| Grannie Annie|
Thank you for your kind wishes regarding my "retreat". The love you exude warms me, heartens me, and just plain feels good. A truly great witness.
Krispy, iffin you read this, I PRAY for the day where Bibles are made illegal as well as public proclaimation of the Gospel. On that day, we seperate the true followers of Jesus from the pretenders.
| 2005/10/8 15:49|
| Re: Hi All|
I want to make a general comment , if I may. I read what krispy wrote and the following posts about his source. Personally since I didn't know who this person was that he took the information from I read it and took notice of the Laws He was pointing to, Or the bills to be made law. I was very surprised to the overall reaction on what he posted since it had nothing to do with the source (thier character) but with the "Bills" to be passed into Law. The "bills" are fact.
I feel that it's a subject that MUST be addressed since it WILL affect each and every one of us in the near future. As a student of history you'll note that the back lash of the Bush presidency will be a liberal society (government) that will do all the more to errase christianity than that which President Bush did to promote it. You'll see the "Faith based " programs turn into a nightmare for all thoughs christian groups who foolishly allowed themselves to be sucked into them.
The pulpit and the preaching against sins that are group specific is already under fire, in Cincinatti a preacher was arrestted and charged after preaching "From The Pulpit" against the sin of Homosexuality.
So I sat here and not really wanting to get involved in this thread but knowing the times, I'll make 2 observations:
1)I don't believe Krispy meant anything other than the surface comment that our freedom of speech is under attack and prehaps really is dead.
2)This "IS" a topic that needs much prayer,prayerful discussion since it will affect all of us in the very near future. Note also that the federal government has a web sniffer that keys certain words (homosexuality etc.) under the guise of homeland security and boards like this may someday be shut down.
If I was to look closely, most of what I eat (name brand foods), or wear (name brand clothes or gymn shoes), promotes some type of agenda which more than likely is anti-christian or anti-jewish or anti-something good. So we must use information for our advantage and cut away ,sometimes, the carrier of that information if it is deemed to be accurate. In this case I don't care who this guy was , I do care that these "bills" are presently making thier way through congress/senate/presidency toward law (that IS fact).
Now that I have everyone mad , "what manner of christian aught we to be"? seeing the times. Bro. Daryl
| 2005/10/8 16:58||Profile|
| Re: FUNERAL OF FREE SPEECH|
For a long time, I have not been a fan of democracy, but at last I can see - almost for the first time - that those who promoted it were never in favour of the majority being right with God. Had they been, then a theocracy would have suited them.
Wresting biblical truth from the legal system over a long period has ensured that those who do not wish to be governed by God or judged by Him, are not troubled by such considerations in this life.
As never before, I suspect, Christians are going to have to know why they believe what they believe and in this respect, I think it is hardest to understand qualities like meekness, gentleness, longsuffering, goodness, peace, faithfulness - basically the fruit of the Spirit. We really have to KNOW what it is we're prepared to die for - not to kill for - but to die for.
21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.
22 [u]Ye worship ye know not what[/u]: [b]we know what we worship[/b]: for salvation is of the Jews.
23 But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him.
24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship in spirit and in truth.
25 The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.
26 Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am.
Do you know what you worship?
| 2005/10/9 22:47|
IN HEAVENLY PLACES WITH JESUS
there is a discussion in the scriptures and doctrine section titled "you've been lied to" which i found rather interesting. the opening post is quite provoking and it got me praying. is democracy a Godly thing? is it how we ought to govern ourselves? is it how God ever wanted His people to govern themselves? Whatever God decreed was not left to the people to ratify was it? i feel that democracy robs us by somehow making us neglect God's sovereignty.
bro Baruch said something which was pretty interesting, he said we didn't need rights because Christ died on the cross that we may do the work of the Father. then he asked why do we clutch and clamour for our lives? if Christ forfeited His right to live, what right do we have to our lives? Christ didn't die so we could live like pashas but so we could be reconciled to GOd. it would make life uncomfortable here if we lost our rights to life liberty and pursuit of happiness but i wonder what good could come of it. perhaps our preoccupation with our lives and being comfortable has rendered us unable to do God's work.perhaps losing these things would compel us to seek God more?
at any rate check this out:
Life. Liberty. Pursuing your happiness.
These words sound neat- even liberating - to human ears.
There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end, it leads to death. Prov 16:25
Can I rephrase that ?
There is a Way // Humanist doctrine that seems right to a people - but in the end - it leads to Laodecia.
