|
| FRIDAY, DECEMBER 28, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
If you want to know one thing that gets Europeans mad at America here it is. You must remember that Europe is almost entirely heathen, anti-Christian, and utterly immoral. Given that mindset, many Europeans despise the religious beliefs of the majority of Americans. Those beliefs were set in stark contrast to European heathenism in a recent opinion poll. The Christian Post carried the following report: More Americans believe in a literal hell and the devil than in Darwin's theory of evolution, a new poll found. Over half of Americans, 62 percent, believe in hell and the devil compared to only 42 percent of those surveyed who said they believe in Darwin's theory, according to the findings of the recently released Harris poll. The poll of 2,455 U.S. adults, taken Nov. 7-13, found that 82 percent of respondents believe in God, according to Reuters. It further showed that 79 percent believe in miracles, 75 percent in heaven, and 72 percent of Americans believe that Jesus Christ is God or the Son of God. Now, I know that opinion polls are no true barometer of this nation's spiritual wellbeing. However, I think that it is both amazing and encouraging that after all the time, effort and money that has gone into persuading the American public that Darwinism is true, only 42% can accept his theory. Evolutionists have for decades highjacked our educational system from grade school all the way through university. They have misused billions of dollars of state funds in their scheme to deify Darwin and raise his theory almost to the level of divine revelation. And after all that they have failed to convince the large majority of Americans of their claims. I think that says a lot for the efforts of Creationist groups that have taken the battle to the enemy. They have gained the ear and the respect of millions as they have stood for God's Word. I think also that we are seeing that the residual effects of former times of revival blessing are still with us. That, however, raises a troubling question. Where are the great, Scriptural movements of spiritual power today? They are conspicuous by their absence. Oh, I know the claims made by Charismatic charlatans. They know nothing of real, Biblical power and are more of a curse than a blessing to the nation. We need a genuine visitation of God's Holy Spirit to sweep America and turn many to Christ in true repentance and faith. This need is accentuated by the clear disconnect between the figures in this opinion poll and the moral and spiritual decline that is obvious all around us. In other words, for most people what they believe has little or no impact on how they live. Many deny Darwin's claim that they are descended from monkeys but they live like animals nonetheless. More may believe in the devil than in Darwin but they seem blissfully unaware that the devil has them for dupes, allowing them to be satisfied with a form of belief in God and His Son that is devoid of all life-changing power. Either way, whether they believe in Darwin or the devil, the devil wins. That's one fact the poll doesn't report. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| THURSDAY, DECEMBER 27, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
Michael Savage, the San Francisco based talk show host, is not my cup of tea. I have heard him only infrequently and that by accident and not design. A few minutes of his raw diatribes has been more than enough for me. However, one thing you could never say about him is that he leaves you in any doubt about his position. One of those positions is that America is mad in bringing hordes of Muslims into this country because while America is a republic that cherishes the freedoms laid down in the Constitution Muslims are bound by a book, the Quran, that Savage is sure is the enemy of freedom. Savage alleges that a Muslim group called the Council on American-Muslim Relations (CAIR) has taken copyrighted material from his radio shows and has used them in promotional video that are aimed to raise money. He is therefore suing CAIR for copyright infringement. He is also suing for a perceived attempt by CAIR to silence Savage's voice by using the misappropriated clips of his program to deter advertisers from supporting his show. Savage is represented by celebrity lawyer, Daniel Horowitz, and his suit aims to expose something that many Americans have long believed: that Muslim "charities" are often fronts for Islamic terrorists. The lawsuit noted CAIR was founded in 1994 by Ibrahim Hooper, Nihad Awad and Omar Ahmad, "all of whom had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook." Savage's legal action noted the FBI has concluded the IAP is "a Hamas front ... (that is) controlled by Hamas, it brings Hamas leaders to the U.S., it does propaganda for Hamas." Filed in U.S. District Court in California, the lawsuit boldly claims that CAIR is a "political vehicle of international terrorism" that seeks to do "material harm to those voices who speak against the violent agenda of CAIR's clients." It is one thing to file a lawsuit; it is another thing to win it. Thus far, Muslim "charities" have been successful in raising enough dust to obscure their real agenda. Even the U.S. government has had little success in court against them. However, this is a lawsuit filed by an aggrieved individual, one who has access to the airwaves and who has millions of listeners. Additionally, he says what many Americans really believe and wish that someone in authority would say too. Michael Savage is not in a position of authority but he is in a position of considerable power. It will be interesting if he can convince a jury to declare CAIR an enemy to American freedoms and at last reverse the usual timidity that has just about everyone in public life backing off from Islam for fear of enraging Muslims. Nobody in his right senses wants to enrage or insult law-abiding Muslims or people of any other religious or ethnic group. But it is time that even law-abiding Muslims came out into the open and exposed those who act in their name and who behind a peaceful façade hide the venomous heart of Islamic terrorists. In this lawsuit, I hope that Michael Savage can live up to his name. It's time someone got his teeth into groups like CAIR. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 26, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
