The True Meaning of Separation of Church and State

     Our education system is a failure especially regarding United States History. It's hard to believe that in 2012 so many people do not understand the "separation of church and state issue". Here is what the Amendment says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
     According to many on the left the words “separation of church and state” are in the Constitution, which they are NOT; they are not found in the Amendments to the Constitution, which we call the Bill of Rights, either. The truth is that the phrase “separation of church and state” comes from a Letter written by Thomas Jefferson to the Danbury Baptist, reassuring them that the 1^st Amendment supplies a “wall of separation between Church and State”. This “wall of separation” is to prevent government, and especially Federal Government from infringing on the rights declared in the 1^st Amendment. You see at the time of the Constitution the Episcopalian Church especially was the state church of Virginia, for instance. Everyone in Virginia, regardless of their personal faith, was counted as Episcopalian. Baptists and others still struggled with persecution. Patrick Henry and others demanded the Bill of Rights as protection from State Churches as well as Federal intrusion.

As I see it reading and comprehension skills are lacking among modern households and especially households who still think we live in a democracy and who are indeed democrats. So I think there ought to be special education for these people. I am convinced there is a form of mental retardation that has been unrecognized among educators because most educators are democrats. It's like the blind leading the blind. They are suffering from the same retardation.

    People with good reading skills and comprehension skills understand what the 1 Amendment “wall” really is. It is a protection FROM Government intrusion and NOT protection of the Government from religion!

    BUT the problem is a deeper problem, an evil and dangerous methodology that seeks the ruination of our Nation by undermining the authority of the Constitution of the United States and thereby, weakening the Republic of the United States, altering it to become a democracy, which it is not, and was never meant to be.

    One might ask “Why would this particular amendment be attacked in such a way?”  It is because we Americans have certain inalienable rights that are God granted. When we exercise those rights we do so as a free and powerful people with a free and powerful voice. But there are those who wish to silence our voices to crush our foundations. You see so long as we are a Republic we have that voice and those rights regardless of age, sex, color, size or anything else. All that matters is that we are Americans!

    Here is a quote I got from someplace, don’t remember where but it is accurate: “By definition, a republic is a representative form of government that is ruled according to a charter, or constitution, and a democracy is a government that is ruled according to the will of the majority. Although these forms of government are often confused, they are quite different. The main difference between a republic and a democracy is the charter or constitution that limits power in a republic, often to protect the individual's rights against the desires of the majority. In a true democracy, the majority rules in all cases, regardless of any consequences for individuals or for those who are not in the majority on an issue.”

     So, back to the “separation of church and state issue” we go. All of these intertwine. Our Republic is based upon the foundation of our Constitution which is our rule of law. The Amendments, called the Bill of Rights are attached to the Constitution as clarification of certain issues. They stand or fall together! If the left can get away with re-interpreting the “separation of church and state issue” then they can get away with altering ANY part because they have succeeded in silencing those free and powerful voices. And remember, if the Federal government can take away these freedoms from religious people, they can take these freedoms away from anyone, including the press!

BUT anyone who has reading and comprehension skills can read this 1st Amendment and understand that it is a protection of our religious freedoms, including religious speech, writing, and assembly! And let me say that this amendment is especially important because it reflects on our Republic form of government, which itself being based on the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights wherein we find this amendment and the others, and is the foundation of our government. Attacking the 1st Amendment is an attack on the Constitution of the United States which in turn is an attack on our Republic, which amounts to treason! Therefore I propose that those who attack our 1st amendment are traitors to our country and worthy of banishment if not harsher punishment! They are certainly NOT Patriots!BUT anyone who has reading and comprehension skills can read this 1st Amendment and understand that it is a protection of our religious freedoms, including religious speech, writing, and assembly! And let me say that this amendment is especially important because it reflects on our Republic form of government, which itself being based on the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights wherein we find this amendment and the others, and is the foundation of our government. Attacking the 1st Amendment is an attack on the Constitution of the United States which in turn is an attack on our Republic, which amounts to treason! Therefore I propose that those who attack our 1st amendment are traitors to our country and worthy of banishment if not harsher punishment! They are certainly NOT Patriots!BUT anyone who has reading and comprehension skills can read this 1st Amendment and understand that it is a protection of our religious freedoms, including religious speech, writing, and assembly! And let me say that this amendment is especially important because it reflects on our Republic form of government, which itself being based on the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights wherein we find this amendment and the others, and is the foundation of our government. Attacking the 1st Amendment is an attack on the Constitution of the United States which in turn is an attack on our Republic, which amounts to treason! Therefore I propose that those who attack our 1st amendment are traitors to our country and worthy of banishment if not harsher punishment! They are certainly NOT Patriots!. BUT anyone who has reading and comprehension skills can read this 1st Amendment and understand that it is a protection of our religious freedoms, including religious speech, writing, and assembly! And let me say that this amendment is especially important because it reflects on our Republic form of government, which itself being based on the United States Constitution, including the Bill of Rights wherein we find this amendment and the others, and is the foundation of our government. Attacking the 1st Amendment is an attack on the Constitution of the United States which in turn is an attack on our Republic, which amounts to treason! Therefore I propose that those who attack our 1st amendment are traitors to our country and worthy of banishment if not harsher punishment! They are certainly NOT Patriots!

 

Democracy or Republic: Why Does It Matter?

DEMOCRACY OR REPUBLIC? THIS IS IMPORTANT!

 

“By definition, a republic is a representative form of government that is ruled according to a charter, or constitution, and a democracy is a government that is ruled according to the will of the majority. Although these forms of government are often confused, they are quite different. The main difference between a republic and a democracy is the charter or constitution that limits power in a republic, often to protect the individual's rights against the desires of the majority. In a true democracy, the majority rules in all cases, regardless of any consequences for individuals or for those who are not in the majority on an issue.”

    Why is this important? Ours is often called a “constitutional democracy” which is practically synonymous with “Republic”. A Republic is a representative government which operates “according to a charter, or constitution”. This constitution protects the rights of individuals and minorities against the majority. In a true democracy there is no protection because if the majority desires a thing, for even selfish reasons, they can legally do injury to the individual or minorities.

