Search This Blog

Monday, March 22, 2010

My Opinion

Hello Everyone,

Charlie Daniels entitled this article as, “My Opinion.”  When I read the articles I send out I generally find some disagreement, a little at least.  I sure would have a hard time finding anything I wanted to change on this one.  So the only thing I can add here is, “My Opinion Too!”

Godspeed,

Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit



My Opinion
Charlie Daniels
03/12/2010

I have observed Barack Obama in office for over a year now and have drawn some conclusions, which are my personal opinion only. I do not claim to represent the opinions of any other group or individual.

In my opinion, Barack Obama is more Muslim than Christian, despite the beliefs of some people that you can’t be both, as Christians and Muslims worship different gods. He appears to try to walk between the two faiths.

He certainly seems to reach out more to Muslims than to Christians. He virtually ignored the White House’s observance of the National Day of Prayer, which had been recognized -to one degree or another- by every president since Reagan, and has called the Muslim call to prayer, “one of the prettiest sounds on earth.”

The Christians worship Jehovah, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. God changed Jacob’s name to Israel and he fathered the patriarchs of the twelve tribes of Israel.

The Muslims worship Allah.

The Muslim’s holy book is the Koran, which tells its followers to mistreat Christians and Jews.

The Christian’s holy book is the Bible in which God says that he who blesses Israel, He will bless, and he who curses Israel, He will curse.

It is totally impossible for them to be one and the same.

I believe Obama is more socialist than capitalist and would like nothing better than changing America into a total socialist state with an all powerful, monolithic, central government that would control everything from health care to the price of loaf of bread.

I believe that Obama is more globalist than American. I believe that he believes in a global government that would assume the running of the planet and control the levying of taxes and the allocation of goods, with one currency and one seat of power.

His cap and trade legislation is nothing more than a bald face attempt to hand the sovereignty of the United States of America over to the corrupt and inept United Nations or some other worldwide organization.

I believe that Obama’s ego is such that he will lead this nation down the path to financial ruin before he’ll admit to being wrong about the economy.

Obama is an elitist who thinks that Harvard degrees mean more than common sense and has proven it by the bunch of unrealistic ding-a-lings he has appointed to his cabinet.

I don’t believe that Obama understands or really supports the military. He has vowed to do away with the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy of gays in the military, opening the door for constant harassment lawsuits and major unrest among the troops.

I don’t think Obama believes in the sanctity of life and his record of supporting radical pro-abortion legislation attests to that assumption.

I don’t believe that Obama is anywhere close to being able to handle the job as leader of the free world. I think he is in over his head, as are most of the people in his immediate circle and cabinet.

And I think the Congress that enables his disastrous programs is just as guilty of what happens to this nation as he is.

What do you think?

Pray for our troops, and for our country.

God Bless America

Charlie Daniels

© Copyright The Charlie Daniels Band


Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit


Sunday, March 21, 2010

Unity in an Anti-Christian World?

Unity in an Anti-Christian World?
Global War on Christian Values - Part 1
By Berit Kjos
March 13, 2010

The new millennium has brought some ominous changes. Last month alone unleashed a flood of anti-Christian plots around the world. All were designed to suppress God’s unchanging truth—an intolerable obstacle to global solidarity. Even “friendly” regimes have joined this war on faith:

“There is a growing and intensifying attack on Christians around the world. It is not just confined to the Middle East and Islamic countries.”[1]

“...lawmakers in the lower house of the Mexican Congress approved a bill officially instituting the separation of church and state....The bill passed 363 in favor with one ‘no’ vote and one abstention. It ‘guarantees the autonomy of institutions from religious norms, rules and convictions...”[2]

“Moroccan authorities raided [the orphanage] Village of Hope and said they were expelling the 20 workers and parents. The 33 children who were being cared for cried out ‘hysterically’ for their foster parents as they were left behind.... Lately Morocco has taken a tyrannical stance against Christians, forcibly deporting foreigners and bringing charges against the Moroccan nationals they associated with.”[3]

“Sweden is forcing Iraqi Christian refugees to leave its country. This will put the lives of Iraqi Christians in greater danger.... Swedish hospitality was beginning to diminish.”[4]

