Jul 30, 2011

Christian role in politics

Is there Biblical precedent either for or against participating in government affairs?

Government is divinely ordained by God and is necessary to maintain order. Government has been given three responsibilities to maintain and protect social order: the sword of justice (to punish criminals), the sword of order (to prevent rebellion), and the sword of war (to defend the state). This is not to say that all governments are working within the precepts set forth by God to ensure a righteous government.

Because government is a God-ordained institution, Christians are to submit to civil authority as we would to other institutions of God as commanded in I Peter 2: 13-17.

As Christians we have duel citizenship, citizens of heaven and citizens of this world. This duel citizenship comes with a twofold responsibility. If there is a conflict between the two our first responsibility is to our LORD as demonstrated in Acts 5: 29.

Separation of church and State 

Unfortunately  “separation of church and state” is widely misunderstood. The first amendment of the United States Constitution does not say that people of faith are to separate themselves from government affairs. It states that government cannot institute the establishment of a state religion; thus guaranteeing the freedom of the citizens to practice the religion of their choice without concern for government interference. 

Indeed the words “separation of church and state” are not in the Constitution of the United States. The founders and framers of the United States clearly understood the responsibilities and role of duel citizenship. They understood that the perspective of a citizen of heaven is spiritual and that their perspective as citizens in this world is secular. These two are separate functions, to combine them would be a failure to keep church and state separate and distinct which would be outside God’s will for a righteous government


Jul 28, 2011

Calvinism vs Arminianism – Comparison Chart

The following material from Romans: An Interpretative Outline (pp.144-147). by David N. Steele and Curtis C. Thomas, contrasts the Five Points of Arminianism with the Five Points of Calvinism in the clearest and most concise form that we have seen anywhere. It is also found in their smaller book, The Five Points of Calvinism (pp. 16-19). Both books are published by The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., Philadelphia.(1963). Messrs. Steele and Thomas have served for several years as co-pastors of a Southern Baptist church, in Little Rock, Arkansas.

  1. Free Will or Human Ability
    Although human nature was seriously affected by the fall, man has not been left in a state of total spiritual helplessness. God graciously enables every sinner to repent and believe, but He does not interfere with man’s freedom. Each sinner possesses a free will, and his eternal destiny depends on how he uses it. Man’s freedom consists of his ability to choose good over evil in spiritual matters; his will is not enslaved to his sinful nature. The sinner has the power to either cooperate with God’s Spirit and be regenerated or resist God’s grace and perish. The lost sinner needs the Spirit’s assistance, but he does not have to be regenerated by the Spirit before he can believe, for faith is man’s act and precedes the new birth. Faith is the sinner’s gift to God; it is man’s contribution to salvation.
  1. Total Inability or Total Depravity
    Because of the fall, man is unable of himself to savingly believe the gospel. The sinner is dead, blind, and deaf to the things of God; his heart is deceitful and desperately corrupt. His will is not free, it is in bondage to his evil nature, therefore, he will not — indeed he cannot — choose good over evil in the spiritual realm. Consequently, it takes much more than the Spirit’s assistance to bring a sinner to Christ — it takes  regeneration by which the Spirit makes the sinner alive and gives him a new nature. Faith is not something man contributes to salvation but is itself a part of God’s gift of salvation— it is God’s gift to the
    sinner, not the sinner’s gift to God.
  1. Conditional Election
    God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before the foundation of the world was based upon His foreseeing that they would respond to His call. He selected only those whom He knew would of themselves freely believe the gospel. Election therefore was determined by or conditioned upon what man would do. The faith which God foresaw and upon which He based His choice was not given to the sinner by God (it was not created by the regenerating power of the Holy Spirit) but resulted solely from man’s will. It was left entirely up to man as to who would believe and therefore as to who would be elected unto salvation. God chose those whom He knew would, of their own free will, choose Christ. Thus the sinner’s choice of Christ, not God’s choice of the sinner, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
  1. Unconditional Election
    God’s choice of certain individuals unto salvation before fore the foundation of the world rested solely in His own sovereign will. His choice of particular sinners was not based on any foreseen response or obedience on their part, such as faith, repentance, etc. On the contrary, God gives faith and repentance to each individual whom He selected. These acts are the result, not the cause God’s choice. Election therefore was not determined by or conditioned upon any virtuous quality or act foreseen in man. Those whom God sovereignly elected He brings through the power of the Spirit to a willing acceptance of Christ. Thus God’s choice of the sinner, not the sinner’s choice of Christ, is the ultimate cause of salvation.
  1. Universal Redemption or General Atonement
    Christ’s redeeming work made it possible for everyone to be saved but did not actually secure the salvation of anyone. Although Christ died for all men and for every man, only those who believe on Him are saved. His death enabled God to pardon sinners on the condition that they believe, but it did not actually put away anyone’s sins. Christ’s redemption becomes effective only if man chooses to accept it.
  1. Particular Redemption or Limited Atonement
    Christ’s redeeming work was intended to save the elect only and actually secured salvation for them. His death was a substitutionary endurance of the penalty of sin in the place of certain specified sinners. In addition to putting away the sins of His people, Christ’s redemption secured everything necessary for their salvation, including faith which unites them to Him. The gift of faith is infallibly applied by the Spirit to all for whom Christ died, therefore guaranteeing their salvation
  1. The Holy Spirit Can Be Effectually Resisted
    The Spirit calls inwardly all those who are called outwardly by the gospel invitation; He does all that He can to bring every sinner to salvation. But inasmuch as man is free, he can successfully resist the Spirit’s call. The Spirit cannot regenerate the sinner until he believes; faith (which is man’s contribution) precedes and makes possible the new birth. Thus, man’s free will limits the Spirit in the application of Christ’s saving work. The Holy Spirit can only draw to Christ those who allow Him to have His way with them. Until the sinner responds, the Spirit cannot give life. God’s grace, therefore, is not invincible; it can be, and often is, resisted and thwarted by man.
  1. The Efficacious Call of the Spirit or Irresistible Grace
    In addition to the outward general call to salvation which is made to everyone who hears the gospel, the Holy Spirit extends to the elect a special inward call that inevitably brings them to salvation. The eternal call (which is made to all without distinction) can be, and often is, rejected; whereas the internal call (which is made only to the elect) cannot be rejected; it always results in conversion. By mean, of this special call the Spirit irresistibly draws sinners to Christ. He is not limited in His work of applying salvation by man’s will, nor is He dependent upon man’s cooperation for success. The Spirit graciously causes the elect sinner to cooperate, to believe, to repent, to come freely and willingly to Christ. God’, grace. therefore, is
    invincible; it never fails to result in the salvation of those to whom it is extended.
  1. Falling From Grace
    Those who believe and are truly saved can lose their salvation by failing to keep up their faith. etc. All Arminian, have not been agreed on this point; some have held that believers are eternally secure in Christ — that once a sinner is regenerated. he can never be lost.
  1. Perseverance of the Saints
    All who are chosen by God, redeemed by Christ, and given faith by the Spirit are eternally saved. They are kept in faith by the power of Almighty God and thus persevere to the end.
According to Arminianism:
Salvation is accomplished through the combined efforts of God (who takes the initiative) and man(who must respond)—man’s response being the determining factor. God has provided salvation for everyone, but His provision becomes effective only for those who, of their own free will, “choose” to cooperate with Him and accept His offer of grace. At the crucial point, man’s will plays a decisive role; thus man, not God, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation.
by the Synod of Dort
This was the system of thought contained in the “Remonstrance” (though the “five points” were not originally arranged in this order). It was submitted by the Arminians to the Church of Holland in 1610 for adoption but was rejected by the Synod of Dort in 1619 on the ground that it was unscriptural.
According to Calvinism:
Salvation is accomplished by the almighty power of the Triune God. The Father chose a people, the Son died for them, the Holy  Spirit makes Christ’s death effective by bringing the elect to faith and repentance, thereby causing them to willingly obey the gospel. The entire process (election, redemption, regeneration) is the work of God and is by grace alone. ThusGod, not man, determines who will be the recipients of the gift of salvation.
by the Synod of Dort
This system of theology was reaffirmed by the Synod of Dort in 1619 as the doctrine of salvation contained in the Holy Scriptures. The system was at that time formulated into “five points” (in answer to the five points submitted by the Arminians) and has ever since been known as “the five points of Calvinism