   When you hear politicians and others speak about our country as a democracy they are speaking either out of ignorance, stupidity, or they are revealing their heart’s desire. What you need to know is that most democrats would like to put our constitution on a shelf and cover it with dust because of its restraining influence. This is why the upcoming election is so important. You see, we have judges on the Supreme Court who have disdain for our constitution. They believe it is outdated and, like those who hate a literal translation of the Bible, they want it to be interpreted by dynamic equation. That is, they want that “change” that our current president has repeatedly proposed. Most democrats want a democracy…not a Republic!

    Our United States Constitution is in danger! Our Constitution is what has made the United States exceptional among nations. The Bill of Rights amended to our Constitution is what protects our rights to bear arms, our rights to assemble, or freedom of speech, and our protection as individuals. But a movement has been underway to confuse the populous about democracy. This is why the democrats continue referring to our country as a democracy and failing to define us as a “Constitutional Democracy” or Republic. This movement is subtle in many ways, and patient. Its leaders know that a thing has to be said over and over again until the public becomes so used to it they adopt it. They use the “frog in the frying pan” approach. This should be no surprise to those of us who are old enough to remember the communist’s promise to destroy us from within because we have communists in high places today and they HATE our Constitution!

In fact, I believe our current president has communist tendencies. He is definitely a socialist and has great disdain for our constitution and has proven it by his actions. Michael Barone writes, “That scorn has been expressed most recently in his “recess” appointments of members of the National Labor Relations Board and the chairmanship of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The quotation marks are appropriate because when he made the appointments the Senate was not in recess as the Constitution requires.” (See Article II, Section 2) This is just one example and there are others but since this essay is getting too long already we’ll forgo any others.

    Keep in mind that the upcoming elections will determine the status of our country in the world. Our Constitution is indispensable to our Republic. We need to check those who would destroy it!

 

Civility , Mendacity, or Transparency?

"Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." (1 Cor.5:8) 

     I've been thinking about the public discourse of the last couple of weeks regarding civility and I'm wondering what it is that we really want. I mean, of course we should all be kind and considerate of one another and our differences of opinion regarding a variety of subjects. I think of what we call "The Golden Rule". Our Lord Jesus Christ said, "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets." (Matthew 7:12) The Christian is taught, "And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him." (Col.3:17) So, for the Christian, civility should not even be question, although even we can, at times, become uncivil.

     A well known radio talk show host recently caused a stir by using words that were less than diplomatic when describing the activity of a woman who was being used by the present administration to appeal for forced contraceptive costs to be paid by her employer, a religious organization. Of course there was an immediate reaction, by the press, to the words this commentator used, which caused a public uproar. And it deflected the point from being about forcing religious institutions from having to go against their religious convictions, to being about contraception.Now I don't believe this commentator is a Christian other than nominally, so his words were harsh. But they were also true!

      What I have realized is that Americans really don't like truth. It makes them uncomfortable. So when popular television shows promote promiscuity they would not like to be titled what they are really about. I don't think "Sin in the City", replaced by "Whores in the City" would be a popular name, but according to traditional usage of the word it would be correct. I have relatives that, according to proper traditional usage, could rightly be called "whores" or "sluts". It wouldn't be kind, but it would be honest to do so. A television show like "Two and A Half Men" has a constant flow of sluts and whores, and, when Charlie Sheen starred in the program, featured a bona-fide fornicator! Any of these programs that have a character who is sleeping with one guy after another is featuring a slut. It is sluttish behavior!

     Our problem is that we have tried to become so civil that our morals have dropped dramatically! We call homosexuals "gay", when, for the most part, they are far from being gay. We call adultery having an affair. The word "affair" can have lots of different meanings. Years ago one could say, "I just got home from having a gay affair!", and it would only mean he or she had attended a happy or fun event. Now the words "gay" and "affair" carry an evil connotation to them which simply shouldn't be! Why do we constantly want to water down these expressions to blunt their meaning, or change them to have different meanings? It's because our morality has lowered to such a degree. Admittedly, to call a homosexual a "queer" like we did when I was young, seems to be a little sharp, but if you look the word up in the dictionary, one of the definitions is, "differing from the usual or ordinary" and, frankly, I think it fits quite well, though because I'm "civil" I don't use it in public discussions.

     That brings me to the point of this post which is, "What is it we want, civility or mendacity? Frankly I like to know where people stand on issues, and strong, fervent language does not bother me. I'm not afraid to call the kettle black, and neither should anyone else!

When a soldier goes to battle it is a great relief to know who the enemy is. In days gone by they could be identified by their flag or by their uniforms or any number of ways but in today's world it is difficult because they don't wear common uniforms or carry flags. If they did it would be a great help! So, I like it when the democrats identify their positions. I don't like dishonesty and I don't want a man to identify himself as a friend when he is, in fact, an enemy!

     It's not the use of name calling that bothers me so much if what is being said is true and not just a knee-jerk reaction, and, if there were not a double standard in society's reaction. The word "mendacity" means dishonesty or falsehood. There are certain individuals like late night comedians, political commentators on the left, and even Representatives and Senators who have used harsh and untruthful language regarding, not only their opponents, but private citizens as well. Even the president has used mendacity, sophistry, and just plain meanness to attack his opponents, and again, private citizens as well. So it is nothing short of blatant hypocrisy for them to cry out for civility!

     So which is it we want? I think truth is superior to civility. You can be civil by saying for instance, "Our president is doing the best he can, and though he's made a few honest mistakes, his intentions are honorable." Now that would definitely be a civil statement but would it be an honest one? No, as I stated in the previous paragraph, at least for me, that would not be honest so I would be guilty of mendacity to make such a statement! I like to know who is my friend and who may be an opponent and I want that opponent to say what he or she thinks, not what they think may be generous or mendacious.

