Sunday, March 22, 2009

Prez Sets Stage for Future Persecution of Christianity


By Rev. Michael Bresciani Thursday, March 19, 2009


President Obama’s show of anger with AIG for giving out bonus money to its top exec’s has raised the ire of the nation and in AIG it has started an open rebellion. America may have a lot of enemies but AIG would hardly make the top ten list of real bad guys. What’s the spin?

The Washington Post is reporting “a mob effect” inside AIG. The Post said “A tidal wave of public outrage over bonus payments swamped American International Group yesterday. Hired guards stood watch outside the suburban Connecticut offices of AIG Financial Products, the division whose exotic derivatives brought the insurance giant to the brink of collapse last year. Inside, death threats and angry letters flooded e-mail inboxes. Irate callers lit up the phone lines. Senior managers submitted their resignations. Some employees didn’t show up at all.”

A little ‘choking up’ shouldn’t cause a riot but when it’s seen in a newbie President who seems to be on the frontline in the fight for the little guy all bets are off.

If anyone is thinking of actually writing a book entitled “The Audacity of Hypocrisy” they may want to make note that AIG gave a whopping $101,332 according to New Orleans examiner.com to the campaigns of Chris Dodd and Barack Obama.

To many Americans who see the choking up as a masterful diversionary ploy to take their minds off the 8,000 plus pork additions to the stimulus bill the anger is blatantly disingenuous.

To American Christians the anger and the hype are a giant diversionary tactic (intended or not) to pull attention away from another presidential act that so far has garnered much less media attention.

The President has announced to the Congress his intentions to sign the UN declaration that calls for the decriminalization of homosexuality. The declaration that George W. Bush shunned has now been OK’d by all 27 member nations of the European Union.

Ignoring the moral sensibilities of over half of the American public Barack Obama has proven that the hallmarks of his presidency will be to further amorality, prurient interests and the gay agenda regardless of America’s Christian heritage or the basic sentiments of the population. He has hit the ground running on pro-abortion and gay agenda causes that are causing disgust all the way from little independent fundamental churches to the Vatican.

The Bible does hold that homosexuality is a crime against nature but Barack Obama has assured the doubtful that they needn’t take the Apostle Paul’s warning in the first chapter of the book of Romans too seriously because it is after all “obscure” according to Obama in the Christian Post Mar 04, 2008.

Nature doesn’t have any courts so for the moment the gays are on relatively safe ground but according to scripture natures God does have a final session coming up.

It is becoming increasingly apparent that the Presidents ineptness at politics is second only to his weakness in theological treatise. Putting the ‘Sermon on the Mount’ over against or above the warnings against homosexuality made by Paul shows that Obama thinks the scripture is only inspired in spots and he sees himself as perfectly qualified to spot the spots!

It isn’t the nature of a passage that gives it authority but it is the authority of the one who inspired the passage. The word “all” summarizes this fact in this passage Barack Obama may have missed. “All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:” (1Tim 3:16)

Signing the UN declaration is groundwork for future persecution of the church. With a few well worded “hate crime” bills it is only a small step away from a day when quoting the Apostle Paul on homosexuality could result in prosecution and serious jail time across the globe.

Oddly, no one thinks the Vatican and the Muslim world have anything in common but they along with the remaining theologically conservative Protestants still hold that homosexuality is a curse to any society but especially the civilization of the last days.

AP writer Matthew Lee said on Mar 18, 2009 “Some Islamic countries said at the time that protecting sexual orientation could lead to “the social normalization and possibly the legalization of deplorable acts” such as pedophilia and incest. The declaration was also opposed by the Vatican.”

Over fifty countries still have anti-gay laws along with some states in the U.S. but with the help of America’s most liberal President in its history the world may be coaxed to the other side. But what is “the other side?” According to the scripture it is the final judgment and the return of Christ to wrest the governments of the world away from the hands of men.

In signing the UN declaration President Obama is keeping his own declaration that he is a “citizen of the world” alive and well but even that raises concern for those who are not yet sure he is even a citizen of the U.S. That controversy still rages and has recently seen a positive surge coming from Chief Justice John Roberts who has promised to read the petition of Dr. Orly Taitz questioning Obama’s eligibility to hold the office of President of the United States.

The jury is still out on Obama’s eligibility to be President but to those who are only nominally versed in scripture the controversy is already settled, Barack Obama will never make chief theologian; now or in the near future.

Those who stand entranced as if under the sway of a familiar spirit listening with awe to everything Obama says are not hearing the same thing as the rest of us.

We hear the meddling of a President who is micro-managing fiscal affairs by centering in on those he thinks are undeserving of benefits and those who are. We see a president who has one eye on the groups and minorities whose prurient interests read like the feature article of a porn magazine and the other eye on the path to putting America into the one world order whether we like it or not.

If we don’t give up, if we don’t sleep through, if we are not to busy to act then it would be reasonable to think that Mr. Obama will eventually run head on into some people who are also irate but for different reasons than those of the AIG executives.

It isn’t bonuses or bailouts we are upset with but eroding sovereignty, and the blocking of redress that was promised to us in our constitution. “We the people;” who so foolishly still believe our government is established for, by and of the people don’t want to be hypnotized we want to be heard.
We don’t want to be looked upon as discontented fools because we want to see Mr. Obama’s fully signed and sealed birth certificate. And we don’t want to be labeled as isolated and pompous because we aren’t ready to jump feet first into a world community that promises more of everything but nothing in particular but membership.

As for the endless gab about the economy Mr. Obama should have no complaints, we have allowed him not to tinker with our treasures but to gouge them. This is being done even while no citizen in our history ever thought the way to stave of a financial crisis was to spend all the money they had.

We stand on the side calling, imploring, perhaps even bellowing for our fellow citizens to come to their senses but few have ears to hear.

We are the wife who tugs on the arm of her husband; she whispers stern disapprobation into the ears of the husband who thinks he’s on a streak at the craps table. She knows he is on a streak. But she also knows he keeps raising the stake and the next throw of the dice could be the end of the family fortune.

We don’t care if you go down to the Leno stage and play the regular nice guy with the new ideas after shooting us in the fiscal foot. We will expect an accounting for our recovery and the expenses associated with it. We don’t think America needs a “Supreme American Idol” in addition to the cookie cutter models the American Idol show is offering to its mesmerized and accounted for every week.

Do we have a President who is gambling with America’s fame, fortune and future? Yes, say the nervous majority, and if they regain their composure they will act, they will refuse the tinkering, the recklessness and the personality hype that is clouding the real direction our Chief is proposing we take. Americans must decide America’s destiny not its government.

Since no other country in the world has ever even offered such a thing to its people why should we be in hurry to become part of a new world order? That answer being understood the only remaining question is how long will it take for America to reclaim what America really is?

Rev. Michael Bresciani Most recent columns
Rev Michael Bresciani is a Christian author and a columnist for several online conservative and Christian news and commentary sites. His website is The Website for Insight covers current events, politics, Christianity, movie and book reports and much more. Americanprophet.org. Rev. Bresciani can be reached at: ampro@americanprophet.org
.
.
Note: Bolds added for emphasis. Blogman.

The Boiling Frog Syndrome



The Boiling Frog Syndrome
by Steven Yates

Just recently my father drew my attention to Ric Edelman’s financial planning website, which has a wealth of information and strategies on the subject. While exploring the site I ran across what Edelman called the Boiling Frog Syndrome. He introduced the idea to explain how the American public has come to accept a certain amount of inflation as normal, despite the ease of producing sound arguments that inflation works against our best efforts to plan and build wealth over the long term. Here is Edelman’s account of the Boiling Frog Syndrome: "If you throw a frog into a pot of boiling water, he’ll jump out. But if you place a frog into a pot of lukewarm water and slowly turn up the heat, it will boil to death. And so it is with inflation. We’ve grown accustomed to inflation over the past 25 years, but that doesn’t mean we don’t continue to be hurt by its effect."

In other words, if people become acclimated to some policy or state of affairs over a sufficient period of time, they come to accept the policy or state of affairs as normal. It struck me that we have on our hands a principle that can be generalized beyond explaining the acceptance of the slow devaluing of our currency. The Boiling Frog Syndrome explains how the American public has come to accept breaches of Constitutional government that would have provoked armed resistance a hundred years ago. The public has grown accustomed to these breaches, and to the federal government conducting myriad activities that are nowhere authorized by the Constitution and accepts them as normal.

The principle is one of gradualism, or what might be called piecemeal social engineering rather than calls for the kinds of revolutions that led to the Soviet Union and Red China. Most people will instinctively resist abrupt, revolutionary change. Nor can they really accommodate it. Large scale revolutions attempting to change all the institutions of society at once make it impossible for anyone – including the revolutionaries – to plan rationally. This is why, with very rare exceptions such as our own War for American Independence, they tend to leave everything worse off than it was before.