Jul 27, 2011

'Chrislam' in Protestant churches

And unto the angel of the church of the Laodiceans write; These things saith the Amen, the faithful and true witness, the beginning of the creation of God; I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth. (Revelation 3: 14 - 16)

A Protestant renewal organization is concerned about the recent efforts of some mainline Protestant churches to produce an ecumenical reconciliation between Christianity and Islam.

According to a recent blog post from The Last Crusade, congregations in several metropolitan areas -- Houston, Atlanta, Seattle, and Detroit -- preached sermons and held Sunday school lessons recently on the founder of Islam, Mohammad, whom Muslims consider a prophet. Qurans were also placed in the pews next to Bibles.

Is it plausible that a similar program is destine for a church near you?

Proponents of the movement, which has been dubbed "Chrislam," claim that Christians cannot love their neighbors without having a relationship with them.

Alan Wisdom, director of the Presbyterian Action committee and vice president for research and programs at The Institute on Religion & Democracy (IRD), contends that Islam should never be viewed as an equal to the gospel of Jesus Christ. Moreover, Qurans should never be placed next to God's Holy Word.

"I think that that implies some kind of equal authority there, and I don't think that's the case," Wisdom explains. "The Bible is God's unique revelation to us. The pulpit of a church is for preaching the Word of God, and we believe that that is the scriptures of the Old and New Testament. When we go to worship God, we worship Jesus Christ, and we can't mix that worship with any other allegiance."

The IRD committee director adds that while he believes it is important for Christians to study and understand religions like Islam, he does not think believers should ever cross the line and blend Christianity together with a religion that is antithetical to Christian teachings.

Is it plausible that a similar program is destine for a church near you?

Similar posts:
Cafeteria Christianity - Spiritual Blending
Do All Religions Pray to the Same God?


Jul 26, 2011

Willow Creek Church Splits From Exodus International

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2 Timothy 4: 3) 

Willow Creek Community Church, a Chicago-area mega-church that gained fame 20 years ago for its “seeker-sensitive” approach to evangelizing non-Christians, has announced that it will no longer partner with Exodus International, a national ministry that reaches out to individuals wishing to leave the homosexual lifestyle. 