      In our "Politically Correct" society we have settled for mendacity but that's really all one can expect for a society whose morals are at an all time low. Some societies were destroyed by the command of the Lord for having such low morals. Some societies were slowly eaten away from within by this cancerous moral decline. Do we want to be kind? Yes! Do we want to be fair? Yes! Do we want to be considerate? Yes! But we want to be honest in the process and we don't want to be tactfully deceitful. So it would be good if we'd grow a little thicker skin, if we'd learn to "take it as well as dish it out", and if everyone would be decidedly honest as well as kind. But above all I appreciate transparency, that way I probably won't get stabbed in the back!

America Is Not Just Changing; America Has Changed!

                                                                                                                                                 

     One of the things I keep hearing these days is that if the current occupant of the White house gets

reelected America will never be the same. This is true but the fact is America is, and has been changing for a long time. It is certainly changed from the time I was a kid! It's changed economically, socially, and morally.

    I hear people get angry over President Obama's assertion that the United States is not a Christian nation but he is only stating the obvious! Yes, at one time America WAS a Christian nation, and yes, even today America is nominally Christian by majority, but there is no way we can be considered a Christian nation. If we were, President Obama would NEVER have been elected and neither would many of the present office holders in his administration, a number of members of the Senate, a few from the House of Representatives, and others, from the Governors of states on down to the local level!

    Just look at the national debates over birth control, abortion, gay rights and same sex marriage. If this were a Christian nation none of these things would be debatable! Every true Christian knows that same sex marriage is wrong; every true Christian knows that abortion is wrong! How can a Christian nation allow the Ten Commandments to be kicked out of our public schools? How can a Christian nation even consider whether prayer should be allowed in schools? Christian nation?...far from it!

     If ours were a Christian nation the television and movie industry would be churning out G movies only. If we were a Christian nation the National Endowment For the Arts would be strictly regulated. If we were a Christian nation stores would still be closed on Sunday. If we were a Christian nation Christianity would be held in high regard. If we were a Christian nation our leaders would have to profess Christianity or they would not be elected, which, by the way, was true at one time in our history. If we were a Christian nation Israel would be confident of our alliance. If we were a Christian nation Muslims would not come here!

     When I was a boy things had already changed! I was born in 1947 and WWII had ended just shortly before. Women were now in the work place. America was in recovery economically from a costly war. Sometime early in my youth we had a black and white television set and, as I recall, though there were comedy programs like Sid Caesar and Jackie Gleason shows, there was never any foul language and there certainly was no sexual innuendo, let alone nudity. There were programs like Roy Rodgers and Dale Evans, the Lone Ranger, the Cisco Kid. You never heard a swear word from television. My dad could swear pretty good but we didn't see it on t.v. Dress was modest and men and women alike had a sort of code about beach wear. Not everyone was a Christian. I did NOT grow up in a Christian family but there was a Christian culture that was understood. It was evolving and not for the better! During my teenage years I saw this change speed up.

     Now, here we are in 2012 and what do we have? Is this a Christian nation? Definitely not! Our president claims he is a Christian but he does nothing to show it. It fact, according to his own testimony regarding his "Muslim faith", one would better assume he is a Muslim. Personally I don't think he's anything but self-worshipping but he is correct when he says we are not a Christian nation. Perhaps it's just the way he says it, as though he's bragging about our not being a Christian nation; as though that is something to be admired. But friends, we have been changing for a very long time and NOT for the best.

      You see the truth is, that relatively few in our society are true Christians. Many claim to be Christians because they have been, at some time in their past, part of a Christian group, or had Christian relatives, or embrace certain Christian associations, but relatively few are true Christians. And because they are not true Christians they cannot discern moral issues the same way that Bible believing Christians do. A large percentage of nominal Christians do not believe in absolute truth and, of course, to the Christian, the Bible is absolute truth. A very high percentage of nominal Christians do not accept the whole Bible; they pick and choose. And high percentage of nominal Christians don't know where they stand on the major doctrines of the faith. And, since most "Christians" are nominally so, they cannot discern those  politicians who are bad for our country. The very nature of a politician is to do whatever it takes to get elected, so lying is a necessary means to an end. And if the politician is not a true Christian than we cannot expect him to have Christian values. He may have values but they will not be Christian values. Truth and honor will not be high on his list of priorities!

                                                                                            

     If we were to go back to the founding of our nation we would find that Christian principles mattered. In fact, the Mayflower Compact clearly states the establishment of a Christian community as its goal. The early settlers were Puritans and their communities were Christian. They may have been a bit prejudiced regarding their particular brand of Christianity. It took some struggles, for instance, for Baptists to finally establish a free Christian community in Rhode Island. BUT, THEY WERE CHRISTIAN!

    So, in closing, I know for certain that we, at our founding (by founding I mean in regards to white settlers) were Christian. But, as it goes, Christians are not born physically, but spiritually, so Christianity, true Christianity is not inherited. And if the Christian message is not propagated, if the gospel is not passed on and preached by mothers and fathers then the children will end up "Christian" in name only except by the election of God. Therefore, if we desire a Christian nation it will take every Christians influence. I personally believe things have gone too far and that there is no chance of remedy. Our forefathers let us down by not standing for Christian truth and Christian principles and our country has changed. It's not changing only, it has changed!

You Just Can't Judge A Person By His Color!

  
                                                                         

     Wednesday I had to pick my son up at his school because the serpentine belt broke on my van which he had been driving to school. Yesterday I moved it from the school parking lot and took it to my sister's house till I can get it repaired. I'm depending on a couple of friends who are able to do such things.

     Anyway, it reminded me of the last time a serpentine belt broke and a lesson that I learned along the way. My family and I had gone to Dauphin, Pennsylvania to attend a wedding near Harrisburg. We went to the wedding and, on the way to the reception the serpentine belt broke on this same van and there we were, in strange area, and on a Saturday afternoon. It got even stranger as we found we could drive for short distances and then, letting the engine cool, we could then drive a little further as we searched for someplace, anyplace where we might find repair.

     We knew the way to the reception so as we proceeded we began to notice that all of the businesses had bars on their windows. It was a bit of a run down area, kind of dark and dingy, and we began to grow more and more uncomfortable, especially when we noticed that there were comparatively few "white" people seen. Most of the people that we were seeing were either black, Hispanic, or oriental.