These ideological clashes may look like isolated incidents, but they expose the corrupt values behind the rising system that is shaping our global culture. Mexico, Morocco and Sweden are all tied to the international laws and standards of the United Nations and its many branches—including the Alliance of Civilizations (AOC). This statement from the AOC website gives us a glimpse of its agenda:

“The Alliance seeks to forge collective political will and to mobilize concerted action at the institutional and civil society levels to overcome the prejudice, misperceptions and polarization that militate against such a consensus. And it hopes to contribute to a coalescing global movement which... rejects extremism in any society.”[5]

Do you wonder what they mean by “extremism?” According to media reports, its main expressions are Islamic terrorism and Biblical Christianity! Though neither can be conformed to the UN vision of solidarity, the former provides a useful “crisis” as well as a needed tool for silencing the latter.

“The Community of Latin American and Caribbean States”

On February 22-23, thirty-two leaders from Central and South America gathered in Cancun to organize the new regional union of “Latin American and Caribbean States.” Communist rulers from Cuba and Venezuela were warmly welcomed. The United States and Canada were not invited. 

Nor was Porfirio Lobo, Honduras’ new president. Instead, the leaders planned to discuss the issue of his legitimacy. Some still denied the unwanted facts behind the legal removal of the corrupt former President Zelaya—a collaborator with Communist Hugo Chavez and the drug lords they both protected.[6]

Russia—another AOC member—cheered the rise of this left-leaning alliance:

“Russia hailed Friday the creation this week of the Community of Latin American and Caribbean States.... The new organization can be an important factor for the formation of a multipolar world order. Russia is ready to undertake cooperation and political dialogue with it.”[7]

Mexican President Felipe Calderon, host of the two-day summit, urged the attending leaders to set aside their “ideological differences” and focus on a “future where the values we believe in—democracy, justice and freedom—can flourish.”[8]

Democracy, justice and freedom! It sounds good, doesn’t it? But what do those words really mean in this context? How can freedom blossom in the midst of lawlessness, corruption and communism?

Remember the upside-down slogan from George Orwell’s eye-opening book, 1984:

“War is PEACE. Freedom is SLAVERY. Ignorance is STRENGTH.”

It exposed Soviet-style brainwashing back in the 1940s, when the British media had persuaded the masses to love Stalin. Yet, it still fits our times! When nations ban God’s moral guidelines, familiar words can become convenient tools in the hands of its trainers. Fact and fiction become interchangeable—a mere matter of political expediency. That’s why the global warming myth survived all the contrary facts! [See Green Lies]

O’Brien, Orwell’s fictional change agent, was a master at twisting the truth and changing minds:

“You are a slow learner, Winston,” said O’Brien gently.

“How can I help it?” [Winston] blubbered. “How can I help seeing what is in front of my eyes? Two and two are four.”

“Sometimes, Winston. Sometimes they are five. Sometimes they are three. Sometimes they are all of them at once. You must try harder. It is not easy to become sane.’”[9]

Mind control is more gentle and subtle today.[10] What hasn’t changed is the goal: unity based on global standards and Communist pragmatism. Now as then, everyone must conform to the new ways of thinking. None can resist or obstruct global re-education [The subject of Part 2 in this series].

“O’Brien was looking down at [Winston].... ‘There is a Party slogan dealing with the control of the past,’ he said. ‘Repeat it, if you please.’”

“‘Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past,’ repeated Winston obediently.

“We, the Party, control all records, and we control all memories. Then we control the past, do we not?’

“’But how can you stop people remembering things?’ cried Winston....

O’Brien’s manner grew stern again. He laid his hand on the dial....”[9]

Amending Mexico’s Constitution: Separation from what?

Mexico flows right along with this shift from moral freedom to amoral solidarity. Luke Goodrich explains it well in his insightful article, “Mexico’s Separation of Church and State:”

“Last week, Mexico’s lower house of Congress began the process of amending the Mexican Constitution to formally declare the country to be ‘laica’ [’lay’ or ‘secular’]. Supporters say the amendment merely codifies Mexico’s commitment to the separation of church and state. But the term ‘laica,’ like the term ‘separation of church and state,’ means different things to different people....

