Happy Independence Day 2017.

The following is our traditional message for the 4th of July:

Flags are flying, parades are moving, drinks are flowing, and politicians are speaking today in America.

240 years ago a message was confirmed by representatives of 13 colonies proclaiming their freedom, a freedom that was considered to be derived from God:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

Much has been made of the variety of beliefs held by the founders of this country but their words and convictions remain not only on paper but also in the hearts of the people.

Declaration of Independence: The Emphasis Upon God

When it comes to the Declaration of Independence, the words- “by their Creator” were a major part of the message, the subject, and the emphasis.

Many secularists and atheists today want to de-emphasize the role of faith in the founding of this country to the point that many are attempting to actually rewrite history itself. For them, God could have easily been left out of the document with little or no effect.

But in the context of 1776, those words were the whole linchpin of the document and appealed to as the ultimate authority and source for the rights of the Americans to rebel against the King of England.

In the context of the 18th century the Europeans believed that their Kings reigned and ruled ‘by Divine right’ under the authority of God and were His direct representatives. In fact, the King of England was also the head of the church and was supposed to defend the Christian faith against heresy and all enemies. In that cultural context, to rebel against the King was tantamount to rebelling against God the Creator himself.

In the Declaration the founders made it clear that they were not rebelling against God but that the Creator was actually the ultimate authority they were appealing to saying that their ‘rights’ were derived directly from the Creator and not given to them by the King of England or some parchment or Parliament.

It was a radical document at the time and changed the whole course of human history and ‘the Creator’ was part and parcel of the Declaration of Independence and the ultimate authority appealed to in the whole process.            *Top

  TOLERANT AND OPEN MINDED

A new study in Europe confirms what most Christians already know. Religious folks are actually more tolerant and open-minded than most think and even more so than atheists.    From the Blaze:

A new study has upended long-held assumptions that religious people are more closed-minded and intolerant than atheists.

The study, conducted by Dr. Filip Uzarevic, a researcher at the Catholic University of Louvain in Belgium, revealed that while atheists might consider themselves open-minded than religious folk, they are actually less tolerant of differing opinions.  …

Uzarevic’s analysis determined that religious believers “seem to better perceive and integrate diverging perspectives.”

The paper, which explored whether atheists are “undogmatic,” claims that nonbelievers measured lower than religious people in “self-reported dogmatism” but were actually rated higher in “subtly-measured intolerance.”

<Read the whole article>

Response: Interesting research. The recent attacks by the secular media and all of the whining and riotous protests from the left since the election of President Trump surely prove that conservative folks are far more tolerant and open minded than those on the left. Particularly with how we put up with and reacted to 8 years of Obama’s leftist extremism. Then there is the attempts to shut down all conservative and religious speech on college and university campuses.

Also, all of the attacks by activist atheists in recent years against crosses and non-denominational prayers, and military chaplains have gone a long ways towards showing who the most intolerant folks in America really are.               *Top

                  (Image: Wikipedia)

The Church of Sweden’s first lesbian Bishop wants to take crosses and Christian symbols down in a church to make space for Muslims to pray. Here’s the story from Breitbart:  

The Bishop of Stockholm has proposed a church in her diocese remove all signs of the cross and put down markings showing the direction to Mecca for the benefit of Muslim worshippers.

Eva Brunne, who was made the world’s first openly lesbian bishop by the church of Sweden in 2009, and has a young son with her wife and fellow lesbian priest Gunilla Linden, made the suggestion to make those of other faiths more welcome.

The church targeted is the Seamen’s mission church in Stockholm’s eastern dockyards. The Bishop held a meeting there this year and challenged the priest to explain what he’d do if a ship’s crew came into port who weren’t Christian but wanted to pray.

<Read the whole article>

Response: I wonder if the Bishop understands that the very prayers that her ‘tolerant’ Muslim guests would utter include condemnations of Christians and Jews  and all ‘unbelievers’ -all in a church consecrated to the Christian faith?

This is the kind of thing you can expect once a denomination leaves behind the Bible and the faith once delivered to the saints. It has been my experience in the last 30 years to observe that many of the new ministers trained in the mainline seminaries not only question the authority the scriptures but have real reservations about the divinity of Christ though most would never admit it to their parishioners. 