                                                                                               

When we pulled into a gas station to get some information about where we might get some help I noticed that the attendants were behind a steel cage. Now I really got uncomfortable and began to wonder what I had gotten my family and myself into.

    The people behind the counter told me of an auto repair around the corner so I walked there (it was daylight) and asked for some assistance but I was told they were closing for the day and that they could not help so I returned and found everyone still in tact. The strange thing is that, as people stopped for gas, many of them asked if we needed help. They must have thought it was strange for us to be there. There were black people, Hispanic people, Asian people asking if we were o.k. and seeming genuinely concerned.

   I don't remember exactly who brought who, but a fellow came by on foot and asked if he could be of help. He said he had a small shop in the community and did some repair. He looked the situation over and said he could help. By this time one of the relatives showed up and picked my family up for the reception. Now I was alone and at the mercy of people whom I did not know, whom I did not trust, and of whom, admittedly, I was a little afraid.

   This gentleman took note of the year and make of my van and said he'd be back and, in about a half hour he was, with a new serpentine belt. He had brought some tools with him and proceeded to put the belt on. He knew what he was doing and the job was done in a very short time. He showed me the receipt for the belt, for which I did not ask, and then I paid him for the belt and what I figured the going rate would be for a certified mechanic, for which HE did not ask!

     In no time at all I was on my way to the reception and amazed! I was amazed that people that I did not know, that I did not trust, and of whom I was uncomfortable, were some of the kindest people I have ever come across! I realized that, even though I had always considered myself unprejudiced and impartial, in truth I really was! I realized that had this been a totally white community none of the uneasiness and fear would have been felt. I realized that you can't judge a person by his color!

     Now, as you read this you probably consider yourself to be an unprejudiced person as well. But if you should find yourself in a situation similar to what I have just described, you'll find out if your opinion of yourself stands.

Life In A Secular Environment

     "We've come a long way, baby!", and it's NOT good! There was a time when the great universities of America were Christian in their foundations. Universities like Princeton and Harvard produced some great minds and godly pastors. There was a time in America when all who settled here were of Puritan faith. There was a time in America when, if a man was going to run for public office, he had to profess faith in Jesus Christ. There was a time in America when certain things were simply not discussed in the public arena. There was a time when modesty prevailed, when character mattered, when righteousness was pursued, and when the Christian ethic was respected.

     Then we come to 2012 and what do we find? We find that a young woman can sit in a congressional hearing and testify that her sexual exploits are so common, so often, that she needs her University, a Roman Catholic University, to provide for her contraceptive needs. And, furthermore, that her contemporaries find themselves in the same position! And the shocking thing is that nobody in the hearing questioned her immorality! No one in the television media questioned the immorality of these women.

     I looked up the word "slut" in my Webster's New World Dictionary and one of the definitions is a sexually promiscuous woman. The young woman in question is not married, and I assume that, for the most part, her contemporaries are not married, so it begs the question, "Is the use of the word slut accurate?"

      The next word that I looked up (I want to be accurate) is the word "whore" and I found that a whore is a sexually promiscuous woman or a prostitute. So I considered whether this word is a fitting word for someone who testifies that she is promiscuous and wants others to monetarily support her promiscuity. I think it is!

     One more word that I felt like I needed to research is the word "prostitute" and guess what I found! I found that one of the definitions of a prostitute is "a woman who engages in promiscuous sexual intercourse for pay". As I considered this definition I concluded that, in the strictest sense the young woman was not being paid for her sexual indiscretions, but in a wider sense, she wants others to pay for her promiscuity! So, that particular word may, or may not be, applicable.

     This leads me to wonder if these words should be removed from the dictionary. I mean, if they are not supposed to be used to rightly describe the social and sexual activities of those engaging in them then why have them in the dictionary? And the next question is, "What has happened to a society that no longer wants to name behaviors for what they are?" I mean we like to call adultery having an affair. We call sodomites "gay". And, if someone should call a promiscuous woman a slut (which, by the way did not actually happen), then somehow the one using the term is the object of anger! I saw a sign a woman held up which said, "Sluts Vote Too!" and I thought, why isn't someone really angry at her self-admission?

     Recently in an interview the Christian actor Curt Cameron was asked about his views concerning gay marriage. He honestly told the interviewer his views, and now is being accused of hate speech! What has gone wrong with a society that cannot bear hearing truth? Must we all live in a fantasy world, a fairy tale world where nothing is real? Must we all agree on everything? Is it becoming fashionable to lie about what you believe just to fit in? And if we say what we believe are we preaching hate?

     It is very difficult for Christians to live in the secular world. The great persecutions of history are a testimony to that! But I'm talking about living in a free society that has had Christian roots. It always has been difficult, but I think it's getting worse because, at least for citizens of the U.S., we've seen a consistent decline in morality. Books, magazines, television shows, movies, the news media, and of course the Internet seem to be determined to progressively introduce more immorality to our society. So, while we are spiritual beings, we live in temporal flesh and we have to put on the full armor of God just to survive each day with our spirituality in tact!

     BUT, just because depravity abounds, does not make it acceptable to us. We must "call a spade a spade" if you will. We must not back down. Curt Cameron didn't and neither should we. And if a word, so long as it is not profane (in the negative sense), is found in our English dictionary, can describe an activity, let's not be afraid to use it. Yes, we are to be kind, and no we shouldn't be unkind in our descriptions of people or their actions, but we also must consider accuracy. "A word fitly spoken is like apples of gold in pictures of silver." (Proverbs 25:11)

I Respect Honesty

     Be honest with me and you'll have my respect! I don't expect perfection; I don't even expect friendship. I just want honesty.