“Jaime Cardenas Garcia, a congressional supporter of the amendment, has said the amendment is necessary because of the presence of ‘a militant Catholic Church’ that opposes legal reforms [such as legalizing third trimester abortions].

“Another congressional supporter, Feliciano Marin Diaz, has argued that the amendment is necessary to ensure that ‘religious beliefs’ will not be used to support political allies or oppose political adversaries. In short... it might be an attempt to suppress the Catholic Church’s ability to engage in public policy debates.

“Most Mexicans self-identify as Roman Catholic. But for most of the twentieth century, the government was heavily anticlerical.... For example, when President Calderon suggested in June that ‘young people drug themselves because they don’t believe in God’ he was excoriated for violating the separation of church and state and, more tellingly, for forgetting that faith is ‘reserved to the private sphere of individuals’ and is unwelcome in politics.... The proposed ‘laica’ amendment looks like it might be an attempt to codify this sentiment.”[11]

“But who cares?” asks Mr. Goodrich. “Why not codify the idea that religious arguments are unwelcome in the public square?” Note his wise warning:

“First, since religious beliefs are inseparable from the individual, forcing religious arguments from the public square effectively forces religious individuals from the public square. ...Nihilists, Capitalists, and Socialists can all bring their philosophy to bear on public life, but Catholics (or other religious minorities) must check their religion at the door....

“Second, religion... has classically served as a bastion of dissent and a check on unlimited government power. But once the government delegitimizes religious dissent, it can also delegitimize other forms of dissent. The end result is not just increasing restrictions on free speech, but at worst, the tyranny of a government-enforced viewpoint and unchecked government power.”[11]

Back in 1994, Dr. Thomas Sowell wrote a review of Road to Serfdom by Friedrich Hayek. It brought a similar warning:

“At the heart of the socialist vision is the notion that a compassionate society can create more humane living conditions for all through government ‘planning’ and control of the economy....

“Idealist socialists create systems in which idealists are almost certain to lose and be superseded by those whose drive for power, and ruthlessness in achieving it, make them the ‘fittest’ to survive under a system where government power is the ultimate prize.”[12]

How does the United States fit into this global transformation?

Though excluded from the new “Community” of Latin nations, the USA is certainly not falling behind. Far from it! The interlinked webs that connect our government to nations, regions and rulers around the world are beyond description. So let’s look closer to home. The latest attack on Christianity took place in Gilbert, Arizona:

“The city...has ordered a group of seven adults to stop gathering for Bible studies in a private home because such meetings are forbidden by the city’s zoning codes.....

“There had been no complaints about the meetings, which had been rotating among members’ homes before the officer wrote the letter and ordered the group to ‘terminate all religious meetings...regardless of their size, nature or frequency.”[13]

The ban was revoked after a legal team from Alliance Defense Fund showed that the city’s action was unconstitutional. But this incident, like many others,[15] remind us that the First Amendment is being interpreted in ways that make freedom increasingly fragile.

A Christian response

Our Lord rejected any kind of compromise. He died at the hands of religious leaders who were offended by His uncompromising words.

His disciples followed the same narrow path. When the high priest complained that they had disobeyed public guidelines and “filled Jerusalem with [their] doctrine,” they answered:

“We ought to obey God rather than men.” Acts 5:29

There’s no wall between Christians and the world around us. We walk freely among its people as citizens of heaven and messengers of His love. But there is a wall between what is holy and unholy. God tells us to “Abhor what is evil. Cling to what is good.” (Romans 12:9) Only by His Word and Spirit in us can we discern the difference and encourage each other to follow His narrow way—in the midst of rising hostility. So,

“...do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God..” Romans 12:2


Notes:
5. “An Alliance of Civilizations: Terms of reference for the High-Level Group.” www.unaoc.org/repository/Terms%20of%20Reference%20for%20HLG.pdf
6. See the facts behind the legal removal of the corrupt President Zelaya here: www.crossroad.to/articles2/009/honduras.htm. An article titled “Federation signs onto OAS-substitute regional community” adds to the sobering picture: “The new bloc is aimed at reducing US influence on the region, and membership will not be extended to the United States and Canada.... Evo Morales and Hugo Chavez, the Presidents of Bolivia and Venezuela [both Communist], respectively, also praised the new initiative.”
9. George Orwell, 1984 (First published in 1949 by Harcourt, Brace & Co.) See George Orwell’s 1984 at www.crossroad.to/Excerpts/books/transformation/orwell.htm
12. Thomas Sowell, “A Road to Hell Paved with Good Intentions,” Forbes (January 17, 1994); 62, 63, 64.
15. See “A little child shall lead them” and An Evangelical Manifesto. For many more examples, see “Whose Rights?”



Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit

.

Saturday, March 20, 2010

John McCain’s Attack On Liberty

John McCain’s Attack On Liberty
By Chuck Baldwin
March 16, 2010

Anyone paying attention knows that John McCain has been a Big-Government Globalist Neocon (BGGN) for virtually his entire senatorial career. As with many BGGNs hiding out in the Republican Party, McCain likes to talk about smaller government, but his track record is littered with the promotion of one big government program after another. But, what else would one expect from a member of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR)?

Lately, however, McCain has outdone himself. He has introduced two bills in the US Senate that are about as Machiavellian as they could be. I am referring to S.3081, a bill that would authorize the federal government to detain American citizens indefinitely without trial, and S.3002, a bill that would authorize the federal government to regulate vitamins, minerals, and virtually all health and natural food products.

According to Examiner.com, “Last week, John McCain introduced a bill into the U.S. Senate which, if passed, would actually allow U.S. citizens to be arrested and detained indefinitely, all without Miranda rights or ever being charged with a crime.”

The Examiner report continued by saying “This bill, introduced by McCain, who despite overwhelming evidence, claims to be a ‘conservative,’ would not only take away our right to a trial, but would also allow the federal government to arrest and imprison anyone the current administration deems hostile.

“Of course, that would be the same administration whose Homeland Security Secretary has classified veterans, retired law enforcement, Ron Paul [and Chuck Baldwin] supporters, and conservatives as ‘terrorists.’”

The Examiner report concluded by saying “If it was not clear before, it should be now that John McCain has as little respect for the Constitution as he does for our borders.”

Amen!

If Juan McCain gets his way, your constitutional right to a speedy trial by jury is gone, as well as your constitutional right to Habeas Corpus. But, of course, they would attempt to justify this by claiming it is being done in the name of national security and the war on terrorism.

See the Examiner report at:

Regarding McCain’s desire for the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, attorney Jonathan Emord wrote, “If you had any doubt about whether John McCain is a limited government conservative, you may put that doubt to rest—he is not. On February 3, 2010, John McCain introduced to the United States Senate the Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010. Reflecting upon this poorly written bill, I am struck by the fact that John McCain apparently sees little difference between fissile material and dietary supplements. He is intent on regulating supplements as if they were radioactive enriched uranium rather than bioactive vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and botanicals that more often than not help people.

“The Dietary Supplement Safety Act of 2010 enjoys support from the most liberal members of Congress. It is an invitation for the FDA to assume broad new powers and replicate here the system now operating in Europe over dietary supplements where dietary ingredients are presumed adulterated and unlawful to sell unless pre-approved by the government. In short, good bye free enterprise, good bye limited government, and hello more heavy handed, arbitrary and punitive FDA bias against the beleaguered dietary supplement industry.”

See Emord’s column at:

Please remember, this is the same John McCain that, during the 2008 Presidential campaign, said he would “order the secretary of the treasury to immediately buy up the bad home loan mortgages in America.” Of course, McCain didn’t explain where this authority would come from, because such a proposal has no legal or constitutional authority. And, by the way, this one little sentence, if implemented, would cost taxpayers some $300 billion.

McCain also said he wanted to tap Mr. Climate Change Wacko himself, Al Gore, “to work in his administration on developing a new and much tougher U.N.-sponsored global warming treaty.”

(Source: Cliff Kincaid. See his column at:

This is the same John McCain who addressed the Hoover Institution on May 1, 2007, and said if he were elected President, he would create a new international organization known as “The League of Democracies” (LD).