Anyone who has studied systems theory grasps what is operating here. Systems theory (sometimes called cybernetics) is the general science of organization. It attempts to understand the behavior of complex, integrated structures involving multiple and often interdependent components and their responses to both internal and external sources of potential disruption. System is a very general concept. What counts as a system can be a cell in an organism’s body or a business corporation or the U.S. economy – and every other kind of organization in between, including an acting person. A central aspect of systems theory is to reflect on the primary need of all systems, which is to maximize stability or equilibrium. Systems of whatever sort automatically attempt to enhance their own stability or equilibrium by influencing their environment (everything outside their boundaries). This may mean coordinated actions with other systems, it may mean acting directly on some potentially disruptive agent in the environment, or it may mean adjusting its own internal function so as to minimize the potential for disruption. In sum: systems, to maintain or enhance their own stability, must be able to anticipate and prepare for potential sources of destabilization from outside, where the source is a disease source or other harmful agent affecting the health of an organic body or a revolutionary army that threatens to disrupt a country. And they must be able to deal with sources of potential disruption from inside, from violent criminals to power-hungry politicians.

Thus revolutions tend to bring about bloody dictatorships rather than improved social systems by forcing abrupt change on entire, complex societies (political arrangements, economic relations, etc., at multiple levels) and they destabilize everything. Relations that have formed over generations are suddenly broken apart. Human beings, like all systems, dislike instability intensely. In practice, they will turn to the first person who promises to restore stability to the system, and that person is usually a dictator who clamps down on the entire society from the center.

But there are other ways of changing one kind of socioeconomic system to a fundamentally different kind of system that minimize or localize abrupt, destabilizing change. Gramscian "revolutionaries" have learned this lesson well – although they do not speak the vocabulary of systems theory, of course. They have learned to get what they want by pursuing their goals gradually, one step at a time, through infiltrating and modifying existing institutions and other systems rather than overthrowing them and trying to create new ones from scratch. Clearly, a central-government initiative calling for abolishing the U.S. Constitution would have provoked an armed upheaval at any time in U.S. history, and it is at least possible that anything this abrupt still would. U.S. citizens, that is, would jump out immediately if thrown into that pot of boiling water. But if the haters of Constitutional government proceed in small increments, they eventually gut the Constitution almost unnoticed – particularly if they carry out their initiatives in multiple components of U.S. society (so-called public schools, the banking system, the major news media, the legal system, etc.). Moreover, Gramscians have found that the road to centralization is much easier if "paved with good intentions," expressed in pseudo-moral language and portrayed as a source of stability to come. Myriad small disruptions in the lives of individuals and local communities can be rationalized as the price to be paid for the utopia just over the horizon. "You can’t make an omelet," so the saying goes, "without breaking a few eggs." So systems accommodate and incorporate these small steps, absorbing the disruptions as best they can and not allowing them to threaten the system’s overall stability. But when a system absorbs these small steps instead of repelling them, it incorporates them into its basic functioning and its transformation to a different kind of system with entirely different arrangements between its components has begun. Or in terms of the Boiling Frog Syndrome, the frog is in the pot, and the temperature of the water has begun, very slowly, to rise.

Among the earliest steps toward the transformation of the U.S. from Constitutional republic to politically correct police state seem to have occurred with federal intrusions into education prior to the War for Southern Independence. These, of course, were very minor by today’s standards, but met with skepticism even then because of the lack of any mention of a federal role in education in the Constitution. (And speaking of the War for Southern Independence, it seems useful to observe, somewhere along the line, that there is room in systems theory for understanding how systems may split apart, disintegrate or dissolve, when facing uncontrollable internal or external sources of disruption. Lincoln’s war alone, it is now clear, changed the character of the American system in fundamental ways.) However, the water in the pot was still relatively cool and comfortable overall – in comparison to what was to come, of course. Those who wanted power would turn up the heat very slowly, and their actions conform quite well to the idea that one can modify systems very gradually and change them into entirely different systems simply by acclimating their components (the American public) each step along the way. Those who wanted centralization would begin agitating for a central bank, for example, even though the Framers had warned against central banks. The power-hungry would begin agitating for more U.S. involvement overseas, despite George Washington’s wise admonition that we avoid "foreign entanglements" in which we have no legitimate stake. The power-hungry would start calling for more federal interventions in the economy generally, usually promising enormous payoffs. Since someone would have the pay the bureaucrats entrusted to administer the intervening, we soon saw a call for a progressive income tax – something that would have provoked an armed revolt had it occurred during the generation following the country’s founding. (A far lesser tax provoked the "whiskey rebellion" of the early 1790s, after all!)

The temperature of the water was slowly rising, and while the frog’s brows may have risen somewhat, he was not sufficiently alarmed to jump out of the pot. We soon had the Federal Reserve and the Internal Revenue Service – and found ourselves smack in the middle of the first World War. All of this was before 1920. The American system was slowly being transformed, its components incorporating rather than repelling the changes. The temperature of the water was rising, and would rise still more during the Roosevelt era, as federal expansion occurred – always in relatively small steps instead of all at once. The American system continued to incorporate the changes, and few members of the public sensed that anything was amiss (indeed, courtesy of "public schools," most were "learning" to welcome the transformation in progress).

Following the Roosevelt Era which gave us the Social Security system and so much more came the Civil Rights Era, which began essentially with the Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka, Kan. Supreme Court decision. This decision was based for the first time not on the Constitution or any legal precedent whatsoever but what has since been shown to be a poorly controlled sociology experiment. With that decision, the temperature of the water in the pot went up perhaps ten degrees. With the coming of affirmative action programs and radical feminist activism, it went up perhaps ten degrees more. There was unrest, but not organized resistance; the system absorbed and incorporated the changes. Assisting the changes were slowly escalating rates of taxation. More Americans were working longer and harder in order to feed the increasingly bloated Uncle Sam. As taxes climbed, one breadwinner per family of four slowly became a thing of the past; women were forced into the work force whether they wanted to be there or not. All these things became accepted, incorporated into the mainstream. The water had begun to get uncomfortably warm, but the frog stayed in the pot.

Since then, we have seen the so-called "war on drugs." We have seen the Ruby Ridge massacre and the Waco holocaust, among myriad other evidence of federal wrongdoing. We have seen foreign interventions that have succeeded only in harming the general population (e.g., Iraq) or destabilizing regions (e.g., the Balkans). From January 1993-January 2001 we saw in action the most corrupt presidential regime ever, alongside the rise of public apathy in which people, like frogs in pots of warming water, were largely contented because they found all the new technology fascinating and perceived the economy to be doing well. The adoption of an entire philosophy by a society helps enhance a sense of stability in the mainstream, even if the philosophy is a calculating, hard-line materialism.

So where are we now? The water in the pot has gotten pretty hot. It has probably begun to steam. The frog that would have jumped out long ago, had he been thrown in abruptly, is still accommodating these slow increases in temperature. Will our frog eventually awaken in alarm to the truth of his situation, that if he stays in the water he’s about to be cooked alive, or will he remain in a state of warm contentment until it is too late? The Boiling Frog Syndrome, I submit, is more than simply a warning about the true nature of inflation and its effects on long-term financial planning (although it serves its purpose there quite well). It is a general warning about the times we live in today, and we had better start paying attention.

We who write for LewRockwell.com and other (more or less) underground publications bemoan this society’s abandonment of Constitutional principles, and are all-too-aware that we are a minority. Even mainstream so-called conservatives of the National Review stripe hate our guts. They would ignore us completely if they could. (Never mind what the extreme leftists think!) None of this changes the fact that we now live in a vastly different political system from the one the Framers created; it has been transformed very slowly, with the potential disruptions minimized and then incorporated, changing the basic function of the system. As with inflation in Ric Edelman’s account, we have been – are being – harmed by these changes no matter how slowly and gradually they have been brought about, no matter how much acceptance they have won, or comfortable the masses are. Over the past 140 years, we have gone very slowly from being a mostly free people to a mostly enslaved people – with the primary source of slavery being the tax system. We continue to speak the language of freedom. But to paraphrase Goethe, no one is so completely enslaved as the person who thinks he is free. Some of us write passionately on behalf of the secession stirrings occurring in various places around the country, but by and large the public seems content with the status quo and doesn’t sense any danger. While there have been plenty of warning signs, all more or less independent of one another, so far, there have been no catalysts, no major sources of disruption that can be obviously blamed on the purveyors of centralization, and which could therefore capture the attention of the critical mass of people necessary to propel a successful secession movement. Something more than what we have seen so far is going to be necessary to awaken this critical mass.