Alan Chambers, president of Exodus International, said that Willow Creek’s move reflected an emerging tendency among some evangelicals to shy away from dealing with controversial issues. “The choice to end our partnership is definitely something that shines a light on a disappointing trend within parts of the Christian community,” Chambers told Christianity Today, “which is that there are Christians who believe like one another who aren’t willing to stand with one another, simply because they’re afraid of the backlash people will direct their way if they are seen with somebody who might not be politically correct.” 

But that all changed after Willow Creek’s head pastor, Bill Hybels, agreed to a meeting in 2008 with members of SoulForce, a homosexual activist group that specifically targets churches and Christian organizations. According to the Chicago Tribune, Hybels was one of the nation’s few mega-church pastors who had agreed to meet with the homosexual group. Others, including Joel Osteen, pastor of the massive Lakewood Church in Houston, did not respond to SoulForce’s request for a sit-down.

“Bill Hybels is to be commended,” said Jeff Lutes, a spokesman for SoulForce. “They were the first church that responded to our letters and to begin to have conversations with us and show willingness to meet face to face. By being willing to sit down at the table with us, they’ve demonstrated courage.”

Cindi Love, executive director of SoulForce, applauded the news that Willow Creek had decided to stop working with Exodus International, calling it a “red letter day” for her group, which would ultimately like to see evangelicals take a tolerant — or even embracing — stance toward homosexuality. 

Meanwhile, Chambers said decisions such as Willow Creek’s to cut ties with ministries that help individuals overcome same-sex attraction “highlight a reticence in the church to stand up for biblical truth….” He added that such moves are “coming at a time when we’re going to have to stand up for what we believe. I think there’s a way to stand up. We have to find that way.” 

Now let me see; where did I put that Willow Creek “Leadership Summit” registration form? Oh-yah, file thir...


Jul 25, 2011

Campus Crusade for Christ to change name after 60 years

Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation; of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mark 8: 38)

Campus Crusade for Christ (CCC), a mainstay of Christian outreach ministries at universities across the United States for the past 60 years, is changing its iconic name. Their reasoning is because “the word ‘crusade’ has negative associations with the bloody Christian conquests of the 11th to 13th centuries.”

The new name the organization as decided on us Cru which is, you guessed it, short for Crusade and missing Christ. I see a bit of a flaw in the line of reasoning the organization is trying to sell their supporters on in the choice of their new name. 

Campus Crusade for Christ’s president, Steve Douglass, said that after six decades the time had come for a new branding. “Our leadership team and board of directors are united in their belief that this is the right time to embrace a new name, and this name meets our objective of achieving a greater level of effectiveness in ministry.”

As for the elimination of  “Christ” from its name, CCC said that change does not imply less emphasis on the Christian gospel that is the foundation of its mission. “Cru enables us to have discussions about Christ with people who might initially be turned off by a more overtly Christian name,” the organization explained in a statement.

Founder of CCC, the late Bill Bright, is said to have been open to changing the name of the organization but I find it difficult to believe he would have approved of removing Christ from the name.

In my next post I will highlight another organization that recently made a politically correct rather than a Biblically correct decision. 


Norway terrorist claims Christianity, but Darwinism too

Norway (MNN) ― Norwegian mission leader reacts to terrorist attack in Norway | July 25, 2011

The world continues to grieve for the country of Norway after a bombing in Oslo's City Center and subsequent shooting that left 92 dead Friday.

32-year-old Anders Behring Breivik of Oslo is in custody after allegedly detonating a bomb which targeted government buildings, including the office of Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg. Seven people were killed there.

Breivik then traveled to the Island of Utoya to attack a youth summer camp. Oslo police say more than 80 people were killed at the camp organized by the governing Norwegian Labor party. Most of those killed were youth.

RK Ulrich, founder of The Bridge International based in Florida, was born and raised in Norway, and she says the church has responded. "There was an immediate response from all church levels, from all Christian levels. They just all poured in with their compassion."

While the majority of Norwegians claim to be Christians because the state-sponsored church is Lutheran, Ulrich says many may not have a relationship with Christ. "When you're born, you're born into the church automatically. You get baptized. You go for confirmation, and all those things are part of your Christian heritage." Ulrich continues, "A lot of people are defined as Christians in Norway, but they may never have seriously read the Bible or have a relationship with God."

That should help you understand why Breivik claims to be a conservative Christian. Ulrich spent much of the weekend looking through Breivik's Facebook and other blogs, including his 1500-page manifesto.

Ulrich says Breivik had been planning this attack for nine years, wanting to punish his national leadership for being so multicultural and Muslim-friendly. She says, "He states he wants to support the Christian principles culturally, but there's nothing in his blog that even indicated that he even has any personal relationship with Jesus or understands salvation or leading a Christian life."

In his manifesto, Breivik says he's not religious, has doubts about God's existence, and does not pray. But he does assert the primacy of Europe's "Christian culture" as well as his own pagan Nordic culture. Breivik instead hails Charles Darwin whose evolutionary theories stand in contrast to the claims of the Bible. Breivik affirms: "As for the Church and science, it is essential that science takes an undisputed precedence over biblical teachings. Europe has always been the cradle of science, and it must always continue to be that way. Regarding my personal relationship with God, I guess I'm not an excessively religious man. I am first and foremost a man of logic. However, I am a supporter of a monocultural Christian Europe."