This is why I believe that we may not be that far removed from a time when some of the major liberal ‘Christian’ denominations might engage with Muslim leaders to find some way to combine the two ‘faiths’ together in order to combat Islamic terrorism and Islamophobia.

Allowing Muslim prayers in Christian churches (which actual condemn the Christian faith) is the first step. We have already seen this happening on a number of different occasions. However, we have never seen even one incident where a Christian minister was invited to pray in a mosque.

Next would be the acceptance of the Quran as on par with the Bible. The final step would be the official denial of the divinity of Jesus Christ and persecution of all who continue their exclusive worship of the Lord Jesus Christ. Shades of Book of Revelation and one world religion.  Come quickly Lord Jesus!              *Top

                            (Image: Wikipedia)

In an interview with Jake Tapper on CNN, Sen. Bernie Sanders made it plain that Christians have freedom to believe what they want but those who maintain similar conservative views as Russell T. Vought should not be allowed to serve in the American government. From PJ Media:

In the interview Sunday, Sanders stood by this position, even while granting that Vought has religious freedom. He was asked point-blank,

"Senator, are you saying that someone is necessarily hateful and Islamophobic if they believe in their private life and express in their private life that the only path to God is through Jesus Christ?"

To this, Sanders said, "No, absolutely not." He insisted that "one of the great parts of our Constitution is to protect freedom of religion. You practice whatever religion you want, you do, I do, Mr. Vought does, that’s what it’s about."

Even so, the senator insisted that Vought’s religious views disqualify him from public service. He argued that it should be "unacceptable" to have "a high-ranking member of the United States government essentially say Islam is a second-class religion."

Make no mistake, Sanders is imposing an unconstitutional religious test for public service. …

<Read the whole article>

Response: The problem with Sanders position is that it would ban millions of Christians from serving in the government. I wonder if he really understands that he is actually attacking basic Christian theology in the process?

At the same time he completely ignores similar Muslim exclusivity and diatribes against Christians and Jews which are part of the actual prayers given daily by faithful Muslims.

Here’s a link to our first article on this issue:  -Does Bernie Sanders Advocate a Religious Test Blocking Christians?

*Top

POLYAMORY, POLYGAMY, and THE SLIPPERY SLOPE 

Three men recently got legally married in Columbia. The first country to recognize polyamory. Here’s the story from Charisma News:

In 2016, same-sex "marriage" was legalized in Colombia. One year later, the courts have now recognized a polyamorous "family" of three men. …

As reported by the Daily Mail, "Actor Victor Hugo Prada and his two partners, sports instructor John Alejandro Rodriguez and journalist Manuel Jose Bermudez, have signed legal papers with a solicitor in the city of Medellin, establishing them as a family unit with inheritance rights. …

Here in the States, the Associated Press notes that, "More courts [are] allowing three parents of one child." An example would be when a lesbian couple has a child with the help of another man, all three of whom become parents. …

In recent years, the media has pushed polygamy, polyamory and even consensual adult incest, with public opinion gradually shifting towards more acceptance of these lifestyles and acts.

<Read the whole article>

Response: A few years ago when the drum beat for same-sex marriage began to make real legal gains everyone was denying the existence of any kind of ‘slippery slope.’ But now it is becoming fashionable to accept any kind of consensual lifestyle if ‘love’ is involved.

Once the definition of marriage was changed to include same-sex partners there was really nothing logically keeping our secular society from eventually accepting other kinds of relationships. Polygamy and polyamory are next on the horizon since there are already large numbers of folks living in those types of ‘family’ relationships. The same legal reasoning used to establish same-sex marriage can easily be used to support the inclusion of other ‘love’ relationships. We already have thousands of FLDS living in polygamous communities and an untold number of Muslim families also.

The current liberal/progressive support for American Muslims and Muslim immigrants could easily morph into a push towards accepting polygamy which is recognized by that religion. One Utah court has already proclaimed that polygamists in that state can no longer be prosecuted- a sort of ‘defacto’ legalization in at least one state in the country. The fact that conservative Christians might oppose its legalization actually may lend support to  an eventual liberal/progressive political acceptance.

A Polyamory mixture like in this case could not be denied if Muslim polygamy became legal which is not that far-fetched and is only a lawsuit away. Especially since known polygamist Muslim families have been denied immigration status in the past. It could easily be part of a legal action against the Trump administration’s immigration policies.               *Top