Let us hope that what finally awakens the American public is not the boiling of the water with all of us still in the pot!!


August 11, 2001

Steven Yates [send him mail] has a Ph.D. in Philosophy and is the author of Civil Wrongs: What Went Wrong With Affirmative Action (ICS Press, 1994). He is a professional writer at work on a number of projects including a work of political philosophy, The Paradox of Liberty. He also writes for the Edgefield Journal, and is available for lectures. He has started writing a novel and also set up a small freelance writing business, Millennium 3 Communications, in the hope that one or the other will eventually lead to an escape from underemployment. He lives in Columbia, South Carolina.

Source: http://www.lewrockwell.com/yates/yates38.html
.

To the Little Flock


(Excerpt)


The suffering Jesus, His love so deep as to lead Him to give His life for man, was again held up before me; also the lives of those who professed to be His followers, who had this world's goods, but considered it so great a thing to help the cause of salvation. The angel said, "Can such enter heavens?" Another angel answered, "No, never, never, never. Those who are not interested in the cause of God on earth can never sing the song of redeeming love above." I saw that the quick work that God was doing on the earth would soon be cut short in righteousness and that the messengers must speed swiftly on their way to search out the scattered flock. An angel said, "Are all messengers?" Another answered, "No, no; God's messengers have a message."


I saw that the cause of God had been hindered and dishonored by some traveling who had no message from God. [SEE APPENDIX.] Such will have to give an account to God for every dollar they have used in traveling where it was not their duty to go, because that money might have helped on the cause of God; and for the lack of the spiritual food that might have been given them by God's called and chosen messengers, had they had the means, souls have starved and died. I saw that those who have strength to labor with their hands and help sustain the cause were as accountable for their strength as others were for their property.


The mighty shaking has commenced and will go on, and all will be shaken out who are not willing to take a bold and unyielding stand for the truth and to sacrifice for God and His cause. The angel said, "Think ye that any will be compelled to sacrifice? No, no. It must be a freewill offering. It will take all to buy the field." I cried to God to spare His people, some of whom were fainting and dying. Then I saw that the judgments of the Almighty were speedily coming, and I begged of the angel to speak in his language to the people. Said he, "All the thunders and lightnings of Mount Sinai would not move those who will not be moved by the plain truths of the Word of God, neither would an angel's message awake them."

Early Writing, E. G. W., pp. 50-51.

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Baptists, Adventists meet to underscore common Christian values [APD]


[APD] Baptists, Adventists meet to underscore common Christian values

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Christian B. Schäffler<mailto:APD%40stanet.ch>
Date Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:07:43 +0100


[APD] Baptists, Adventists meet to underscore common Christian values

Silver Spring, Maryland/USA, 13.03.2009/ANN/APD
Delegates from the Baptist World Alliance (BWA) met with Seventh-day Adventist world church President Jan Paulsen March 11 to affirm their denominations' common values and recommit to their shared goals of religious freedom.

The meeting, which included other church leaders, took place at Adventist world church headquarters in Silver Spring, Maryland/USA.

"[Adventists and Baptists] share a Christ-centric faith and many of the same values," said John Graz, director of public affairs and religious liberty for the Adventist church. "We also share a passion for religious freedom, and in many countries around the world we cooperate closely to promote and defend this freedom."

The Jamaican pastor and theologian Neville Callam (58), general secretary of
the Baptist World Alliance since 2007, echoed the common need to work for
religious liberty.

"Part of the genetic makeup of the Baptist community is [the affirmation] of
human dignity," Callam said. He also expressed interest in pursuing "mutual
sharing and collaboration in common causes" in the future. The BWA general
secretary serves as the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the Alliance. For
15 years, Callam served as a member of the Standing and Plenary Commissions
of the Faith and Order Movement of the World Council of Churches (WCC) and
chaired a number of its study groups.

The Baptist delegation also included Fausto Vasconcelos, director of
evangelism and education for the Baptist World Alliance.

Adventist world church President Jan Paulsen (74) also commended the group
on past collaborations in the area of religious liberty.

"The strength of affirming and protecting religious freedom depends on
participation of many. [Let us] explore opportunities to work together in
the name of Christ and to strengthen our witness for him," Paulsen said.

Paulsen added that the partnership has provided "a fertile spiritual soil to
our faith family." Paulsen is serving as world church president since 1999.
He was re-elected in 2000 and 2005 for two more terms. Paulsen is recognized
as an eminent Adventist scholar in the field of theology.

The Baptist World Alliance, founded in 1905 in London, is a fellowship of
214 Baptist conventions and unions comprising a membership of more than 37
million baptized believers and a community of 105 million, in 119 countries.

The Seventh-day Adventist Church is a mainstream Protestant church with
approximately 16 million adult members worshipping in more than 121,500
congregations in 202 countries.

>*********************

This article is also available on the Internet at:

>http://www.stanet.ch/APD/news/2110.html

>*********************

>Publisher/Editor:

>Adventist Press Service APD, P.O. Box 136,

>CH-4003 Basel/Switzerland

Fax 0041-61-261 61 18; E-Mail:
APD@stanet.ch

Web Site:
http://www.stanet.ch/APD
.
Source: http://www.wfn.org/2009/03/msg00112.html
.

I Will Follow Thee (#623)


I Will Follow Thee
[#623]
Words and Music by James Lawson Elginburg, 1886


I will follow Thee, my Savior,

Wheresoe'er my lot may be.

Where thou goest I will follow;

Yes, my Lord, I'll follow Thee.


Refrain

I will follow Thee, my Saviour,

Thou didst shed Thy blood for me;

And though all men should forsake Thee;

By Thy grace I'll follow Thee.


Though the road be rough and thorny,

Trackless as the foaming sea,

Thou hast trod this way before me,

And I'll gladly follow Thee.


Refrain

I will follow Thee, my Saviour,

Thou didst shed Thy blood for me;

And though all men should forsake Thee;

By Thy grace I'll follow Thee.


Though I meet with tribulations,

Sorely tempted though I be;

I remember Thou wast tempted,

And rejoice to follow Thee.


Refrain

I will follow Thee, my Saviour,

Thou didst shed Thy blood for me;

And though all men should forsake Thee;

By Thy grace I'll follow Thee.


Though Thou leadest me through affliction,

Poor, forsaken though I be;

Thou wast destitute, afflicted,

And I only follow Thee.


Refrain

I will follow Thee, my Saviour,

Thou didst shed Thy blood for me;

And though all men should forsake Thee;

By Thy grace I'll follow Thee.


Though to Jordan's rolling billows,

Cold and deep, Thou leadest me,

Thou hast crossed the waves before me,

And I still will follow Thee.


Refrain

I will follow Thee, my Saviour,

Thou didst shed Thy blood for me;

And though all men should forsake Thee;

By Thy grace I'll follow Thee.


dh623fv.mid
.

Who will follow?


57And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.

58And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head.

59And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said, Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father.

60Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

61And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee; but let me first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.

62And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God.
Luke 9:57-62.

Friday, March 20, 2009

Second Coming of Jesus


Second Coming of Jesus


Jesus promised His disciples He would come again. It's in the Bible, John 14:1-3, TLB. "Let not your heart be troubled. You are trusting God, now trust in Me. There are many homes up there where my Father lives, and I am going to prepare them for your coming. When everything is ready, then I will come and get you, so that you can always be with Me where I am. If this weren't so, I would tell you plainly. And you know where I am going and how to get there."

The angels promised Jesus would come again. It's in the Bible, Acts 1:10-11, TLB. "It was not long afterwards that He rose into the sky and disappeared into a cloud, leaving them staring after Him. As they were straining their eyes for another glimpse, suddenly two white-robed men were standing there among them, and said, 'Men of Galilee, why are you standing here staring at the sky? Jesus has gone away to heaven, and some day, just as He went, He will return!'"

How will Jesus come again? It's in the Bible, Luke 21:27, NIV. "At that time they will see the Son of Man coming in a cloud with power and great glory."

How many will see Him when He comes? It's in the Bible, Revelation 1:7, NIV. "Look, He is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see Him, even those who pierced Him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because of Him."

What will we see and hear when He comes? It's in the Bible, I Thessalonians 4:16-17, NIV. "For the Lord himself will come down from heaven, with a loud command, with the voice of the archangel and with the trumpet call of God, and the dead in Christ will rise first. After that, we who are still alive and are left will be caught up with them in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air."

How visible is His coming to be? It's in the Bible, Matthew 24:27, NIV. "For as the lightening comes from the east and flashes to the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man."