Regarding Politics

     One of the things I hate about election time is the use of dishonesty when one is trying to topple another. I think we've seen a lot of that this time around. It's always the case I suppose and, frankly, it's socially acceptable it seems. But to me, it rakes against my consciousness! I don't care if it's a republican or a democrat, although I've come to expect it more from one group than the other, but it grinds me just as much regardless of who the guilty party is. I don't even mind negative ads so long as they're truthful! Now, if a person distorts what another person says, that's being dishonest. I have seen republicans distort some things President Obama has said and I've seen President Obama distort some of the things republicans have said. I've even seen republicans distorting republicans. Now don't get me wrong as I am not saying we must always tell the truth! Sometimes it's better to remain silent. Sometimes, if for instance you wife asks you, "How do I look in this?", you might want to plead the 5th!  I like Newt Gingrich because I believe he's at a place in his life where he says what he thinks. I like Rick Santorum because he sticks to his grounds. I respect both of these men. I like Rush Limbaugh because he says what he thinks and I respect him.

Regarding Hollywood

     I'm proud though when a man or woman stands for what he/she thinks is right. One of the things that peeves me about people is that so many times they don't actually state their belief. In fact, they sometimes state what they don't really believe just to get along. I think Hollywood is a great example. There you have a community of actors who, due to the pressure put on them from the majority of the community, tend to be silent on what they believe. I guess those who tend to live out fantasies as their work have trouble facing reality in real life! When one of them comes out and states what he believes I can respect him/her. I don't like Shaun Penn for instance. But I'm convinced that he actually believes what he says and I respect him for that. I don't like Matt Damon, but I don't respect him because I don't believe he really believes what he says he believes. I don't like Bill Marrs because he's a mean spirited idiot along with Alec Baldwin; these deserve no respect! I like honesty and integrity and it is absent with both of these men. I believe Shaun Penn has both and though I disagree with him I respect him.

Regarding Bible Handlers

     Again, honesty and integrity matter. I am a Calvinist. I don't really like that word because I believe all of Calvin's work on matters of salvation are found to be faithful to the Scriptures. So, I am pretty insistent that one sticks to what the Bible actually teaches and askew what they'd prefer it taught! I believe one MUST be honest when using the Scriptures. If one persists on misusing Scripture because it makes life easier for him or because it suits his own pleasure, he'll get little respect from me!

     Now, I have not always been in that "Calvinist" camp. In fact, for the first 10 years of ministry I was part Armenian and part Calvinist. The cop-out term is "biblicists". To me, the term biblicists applies to anyone who claims to go by the Bible's teachings, but who avoids the hard work of studying and taking a stand. I can have no respect for someone like that!

     Unlike those of Hollywood, when handlers deliberately mishandle, misinterpret, or mislead when teaching the Bible, they are not only unlikeable but they deserve no respect at all. If on the other hand, one who occasionally teaches a Sunday School or a Vacation Bible School or some other type of communication of God's word, and does so incorrectly, he should be corrected. And, if he is sound he will see the error of his ways and repent. If he is not sound he will not. I remember when I was first confronted with the Doctrines of Grace (meaning Calvinism) I had a difficult time absorbing it. Partly it was because none of my associates were Calvinists, I had been taught in Bible School to be a 3 point Calvinist (that's a phrase meaning moderate Armenian). But when I began to study it out I found out that I had been taught wrong. What to do? Stick with my prideful adherence to a system that didn't work? Or bow to God and His Sovereignty? I chose the latter. Dishonesty just did not work for me!

     So you see, honesty and integrity are important to me. I hope the same is true for you. I don't even mind if you disagree with me...just be honest about it!

Remembering When....

                                                                                                            

    I was born in 1947 but my real memories begin in the mid fifties. I mean there are fragments of memories from younger days but there was not really a sense of who I was or who I wanted to be. Growing up in the fifties I was exposed to country music icons like Ernest Tubb, Hank Williams, George Jones and more. My heroes were Roy Rogers, Gene Autry, the Lone Ranger, and Lash Larue. Of course there were others as well. A few years went by before I became a huge John Wayne fan. Of all of them I guess John Wayne influenced me the most. To me, John Wayne was a perfect example of what a man was supposed to be.

   But the fifties and sixties were also a time when Elvis and Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, and other rockabillys were influential. I never really got awe struck by Buddy Holly so it took a few years before I even became aware of him. So, on the one hand there were these country music legends that influenced me and on the other this early rock-n-roll sound. The Everly Brothers and Roy Orbison were a hit. Michigan's own Del Shannon was popular back then.

    Western movies and war films were the kinds of things that helped me to get a sense of the patriotism that has been important to me. I remember going to a movie called "Pork Chop Hill" starring Gregory Peck in the lead role. Later, when I was in the U.S. Army I served under the officer that Gregory Peck played. He was a Lt. Col. Joe Clemens then and commander of the Battalion, in which I served. It's funny that I had to look up his name. I still have my dress uniform from those days. I think I might be able to fit one arm it in!

     One thing I remember clearly is a sense of being an American with a rich history of heroes. In those days teachers actually taught the truth about American history. We said the Pledge of Allegiance before classes and we always stood with our hand on our heart when our National Anthem was played. We learned about the exploits of George Washington and we read about Abraham Lincoln and Patrick Henry and a host of others. I remember reading of Davy Crockett, Daniel Boone, Jim Bridger, Kit Carson and more, holding them in high esteem. Back then we didn't try to dig up dirt on people like we do now! We let the heroes stay heroes and kids like me had examples of manliness and bravery. We could distinguish the good guys from the bad guys and it was easy to do so.

     Now I know that when you go through that list of people that I named, some real, and some fictional, you will note that, really, none of them were perfect. The all had failures, some more than others, but as a kid I didn't know about their shortcomings. Who would have dreamed that Rock Hudson was a homosexual? I guess what I'm saying is that, even though kids of my generation did some pretty bad things there was still a sense of innocence. Yes, I tried smoking and cussing and I probably would have tried beer if I'd had the opportunity. But my folks kept me busy enough for me to stay out of trouble. I loved the girls too! I'll leave that for another time though............

     Still, though I was not raised in a Christian home we all had a sense of honor. We were taught to love country and family. If a preacher came by we treated him with kindness. As I recall we were always patriotic. I mean there was never any question about it!