In advancing the LD, McCain said, “We should go further and start bringing democratic peoples and nations from around the world into one common organization, a worldwide League of Democracies.” He then added, “The new League of Democracies would form the core of an international order . . .”

See McCain’s speech to the Hoover Institution at:

If McCain and his CFR buddies get their way, this new LD would be a United Nations on steroids! As I said all over America on the campaign trail in 2008, “John McCain is a globalist.” Of course, so is Barack Obama. In fact, every President since (and including) George H.W. Bush has been a full-fledged, rotten-to-the-core globalist.

And, yes, this is the same Juan McCain who is one of the primary movers and shakers (along with Obama, Lindsey Graham, and G.W. Bush) attempting to provide amnesty to illegal aliens and open America’s borders to illegal immigration.

And now McCain wants the federal government to take over the vitamin industry, and he wants to give the federal government the power to jail American citizens indefinitely without trial.

The citizens of Arizona can do the American people—and liberty itself—a great favor this year by giving Senator John McCain his walking papers. Big-Government dinosaurs like McCain are an albatross around the neck of freedom and constitutional government. If we don’t send them packing now, the shackles they put around our throats will become insufferable.

P.S. As this column goes to press, word has come to me that the State of Florida is poised to vote on a bill that calls for a Constitutional Convention. Readers should familiarize themselves with the dangers that a new Con Con poses to our liberties and to the very Constitution itself.

Please read my previous columns on this subject at:

And if you live in Florida, contact your senators immediately to let them know in no uncertain terms that they must reject any bill calling for a Constitutional Convention!

*If you appreciate this column and want to help me distribute these editorial opinions to an ever-growing audience, donations may now be made by credit card, check, or Money Order. Use this link:

© Chuck Baldwin 



NOTE TO THE READER:
To subscribe, click on this link and follow the instructions:
Chuck Baldwin’s commentaries are copyrighted and may be republished, reposted, or emailed providing the person or organization doing so does not charge for subscriptions or advertising and that the column is copied intact and that full credit is given and that Chuck’s web site address is included.
Editors or Publishers of publications charging for subscriptions or advertising who want to run these columns must contact Chuck Baldwin for permission. Radio or television Talk Show Hosts interested in scheduling an interview with Chuck should contact chuck@chuckbaldwinlive.com 
Readers may also respond to this column via snail mail. The postal address is P.O. Box 37070, Pensacola, Florida. When responding, please include your name, city and state. And, unless otherwise requested, all respondents will be added to the Chuck Wagon address list. 
Please visit Chuck’s web site at http://www.chuckbaldwinlive.com

Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit


Assaulting Truth with a Vengeance

Assaulting Truth with a Vengeance
by John Lanagan (free-lance writer and researcher)
March 7, 2010

In Brian McLaren’s latest book, A New Kind of Christianity, the reader is cordially invited to join the author in a heretical assault upon God and the Bible. Indeed, as McLaren enthusiastically demonstrates, it is not possible to attack one without attacking the other.

Acknowledging the work of fellow emergent travelers such as Phyllis Tickle, Tony Jones, and Doug Pagitt, McLaren tells us “something is trying to be born among those of us who follow Jesus Christ.” (pg.13) In fact, writes McLaren, “what is trying to be born today echoes the Great Reformation in many ways.” (pg.257)

But does McLaren’s paradigm vision really echo the Great Reformation? From the Reformation came the freedom of Sola Scriptura—the Word of God alone. The chains of a false religion were cast off. From the Reformation came men and women who were willing to die for the right to believe and proclaim Truth.

What does McLaren’s “reformation” offer? An errant eschatology. A New Age “christ.” The ascent of homospirituality into the temple. (2 Kings 23: 7) All made possible, of course, through creative misinterpretation of God’s Word. The author has brought us his Great Deformation, a theology that plays to the flesh even while being portrayed as a spiritual journey.

One of the major themes in A New Kind of Christianity, homosexuality, cleverly defines Christians who speak out against the homosexual lifestyle as suffering from “fundasexuality.” (Pg.174-5) However, you are only a “fundasexualist” if you speak out loudly against this sin.

