atheist Day. Actually, I will be extending this day for this first week of April, and declare it National Atheist Week by posting blogs about "The fools..." The Bible is not name-calling here, but describing what Atheists really are. And what is that? That atheists are mentally dull. By rejecting God, atheists are reduced to absurdity in their reasoning because they cannot make sense out of the world in which they live; which includes morality, rationality, science, human dignity, and more. Atheists refuse to take what is obvious to everybody and draw out the conclusions and worship Him. Romans Chapter 1:18-22 confirms this because the atheists refuse to acknowledge God, their reasoning becomes futile. In this next week, I will be directing you to great articles about the foolishness of atheism and the arguments they love to press and...avoid.

Today's great article is entitled, "Why Atheism Fails: The Four Big Bangs", by Frank Pastore, Christian talk show radio host and former Major League Baseball pitcher.

Here are his Four Big Bangs:

1. The Cosmological (the universe “just popped” into existence out of nothingness).
2. The Biological (life “just popped” into existence out of a dead thing)
3. The Psychological (mind “just popped” into existence out of a brain)
4. and the Moral (morality “just popped” into existence out of amorality).

Now, watch how atheist borrow from the Christian worldview to raise a moral argument by commenting to this week's posts. I pray in contrast, that they come to the saving knowledge of the Saviour of their souls, Jesus Christ!

"Bob, my answer is...ABORTION"

CORRECT!

With the recent "milestone", as the NY Times calls it, of 4000 U.S. deaths of our beloved soldiers in IRAQ, I wanted to take this opportunity to make the Blogger Nation aware of the hypocrisy living within the Political Left regarding the war. By no means am I downplaying this tragic death toll of American Soldiers in IRAQ. One American loss in any war is one too many. My brother is a Veteran who is against the war, and my nephew, his son, served in IRAQ for two years, is for the war. He is now home. He wishes he could go back and help his fellow "brothers in the war" to finish the job. However, to say that 4000 American deaths is an atrocity and on the other hand sweep under the carpet 1.2 million American deaths each year is extremely wicked! The hypocrisy is that Liberals cry and moan about the deaths of Americans in other countries, but fail to see American Holocaust going on in their own backyard.

Here are some Abortion facts;

• Total number of abortions in the U.S. since 1973: 48 million +
• Abortions per year: 1,200,000
• Abortions per day: 3,288
• Abortions per hour: 137
• 9 abortions every 4 minutes
• 1 abortion every 26 seconds

This is barbaric and is happening right under our noses.

More stats about Abortion here.
http://www.cdc.gov/search.do?queryText=Abortion&searchButton.x=0&searchButton.y=0&action=search

American Vison's President, Gary DeMar has posted on his website an excellent series on "The Resurrection of Christ; Hoax or History?" Here are the topics he's covering;

• Part 1 (March 14): Introduction and Scriptural account
• Part 2 (March 19): Refuting poorly constructed theories concocted to explain away the resurrection
  • The Theft Theory (The Jews or Romans stole the body)
  • The Wrong Tomb Theory
  • The Legend Theory
• Part 3 (March 20): Refuting poorly constructed theories concocted to explain away the resurrection continued...
  • The Swoon Theory (Jesus never actually died and was simply resuscitated.)
  • The Hallucination Theory (The people who claimed to be witnesses of Christ's resurrection simply had hallucinations.)
  • The "Contradictory Gospel Accounts" Theory
• Part 4 (March 21): How the Resurrection of Jesus Christ Changed the World (link not available yet as of 3/20/08).
  

I encourage you to visit and read it. Naturalist may not find the above evidences to the Resurrection of Christ to their liking, however, just because they don't like it, doesn't mean it's not true.