Many preachers have a dirty little secret. They would be embarrassed if their congregations knew it and so they go to great lengths to make sure they don't. And what is their secret? It is that the sermons many men preach as if they were their own are really lifted lock, stock and barrel from someone else. Years ago, a preacher who was candidating for a large Baptist church in Ireland inquired what kind of preaching would go down well with the congregation. He said that if they liked Spurgeon, he could give them Spurgeon. If they preferred the ornate oratory of Talmage he could supply that. Just tell him whose work he had to steal and he would do it! Thankfully he did not receive the call to the church. If you think that is a bit far-fetched, consider this. Rick Warren has said that he regularly sends out copies of what he is going to preach so that all the would-be Warrens around the world may preach them too. And every year a publisher produces a handbook for "busy" pastors with everything a pastor needs for his pulpit ministry-both services on the Lord's Day and a sermon for the mid week meeting! Not only does the book supply the text, it gives the message in full, including illustrations. It gives the prayers to be prayed and just about everything else the preacher may need to do "his" work! When a newspaper reporter steals another person's work and passes it off as his own, he gets fired. I don't think most of us have too high an opinion of newspaper men and yet we put up with preachers who regularly steal other men's sermons and pass them off as their own. I have no problem with preachers learning from the great preachers and expositors of the past. But I have a big problem with preachers who go to war in Saul's armor, preaching another man's material and never for a moment indicating that they might have taken it from him. It's not just that lying and stealing are wrong. They are and will drive away the blessing of God. What worries me even more is the idea of preachers all over the world delivering some sermon text and never getting on their knees before God to receive from Him a message for the people, not just a sermon to fill in the time. The world's first Gospel Telephone Service in New York City had a slogan, We have a message from God for you! Every preacher should seriously think of adopting that slogan. Here is something he should be certain of every time he enters the pulpit: I HAVE A MESSAGE FROM GOD FOR YOU. That is the kind of preaching that will do lasting good all over the world. It was said of the great Scottish preacher, Robert Murray McCheyne, that he entered the pulpit as one who had just come from the presence of God. May God raise up a race of preachers like McCheyne! Men who meet with God, spend time in preparation over His word-yes and who take time to research what great scholars and preachers have said on their text-will go to the pulpit with a message, not just a sermon. And having received a message from God, they will not need to steal someone else's work and palm it off as their own. What we need today is real preachers and not pulpit puppets, men whose every move is orchestrated by the unseen hands those whose work they steal. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| TUESDAY, DECEMBER 25, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
O.K. so we cannot be absolutely certain about the exact date when the Lord Jesus Christ was born. Nor are we commanded to have Christmas holidays or church services. So does that mean that we must not celebrate the greatest even in human history, the actual incarnation of the Son of God? I believe not. I am not going to enter into a polemic this Christmas Day with those who seem to take some special delight in being sour and who pose as especially holy in their determination not to recognize any reference to the birth of Christ at this season of the year. And I give such people fair notice that they will be wasting their time to write me and expect me to reply. I have been there and done that. I have read and heard just about every argument you can make and I am more convinced than ever that it is good, wise and entirely consonant with Scripture to pay special attention to the coming of our Saviour into the world. So, with a farewell wave to all my sour-hearted friends who refuse to be happy with the rest of us, let me wish all of our listeners a very blessed Christmas. One of my favourite texts is, "Thanks be unto God for his unspeakable gift" (2 Corinthians 9:15). When you consider it you will see that it speaks of a Giver, a Gift, and our Gratitude. God is the great Giver. Idols always take; God gives. He owed us nothing and yet He gave us everything. He has given us every blessing we enjoy but when He