The international news media continues to call Breivik a Christian fundamentalist. Ulrich says that could fuel anti-Christian propaganda around the world. "It's such a great opportunity for someone in opposition to the whole Judeo-Christian worldview to say, 'Look, these are crazy people. To become a Christian, you become like him.'"

Ulrich is asking Christians worldwide to pray that this does not happen. She is also asking Christians to "pray for the Norwegian people, that the Gospel of Salvation in Jesus Christ will be echoed through the country for many, many who perhaps never have heard it clearly. [Pray that they] will hear the clear biblical Gospel."


Jul 23, 2011

The cost of being a disciple

And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned, and said unto them, 26  If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. 27  And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me, cannot be my disciple. 28  For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it? 29  Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him, 30  Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish. 31  Or what king, going to make war against another king, sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty thousand? 32  Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace. 33  So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple. 34  Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be seasoned? 35  It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill; but men cast it out. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear. (Luke 14: 25 - 35)

Salvation costs you nothing. Discipleship costs you everything.


Jul 20, 2011

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit – unpardonable sin

Wherefore I say unto you, All manner of sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men: but the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven unto men.  And whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him: but whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in the world to come. (Matthew 12: 31 - 32)

This is one of the most debated and misunderstood principles taught by Our LORD.   

Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is defined as a continued and obstinate rejection of the Gospel, and hence is an unpardonable sin, simply because as long as a sinner remains in unbelief he voluntarily excludes himself from pardon.

There is no sin committed yesterday that the Lord would not forgive today because He died for all sin. The Holy Spirit came into the world to make real the salvation of Christ to the hearts of men. If you resist the working of the Spirit of God when He speaks to you, my friend, there is no forgiveness, of course. There is no forgiveness because you have rejected salvation made real to you by the Holy Spirit. And it is the work of the Spirit of God to regenerate you.

In Mark 3 the Lord amplifies the matter of the unpardonable sin by saying that it attributes the Spirit’s work to Satan, that Christ had performed these miracles by Beelzebub when actually He was doing them by the power of the Spirit of God. You see, they were rejecting the witness of the LORD Himself and of the Holy Spirit.

In our day that particular sin cannot be committed because it could only be committed when Jesus was here upon the earth. There is no act of sin that you could commit for which there is no forgiveness. Of course, if you resist the Holy Spirit, there is no forgiveness because He is bringing forgiveness. It is like the man who is dying from a certain disease, and the doctor tells him there is a remedy for it. The man refuses to take the remedy and dies, not from the disease but from refusing to take the remedy. There is a remedy for the disease of sin, and the Holy Spirit applies it; but if you resist it, there is no remedy. That is the only way sin can be unpardonable today.

Again, sin is only unpardonable if one does not receive Christ Jesus and repent before their physical life is extinguished. You can receive Christ Jesus repent of your sin trust in Him and He will indeed forgive your sin, past, present and future.


Jul 19, 2011

Cool Down with New Adult Stem Cell Videos

The hot days of summer have arrived, but so have some very cool adult stem cell successes! A Swedish group constructed a new windpipe using adult stem cells for a patient with throat cancer. He's alive and well now, thanks to his adult stem cells growing new tissue.

Scientists have shown that adult stem cells can relieve angina pain in heart patients, experiencing significant relief using what the doctors called "this pre-installed mechanism for self-repair." A new trial has started using a patient's own adult stem cells to treat stroke as much as 19 days after the stroke hits. The treatment is similar to using a child's own umbilical cord blood stem cells to treat cerebral palsy. Chloe Levine, diagnosed with cerebral palsy, was re-infused with her own cord blood adult stem cells when she was two years old, and experienced a dramatic turnaround and improvement in her physical condition, opening new doors for her life.

Opening new doors for patients is what inspires Dr. Richard Burt of Northwestern University Medical School. Years ago he had an idea that rebooting the immune system and using adult stem cells might help patients with autoimmune diseases. Now, 14 years later, Burt and his team are helping patients suffering from 23 different diseases. His technique is also being used in centers around the world. As he says, "It just means that I've helped, in some small way, to change this world." You can see these new video stories about Chloe and Dr. Burt at FRC's powerful Stem Cell Research Facts site. Adult stem cells are changing the world, one patient at a time!


Jul 18, 2011

Worldview Blinders

'Missing' Women and Abortion on Demand


Jul 17, 2011

Family Life

“There is a great deal in the way in which a man walks in his house. It will not do to be a saint abroad and a devil at home! There are some of that kind. They are wonderfully sweet at a Prayer Meeting, but they are dreadfully sour to their wives and children. This will never do! Every genuine Believer should say, and mean it, ‘I will walk within my house with a perfect heart.’ It is in the home that we get the truest proof of godliness. ‘What sort of a man is he?’ said one to George Whitefield, and Whitefield answered, ‘I cannot say, for I never lived with him.’ That is the way to test a man—to live with him.”—1894, Sermon #2362


Jul 16, 2011


It is important for Christians to know the differences between Truth, Belief and Conviction. 

Truth may never be sacrificed. All truth is from God because God is Truth. Some people call this absolute Truth but I consider that redundant. An example of Truth is that God revealed Himself (incarnate) to man in the person of Christ Jesus The Messiah. 

Belief is personal based on understanding of Biblical Truth. An example of belief is that some believe in baptism by sprinkling and others by immersion.   