What warning has Christ given so we won't be fooled about the second coming? It's in the Bible, Matthew 24:23-26, NIV. "At that time if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!’ or 'There He is!’ do not believe it. For false Christ's and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time. So if anyone tells you, 'There He is, out in the desert,' do not go out; or, 'Here He is, in the inner rooms,' do not believe it."

Does anyone know the exact time of Christ's coming? It's in the Bible, Matthew 24:36, NIV. "No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father."

Knowing how human it is to procrastinate, what does Christ tell us to do? It's in the Bible, Matthew 24:42, NIV. "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come."

What warning has Christ given that we might not be taken by surprise by this great event? It's in the Bible, Luke 21:34-36, TLB. "Watch out! Don't let My sudden coming catch you unawares; don't let Me find you living in careless ease, carousing and drinking, and occupied with the problems of this life, like all the rest of the world. Keep a constant watch."

Why is Jesus second coming taking so long? It's in the Bible, II Peter 3:8-9, TLB. "But don't forget this, dear friends, that a day or a thousand years from now is like tomorrow to the Lord. He isn't really being slow about His promised return, even though it sometimes seems that way. But He is waiting, for the good reason that He is not willing that any should perish, and He is giving more time for sinners to repent."

While we wait for Jesus, how should we live? It's in the Bible, Titus 2:11-14, NIV. "For the grace of God that brings salvation has appeared to all men. It teaches us to say 'No’ to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age, while we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ, who gave Himself for us to redeem us from all wickedness and to purify for Himself a people that are His very own, eager to do what is good."

What will the world be like when Jesus comes? It's in the Bible, Matthew 24:37-39, NIV. "As it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. For in the days before the flood, people were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day Noah entered the ark; and they knew nothing about what would happen until the flood came and took them all away. That is how it will be at the coming of the Son of Man."

Will Christ's coming be a time of reward? It's in the Bible, Matthew 16:27 and Revelation 22:12, NIV. "For the Son of Man is going to come in His Father's glory with His angels, and then He will reward each person according to what he has done." "Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with Me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done."

Why is Jesus coming back? It's in the Bible, Hebrews 9:28, TLB. "So also Christ died only once as an offering for the sins of many people; and He will come again, but not to deal again with our sins. This time He will come bringing salvation to all those who are eagerly and patiently waiting for Him."

At Jesus' second coming, we will fully experience the reality of our salvation. It's in the Bible, I Corinthians 1:7-8, TLB. "Now you have every grace and blessing; every spiritual gift and power for doing His will are yours during this time of waiting for the return of our Lord Jesus Christ. And He guarantees right up to the end that you will be counted free from all sin and guilt on that day when He returns."
.

.

What was Nailed to the Cross?


What was Nailed to the Cross?
Sermon by Ulrike Unruh

Deliverance? What does that word mean to you? What would the word deliverance mean to a group of men trapped in a mining shaft with the air supply rapidly dwindling. What would the word deliverance mean to a group of people held hostage in a foreign country who knew they would face certain death if deliverance did not come?

Do we consider Christ's death and resurrection as the key to our deliverance? We who are held hostage in sinful world, trapped by sin?

Deliverance!

Which brings us to the Chapter in the Bible I wish to carefully study with you this morning.
Colossians 2
This chapter is a grand chapter dealing with cross and the Passover of deliverance, yet it is probably one of the most controversial chapters in the Bible for Adventist. It has been used against us more times than not. It has been used to tell the world that Christ died, to deliver people from obedience to God's laws! To deliver them from the Sabbath which the Lord God blessed and hallowed and asked us to remember! Is this really what it is all about? You know, the more I read that chapter the more I'm convinced it has a very important message for these last days. It is definitely a passage of deliverance-- but it is the message of the true Passover, for Christ is our Passover, Paul says. We have here the message of deliverance from sin. Colossians neither does away with the God's ten commandment law, nor does it belittle the Passover as "being that which was against us".

Anyway, let us commence with our Bible study.
Please open your Bibles to Colossians 2 an I would encourage you to leave it open at this chapter as we will be referring to it throughout the remainder of this study.
`hat was nailed to the cross? Let's read it in Colossians 2:13-15

"When you were dead in your sins" What were we?
Dead in our sins! What does that mean? That means we were enslaved in our sins, we couldn't rise out of those sins. We were dead in sins— We needed deliverance! Right!

"When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature"

Oh, it's getting worse, not only were we dead and needed deliverance from sin, but our very natures were against any hope of deliverance from this slavery of sin.
So, se were dead in our sins and in the uncircumcision of our sinful nature, BUT GOD MADE YOU ALIVE WITH CHRIST."

Wow! The story of Ezekiel's dry bones all over again. We were nothing but a bunch of dry bones— DEAD in sins with no hope, but God — how wonderful those words (they appear many times in Paul's writings,-- Things appear to be totally hopeless "BUT GOD" changes the whole picture-- In Ezekiel those dry bones came to life when the Spirit of God came upon them. And here we read that God makes us alive with Christ!

How does He do that? How does He give us life and deliver us from death?
Paul's next words tell us!
"He forgave us all our sins"
What was that again? How did He deliver us from death and bring us to life?
Say it with me— "He forgave us all our sins." Wonderful is the promise of forgiveness!

And how was He able to forgive us our sins?
Let's read the next sentence: and I'm going to go to the Greek to be sure of my words here--

"He forgave us all our sins; having canceled the written record with it's legal demands which stood against us."
Was that a little different from your Bible? Probably, depending on which version you have. Let's study this deeper, for we want to KNOW what this verse is saying!

"He forgave us all our sins having canceled, blotted out or "exaleipho" which means "smeared out", pardoned, canceled, the written record, or the "cheirographon", which means written record.

Now how did God forgive us our sins according to all this? By canceling a written record? What is that written record?

Recent studies of historical writings show that "Cheirographon" was used to show a "certificate of indebtedness". So we could read the verse to say: he canceled the written record of our debts.

Now it makes more sense...especially when we consider Jesus parable of the ungrateful man. You remember the story of the king who was going through his accounts and found one man who owed him a couple million dollars. The man was summoned to appear before the king and ordered to pay up. Of course he couldn't— he was dead, dead in debts! No hope at all to be free from those debts. BUT THE king forgave him all his debts by canceling the written record of those debts which stood against him!

Do you see the parallel here. The king forgave him all his debts by canceling the written record against him! What did the king cancel? He cancel the record that said the man owed those millions of dollars.

In the same why, Colossians tells us that God "Delivered us by Forgiving us all our sins, having canceled the written record, with it's regulations, (ordinances).... What are those regulations? The Greek word is "dogma" referring to legal decree or requirement. Well what legal demand would a person be under who owed a several million dollar debt? Would not the legal demand be that he repay his debt, complete with the regulations that if the person could not repay the debt that he'd be sent to prison and his family could be sold as slaves etc..

What regulations or legal decree is held against sinners? The Bible tells us the wages of sin is death. That is the legal decree— you sin— you will die! That is the wage for sin. But even before the cross there was the hope of deliverance. They could bring a lamb, symbolizing the promised Messiah, to die in their place. But now, the Lamb of God took upon Himself the legal penalty or regulation held against the sinner, so that the decree requiring the sinner's death is lifted from those whose sins are forgiven.

It is also true that now that CHRIST is our sacrifice, we no longer are bound by the sacrificial system. No more sacrifices and sacrificial rituals and cerimonies are necessary, FOR CHRIST IS our sacrifice.

How was it possible for God to forgive us our sins, canceling the record with it's legal decree against us? The verse continues, "He took it away by nailing it to the cross."

So what was nailed to the cross? What was it that was against us, what was it that opposed us, what was it that stood in the way of life for us?

In this study we have seen that it was the record of our sins which demanded our eternal death. It is Christ's blood that blots, or "smears" out the record of sin.

However, the answer that is usually given is that somehow these verses mean Christ nailed His ten commandment law to the cross. But how could they come to that conclusion?

The Bible tells us that — By the commandment law sin is defined (Romans 7:7)

So would Christ nail that which defines sin to the cross and tell us it no longer matters if we obey that law or no — did he "free us from sin" by destroying that which defines sin, thus negating the whole concept of sin. For without the law there is no sin, for sin is the transgression of the law. Is it God's law that was against us, opposing us? That's what many seem to believe and teach.

Yet Paul clearly says in Romans 6;1-2 "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin (transgressing God's commandments law) that grace may abound? God forbid, How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein. Do we then make void the commandment law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law.

So would Paul, in Colossians 2, support the popular interpretation that the "written document, the "cheirographon" that was against us and which was nailed to the cross are the commandments of God, and the Sabbath in particular?