gave His Son He gave such a gift as to make all other gifts pale by comparison. The Lord Jesus Christ is God's great gift to men. While all too many people fail to give much thought to this, it is the foundation of our tradition of giving gifts to each other at this season. The Lord Jesus was an expensive gift. His worth cannot be measured in silver or gold. These precious metals are mere creations and God could multiply them as much as he pleased simply by saying the word. Not so with His Son. He is the "only begotten of the Father." When God gave Him He gave His all. Thus the Lord Jesus was an exhaustive gift. So vast is this gift that even God could add nothing to it. This gift was also an extensive gift. By that I mean that it includes much more than the birth of the Babe who was laid in a manger. That was an unspeakable miracle but it was just the first of an unbreakable chain of events that led from the manger to the Cross and the tomb and from there to the Throne of Glory. All God has provided for our salvation is in Christ. He includes all God's saving goodness to sinful men. If you have Christ, you have God's all. If you don't have Christ, you have nothing that will stand the test of time, death and eternity. That leads to the last thought: Gratitude. The only way to thank God for His unspeakable gift is to receive it. Have you done so? Or are you one who may enjoy the festivity of this season but who has no time for Christ. Without Christ, not only Christmas but all of life and all of eternity must be bleak and sad. So make sure you receive Him today. To all who have received God's unspeakable gift I can truly say, MERRY CHRISTMAS! |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| MONDAY, DECEMBER 24, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
A British Member of Parliament, Mark Pritchard, a Conservative Party member, gained time in the British Parliament for a debate on what he termed "rising Christianophobia." Mr. Pritchard argued that there is an obvious reluctance on the part of officials, the media and even Royal Mail to mark Christian festivals and traditions. He said that while the reason given for marginalizing Christianity is often to avoid offending people of other faiths, this was a "bogus cover" for the secularist and politically correct agenda. Support for the M.P. and his views came from a wide variety of churches and church organizations, especially from the Evangelical Alliance. An ex-government minister, David Burt, who is a member of the Council of the Evangelical Alliance, argued that Britain's cohesiveness as a nation in the past owed much to a public framework of Christianity. Mr. Burt said the Church can survive Christianophobia but that the nation would be much poorer if Britain's faith heritage is marginalized. He said, "The church does not need contemporary Britain, but does contemporary Britain need the church? You bet it does." The government minister who responded for the government, Parmjit Dhanda, is a Sikh who is on the left wing of Britain's ruling Labor Party. His response was a vain repetition of the usual meaningless mumbo jumbo that politicians feed us when they have really nothing constructive to say. He called for greater tolerance, adding that Christianity had played a significant role in community cohesion and education. That is just typical eyewash. The British government is fully involved in the rampant secularization of the nation and the almost total exclusion of anything remotely Christian in the public forum. Under the guise of promoting good community relations it will protect almost any expression of any religion except Christianity. One of the first actions of the present Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, was to rule that such terms as "Muslim terrorist" and "the war on terror" must not be employed by anyone in his government-such expressions may wound tender Muslims who don't like their co-religionists designated terrorists, no matter how many people the kill. This is the same bunch of politicians who, during the years of terrorism in Northern Ireland, never wearied of lecturing the people of the province about the scandal of "Christians" fighting each other-when the killers were mostly either Roman Catholics or "Loyalist" despisers of Christianity. In other words, any situation will do to bash the name and public image of Christianity. Any excuse is good enough to limit its rights under the law. To see how much toleration this government will ultimately show, just watch how it will move against churches and Christians who refuse to embrace its pro-Sodomite agenda. Parmjit Dhanda's "toleration" will then stand in its true colors. Here in America there is the same official phobia of anything Christian. Actually such opposition may purge the true Church and strengthen it. The gospel owes nothing to human government for its power but human government owes everything good in it to the gospel. The nation is the real loser in its campaign to marginalize Christ and His gospel. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| FRIDAY, DECEMBER 21, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