Think about Laodecia - and its values. You know the scripture - I wont quote it [ 3:17]
Can we have LAODECIA TODAY - without the human-centered doctrine of we have A RIGHT TO Life, Liberty and Pursuit of human happiness ?
Humans are so religious ... theyll even pursue happiness in man-made Religion. Is there a better way of describing the Laodecians, in their
lukewarmness --- than happy in their comfortable religious forms emanating in Man, but not God ?
Whats the point, then ?
Can non-Laodecian disciples live without life ( i no longer live ~ Gal.
2:20 ) - human liberty ( john 8:36 - 2 Cor 3:17 ) - and "pursuing happiness( Luke 9:23-25, 14:26b -- Phil 3:8-10 -- Gal 6:14 ) ?
Can the Church under harsh Communist oppression in China flourish without these vaunted Western-Laodecian RIGHTS?
Sure they can. Read up on the history of 20th Century growth in His Church in China after the Communist takeover in 49.
Weve been lied to, my friends ...
We dont need rights
Christ laid His down [ john 19:10 / phil 2:6 - 9 ] - to do the Work of The Father - why do we
clutch and clamor over
Why do we think were doing a service in Gods name - by fighting democratically/constitutionally - for our rights ?
Do we realize democracy is of pagan Greece - not Jerusalem?
How little we know our own paganness -- as
Constitutional Christians, playing the harlot with words written unwittingly to pave the Laodecian Broad Path ( Happy Path )
How little we see of the heavenly City - Jerusalem Above - when our eyes are fixed on Washington, London - or whichever pagan house warmed over by a small dab of christianity.
How ingenious our Adversary is -- insinuating his desires to keep man ensnared in his sin - by insinuating to him the idolatry of freedoms to sin ...
.... within the Western-Laodecian mix.
( Is there anything more definitive than the country of America, for instance, being a country free to sin - and vaunting Its Freedoms to export, for gain -- its sin culture around the globe ? )
when human freedom is unleashed - sin is unleashed - or do we not yet know this?
Why does the Gospel flourish today in areas of the
planet without the chains of Political Freedom ? . .
compared to the Gospel move in the Cultural West, where we are free ? ( yes, I said chains )
Is there a correlation between our Glorious Rights guaranteed us by a piece of parchment ( God did not write any modern human constitution, no matter what weve been told on this by the Adversary and his powers & principalities in the heavenly places ---
Satan loves that we think God guarantees our rights to happiness )
-- these glorious rights & our Laodecian languishing, today in the West - any correlation ???
were First Century hearts free, living under the Roman oppressive yoke ?
How many hearts arent free in the modern West,
today as were constitutionally free to enslave ourselves . . .
Do we see the meaning of Pauls declaration:
But, our citizenship is in heaven . . ?
why the but ? if it is but not to contrast with the heart-fixedness of many that name the name of Christ - upon earthly matters ( "civilian affairs" - 2 tim. 2:4) . . .
Why arent our hearts there ( in heavenly places ) ?
Why are we palpitating politically over human rights .. as though Christ enjoined us to this battle: Today [ heb 4:7 today if you hear His voice. . harden not - on the political . .]
Christ saw Roman oppression whereever He turned . . and so did the apostles.
They palpitated not to "work the System" - to change the "Order" of things on earth. [ My kingdom is not of this World, my friends . . ]
why are we so worldly, then ?
why do we sweat to see 'Religious Men' seek & take office in the land . . in the World, whereever we are . .
has there ever been a time in the West, since the
fourth century, when western political men did not use the NAME ---- in furtherance of their earthly ambition, however well-disguised with apt piousness . . .
what a jejune picture this is, then -
And we play the harlot with this world System !
. . Would not the apostle Paul question us . . if he could be transported to our modern evangelical "Political" age -- and say unto us : Are you not acting like 'mere men ?
The worldly -- and the christian laodecians -ought sweat and strive for worldly rights - panting after every article of news emanating from the halls of the american capitol or londons westminster ~ for they have no KINGDOM ABOVE . .
The one whose mind is set on the heavenly Kingdom has forfeited these high places ( lev 26:30, num 33:52 ), when he has enlisted in the King's Army . [ 2 tim 2:4]
--- he no longer warfares with carnal weaponry [ 2 cor. 6:7, 10:4] --
he battles not for rights ...
he battles to put himself & his own life on that very Altar --- not the High Places of human political carnality -- but on that Cross to which His Lord bids him come . . . .
| 2005/10/10 0:36||Profile|
That is a really good passage! Thanks for sharing! I think that there is a big difference between the [i]government[/i] of nations -- and the [i]government[/i] of the Church.