Conviction is imparted to individuals by the Holy Spirit. An example of conviction might be choosing a job or move (life choices). 

Genuine belief and conviction will never be in contradiction to Truth.  Furthermore authentic Christians will never demand that someone else must have the same belief & conviction to be Saved. 

It is unfortunate that we spend precious time arguing that our belief or conviction is Truth and that all must comply to be granted salvation. It is on these two items that Christians must learn to agree to disagree and get on with the greater command of Kingdom building. Making disciples that are capable of carrying out the Great Commission.


Jul 15, 2011

Help to halt Idealease from allowing trucks to transport aborted babies


Idealease, Inc. is the number one supplier of trucks to the medical waste disposal giant Stericycle, which depends entirely upon leased vehicles for its medical waste collection routes. Stericycle's service stops include hundreds of abortion facilities nationwide where they collect the fetal remains of aborted children and the tools used to kill them. While Stericycle currently maintains a national contract with the multi-million dollar truck leasing company, its 400 affiliate locations within the franchise have the ultimate say regarding what lease agreements they will sign. Idealease trucks have been seen being used by Stericycle at numerous abortion facilities nationwide, including at Planned Parenthood in Columbus, Ohio and the third largest Planned Parenthood facility in the country, located in Denver, Colorado.

Most recently, the Campaign to Stop Stericycle learned that Idealease has signed a national contract with Stericycle to supply a truck for a route in Richmond, Virginia, which includes pickup at an abortion facility. The news follows Ryder's prohibition against Stericycle using its trucks to service the abortion industry "in any way, shape or form." (Read the recent news release here.) The finalization of the Richmond contract is currently pending co-signing by franchise affiliate Idealease of Richmond, LLC. Its General Manager, Jan Cross, has confirmed that the company has been presented with a 5-year lease agreement to replace Ryder and may soon sign off on it.
In an effort to stop Idealease's collaboration with Stericycle in servicing the abortion industry, CSS urges immediate calls and emails to the Richmond Idealease office, as well as its national headquarters, to implore that it would refrain from furthering the abortion holocaust. 
One of the millions of babies aborted every year in AmericaCSS began its fight against Stericycle in the city of Richmond, Virginia last year when it became aware that a Penske truck was being used to pick up at the "Richmond Medical Center for Women." When the campaign learned that Stericycle had leased the truck from Penske to service the abortion facility, it immediately contacted the company to express concern. Penske Truck Leasing President Brian Hard sent an email to the campaign soon afterward, which stated, "We have been, and you have my word that we will continue to be, proactive in stopping Stericycle from using our trucks to service abortion clinics."
The following week after the Penske truck was removed from its route in Richmond, it was replaced by a Ryder truck. Because of public outcry and the campaign's regular contact with Ryder's legal department, Ryder conducted an independent investigation into the matter and, like Penske, prohibited Stericycle from using its trucks to service the abortion industry.
Now, Idealease is tentatively taking over from Ryder in Richmond, and most likely also the other cities that Ryder had serviced as the Idealease corporate office will be presenting contract opportunities to many of its other franchise locations nationwide. While company executives could refuse to sign the contract, sadly, both corporate and franchise officials have taken a much different attitude than Penkse and Ryder. Despite the fact that Idealease of Richmond President Tom Thayer has been warned by the campaign that the company's truck would be used by Stericycle to collect aborted babies, he has been extremely hostile. In fact, when Thayer accepted a call at his office this week concerning the matter, he answered: "House of Satan!" May the Lord break his heart over the plight of millions of aborted babies nationwide that he might refrain from facilitating the holocaust of the preborn.
Idealease of RichmondA CALL TO ACTION: Will YOU help to halt Idealease from allowing their trucks to be used by Stericycle to transport aborted babies? A phone call or email can make a significant impact when we stand together! Please join CSS by taking action in these simple ways:
1) Call Idealease of Richmond President Tom Thayer at (804) 353-5555, Ext. 669and/or email thayer@itsrva.com and kindly, but firmly, urge him not to allow Stericycle to use Idealease trucks to service the abortion industry.
2) Call Idealease of Richmond General Manager Jan Cross at (804) 353-5555, Ext. 665 and/or email jancross@itsrva.com and implore her not to sign the contract with Stericycle as it pertains to servicing the Richmond Medical Center for Women or any other abortion facilities.
3) Call corporate Idealease President Dan J. Murphy at (847) 304-6000 and/or emaildanjmurphy@idealease.com and plead with him to instruct his company to stop supplying the means for Stericycle to service abortion facilities nationwide.
4) Contact the Idealease office in a city near you and urge them not to sign any contracts that involve picking up aborted babies and the tools used to kill them.

"Rescue those who are being taken away unto death; hold back those who are stumbling to the slaughter." - Proverbs 24:11


Jul 13, 2011

Susan G Komen for the Cure and life?

 Principle #1 of the Judeo-Christian Ethic
—The Dignity of Human Life
 “The Scriptures emphatically teach the great importance of the respect and preservation of human life.  In the Declaration of Independence our nation’s Founding Fathers wrote that everyone has ‘unalienable rights,’ and that among these rights are ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.’  We Americans not only believe this for our land, but also we send our brave military men and women around the world to defend the rights of those who are threatened.