The same press that regularly holds up to ridicule almost anything that a Bible believing Christian may say, especially on matters of a metaphysical nature such as the origin of man and the universe, soberly reports the most egregious nonsense from heathen religious leaders. The Dalai Lama, leader of Tibet's Buddhists, is a case in point. Consider the following from The Times of London: Faced with Chinese plans to seize control of his reincarnation, the Dalai Lama has come up with two revolutionary proposals - either to forgo rebirth, or to be reborn while still alive. The exiled Tibetan Buddhist leader proposed yesterday to hold a referendum among his 13-14 million followers around the world - before his death - on whether he should be reincarnated or not. If the majority vote against it he said he would simply not be reborn, ending a lineage that tradition dictates dates back to the late 14th century, when a young shepherd was appointed the first Dalai Lama. If the vote was in favour he said that he might appoint a reincarnation while he was still alive, breaking the 600-year-old tradition of being reborn as a small boy after his death. His proposals not only raise some mind-bending metaphysical questions: they put China's atheist Communist leaders in the unusual position of claiming to be the protectors of Tibetan Buddhist tradition. I do not want to pursue the political ramifications at any length. I think it probable that political considerations are making the Buddhist leader play mind games with the Chinese Communists. He may yet prove that he has adopted a dangerous ploy, for if history proves anything it is that Beijing has usually a blunt and very bloody answer to any challenge to its authority. What interests me is the mad notion not only that the Dalai Lama will be reincarnated-an absolute fallacy-but that he can choose whether to be reincarnated before he dies! He terms this "appointing a reincarnation." In almost anyone else the press would label this for what it is-madness. In any other line of succession, if a leader chooses his successor he claims no wisdom other than he has as a man. And that is all the Dalai Lama can do. Oh, I know that millions of Tibetan Buddhists look on him a divine being, but we know that his present shenanigans prove that he is no more and no better than any other human leader or ruler. His ploy is to play his religious card with utter ruthlessness as he tries to do an end run around the Chinese-who had been threatening to do the same around him! It's time we in the west recognized all this nonsense about reincarnation for what it is: a diabolical deception aimed at getting men away from the message of God's love and mercy in Christ. The lie of reincarnation is the ultimate rejection of divine grace and the assertion of human works as man's final hope. In the end, it is a religious fallacy that leads those who fall into it to a hopeless destiny of everlasting separation from God. It is not some earned reincarnation sinners need but a gracious regeneration by God's Spirit, a justification by which we may stand accepted in the righteousness of God's Son. That is what we need and that is exactly what God freely offers in the gospel of is grace. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| THURSDAY, DECEMBER 20, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
Here's a report from the Associated Press that ought to awaken Bible believers everywhere: The tall, tan pastor stood at the pulpit of his Baptist church on a recent Sunday morning, cleared his throat, and nervously proclaimed the following: First, he believes in God. And second, he believes in the Bible. Robert Walker Jr.'s audience, a crowd of about 100 faithful parishioners, shuffled uncomfortably as he spoke, surely wondering why their pastor of a decade was offering up these disclaimers. But it didn't take long to figure out why. Over the next few minutes, Walker told his flock that science contends that sixth century scholars wrote the Old Testament, but that it was still written with "divine spirit." It was his way of telling them that science and religion aren't always at odds. "We can embrace God and Scripture and science together. And it's enough to say when they agree - and sometimes they do - we should embrace it. And they agree that our Earth cannot last forever. And that we are charged with the responsibility of taking care of it." With that, there was another rustle in the crowd. And Peachtree Baptist Church had opened its two-month Sunday sermon series on the environment. The congregation is one of 130 members of the local chapter of the Interfaith Power and Light movement, a group that tries to engage the faithful into environmental activism. And thanks to a recent spurt in environmental interest, similar chapters are springing up through the South. "We try to engage faith communities to do just this - encourage their congregations to talk actively about environment and faith," said Jennifer Downs, the chapter's outreach coordinator. "We don't want this just to be a political conversation. Scientists won't be able to solve this by themselves." The chapter offers tips on low-energy care of church organs, sermon suggestions and hands out kits that encourage people that encourage greening through holidays. This is amazing. For a pastor to say he believes the Bible and then inform his congregation on the basis of the opinion of something called "science" that the Old Testament was written by 6th century scholars-making it a bundle of lies and false claims from start to finish-is utter hypocrisy. No enemy of Scripture is more reprehensible than the one who claims to be a Bible believer but uses that profession as a cloak to deny the Bible. Let me make it clear: no matter how theological liberals howl to the contrary, their theories about the origin of the Bible are unfounded, ridiculous and absolutely unfaithful to the facts of the case. So why did a Baptist pastor reject the claims of the Bible about itself? Evidently because it didn't give him enough support for a radical, green agenda. He wants to paint God green and the Bible clearly doesn't support his radical agenda. There is no marrying of the earth-worshiping, tree-hugging environmentalist movement and the Word of God. If you believe one, you must reject the other. I believe the Bible. I reject the clamors of the Greens as a base political ploy in the interests of a worldwide socialist agenda. And I utterly repudiate any deception in the name of Christianity that seeks to lend the authority of God and His word to the humanistic/ heathen religion of environmentalism. We are not green-either in the sense of being global warming tree huggers or in the sense of being easily fooled by preachers who turn the truth of God into a lie. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 19, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
Yesterday I reported on a question put to Republican presidential candidates in a recent debate. The questioner asked if they believed the Bible. He received answers from three candidates, the only ones to whom the moderator put the question. The point, however, is that the question was put and answered in a public debate before an important presidential primary. By contrast, Britain's ex-Prime Minister, Tony Blair, recently said: "It's difficult if you talk about religious faith in our political system. If you are in the American political system or others then you can talk about religious faith and people say 'yes, that's fair enough' and it is something they respond to quite naturally. You talk about it in our system and, frankly, people do think you're a nutter." Blair is an Episcopalian who is soon to announce his defection from the Church of England to the Church of Rome. He has been speaking of his "deep religious faith." His aides say that he carried a Bible with him wherever he went and read it daily, especially the last thing before going to bed at night. Blair has confirmed that his beliefs influenced his political decisions. Actually, I have to wonder about a lot of this. Tony Blair was a consummate politician and his political decisions were almost entirely decisions that arose out of political expediency or out of a left-wing socialist philosophy. He could never have justified promoting a whole slew of practicing homosexuals to positions of power because he was influenced by the moral standards of Scripture. His government was as morally corrupt as any you could meet with and Mr. Blair's "deep religious convictions" did not influence him one bit toward removing it as a cancer from the body politic. However, he makes a valid point when he notes the difference between the U.S. and Britain or for that matter between the U.S. and Europe generally. Whereas in the U.S. questions about faith and Scripture are legitimate and even a vital part of the public debate, in the U.K. and other European countries, any politician who speaks of God and His word will be treated as a "nutter," a lunatic who needs to be locked up. A political leader who reads the Bible is looked on as a threat to the welfare of the nations. He may read pornography or Marxism and be hailed as a scholarly statesman but if he reads God's word he is deemed to be mad and certainly not to be entrusted with the nation's security. In Britain, according to one commentator, less than one third of the population believes in God in anything like a Christian sense. Another third believe in something, though they know not what. Half the population seems to think religion is harmful and fewer than 20% think it beneficial. In this climate you can see why during his years in office, Tony Blair kept largely silent on all mention of God. As Alastair Campbell, Blair's equivalent to George Bush's Carl Rove, said, "We don't do God here." One excuse made for excluding God from public life is the fear of religious extremism. That is a valid fear. Nobody wants to encourage another Muslim zealot to fly a plane into a building with name of Allah on his lips. Still, it says a lot about the fall of Britain when there is no distinction between the truth of God in Christ and the fallacy of a religion like Islam. Britain used to be a nation whose whole civilization was built on the Christian revelation. Today it is a nation adrift from its moorings, a nation without God, a nation that is all too clearly fulfilling the awful prophecy of Psalm 9:17. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| TUESDAY, DECEMBER 18, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
I start today with a word of warning. I don't do party politics or state party political preferences on this program. But I will hold every political party and every politician to the standard of God's word. With that in mind, we will step into the strange world of presidential debates as a few humble men present themselves as God's answer to the needs of America. "Do you believe every word of this Book?" That was a plain question for the Republican candidates who are running for President. The Book was the Bible. The answers were predictable but still enlightening. The answers were predictable but still enlightening. Former New York mayor, Rudy Giuliani, a Roman Catholic, did what politicians do best: he tried to speak out of both sides of his mouth. "The reality is, I believe it, but I don't believe it necessarily literally true in every single respect. I think there are parts of the Bible that are interpretive; I think there are parts of the Bible that are allegorical; I think there are parts of the Bible that are meant to be interpreted