A democracy has historically been the most stable form of national government (whether it is a parlimentary or republican form) in that it attempts to provide a voice for all individuals within the nation. The "founding fathers" of the United States saw the corruption of a [i]monarchy[/i] (and the corruption of all such governments based upon nobility). They attempted to draw a government that was not based upon nobility -- but based upon certain "inalienable" rights. While the spiritual impact of "[i]life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness[/i]" can be debated -- the First Amendment in the U.S. Bill of Rights does provide a basic right for faith.
There is an area of the world where [i]theocracy[/i] is widely practiced and accepted. However, few of us would want to live there (accept for purposes of evangelism). Islamic nations tend to have governments that are tied together with their cultish religion. The governmental laws are based upon the law of the Quran.
Would a theocracy have worked in America?
There were some "founding fathers" that supported the notion of a [i]christian theocracy[/i] in this nation. But the problem with such a theocratic government is the denominational interpretation of Christian living. Which interpretation of Christianity would be used? During a discussion about such a government, Thomas Jefferson stated that Christ is gentle -- and He does not force Himself upon anyone (at least until His return). Instead, Jefferson said, Christ must be accepted by free will. Why would men want a Government that dictated the law by the Scriptural interpretive beliefs of a few ministers? Jefferson reasoned that this was part of the corruption of Rome. Monroe stated that New Testament law is based upon the principle of loving God and your neighbor. He questioned whether or not this law could be legislated.
Jefferson was the first to speak about the concept of a seperation between Church and State. Someone wrote him a letter stating that they heard that the U.S. was going to create an officially recognized religious denomination. This person was the member of a certain Christian denomination, and he was afraid that the U.S. was going to officially recognize another Christian denomination. Jefferson wrote this person back to assure them that there was an inseperable wall between Church and State.
I am actually glad that such a seperation exists. As can be witnessed even on a wonderful website like SermonIndex, there are incredible differences between even those of us who truly seek God. And sometimes, a terrible rift develops when discussing matters of doctrine. Unfortunately, there are some in this nation who desire to rid the nation of all Christian influence. Some do this because they see hypocrisy from the "[i]religious right[/i]." But many do this out of a hatred for Christianity (and it's stances on social and moral issues like abortion and homosexuality).
I have traveled overseas for mission work, and I have a brother-in-law who serves as a "missionary" in an Islamic republic. I am amazed at how believers overseas serve God under difficult circumstances. While I am not exactly thrilled with (or [i]trusting of[/i]) all U.S. government or politics -- I do feel blessed to live in a nation that at least provides some freedom for worship and evangelism. I just pray that believers in this nation will work "while it is still day." Who knows how long this freedom will last?
| 2005/10/10 2:43||Profile|
| Re: FUNERAL OF FREE SPEECH|
Thanks for the exposition of the US position. I've heard it alluded to but without enough context.
I don't have a problem with separation of Church and State. I think the problem Christians face, is in deciding where their loyalties should lie, when conflict arises between the theocracy which they necessarily embrace in Christ, and whatever is passing for secular national government at the time.
In the UK, Tony Blair made much of his Christian credentials in the run-up to his first election win and I'm sure this swayed many who would never have voted for a socialist (atheistic) agenda, otherwise. However, once in power, all the Christian ideals such as the value of vocation, a job well-done to please the Master, and not seeking to be elevated above one's fellows, were systematically undermined by a policy of making money the sole reward for success. Simultaneously, the hestitation of previous governments to encourage homosexuals not to make this public, was officially abandoned along with other constraints.
These two policies alone, are either a realistic recognition that only Christians need hold to scriptural principles, meaning the majority [i]don't[/i] need to, or, they have done irreparable damage to the Christianised culture which held them in abeyance.
While everyone is feeling comfortable over here, letting their sin hang out unashamedly, assumptions about what is known of God and His ways - by received tradition from a previous generation - have well and truly bitten the dust in the last 15 years. It really is a wake-up call to understand what is the difference between living Christianity and living in a culture which acknowledges Christian principles only as one of a range of options and certainly not compulsory to comply with or adopt.
| 2005/10/10 9:07|
Thanks for the post. It is very interesting to see secular politicians try so hard to appeal to Christians (or even those who claim to be Christians -- or at least believe in Christ). It is a very strange thing! I didn't realize that it was happening in the UK as well.
I think that the book of Daniel provides a great example of how believers can coexist within secular governments.
| 2005/10/10 11:11||Profile|