We must ask ourselves, did God bring forgiveness to mankind by destroying that which points out sin, or by taking upon Himself our sins and paying the penalty in our behalf? The Bible makes this clear enough.

In 1 Cor. 15:3 "Christ died for OUR SINS according to the scriptures."

Peter adds; "Christ in his own self bore our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness, by whose stripes we were healed." (1 Peter 2:24)

That is the message of Colossians. All through the chapter Paul is talking about forgiveness of sins (2:13) of dying to those sins (2:12) of putting off the sinful nature through Christ (2:11) of being established in the faith. (2:7)

The verse in question says that He forgave us all our sins by canceling the written debt with it's legal demands which stood against us and nailed it to the cross.

Those legal demands required a death. Before Christ's death upon the cross, those demands required a lamb be brought in a cerimonial ritual and slain in the place of the sinner.

It is our sins which are against us. It was Christ Himself who was nailed to the cross as HE bore our sins. There is a written record in the heavenly books of all our sins which legally condemn us to eternal death. That is the record Christ nailed to the cross, thus enabling Him to freely forgive and faithfully forgive us our sins when we come to Him in confession.

And no, this does not change our concept of an investigative judgment. Remember the parable of the ungrateful man. The king forgave him all his debts by canceling the record that was against him, but what happened when the forgiven man met someone who owed him a few dollars? What happened when he showed that his nature was still totally unchanged by the grace of the king? Was there an investigation? What happened to the canceled debt?

God canceling the record of our sins is not designed to do away with human accountability on the day of judgment, but to provide the reassurance of the totality of God's forgiveness when we come to HIM with a sincere heart.

Having experienced the sweet evidence of forgiveness from all our sins, our hearts should be melted and broken, ready to surrender to God heart and soul. Sin appears in it's awful enslaving reality and we rejoice to be freed from it in order that we can serve God in righteousness.

So we see that it's not the law, which defines sin that was nailed to the cross. It was the record of sin. It was the decree of death for the sinner. It was Christ our substitute. Christ our sin bearer who was nailed to the cross in order that He might remove that record of sin, which stood against us, and bring us into complete harmony with the will of God.

Yes, in a sense we can say the cerimonial law was nailed to the cross, because each lamb slain, typified the taking upon itself the sins of the repentant sinner, and dying in his place. But now JESUS, the LAMB OF GOD, took upon HIMSELF our sins and died in our place. There is no more need for the cerimonial sacrificial system. Christ died once and for all.

But that is not the end of the chapter, we still have the controversial verse 16, which reads;
"Let no man judge you by what you eat or drink, or with regard to a religious festival, a new moon, celebration or a Sabbath day."

Before we delve any further, let's be sure we understand this first. Who is not to judge us?
Does it say don't let God judge you regarding.....?
Does it say that? Does it say that God will not judge?

No, it says let no one judge you. Meaning let no man judge you. Romans 14 brings this out even clearer. This is another chapter that is often used to try and show there is no judgment, but there again we see that we should not let MAN judge us concerning "doubtful disputations". But that we must all answer to God.
"For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ...so every one of us shall give account of himself to God."

Colossians itself, carries the same accountability to God, message. In Colossians 3:23 we read: "Whatsoever you do, do it heartily to the Lord, and not unto men, Knowing that you shall receive the reward of the inheritance from the Lord, for you serve the Lord. But he that does wrong shall receive for the wrong which he has done."

Now back up a few verses to Col 2:8. What do we read there?
Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after what?
What is it that Paul is warning us about? Asking us to be aware of?
Philosophy and vain deceit, after the traditions of who? of men!
And after the principles of the world, and not after Christ.

Now lets jump down to Col 2:22
What is the question Paul asks here? Why are you subject to the commandments of God?
Is that what he asks? Is it? Or maybe it reads "Why are you subject to that old ten commandment law? Is that what he asks? NO!

No, He asks, "why are you subject to rules after the commandments of men and doctrines of men?"

Interesting isn't it. Consider too, what Jesus said in Matt 15:3,6,9 In vain they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of WHO (do you remember?)

"In vain they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men..Why do you set aside the commandments of God by your tradition...making of none effect the commandments of God by your tradition...In vain they worship me...."

Could this be talking about the commandments of men which rise in opposition to the commandments of God?

Now I want you to notice something unusual in Col. 2:16. Let no man judge you....WHICH ARE A SHADOW OF THINGS TO COME.
This is future tense.
Oh, I know some translations have put it into the past tense. But the original writing says it in FUTURE TENSE. Let no man judge you— these are a shadow of things to come.....

What is Paul talking about?
Well, first, the commotion over certain people urging upon others, certain man made rules. In these Colossian texts are not about whether or not we should obey God's commandments— the discussion is obviously about man made rules.
And this commotion which the Colossians are experiencing, is a shadow of things to come.

Now let's think about this:
Did a power arise that insisted on judging people according to man made festivals, sabbaths, and religious regulations as to when to eat and when not to eat, etc?

Did a power arise that caused People to forget that it is through Christ that their sins are nailed to the cross. Was Christ as the substance of salvation, the ONE mediating His blood in the heavenly sanctuary, hidden by an earthly system of sacrifice and forgiveness . Did a whole lot of man made regulations and man made rules and festivals and even a new man made Sabbath come in.

History shows that this did happen to the Christian Church. It is very interesting that the Papal system abolished that which the scriptures in the book of Hebrews says "remains" (the 7th day Sabbath) and established that which the scriptures in Hebrews says was abolished, "the ceremonial systems".

For centuries a religious power has re-established an earthly priest system and told the world they have the power to forgive sins, and determine who is worthy of heaven. For centuries they pretend to re-sacrifice Christ in a daily mass, claiming that they have the power to create the Creator and produce him as a bloodless victim to offer to God. They have pretended to have the power to absolve people from their sins or bar them from heaven. Then they sent out the inquisition and the papal armies to subdue all "heretics" who understood the truth, that sins can only be forgiven by Christ and that the only, once and for all sacrifice, was completed at the cross.

They have established feast days— a whole liturgy of feast days, many of these feast days (like Easter, and Christmas are based on the moon or the suns movements)These liturgical religious days are declare as holy days. They have established fast days, lent, and of course the counterfeit SABBATH-- Sunday.

No, Colossians does not do away with God's Sabbath! Colossians is a clear warning that people will try to implement counterfeit Sabbaths and will try to judge you if you do not keep that counterfeit Sabbath.

Paul warns us in verse 18 (the verse following Let no man judge you) now he warns Let no MAN cheat you out of your reward insisting on self-abasement (acts of penance) and worship of spirit beings (praying to saints and Mary) intruding into those things which he has not seen (taking over the prerogatives of Christ,) vainly puffed up (a proud system)

Read all of Colossians and you will find that the context actually says,

Let no one judge you...according to human tradition, according to the elemental spirits of the universe and not according to Christ (2:8) He, Christ, disarmed the principalities and powers and triumphed over them. Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath. Let no one disqualify you insisting on self-abasement (acts of penance) and worship of spirit beings ( like praying to saints or Mary) ...Why submit to regulations that have an appearance of wisdom in promoting rigor of devotion and self-;abasement...but which all perish according to human precepts and doctrines for they are based on human commands and teachings.

What will perish? Does God's law perish? See (Col. 2:22) It is the rules based on human commands and teachings that will perish.

That's what this whole chapter is about. It focuses on Christ's redemptive act on Calvary. Yes, our sins can be completely and wholly forgiven— the record of them nailed to the cross as our sin Bearer bore them on His own body on that cruel tree. Forgiveness is complete!

But the controversy is not ended. Satan hates the cross, for it has sealed his doom. He can't blot out the cross. It is there. But there is one thing the enemy can do. He can paint that cross with his own colors and turn upon it his own deceptive floodlights. Do not be deceived. For Satan cares not how much we love the cross, as long as he can keep us deceived as to its purpose and its work. It does not grieve him a bit to hear us sing about the mercy and grace and pardon and liberty of Calvary if he can make us think that the cross is an excuse for disobedience to God and His law. The cross is a mighty argument for unswerving obedience but somehow Satan has managed to convince so many that Calvary has eliminated the necessity of obedience to God's law, that the multiplied pardon of Calvary will take care of multiplied neglect to follow Him today and tomorrow, that the liberty of Calvary is freedom from the law— liberty to sin instead of liberty from sin and liberty to live in righteousness in the abiding presence of Christ.

May none of us join the enemy in his work. How can we hold that nail scared hand, pierced for our transgressions, in one hand, and place our other hand in that of the enemy in defying God's law.