                                                                                        

     Then, as a young man, serving in the military, coming home and entering the work force that patriotism continued. The first time I ever had any embarrassment for our country was during the presidency of Jimmy Carter. I had voted for him because he said he was a Christian. In fact, that was my very first vote! You just can't imagine how downhearted I became when Iran held American Hostages and Jimmy Carter seemed so weak. But then, a bright light appeared in the person of Ronald Reagan. When I heard him talk it was just like I was hearing my cowboy hero, John Wayne giving the bad guys an ultimatum. Straighten up or get you A_ _ kicked! The hostages got released and that sense of Patriotism grew! I've never voted for a democrat since, and never will! Ronald Reagan taught us to be strong and firm. He was a man of compassion and you just knew that if the bad guys came into town he would deal with them. Here was a real life hero! And, he even occasionally wore a cowboy hat! Reagan would NEVER have apologized for calling the kettle black!

     Well, here it is 2012 and John Wayne is no longer here. Ronald Reagan is gone and I just keep hoping for another like them. I know one thing for sure. American pride is a dream and it's getting dimmer all the time. We keep asking God to bless America but then we wonder how much longer He can! I saw a picture of president Obama wearing a cowboy hat; somehow it just didn't work!

Americans: The Stupidist People On Earth!

    That's a radical title isn't it? Truly, I cannot come to any other conclusion when I observe what's going on in our country. We have thousands of years of world history from which to learn and hundreds of years of American history to instruct us and we still don't seem to be able to take that accumulation of practical experience and put it into a plan for a rational society.

     For instance, I just read where California is now asking judges what their sexual orientation is so that there would be more homosexual judges on the bench for fairness reasons. So, Californians believe that one cannot properly judge any case involving homosexuals unless one IS a homosexual. Now carry this to its logical conclusion and you will have to find judges who are pedophiles, who practice bestiality, who are rapists, murderers, thieves, etc. If you are one of the few who can rationalize you will have, by now, connected with my point!

     Americans have, arguably, had access to the world's greatest literature, including the Holy Bible. We've had great leaders in science and have amassed countless scientific discoveries, some positive and some negative. In the medical field we've made great strides in surgical procedures and in the elimination of certain diseases. Yet we have not yet figured out that the male of the species is specifically designed to mate with the female of the species!

                                                                                                       

     How many years has it taken the medical community to discover the fraud forced on American patients by deceitful and greedy pharmaceutical companies? Finally, after years of trial and error, of countless lives being treated like laboratory rats, the medical community is discovering that statin drugs are dangerous! That statin drugs actually cause heart failure and cancer is something that has been known by natural healers for a long time but the medical community is just now beginning to admit it! And, when you see the commercials for specific drugs, followed by a list of 10-20 side effects including the thing your are taking the drug for in the first place, plus death, you would presume the listener would say, "That's not for me!" but, because we are a STUPID people we take them anyway. Now we are not IGNORANT. Once you've been told these side effects exist you cannot claim ignorance. You're just STUPID!         

     Our Nation is fighting a war in Afghanistan. So far we, the American people, have provided the Afghans will a little over 8 Billion Dollars in aid. Medical care, education advancements, liberty for women and girls, infrastructure, and protection has been GIVEN them, yet today, (3/1/12) two more of our service men have been murdered because of an accidental burning of the Koran. We cannot claim ignorance regarding Afghanistan because they have thousands of years of history by which we can learn. No, we are STUPID for thinking we can somehow change them.

    I live in Michigan. Our last governor ran our state into debt, put us in the place where we had, at one time, the highest unemployment rate in the Nation, so what did we do? We elected her to office again and made the damages even worse. The majority of people in Michigan are STUPID! In fact, I believe that if she would have been able to run again we would have elected her again. Instead we elected a governor that has us in a surplus for the first time in over 10 years!  He only got elected because the STUPID people were too confused as to what to do since his predecessor left them dizzy!
                                                                                                                           

    Do you know that probably 95% of us could not pass a quiz given to 5th graders at the turn of the 20th Century? Most of us would have a hard time with a McGuffy's Reader! That's how STUPID we are! We think we're smarter because we know more stuff but the STUFF we know is about sports, or movies, or television programs. We may have developed a skill that gets us by but what happens when that skill is no longer needed? We're out of a job and don't have a chance!

     Now, while I'm railing about this I want you to know that I consider myself, and a few friends, a handful of public officials, a cut above STUPID! At least I know that men are supposed to marry women, and I know that if I take a pill that has 10 strikes against me I deserve the outcome. I'm smart enough to know that when a society outlaws marijuana and puts warnings on cigarettes, yet lets the liquor industry slide it doesn't make sense. I know that when you pour 8 Billion dollars into a thankless people, of whom the majority would slit your throat if they had the opportunity, it's a dumb thing to do. I know that when a President is pro-homosexual, believes and supports abortion, including partial birth abortion, when he is found on video to talk of his Muslim faith...he is NOT a Christian! Even I am smart enough to know this! So what conclusion must I come to? I must believe that Americans are just plain STUPID!

     When a millionaire in America runs for public office and tries to convince us that he "feels our pain", way too many people believe him. He doesn't have a clue! This can happen even among Republicans and conservative people. On the other hand, if you are a liberal democrat you are definitely STUPID!

     I for one am grateful for God's grace because if it were not for Him, I would be even STUPIDER!

"Gay" Marriage: Are You Crazy?

     What are the possibilities for implosion in a society where the population has so veered from the norm as to tolerate, let alone, approve an abnormal union between same sex people, and call it a legal marriage? And when said society starts down that slippery slope and removes time tested and sanctified boundaries, what will the next step be? Who would have thought fifty years ago that our states would even consider such a slide? And if you are so foolish as to think perversion has limits you will not agree with me when I say that, given enough time, we will be talking about marriage between adults and little children (as do Muslims presently) but, just watch and see, some pervert will want to marry his cow!

     In the beginning God created Adam (man) and, from him God created Eve (woman) to be a "help meet" or fitted for the man (Genesis 2:7,22). And so, God created the man and his counterpart and blessed them (Genesis 1:28) to procreate. And so, for thousands of years marriage has been between a man and a woman! It matters not whether it is a civil marriage or a religious marriage, the only God blessed marriage is between a man and a woman, and I believe, not even ALL of those! But I will refrain from going there any further this time. The point is there can be no such blessing between same sex people regardless of whether it's done in a "church" or by a magistrate!