in a modern context. I don't believe every single thing in the literal sense of Jonah being in the belly of the whale." Now there you have a whale of a story! "The reality is, ‘I believe it' but ‘I don't believe it necessarily literally true.'" Come on, Rudy! Do you believe it or do you not? Perhaps the question should have been clearer: Do you believe that what the Bible presents as fact is fact; that what it presents as history is history; and that what it presents as truth in the moral and spiritual realm is truth? And how far will you be guided in your private and public life by the truth of this Book? That would have been a better question. I think even Rudy Giuliani would be hard pressed to do his political wriggle and talk his way around giving a straight answer. Ex-Southern Baptist preacher, Mike Huckabee, the former Arkansas Governor, answered, "It's the Word of revelation to us from God Himself. The fact is when people ask if you believe all of it, you either believe it or you don't believe it. As the only person here probably on this stage with a theology degree, there are parts of it I don't fully comprehend and understand, but I'm not supposed to. Because the Bible is the revelation of an infinite God, and no finite person is ever gonna fully understand it. If they do, their God is too small." Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, a Mormon, drew applause when he said, "The Bible is the Word of God, absolutely." The moderator asked, "Does that mean you believe every word?" Romney answered, "Yeah, I believe it's the Word of God. I might interpret the Word differently than you interpret the Word, but I read the Bible and I believe the Bible is the Word of God. I don't disagree with the Bible. I try and live by it." As a Mormon, Romney can't believe the Bible in anything like its plain sense-which makes it all the more ironic that his reply stated so as to sound so evangelical. It seems that even when dealing with Scripture, what politicians believe and what they say about it depends on whose vote they are trying to win. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
| MONDAY, DECEMBER 17, 2007 | 16 years ago |
|
|
Homosexual perverts have long demanded a place of acceptance in the Christian church. I do not mean that they desire to be treated as other penitent sinners. They do not. The church of Christ welcomes sinners to Christ and takes into its fellowship those whom God has delivered from all kinds of sin. Indeed, you may make the point that Christ's church is made up exclusively of sinners-sinners saved by grace; sinners who by that grace have turned and are continually turning from their sin; and sinners who are seeking by that same grace and through faith in Christ to live in victory over sin. Homosexuals demand exclusive treatment. They demand acceptance by God and by the Church as they are, without confessing their perversion as sin and without repenting of it or repudiating it. They demand entrance to the Church and even its ministry while continuing to practice what the Word of God abominates. Some liberal churches-for liberal, read apostate churches-that have little regard for the sanctity of Scripture have accepted homosexuals on their own terms. This is hailed as "enlightened," "kind," and "loving." It is none of the above. It is a shameful, humanistic rejection of God's created order and of His revealed word. And it is the worst possible response for the homosexual sinner for it locks him in to the sin that is keeping him back from receiving God's grace on God's terms. Only if it is enlightened, kind and loving to condemn a man to hell can the attitude of apostate churches to homosexuals be defended. For most churches, the unequivocal condemnation of homosexuality in Scripture is what determines their response to homosexuals. So an Australian publisher has produced a so-called Gay Study Bible. A female NT scholar of some repute is an editor and has lent her name and reputation to this vicious attack on God's Word. The Gay Study Bible is as plain a perversion of Scripture as sodomy is of sexuality. It tells us that the sin of the men of Sodom was having sinful relations with angels. That is an absolute invention, a lie of the first order that flies in the face of the story and even of the words of Christ about the nature of angels. But none of that matters to the editors of Satan's Sodomite Bible. They will sacrifice even Scripture to promote the foul agenda of a perversion that has cost millions their lives already and will cost millions more. Does any of that slow up the Sodomite supporters? Not at all. Ruining lives and damning souls is to them an acceptable price for gaining their stated objective of forcing homosexuality into mainstream society and even into the Christian Church. However, all the sodomites in the world, even with the help of a renegade NT scholar, will never be able to overthrow the powerful and consistent testimony of Scripture against the body-destroying and soul-destroying sin of homosexuality. The Scriptures of Truth hold out the only real message of love and grace to sinners, including homosexuals, namely redemption in Christ by virtue of His blood atonement. Satan's Sodomite Bible is just the latest futile attempt to thwart the progress of word of grace. It is doomed to failure, not just because many bookstores will not stock it but because like every other Satanic attack on Scripture it will be repulsed by the omnipotent hand of Him who ultimately wrote the Bible. |
Weblog Category: Hot Topics
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