True your sins were nailed to the cross with Jesus. Wonderful, glorious thought! But your conscience was never nailed there! Your freedom to choose to walk with Christ or walk the dark paths of sin was not nailed there. If the law could be changed, God could have saved us without the sacrifice of Christ; but the fact that it was necessary for Christ to give His life for the fallen race proves that the law of God stands unchanged...The wages of sin is death. Jesus came to Calvary because there was no other way. He came because we were dead in sin, and because of sin, He came to raise us to newness of life, to walk with Him in paths of righteousness. Let there be nothing between you and your Savior. He is our deliverer to a new and glorious life.
.


.

How to Keep The True Sabbath - What Jesus Taught

How to Keep The True Sabbath - What Jesus Taught

No other institution which was committed to the Jews tended so fully to distinguish them from surrounding nations as did the Sabbath. God designed that its observance should designate them as His worshipers. It was to be a token of their separation from idolatry, and their connection with the true God. But in order to keep the Sabbath holy, men must themselves be holy. Through faith they must become partakers of the righteousness of Christ. When the command was given to Israel, "Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy," the Lord said also to them, "Ye shall be holy men unto Me." Ex. 20:8; 22:31. Only thus could the Sabbath distinguish Israel as the worshipers of God.

As the Jews departed from God, and failed to make the righteousness of Christ their own by faith, the Sabbath lost its significance to them. Satan was seeking to exalt himself and to draw men away from Christ, and he worked to pervert the Sabbath, because it is the sign of the power of Christ. The Jewish leaders accomplished the will of Satan by surrounding God's rest day with burdensome requirements. In the days of Christ the Sabbath had become so perverted that its observance reflected the character of selfish and arbitrary men rather than the character of the loving heavenly Father. The rabbis virtually represented God as giving laws which it was impossible for men to obey. They led the people to look upon God as a tyrant, and to think that the observance of the Sabbath, as He required it, made men hard-hearted and cruel. It was the work of Christ to clear away these misconceptions. Although the rabbis followed Him with merciless hostility, He did not even appear to conform to their requirements, but went straight forward, keeping the Sabbath according to the law of God.


Upon one Sabbath day, as the Saviour and His disciples returned from the place of worship, they passed through a field of ripening grain. Jesus had continued His work to a late hour, and while passing through the fields, the disciples began to gather the heads of grain, and to eat the kernels after rubbing them in their hands. On any other day this act would have excited no comment, for one passing through a field of grain, an orchard, or a vineyard, was at liberty to gather what he desired to eat. See Deut. 23:24, 25. But to do this on the Sabbath was held to be an act of desecration. Not only was the gathering of the grain a kind of reaping, but the rubbing of it in the hands was a kind of threshing. Thus, in the opinion of the rabbis, there was a double offense.

The spies at once complained to Jesus, saying, "Behold, Thy disciples do that which is not lawful to do upon the Sabbath day."

When accused of Sabbathbreaking at Bethesda, Jesus defended Himself by affirming His Sonship to God, and declaring that He worked in harmony with the Father. Now that the disciples are attacked, He cites His accusers to examples from the Old Testament, acts performed on the Sabbath by those who were in the service of God.

The Jewish teachers prided themselves on their knowledge of the Scriptures, and in the Saviour's answer there was an implied rebuke for their ignorance of the Sacred Writings. "Have ye not read so much as this," He said, "what David did, when himself was an hungered, and they which were with him; how he went into the house of God, and did take and eat the shewbread, . . . which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests alone?" "And He said unto them, The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath." "Have ye not read in the law, how that on the Sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the Sabbath, and are blameless? But I say unto you, That in this place is one greater than the temple." "The Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." Luke 6:3, 4; Mark 2:27, 28; Matt. 12:5, 6.

If it was right for David to satisfy his hunger by eating of the bread that had been set apart to a holy use, then it was right for the disciples to supply their need by plucking the grain upon the sacred hours of the Sabbath. Again, the priests in the temple performed greater labor on the Sabbath than upon other days. The same labor in secular business would be sinful; but the work of the priests was in the service of God. They were performing those rites that pointed to the redeeming power of Christ, and their labor was in harmony with the object of the Sabbath. But now Christ Himself had come. The disciples, in doing the work of Christ, were engaged in God's service, and that which was necessary for the accomplishment of this work it was right to do on the Sabbath day.

Christ would teach His disciples and His enemies that the service of God is first of all. The object of God's work in this world is the redemption of man; therefore that which is necessary to be done on the Sabbath in the accomplishment of this work is in accord with the Sabbath law. Jesus then crowned His argument by declaring Himself the "Lord of the Sabbath,"--One above all question and above all law. This infinite Judge acquits the disciples of blame, appealing to the very statutes they are accused of violating.

Jesus did not let the matter pass with administering a rebuke to His enemies. He declared that in their blindness they had mistaken the object of the Sabbath. He said, "If ye had known what this meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice, ye would not have condemned the guiltless." Matt. 12:7. Their many heartless rites could not supply the
lack of that truthful integrity and tender love which will ever characterize the true worshiper of God.

Again Christ reiterated the truth that the sacrifices were in themselves of no value. They were a means, and not an end. Their object was to direct men to the Saviour, and thus to bring them into harmony with God. It is the service of love that God values. When this is lacking, the mere round of ceremony is an offense to Him. So with the Sabbath. It was designed to bring men into communion with God; but when the mind was absorbed with wearisome rites, the object of the Sabbath was thwarted. Its mere outward observance was a mockery.

Upon another Sabbath, as Jesus entered a synagogue. He saw there a man who had a withered hand. The Pharisees watched Him, eager to see what He would do. The Saviour well knew that in healing on the Sabbath He would be regarded as a transgressor, but He did not hesitate to break down the wall of traditional requirements that barricaded the Sabbath. Jesus bade the afflicted man stand forth, and then asked, "Is it lawful to do good on the Sabbath days, or to do evil? to save life, or to kill?" It was a maxim among the Jews that a failure to do good, when one had opportunity, was to do evil; to neglect to save life was to kill. Thus Jesus met the rabbis on their own ground. "But they held their peace. And when He had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts, He saith unto the man, Stretch forth thine hand. And he stretched it out: and his hand was restored whole as the other." Mark 3:4, 5.

When questioned, "Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath days?" Jesus answered, "What man shall there be among you, that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it, and lift it out? How much then is a man better than a sheep? Wherefore it is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days." Matt. 12:10-12.

The spies dared not answer Christ in the presence of the multitude, for fear of involving themselves in difficulty. They knew that He had spoken the truth. Rather than violate their traditions, they would leave a man to suffer, while they would relieve a brute because of the loss to the owner if it were neglected. Thus greater care was shown for a dumb animal than for man, who is made in the image of God. This illustrates the working of all false religions. They originate in man's desire to exalt himself above God, but they result in degrading man below the brute. Every religion that wars against the sovereignty of God defrauds man of the glory which was his at the creation, and which is to be restored to him in Christ. Every false religion teaches its adherents to be careless of human needs, sufferings, and rights. The gospel places a high value upon humanity as the purchase of the blood of Christ, and it teaches a tender regard for the wants and woes of man. The Lord says, "I will make a man more precious than fine gold; even a man than the golden wedge of Ophir." Isa. 13:12.

When Jesus turned upon the Pharisees with the question whether it was lawful on the Sabbath day to do good or to do evil, to save life or to kill, He confronted them with their own wicked purposes. They were hunting His life with bitter hatred, while He was saving life and bringing happiness to multitudes. Was it better to slay upon the Sabbath, as they were planning to do, than to heal the afflicted, as He had done? Was it more righteous to have murder in the heart upon God's holy day than love to all men, which finds expression in deeds of mercy?

In the healing of the withered hand, Jesus condemned the custom of the Jews, and left the fourth commandment standing as God had given it. "It is lawful to do well on the Sabbath days," He declared. By sweeping away the senseless restrictions of the Jews, Christ honored the Sabbath, while those who complained of Him were dishonoring God's holy day.

Those who hold that Christ abolished the law teach that He broke the Sabbath and justified His disciples in doing the same. Thus they are really taking the same ground as did the caviling Jews. In this they contradict the testimony of Christ Himself, who declared, "I have kept My Father's commandments, and abide in His love." John 15:10. Neither the Saviour nor His followers broke the law of the Sabbath. Christ was a living representative of the law. No violation of its holy precepts was found in His life. Looking upon a nation of witnesses who were seeking occasion to condemn Him, He could say unchallenged, "Which of you convicteth Me of sin?" John 8:46, R. V.