McLaren decrees, “The term does not apply to the quiet, pious, respectful fundamentalism of straightforward, sincere people, but rather to the organizing, angry, dominating fundamentalism that declares war on those who differ.” (pg. 174-5)

In other words, when it comes to homosexuality, a good Christian is a silent Christian.

“Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter.” (Isaiah 5:20)

As my wife and I have both repented of this particular sin, it is difficult to comprehend Brian McLaren’s smiley-faced rebellion. But make no mistake: McLaren and others are being used to facilitate homospirituality, which may even assume an elevated, even sacred, status.

Ridiculous? Simply look to the Episcopalians, Lutherans, and Presbyterians. This is just the beginning.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Ephesians 6:12)

Like Doug Pagitt, Brian McLaren believes Christians are trapped in a “Greco-Roman” understanding of the faith. “Now the god of this Greco-Roman version of the biblical story bears a strange similarity in many ways to Zeus,” he tells us, which “is a far different deity from the Jewish Elohim of Genesis 1…” (pg. 42)

Yet, no matter what name his god is given, you will not find this redesigned deity in the Old or New Testament. The only way to promote the existence of this “god” is to radically change biblical interpretation—which is exactly what the author spends much time and many pages seeking to accomplish. “There will be no new kind of Christian faith without a new approach to the Bible,” he opines, “because we’ve gotten ourselves into a mess with the Bible.” (Pg. 67-68)

In his chapter, ‘What is the Overarching Storyline of the Bible?’ McLaren notes he and others have “dared to tweak” the content of the Word of God. “We might question conventional theories of atonement or the nature and population of hell or whether concepts like original sin or total depravity might need to be modified.” (pg. 35)

McLaren does indeed “modify.” He modifies with a vengeance. Thus this emergent “Jesus” was never sent by the Father to die in our place for our sins. There is no substitutionary atonement. There is no original sin.

The Bible tells us, “I cried with my whole heart; hear me, O Lord: I will keep thy statutes.” (Psalm 119: 145)

McLaren believes traditional understanding of the Word of God has made Christians a nasty, dominant bunch. We apparently have difficulty with religious pluralism because of this flawed understanding. On top of that, Christians “currently control most of the world’s wealth, consume most of the world’s resources, produce most of the world’s waste, and sell and use most of the world’s weapons.” (Pg.215)

As in his other books, in A New Kind of Christianity McLaren exhibits his ability and talent to write well and draw readers with his conversational tone, seemingly measured, with humorous comments sprinkled in here and there. He gives the impression of allowing much room to disagree with him. He invites us on a journey, which he portrays as part of the natural “evolution” of Christianity.

“The old paradigm falls away behind us like a point of departure, and we are won over to new possibilities, caught up in a new way of seeing, looking toward a new and wide horizon.” (Pg.30) But since the author does not comprehend the Bible (1 Corinthians 2:14), what practices does he engage in to gain wisdom and knowledge?

Interestingly, McLaren identifies himself as a “contemplative/reflexive.” (pg. 226) He writes, “In the tradition of Julian of Norwich and St. Teresa of Avila and all the other mystics, we can learn to render ourselves vulnerable to the “favors of God”—those indescribable experiences that mock our dualisms and so saturate our imagination with abundance that they transcend our ability to convey joy and wonder. In the tradition of St. John of the Cross, we can learn to survive and derive benefits from the soul’s dark night.” (pg. 227) Like most leading figures in the emergent movement, McLaren advocates contemplative spirituality.

A New Kind of Christianity will serve as a lure for Bible-illiterate Christians. For believers who know the Word of God, McLaren’s heresy will sadden and astound. His book is aimed at the young, and at people who have perhaps grown up in households with little or no faith. It is aimed at the unsaved and the uncertain. It is for the disappointed and disenchanted, and for people who simply know no better. If you have a gripe against God or His people, this book will lick your wounds. But what this book will not do is provide any measure of godly hope and biblical virtue.



(from A Time of Departing by Ray Yungen, excerpted from Chapter 6)
Notes:
1. John Davis and Naomi Rice, Messiah and the Second Coming, p. 150
2. Alice Bailey, The Externalization of the Heirarchy, p. 510

Gill Rapoza
Veritas Vos Liberabit