If people and nations do not grant ultimate respect and protection to both the born and the unborn, all other professed morals and values are meaningless.  The dignity of human life is not just a principle of the Bible—it is the first principle of any civilized society.”---The American Patriot’s Bible

Susan G Komen for the Cure is the giant among breast cancer foundations with chapters in every state and 13 foreign countries. Each chapter organizes community partnerships and fundraisers. They sponsor a variety of events, from bowling to cooking to golfing and driving. They are most well known for their Race for the Cure.


  • Public records indicate that Susan G. Komen for the Cure affiliates (Missouri is not among them) provided grants to local Planned Parenthood chapters for breast health care services
  • The Komen website dismisses the link between procured abortion and increased risk of breast cancer. However, multiple studies invalidate a dismissal of the link.
  • Komen endorses embryonic stem cell research, which requires the destruction of embryonic human life
As we process this information from a Christian worldview we must consider the sanctity of all human life. Indeed God would have us respect and protect both the born and unborn otherwise all other professed morals and values are meaningless.

With this in mind we must seriously consider whether we a glorifying our Lord – Christ Jesus when we participate in and contribute to organizations which disregard the life of the unborn to advance their own cause. Honorable it may be, but not when innocent life is sacrificed and known risk factors are ignored.

Susan G Komen for the Cure sponsors fund raising events across the nation throughout the year. I encourage readers to be wise stewards and share this information with others in your community.

For anyone who wishes to donate to breast cancer research, or to support awareness, there are a number of lesser known foundations that are Pro-Life and do not support the destruction of human embryos used for research:

National Breast Cancer Foundation, Inc.

Vera Bradley Foundation for Breast Cancer Research
Click below to read about Heidi Floyd, a survivor who was diagnosed with breast cancer in her first trimester and chose to give her baby life even though her doctor told her an abortion was her only option.

Breast Cancer Prevention Institute

Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer (ABC)

To check to see where and when Susan G Komen for the Cure sponsors a fundraising event in your area and to see some of their corporate sponsors follow the link below


Jul 12, 2011

Breast cancer foundations reject link to abortion

In my last post I showed that there has been scientific evidence which demonstrates a clear correlation that women who have an abortion are at least 3 times more likely to develop breast cancer later in life. This is not new information; it has been evident to many in the field of science and medicine for over ten years. However many have chosen to ignore and/or attempt to discredit the data.

It is not surprising that abortion providers such as Planned Parenthood have chosen to ignore the reality of the data; after all they are in the business of ending innocent human life, information like this simply doesn’t concern them. Or does it?

Could it be that if women knew the potential for increased risk of breast cancer due to abortion that fewer women would elect to end the life of their unborn child which would have an impact on one of the abortion providers’ primary revenue streams? The obvious answer here is yes.

Follow the money

Of course we are all aware of how abortion has become a political issue, which alters the way many people view this particular issue, placing money above life itself.

What is most disturbing is that upon brief investigation it is astonishing to discover that some of the more well know breast cancer organizations are actually partnering with Planned Parenthood by helping to fund them, allegedly for purposes related to breast cancer.  Although an organization donates to an abortion provider for breast health programs, this frees up funds so that they can pay for abortion-related services. So, while a person’s money may not directly pay for abortions, there is still scandal involved because he or she is at some level enabling abortion elsewhere.

The largest organization that has been identified as contributing to Planned Parenthood and embryonic stem cell research is Susan G. Komen for the Cure.

In part 3 -  I will address how this affects you and your local community.


Jul 11, 2011

Breast cancer linked to abortion


A recent study corroborated the findings of a number of studies over the last ten years, which have linked an increased risk of breast cancer for women who have had an abortion.

Scientists at the University of Colombo in Sri Lanka carried out the research. The findings which were published in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, is the fourth epidemiological study to report such a link in the past 14 months. Research in China, Turkey and the U.S. revealed similar conclusions.

The initial premise of the research was to gather data to determine if breastfeeding can protect women from developing the killer disease. As the data was analyzed researches concluded that an abortion can triple a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer in later life.

Breast Cancer Trend

There has been an 80 per cent increase in the rate of breast cancer since 1971, when in the wake of the Abortion Act, the number of abortions rose from 18,000 to over 200,000 reported annually since 1973.

  • Is breast cancer an unintended consequence of disastrous social policy?
  • Are women being advised during pre-abortion counseling? 
In part two – I will explore some of organizations that are dedicated to curing breast cancer and their relationship with America’s largest abortion provider Planned Parenthood and embryonic stem cell research.  


Jul 9, 2011

The ethics of “Got-cha” reporting

I found a recent article in our local newspaper amusing at first then somewhat troubling as I recounted the history of the issue being reported.

The issue being discussed was the state standardized testing mandated by the federal government under No Child Left Behind legislation. There were a number of computer glitches experienced by nearly every district in the state during the 2009 – 10 testing cycle. The superintendent of public instruction at that time, which is an elected office, applied for and received a waiver from the U. S. Department of Education (DOE) to not have the test results be counted for Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP). 

As you might well imagine this story was heavily reported not only by our local newspaper but also by every news-reporting agency in the state. It was also a prime talking point by all the candidates vying for the office of superintendent of public instruction during the 2010 campaign. On November 2nd a new superintendent of public instruction was elected to the office and seated on January 1st, 2011.

The staff at our local newspaper was utterly shocked and clearly disappointed that their preferred candidate was not elected even after an attempt to discredit and smear the successful candidate one week before the election. A story in itself. 