     We don't learn very well from history! Sodom was destroyed, partly because of such wickedness and there may have been no such "legal marriage" even involved there! Great nations, throughout history, have decayed from within by the adoption of homosexual lifestyles. Rome fell, from among other things through moral decline and Paul writes in Romans, "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet." (Romans 1:27,28) The word unseemly means indecent and shameful. That's exactly what the states are approving, indecent and shameful acts, and calling it marriage.

     Now if you look up the word marriage in your dictionary you will find that the primary meaning has to do with the union of a man and a woman, and, when it is speaking of a union between people that primary meaning is understood. There can be a "marriage of ideas" or a "marriage of ideologies" or any kind of union can be called a "marriage" BUT, when speaking of joining two PEOPLE in marriage we know it MUST be a man and a woman!

                                                                                                            

    A question that occurs to me is, "Why, when we are having a national conversation regarding such things as health care, and economic distress, are we even giving the slightest thought towards creating an even greater problem by pronouncing people as married when it is biologically implausible?" Don't most of us think health insurance is way to high right now? And lots of us can't even afford health insurance! And have we considered the economic woes that will result from such unions? Are we crazy?

   And why, when our youth seem to be struggling with truth and error are we constantly feeding them error?

    The gay crowed shouts out, "We should be able to choose whom we love!" and I agree, BUT, are we really talking about love? Of course, I can choose to love whomever I wish and so can you, but that does not mean that we have the right to desecrate our bodies! And that doesn't mean we have a right to put a heavier weight on the society in which we live. What will you tell that future fellow who wants to marry his cow?

                                                  

   I for one believe this whole conversation is ridiculous and, any state that even considers gay marriage should be shamed! Common sense alone should tell us that there are basically two reasons for marriage. One is for the fulfillment of sexual needs and the other is for procreation. While any homosexual relationship may pretend at fulfillment of a sexual need there is no possible way for that union to procreate! Sexual organs are designed to fit properly. Any plumber or electrician knows that fittings are called "male" or "female". You can't put two "male" fittings together and you can't put two "female" fittings together without somehow bypassing the norm! What is wrong with a society that can't seem to figure this out? Why, after thousands of years of human procreation, and after numerous attempts at social engineering, cannot the judges of any state acknowledge that any "gay" union is outside God's design? I think perhaps King David, though he was talking about a different type of sin, calls it right when he said, "The transgression of the wicked saith within my heart, hat there is no fear of God before his eyes. For he flattereth himself in his own eyes, until his iniquity be found to be hateful. The words of his mouth are iniquity and deceit: he hath left off to be wise, and to do good. He deviseth mischief upon his bed; he setteth himself in a way that is not good; he abhorreth not evil." (Psalm 36:1-4) There is no real fear of the LORD with this person and he thinks himself untouchable, that there will be no retribution for his evil. He has forsaken wisdom and practices sophistry; he lays upon his bed thinking about new ways to carry out his rebellion and mischief. This is the real answer to "Why?"

   I'm 65 years old and I can remember when "gay" meant happy, joyful, merry, bright or brilliant. Now it means something else and I think a lot of those "gay" people are NOT happy or joyful! You can't be truly happy, joyful, or merry when you are of a rebellious spirit and no matter what is accomplished in society to ease the conscience; the truth is still there and that is difficult to deal with.

   I'm not trying to be mean or cruel; I'm just stating what I believe to be true. So what's the remedy? There is only one and that is belief on Jesus Christ, not only as Savior, but as Lord of your life as well! Remember what Jesus said to that Samaritan woman? She was NOT "gay" but she had been married five times and was now living in adultery. She was given a choice to go on in her life, trying to make herself feel better in her own way, OR she could drink of the Life Giving Water that Christ offered her. He said, "Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again: But whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." (John 4:13,14) Anyone who trusts the Lord Jesus Christ to be his/her Savior will drink of this fountain of life and He will help you to overcome whatever sin has overwhelmed you. Do so today!               

Why Not Religious Honesty From Candidates?

     One of the things I've noticed for several years now, and especially in this election year, is the media's preoccupation with the candidate's religion. This preoccupation is NOT so much about a candidate's specific faith as it is about his transparency regarding it. I mean, for instance, Rick Santorum has been asked over and over again about his stance on social and moral issues, and then attacked when he states what they are!

    Now, I don't know Mr. Santorum personally so I don't know anything that is not available for everyone else to see and it is perfectly fine, in my view, if Mr. Santorum wants to tell us where he stands on social and moral issues. Why is it somehow wrong to have a belief? Why is it wrong for a candidate to say, "I'm a Christian" or "I'm a Mormon" or "I'm a Quaker", or "I'm a Roman Catholic?"

I like to know who I'm dealing with and we are talking about a person who may end up as president of the United States! In fact, who can really say what President Obama believes? I would really like for him to come out and state his beliefs clearly. That way I would know absolutely what to expect from him. Instead he has been secretive in revealing his belief system while all the while working behind the scenes to be anything but supportive of our country's Judeo-Christian traditions.

    How is it that we demand to know all of the ingredients that go into the foods we purchase? It's because we're intending to consume those foods and we want to know what we're eating. Why are the ingredients on some cleaning supplies? It's because we want to know if they contain poisons or if they may be harmful if mixed with others. Why are warning labels placed on certain products? It's because we need to know the potential harm they might bring!              

Transparency is beautiful too!

                                                                                                      

     Frankly, I wish there would have been a warning label on Barak Obama for EVERYONE to see! So, when Rick Santorum speaks openly about his beliefs, I like it! I know where he stands and his reputation is one of consistency. I liked it when Newt Gingrich admitted to moral failure and said he sought forgiveness for it. That kind of honesty is helpful to understanding a person. I like it when Ron Paul says exactly what he believes. It helps me to recognize those places where I agree with him and those places I don't.