The Saviour had not come to set aside what patriarchs and prophets had spoken; for He Himself had spoken through these representative men. All the truths of God's word came from Him. But these priceless gems had been placed in false settings. Their precious light had been made to minister to error. God desired them to be removed from their
settings of error and replaced in the framework of truth. This work only a divine hand could accomplish. By its connection with error, the truth had been serving the cause of the enemy of God and man. Christ had come to place it where it would glorify God, and work the salvation of humanity.

"The Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath," Jesus said. The institutions that God has established are for the benefit of mankind. "All things are for your sakes." "Whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are yours; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's." 2 Cor. 4:15; 1 Cor. 3:22, 23. The law of Ten Commandments, of which the Sabbath forms a part, God gave to His people as a blessing. "The Lord commanded us," said Moses, "to do all these statutes, to fear the Lord our God, for our good always, that He might preserve us alive." Deut. 6:24. And through the psalmist the message was given to Israel, "Serve the Lord with gladness: come before His presence with singing. Know ye that the Lord He is God: it is He that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are His people, and the sheep of His pasture. Enter into His gates with thanksgiving, and into His courts with praise." Ps. 100:2-4. And of all who keep "the Sabbath from polluting it," the Lord declares, "Even them will I bring to My holy mountain, and make them joyful in My house of prayer." Isa. 56:6, 7.

"Wherefore the Son of man is Lord also of the Sabbath." These words are full of instruction and comfort. Because the Sabbath was made for man, it is the Lord's day. It belongs to Christ. For "all things were made by Him; and without Him was not anything made that was made." John 1:3. Since He made all things, He made the Sabbath. By Him it was set apart as a memorial of the work of creation. It points to Him as both the Creator and the Sanctifier. It declares that He who created all things in heaven and in earth, and by whom all things hold together, is the head of the church, and that by His power we are reconciled to God. For, speaking of Israel, He said, "I gave them My Sabbaths, to be a sign between Me and them, that they might know that I am the Lord that sanctify them,"--make them holy. Ezek. 20:12. Then the Sabbath is a sign of Christ's power to make us holy. And it is given to all whom Christ makes holy. As a sign of His sanctifying power, the Sabbath is given to all who through Christ become a part of the Israel of God.

And the Lord says, "If thou turn away thy foot from the Sabbath, from doing thy pleasure on My holy day; and call the Sabbath a delight, the holy of the Lord, honorable; . . . then shalt thou delight thyself in the Lord." Isa. 58:13, 14. To all who receive the Sabbath as a sign of Christ's creative and redeeming power, it will be a delight. Seeing Christ in it, they delight themselves in Him. The Sabbath points them to the works of creation as an evidence of His mighty power in redemption. While it calls to mind the lost peace of Eden, it tells of peace restored through the Saviour. And every object in nature repeats His invitation, "Come unto Me, all ye that labor and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest." Matt 11:28.

.
Source:http://www.sabbathtruth.com/jesus_taught.asp
.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Pelosi Tells Illegal Immigrants That Work Site Raids are Un-American


March 14: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Caif., tells an audience that included illegal immigrants that enforcement of America's immigration law is "un-American." (FNC)

Pelosi Tells Illegal Immigrants That Work Site Raids are Un-American

The speaker of the House told a group of both legal and illegal immigrants recently that enforcement of immigration laws in the United States is "un-American."

By William Lajeunesse
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, March 18, 2009

EXCLUSIVE: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi recently told a group of both legal and illegal immigrants and their families that enforcement of existing immigration laws, as currently practiced, is "un-American."

The speaker, condemning raids by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents, referred to the immigrants she was addressing as "very, very patriotic."

"Who in this country would not want to change a policy of kicking in doors in the middle of the night and sending a parent away from their families?" Pelosi told a mostly Hispanic gathering at St. Anthony's Church in San Francisco.

Video: Click here to view the video of Pelosi speaking.

"It must be stopped....What value system is that? I think it's un-American. I think it's un-American."

Pelosi said she was invited to the church by Rep. Luis Gutierrez, D-Ill., as part of his 17-city, cross-country tour called United Families, which he says is intended to put a human face on the immigration debate.

"We think that families are the cornerstone of our society and our nation, and an immigration system should preserve those families, not destroy them," Gutierrez told FOX News Capitol Hill Producer Chad Pergram on Tuesday.

The congressman is collecting petitions that ask President Obama to "stop the immigration raids and deportations that are tearing our marriages, families and children apart." He is expected to present those petitions when Hispanic members of Congress meet with the President Wednesday.

Click here for more video from FOX News.

On Saturday night, Pelosi joined Gutierrez before a cheering crowd at St. Anthony's chanting, "Si se puede," or "Yes we can."

Referring to work site enforcement actions by ICE agents, Pelosi said, "We have to have a change in policy and practice and again ... I can't say enough, the raids must end. The raids must end.

"You are special people. You're here on a Saturday night to take responsibility for our country's future. That makes you very, very patriotic."

"I was embarrassed by what she said," said Rick Oltman, with Californians for Population Stabilization, an anti-illegal immigrant group. "Exhorting illegal aliens for taking responsibility for our country's future.... In fact, sitting there in the audience.... I really resented that comment."

"I think it was pandering to the crowd but also insulting to American citizens who consider themselves to be patriotic, who obey the rule of law," said Oltman, who shot a video of the rally.

For more on this story, watch Special Report With Bret Baier at 6 p.m. EDT on FOX News Channel.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/03/18/pelosi-tells-illegal-immigrants-work-site-raids-american/
.
P.S. Bolds and Highlights added for emphasis.

Visible Instruments of the Almighty


Visible Instruments of the Almighty

Cedric Mascarenhas SJ

The love and zeal for the Lord burnt so strongly in the heart of Francis Xavier, that it leads him to do things, unimaginable to men and women of his times. These events of magnificence performed by a man on a mission have in-turn inspired millions.

The General of the Society of Jesus, Fr. Adolfo Nicolas, is no exception. It was no doubt therefore that he would love to have come and stand in the presence of the patron of Goa, the Saint of the East, the second Companion of Ignatius – St. Francis Xavier, the relics of whose lie at the Basilica of Bom Jesus, Old Goa.

With this auspicious day arriving on the 7th and 8th of March 2009, the members of the Goa Province got together to welcome their leader.

On the 7th of March, the General, Fr. Adolfo Nicolas arrived and visited the Bom Jesus, after which he met with the Superiors and Directors of works, of the province at the Casa Professa, Old Goa. Following this he expressed his goals for the Society of Jesus with all of the province men, celebrated the Holy Eucharist and shared a meal.

In his words to the province men that day he kept on stressing on the ‘Jesuits’ being ‘visible’ signs of God, manifesting himself here and now. All our works must make God’s loving presence tangible to everyone.

The following day, 8th March, the General met with the province men at the Xavier Centre of Historical Research, Porvorim and got a feel of the different works being done in the province. Presentations regarding the Spiritual, Social and Educational works done in the province were made. In his response, Fr. General expressed his gladness in the way we were reaching out to the people. He also gave suggestion to the directors of works, to help them continue the good works they are doing by inspiring the young in the society to join them.

He ended his Visit by celebrating another Eucharist, praying that ‘We’ a group of men dedicated to Christ, listen to ‘His Word’, so that we may be His ‘Visible’ instruments here and now…

Note: Highlights added.

CIA Chief Meets Home Minister

MARCH 19, 2009, 11:01 A.M. ET

CIA Chief Meets Home Minister

CIA Director Leon Panetta waves as he comes out after a meeting with Indian Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram in New Delhi, India, Thursday, March 19, 2009.


Associated Press

NEW DELHI -- CIA Director Leon Panetta, in his first overseas trip since taking office, met Thursday with India's home minister to discuss intelligence sharing and security in the wake of recent unrest in neighboring Pakistan and last year's deadly Mumbai attacks, officials said.

Mr. Panetta's visit comes two weeks after FBI Director Robert Mueller came to India, where the FBI is believed to be helping investigate the November siege in Mumbai that killed 164 people, including several Americans.

The intelligence chief, who was expected to visit Islamabad after New Delhi, met with Home Minister Palaniappan Chidambaram, said Pankaj Kumar Mishra, an official with the Home Ministry.

Mr. Panetta is also expected to meet with Indian intelligence officials and the National Security Advisor M.K. Narayanan.

The U.S. Embassy released no details about Panetta's trip.
.

Note: Bolds added for emphasis:
=========================================
  1. FBI Director Robert Mueller came to India two weeks ago.

  2. CIA Director Leon Panetta,... met Thursday with India's home minister to discuss intelligence sharing and security...

  3. The General of the Society of Jesus, Fr. Adolfo Nicolas recent (don't know if he's still there) visit to India.

Can there be a reason why these high ranking officials of their "orders" have all converged recently on India?