On November 6th, 2010 news broke that the state test scores showed improvement despite the difficulties experienced during testing. At the same time it was reported that the writing portion of the test indicated a remarkable growth but that was due to changes made in scoring.

Previously, the writing test was scored in six skill areas: idea development, organization, voice, conventions, word choice and sentence fluency. The last two skills were folded into the first four, which changed how writing tests were scored. Points awarded changed from a maximum of four points to a maximum of three points per skill, lowering the maximum number of points from 48 to 24. This too was extensively reported in the media and in great detail and clarity by our local newspaper.

This brings us to the recent article, which prompted this post. The superintendent of public instruction held a press conference to talk about the standardized test results among other things. The education reported, who reported all the stories mentioned above, was there. Rater than focus the line of questioning around current test scores, procedures and curriculum changes the reporter decided to grill the superintendent about the decision of the previous superintendent to request a waiver for the previous years test results. After that the reporter asked why there is apparent disparity in the writing scores between the previous year and current year results.

The reporter’s obvious bias is reflected in the line of “Got-cha” questioning and the way the article was written. Do reporters believe their agenda is masked or that their customers are so naïve to miss their prejudice? Could this be one reason why print media is suffering loss of circulation and marketing impact? Has journalism been sacrificed to advance a political agenda?       


Jul 8, 2011

The Foxx and the Marriage Hounds


They may have bought their way to victory in New York, but homosexual activists have a long way to go in persuading the rest of America to follow. Even with the media in their back pocket, the same-sex lobby can't seem to overcome the mass resistance to homosexual "marriage." With the press doing all it can to make same-sex "marriage" feel inevitable, Congress is still solidly standing with the American people. Yesterday, the House made it clear that the President's favorite constituency won't be flying the rainbow flag over Washington any time soon.

Together, members from both parties lined up to support an amendment from Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.) that reaffirmed the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) in matters of military policy. By a 248-175 vote, the House overwhelmingly agreed that normal marriage should be the only union recognized in federal law.

While the media is sure to ignore the significance of Thursday's vote, it speaks volumes about the real state of marriage in America. In all of the back-room dealing and political arm-twisting, we can lose sight of how mainstream marriage actually is. And if the President won't fight for it, Congress will. That includes Democrats--19 of whom voted in favor of the amendment: Reps. Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), John Barrow (D-Ga.), Sanford Bishop (D-Ga.), Dan Boren (D-Okla.), Ben Chandler (D-Ky.), Jerry Costello (D-Ill.), Mark Critz (D-Pa.), Henry Cuellar (D-Texas), Joe Donnelly (D-Ind.), Gene Green (D-Texas), Tim Holden (D-Pa.), Larry Kissell (D-N.C.), Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.), Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah), Collin Peterson (D-Minn.), Nick Rahall (D-W.V.), Mike Ross (D-Ark.) and Heath Shuler (D-N.C.). If their decision proves anything, it's that the administration's radical position is not representative of the country--or Congress.

This morning, the House announced that it wasn't finished protecting marriage. Members followed up the Foxx amendment with a second measure. Led by Rep. Tim Huelskamp (R-Kans.), 236 representatives put their full backing behind an amendment to stop the Navy from slipping same-sex "marriage" onto military bases. After Congress voted to lift the ban on open homosexuality during the lame-duck session, Admiral Mark Tidd used the repeal as an excuse to order his chaplains to perform same-sex "weddings." This amendment would put the brakes on any policy changes that conflict with DOMA. Obviously, the issue of homosexuals in the military is far from resolved. Hollywood and the liberal elite may drown the voice of Congress out, but the importance of these measures cannot be overstated.

If your members stuck by their principles, take time to thank them. If they didn't (like these six Republicans who voted against marriage: Reps. Judy Biggert (R-Ill.), Mary Bono Mack (R-Calif.), Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fl.), Richard Hanna (R-N.Y.), Nan Hayworth (R-N.Y.) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), let them know you're paying attention! Too often, I think we underestimate how much our appreciation means to members who have a record of standing up for what's right. With the administration hammering away at our values, let's encourage the leaders who defend them!


Jul 7, 2011

Common Ground

Standing for Christ before a Hostile Age (4)
By T. M. Moore

“Brothers and fathers, hear me. The God of glory appeared to our father Abraham when he was in Mesopotamia, before he lived in Haran...” --Acts 7:2

It can be difficult at times to remember that people who are outspoken in their opposition to God and the Gospel, who have nothing kind to say about anything Christian, and who seem so angry whenever anything related to religion comes up – these people actually have a good deal in common with those of us who believe.

That might surprise some of us. After all, what can we have in common with people who seem to hate us so much that, given half an opportunity, they would figure out some way to silence us once and for all? But Stephen understood this, and he knew that it was important to stand for Christ on whatever patch of common ground he might share with his accusers.

Notice how he began his defense: He referred to those who would murder him before the end of the day as “brothers.” He spoke about their common ancestry in Abraham, even when Abraham was still living as a pagan in Mesopotamia. And he went to considerable lengths to identify with them in their national story: the promises to Abraham, the patriarchs, captivity in Egypt, deliverance through Moses, the giving of the Law, and so forth.