     Somehow the news media finds fault with honesty. How can this be? They seem to think that the candidates can believe anything they wish so long as they keep it a secret and that is somehow good. In other words, they would rather a person have a secret agenda, that can take us unawares, then to have a man that is open about his faith and leanings. That's why they hated Ronald Reagan, and that's why they hate Rick Santorum! I like honesty. I may not like a person, or I may not like his agenda, but I will respect his honesty.

   In fact, I really want to see more of it. It doesn't bother me when Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich or anyone else talks about their mistakes and admits to them. And I'm not going to hold something that a man did 20 years ago against him because I know that NOW is different!

Restraint Is My Weakness!

                                                                                  

   This morning I wrote on Facebook, that the most difficult exercise for me is restraint! You see, I have been a minister of the gospel for over thirty years and I have been a Natural Health Advocate and Practitioner for about seven years. Now, I am fully convinced that my understanding of the Gospel of Jesus Christ is correct, and I also believe that I have been called to share that gospel. I also believe fully in a natural approach to health care and am of the opinion that everyone should be aware of the fact that there is a natural, sensible alternative to allopathic medicine. Therein lies the difficulty for me!

      I cannot help but share the gospel with those who I know are in need of the healing power of Jesus Christ. A troubled soul, to me, has but one recourse and that is to acknowledge Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord. Over the years I have seen many souls delivered from the bondage and consequences of sin, and brought into the liberty of soul and spirit that only Christ can bring. However, many reject this testimony and continue along the path that leads to destruction. Yesterday, for instance, I spoke to a young man who was having relationship troubles. I know he does not know Christ as his Savior but he has practised some "new age" religion and suffers from the effects of self-aggrandizement and self-worship. His ego is greatly in need of adjustment so I told him that he needed a vertical relationship with Jesus Christ before any horizontal relationships could be real and lasting. Will he heed my warning? I don't know but I was compelled to tell him!

"He came unto his own, and his own received him not. But as many as received him, to them gave the power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name: Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God." (John 1:11-13);

"In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;" (Ephesians 1:7) 

    When I see a posting on Facebook and a person is complaining of a health condition I often feel compelled to advise them on how to deal with it. I have treated my own family and friends for years with natural remedies and I find they work and without unwanted side effects. Sometimes people message me and ask for advise. I'm always thankful for the opportunity to help. But other times my advise is completely ignored and that's when I realize that I have a problem with restraint! I want to help but sometimes people just don't want to hear it! It is so very difficult to restrain myself!

    I have learned how to help people with almost immediate relief when it comes to things like earaches, sore throats, sun burn and so many other things and I know they are hurting. When someone speaks of a bladder infection I can tell them how to fix it! And, knowing what I know, the impulse to share it is sometimes overwhelming. To me, it has become a part of who I am and a part of my ministry.

    Why am I sharing this? It's not because I want to offend you; I want to help you. And though I can help others with various spiritual and physical I seem to have great difficulty in restraining myself from trying to help.

Boaz and Israel vs. Obama and His Socialist Left

                                                                          

     I am of the mindset that the Bible, God's word, is always correct and the imaginations and inventions of men are always wrong when they contradict God's word! There are many examples I could give of such contradictions but I will try to stick with one for today that is a major American problem. Our country has been toying with socialism for many years and as we have seen since liberals have owned the Senate and the White House, socialism is creeping into every aspect of our lives. And it seems the majority of Americans now want "Big Brother" or "Uncle Sam" to take care of their every need.

     But I would like to use a Biblical example to show how charity and hard work can compliment one another so that the poor can be provided for, yet, they get to earn their way at the same time. It comes from the Old Testament practice of leaving a certain amount of grain in the corners of the field so that the poor could come and, through the hard work of gathering the grain, provide for themselves. For instance, "And when ye reap the harvest of your land, thou shalt not make clean riddance of the corners of thy field when thou reapest, neither shalt thou gather any gleaning of thy harvest: thou shalt leave them unto the poor, and to the stranger: I am the LORD your God." (Leviticus 23:22). In the Book of Ruth we find Ruth going to the field of Boaz and gathering grain that was left after the reapers. This was the practice of those days and it worked well! The Bible says, "So she gleaned in the field until even, and beat out that she had gleaned: and it was about an ephah of barley." (Ruth 2:17).  The Bible does not repremand Boaz for being wealthy. In fact, it is Boaz' wealth that brough employment to his workers and charity to the poor!  What do we have here? Well, we have charitable action by the owner of the field and we have hard work by those who are in need! This is NOT a governmental social program; it is, to me, the same principle as a business owner who provides a job. All the land owner was required to do, not by government mandate, but by moral rule, was to leave standing grain in the corners of the field. They were not told how greedy and immoral they might be by acquiring wealth. They were not told exactly how much to leave for the poor, just to be sure to leave some! God was not taxing the wealthy field owners too much or too little; He was simply saying that to provide for the poor is the right and just thing to do! In the New Testament the Apostle Paul admonished "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat." (2 Thessalonians 3:10) Yet today's liberals would try to humiliate Boaz and they would attempt to take, at the very least, a large portion of his field, because, in their minds, he is just too wealthy! Now we know how charitable and kind Boaz really was but you can never satisfy a liberal! And Paul, if he were here today would say the same thing he wrote 2000 years ago.

    The Socialist Liberals of today have no such balanced program. Their idea is that nobody should have any more than anyone else, which, if this were put into practice would mean there would be no corners of the field from which to glean because there would be no field planted. There would be no field planted because there would be no field owners. There would be no field owners because the system would take away all that would be produced in the field and give it away to non-producers who simply wait on the socialist liberal to bring their ephah to them. This is what will result if the Obama Administration and his liberal cohorts have their way!    

                                               

    By the way, those poor who went into the fields and gathered their grain were not told how to cook it! They were not told who THEY could be charitable towards. They EARNED their epha! But let's suppose the Obama Administration owned the field. Not only would the private "land owner" not exist because the government would own the land, but the government would also try to mandate how much could be gleaned but they would also mandate how it must be stored, how it should be baked, and how much should be taxed! If this is what the American people want then go ahead and elect Mr. Obama again!

P.S. I encourage you to read the Book of Ruth.