Keep your eye on New Delhi!


Arsenio.

House Passes Volunteerism Bill Critics Call Pricey, Forced Service

March 17: First lady Michelle Obama greets members of AmeriCorps Youthbuild USA during her visit to a "green" home building project on the National Mall in Washington. (Reuters)


House Passes Volunteerism Bill Critics Call Pricey, Forced Service

The legislation will expand the1993 AmeriCorps program to match the renewed interest in national service since President Obama's election, which backers say is crucial in tough economic times.

By Kelley Beaucar Vlahos
FOXNews.com
Wednesday, March 18, 2009


WASHINGTON -- The House of Representatives passed a measure Wednesday that supporters are calling the most sweeping reform of nationally-backed volunteer programs since AmeriCorps. But some opponents are strongly criticizing the legislation, calling it expensive indoctrination and forced advocacy.

The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act -- sponsored by Reps. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y, and George Miller, D-Calif. -- was approved by a 321-105 vote and now goes to the Senate.

The legislation, slated to cost $6 billion over five years, would create 175,000 "new service opportunities" under AmeriCorps, bringing the number of participants in the national volunteer program to 250,000. It would also create additional "corps" to expand the reach of volunteerism into new sectors, including a Clean Energy Corps, Education Corps, Healthy Futures Corps and Veterans Service Corps, and it expands the National Civilian Community Corps to focus on additional areas like disaster relief and energy conservation.

It is the first time the AmeriCorps program, which was created by President Clinton in 1993, will be reauthorized, and supporters say it will have additional funding to match the renewed interest in national service since President Obama's election and the acute need for volunteerism and charity in tough economic times.

"National and community service can help make Americans a part of the solution to get our country through this economic crisis. I hope the House and Senate will join us in moving as quickly as possible to help President Obama sign this critical bill into law," Miller, chairman of the education committee, said after the bill was passed.

But the bill's opponents -- and there are only a few in Congress -- say it could cram ideology down the throats of young "volunteers," many of whom could be forced into service since the bill creates a "Congressional Commission on Civic Service."

The bipartisan commission will be tasked with exploring a number of topics, including "whether a workable, fair and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the nation."

"We contribute our time and money under no government coercion on a scale the rest of the world doesn't emulate and probably can't imagine," said Luke Sheahan, contributing editor for the Family Security Foundation. "The idea that government should order its people to perform acts of charity is contrary to the idea of charity and it removes the responsibility for charity from the people to the government, destroying private initiative."

House committee staff insist the GIVE Act will not change the voluntary nature of service.

"Its ridiculous to suggest that our bill includes any effort to make service a mandatory requirement. All of the opportunities our bill provides to Americans are voluntary. Americans are proud of their service and volunteering and their interest in it is only growing, especially in the face of this crisis. Our legislation recognizes that more Americans than ever want to serve and give back and provides them with more opportunities to be able to do so," Miller spokeswoman Rachel Racusen said in an e-mail to FOXNews.com.

Others say they are concerned that the increased funding will be used to promote one ideology over another.

"It's allowing taxpayer funding of the left-wing organizations," said Larry Hart, director of government relations for the American Conservative Union.

"I think this is a problem that is rife throughout the federal government. When you dramatically expand the program, then you dramatically expand the ability for these left-wing advocacy organizations to get more funding. I don't see a lot of attention being paid to that, even from those who are critical. That's where the focus should be. Republicans tend to say its not that they oppose the program, they just want to spend less money. It's the program that's bad."

South Carolina Rep. Joe Wilson was one of three Republicans to oppose the legislation in committee. Wilson questioned the utility of the cash-strapped federal government making such huge investments in what he says should be community-inspired projects and programs.

"Volunteerism is part of the American spirit of generosity, and we all stand in support of those who will share their time," said Wilson, who was voted against the bill with Minnesota Rep. John Kline and California Rep. Tom McClintock.

"However, while our economy and our government is in financial trouble, it is not the best use of taxpayer dollars to spend the level of money on new and existing programs included in this bill."

Aides to Miller say they are awaiting estimates from the Congressional Budget Office on how much the GIVE Act would ultimately cost. In addition to all of the funding that goes to organizations in the forms of grants and administrative costs, AmeriCorps volunteers typically receive stipends and college scholarships when they complete one of the several available programs.

For example, a participant in the National Civilian Community Corps, which is a 10-month residential commitment, now receives $4,000 in living expenses and a $4,475 in money toward school. That conceivably would increase under the new legislation.

But regardless of the budget estimate, the financial benefits outweigh the cost, Racusen said.

"The millions of Americans who volunteered in 2007 generated benefits worth $158 billion," Racusen said. "A cost-benefit analysis of AmeriCorps, for example, shows that every dollar invested in the programs yields almost $4 in direct, measurable benefits. Investing in service helps low-income students achieve in school, prepares future workers for green jobs, provides assistance to veterans returning from war, and rebuilds homes and communities after disasters."

Many of the provisions in the GIVE Act can be found in Obama's 2010 fiscal year budget blueprint issued in February. The administration proposes $1.3 billion for the Corporation for National and Community Service, which administers AmeriCorps. CNCS received an estimated $260 million in fiscal 2009.

But some critics on the right suggest that the president's push for national service goes too far, and the recent congressional steps toward expanding the federal role in volunteerism and "civilian service" smacks of a larger agenda. They point to a campaign speech the president made last July in which he suggested national security could be entrusted to a civilian force.

"We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded," Obama, who worked as a community organizer in Chicago early in his career, said during a Colorado Springs rally.

At the time, Obama was discussing expanding the USA Freedom Corps -- created by President George W. Bush in 2002 -- Peace Corps and AmeriCorps, as well as beefing up the cadre of foreign service officers abroad and programs in which veterans help veterans back home.

"This will empower more Americans to craft their own service agenda and make their own change from the bottom up," Obama said in the speech.

"Senator Obama aims to tap into the already active volunteerism of millions of Americans and recruit them to become cogs in a gigantic government machine grinding out his social re-engineering agenda," Lee Cary of the conservative American Thinker wrote at the time about Obama's remarks.

"(His words) were about turning America into one, giant, community organizer's sandbox at enormous cost to taxpayers," Cary wrote.

Supporters say critics are a minority who prefer to agitate than assist.

"Resistance to expanded public service programs can be expected from the ideologically sclerotic, those who occupy the negative ground between government as the problem and government as our enemy," former Democratic Colorado Sen. Gary Hart wrote in a recent op-ed on the Huffington Post Web site.

The Senate is mulling over a similar piece of legislation, the "Serve America Act," sponsored by Sens. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, and Ted Kennedy, D-Mass. It was given a special endorsement by the president in his address before Congress on Feb. 24.



,

Physical Health and Noble Thinking


Physical Health and Noble Thinking

Dearly beloved, I beseech you as strangers and pilgrims, abstain from fleshly lusts, which war against the soul. 1 Peter 2:11.

Many regard this text as a warning against licentiousness only; but it has a broader meaning. It forbids every injurious gratification of appetite or passion. Every perverted appetite becomes a warring lust. Appetite was given us for a good purpose, not to become the minister of death by being perverted, and thus degenerating into "lusts, which war against the soul." Peter's admonition is a most direct and forcible warning against the use of all stimulants and narcotics. These indulgences may well be classed among the lusts that exert a pernicious influence upon moral character.

Let none who profess godliness regard with indifference the health of the body, and flatter themselves that intemperance is no sin and will not affect their spirituality. A close sympathy exists between the physical and the moral nature. The standard of virtue is elevated or degraded by the physical habits. Excessive eating of the best of food will produce a morbid condition of the moral feelings. And if the food is not the most healthful, the effects will be still more injurious. Any habit which does not promote healthful action in the human system degrades the higher and nobler faculties....Indulgence of appetite strengthens the animal propensities, giving them the ascendancy over the mental and spiritual powers.

The strength of the temptation to indulge appetite can be measured only by the inexpressible anguish of our Redeemer in that long fast in the wilderness. He knew that the indulgence of perverted appetite would so deaden man's perceptions that sacred things could not be discerned. . . . If the power of indulged appetite was so strong upon the race, that, in order to break its hold, the divine Son of God, in man's behalf, had to endure a fast of nearly six weeks, what a work is before the Christian! Yet, however great the struggle, he may overcome. By the help of that divine power which withstood the fiercest temptations that Satan could invent, he, too, may be entirely successful in his warfare with evil, and at last may wear the victor's crown in the kingdom of God.
Maranatha, E. G. W., pp.81.