Stephen understood the importance of seeking a positive connection with people, even though he seemed to understand that they weren’t interested in connecting with him and that, no matter what he said or did, this situation was not going to turn out well. Nevertheless, he made the effort. He tried to affirm their story and his own connection to it, if, by any means, doing so might assuage their anger and create a context in which reason and cooler heads could prevail.

Because all people are made in the image of God, we can always find something about their lives which can serve as a kind of common ground for talking with them about the things of the Lord. Whether it’s their work, interests and avocations, views on this or that, or sense of purpose and morality, we can always discover something at work in them, the fruit of their being God’s image-bearers, to which we can establish a connection and begin a conversation about the Lord.

Regardless do the degree of hostility this world may display toward us and the Gospel, we must always do our best to remain respectful, to speak gently and reasonably, and to engage those who oppose us on their turf, seeking to understand their story, their worldview, and their concerns about the Gospel we proclaim. Some people, we know, will respond favorably to such efforts, and civil and ongoing conversation may be the result.

Others will see in our effort a kind of condescending and judgmental attitude, which, combined with what they already regard as naiveté, if not idiocy on our parts, will only serve to make them angrier and more determined to put us in our place. There have been times in history when whole societies were like this, and sincere believers, no matter how gracious and reasonable, have encountered the same response Stephen did, if not always quite so violent and final. We could be heading that way in our day.

But we must not abandon the effort to connect with those we are trying to reach for Christ, even though we may suspect that nothing we might do or say is going to change their minds or reduce their wrath.

We have to proceed anyway, even if the consequences should be dire, for there always young zealots hanging in the background, watching as older heads hammer us and our worldview, who may already be starting to wonder whether perhaps they may have gotten the story wrong.

Download the series, "Standing for Christ in a Hostile Age." Click here: VP Hostile Age.


Jul 6, 2011

In Their Face

Standing for Christ before a Hostile Age (3)
T.M. Moore

Yet the Most High does not dwell in houses made by hands, as the prophet says, ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool…” --Acts 7:48, 49

One of those angry young men present at the trial and murder of Stephen was a young zealot from Tarsus, an up-and-comer in Jewish religious and intellectual ranks. His name was Saul. When we first meet him, holding the coats of Stephen’s murderers, he seems to be still an apprentice – not ready to get his hands dirty, but available to assist those who were. He was of the same mind as those who tore at Stephen. He was just as hostile to the Gospel as they (Acts 8:1), and he was eager to prove his commitment to root out the Christian menace.

We recall that Stephen was charged with sinning against the temple of the Lord, by explaining that God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ and the outpouring of His Spirit, was now building a new temple, the Church. Stephen’s defense against his prosecutors focused on that charge; he was determined to demonstrate that the charge was baseless and, even more, that his accusers were completely mistaken concerning God’s intentions with respect to His dwelling among men.

Having laid a foundation for his main point, by agreeing with the idea that God is determined to dwell among men, Stephen pointed first to the tabernacle in the wilderness (Acts 7:44-46). Undoubtedly those generations served by the tabernacle were of the mindset that this was God’s permanent dwelling-place among His people.

But, Stephen continued, we know that was not the case. For Solomon built a house for God (v. 47), which had subsequently been destroyed and replaced by the present house, against which Stephen was accused of making threats. But, Stephen continued, God Himself had made it known through the prophet Isaiah that this earthly temple was not to be His true or final dwelling. “What kind of house will you build for me, says the Lord, or what is the place of my rest?

Did not my hands make all these things?” (vv. 49, 50; cf. Is. 66:1, 2). Stephen’s point was a subtle one: Had his accusers failed to understand their own prophet? Had they failed to look beyond the temple to a greater and more permanent dwelling-place for God? Had they, in fact, made an idol of the temple, just, as he explained earlier, the people had made an idol in the wilderness (vv.38-42)?

And just so they didn’t miss the point, Stephen put the cards face-up on the table: “You stiff-necked people, uncircumcised in heart and ears, you always resist the Holy Spirit. As your fathers did, so do you” (v. 51). It’s as if Stephen had said, “You self-deceived, power-hungry fools, who think you can control us all by making the temple and traditions of God your own special order of operations! You read your traditions selectively, or not at all, so it’s no wonder you’re so blind to the truth about God.”

You don’t get much more in-your-face than that. But the Jews had heard enough, and their fury could not be contained. Nothing would keep them from silencing such impertinence. Except one thing: It is very interesting to note, in Paul’s sermon on Mars Hill, that he takes off on the Greek philosophers from the same place Stephen had taken off on him and his cronies, so many years earlier (Acts 17:24). Had Stephen’s bold and daring witness made a lasting impression?

Was his suffering and death worth it? Paul never got over the shame and sorrow he felt over his role in Stephen’s murder, as we see in Acts 22:20. Stephen’s confrontational manner before those who presumed to try him may have infuriated them all, including Saul, to the point of murder. But the long-term value of his sacrifice cannot be measured, given the role the Apostle Paul fulfilled in the wide-spread establishment of the Christian faith throughout the world of his day.

Is God preparing you for such a role? You can’t know, but you must be ready. A hostile age, after all, can only destroy our bodies. But who knows what power may be unleashed by our in-your-face witness before a hostile age?

Download the series, "Standing for Christ in a Hostile Age." Click here: VP Hostile Age.


Copyright 2009 All Rights Reserved Revolution Two Church theme by Brian Gardner | Blogger template converted & enhanced by eBlog Templates