Jerome Anchius was an Italian theologian in the time immediately following the Reformation. He was a prolific writer and is best known for his book "The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination". The following words are from him, and possibly from this book:
Without a due sense of predestination, we shall lack the
surest and the most powerful inducement to patience,
resignation and dependence on God under every spiritual
and temporal affliction. How sweet must the following
considerations be to a distressed believer!
(1) There most certainly exists an almighty, all-wise
and infinitely gracious God.
(2) He has given me in times past, and is giving me
at present (if I had but eyes to see it), many and
signal intimations of His love to me--both in a way
of providence and grace.
(3) This love of His is immutable; He never repents
of it nor withdraws it.
(4) Whatever comes to pass in time, is the result
of His will from everlasting, consequently
(5) my afflictions were a part of His original plan,
and are all ordered in number, weight and measure.
(6) The very hairs of my head are (every one) counted
by Him, nor can a single hair fall to the ground but in
consequence of His determination. Hence
(7) my distresses are not the result of chance, accident
or a fortuitous combination of circumstances, but
(8) the providential accomplishment of God's purpose, and
(9) designed to answer some wise and gracious ends, nor
(10) shall my affliction continue a moment longer than
God sees fit.
(11) He who brought me to it, has promised to support
me under it, and to carry me through it.
(12) All shall, most assuredly, work together for His glory
and my good, therefore
(13) "The cup which my heavenly Father has given me to
drink, shall I not drink it?" Yes, I will, in the strength He
imparts, even rejoice in tribulation. I will commit myself
and the event to Him, whose purpose cannot be overthrown,
whose plan cannot be disconcerted; and who, whether I am
resigned or not, will still go on to work all things after the
counsel of His own will.
Dennis: There you have it. Thirteen solid chunks of truth to dwell on as you contemplate your faith and what it means to you.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
My Own Universe?
Let me share with you a brief account of a radio interview I heard yesterday. I was in the car and just happened to catch part of this interview on National Public Radio. I have no idea who the guest or his interviewer were. This will be in my own words and not a direct quote.
The agenda of an unsaved person is quite predictable. The guest of this show was some world renown physicist and scientist. Like many other secular scientists, his underlying purpose in life is to show that we did not need a god or a God to create the universe.
As I think back to this man's words, I must say he is clever. He talks of ideas that are very complicated and involved, and totally unproven. Yet, because no one has been able to show that his ideas are impossible (either mathematically or by principles of physics) he treats his ideas as established truth. It would be like you reading about some capability in a science fiction novel, and then going to your friends and saying this is true unless you can prove it is not. The scientist was very confident in what he was proposing, and sounded so. Thus, there is almost a deceptive drawing or luring of the listener into believing that what he says must be true. After all he is a scientist and understands things way beyond what the normal person could ever grasp.
But, there is no evidence nor proof that what he says is true. He was talking about how we can create a universe. The first thing we must do is create a black hole. Black holes do not need to be huge, but in fact, can be very small. We will use our machine (non-existent) to exert tremendous pressures on a watermelon (his example) and as the watermelon gets smaller and smaller, eventually it will be a black hole. This black hole would be of atomic size or smaller.
From this black hole we can now create our universe. He explained that there is a flip side to the force of gravity that makes thing repel each other. Of course he knows of studies that support this idea. This repulsive force also increases in magnitude the further the two bodies are from each other. This is the force that will take our black hole (crushed watermelon) and expand it into an entire universe. He does not say what makes the expansion forces stop. Of course he also throws out the idea that a universe does not have to be as large as the one we know.
The heart of sinful man has always been bent on showing that man is God, the supreme being. When the scientists create their own universe they will have once and for all proven that the Genesis 1 account of creation is a storybook fable.
Given the arrogance of man I often marvel at the patience of God Almighty. Remember, He can recreate the effect of the Tower of Babel in any number of ways, and He can do it anytime He chooses. Not only in the realm of astrophysics, but also in the realm of medical technology (cloning) do we see man lining up for this kind of disaster.
Something to think about.
God Bless You,
Dennis
The agenda of an unsaved person is quite predictable. The guest of this show was some world renown physicist and scientist. Like many other secular scientists, his underlying purpose in life is to show that we did not need a god or a God to create the universe.
As I think back to this man's words, I must say he is clever. He talks of ideas that are very complicated and involved, and totally unproven. Yet, because no one has been able to show that his ideas are impossible (either mathematically or by principles of physics) he treats his ideas as established truth. It would be like you reading about some capability in a science fiction novel, and then going to your friends and saying this is true unless you can prove it is not. The scientist was very confident in what he was proposing, and sounded so. Thus, there is almost a deceptive drawing or luring of the listener into believing that what he says must be true. After all he is a scientist and understands things way beyond what the normal person could ever grasp.
But, there is no evidence nor proof that what he says is true. He was talking about how we can create a universe. The first thing we must do is create a black hole. Black holes do not need to be huge, but in fact, can be very small. We will use our machine (non-existent) to exert tremendous pressures on a watermelon (his example) and as the watermelon gets smaller and smaller, eventually it will be a black hole. This black hole would be of atomic size or smaller.
From this black hole we can now create our universe. He explained that there is a flip side to the force of gravity that makes thing repel each other. Of course he knows of studies that support this idea. This repulsive force also increases in magnitude the further the two bodies are from each other. This is the force that will take our black hole (crushed watermelon) and expand it into an entire universe. He does not say what makes the expansion forces stop. Of course he also throws out the idea that a universe does not have to be as large as the one we know.
The heart of sinful man has always been bent on showing that man is God, the supreme being. When the scientists create their own universe they will have once and for all proven that the Genesis 1 account of creation is a storybook fable.
Given the arrogance of man I often marvel at the patience of God Almighty. Remember, He can recreate the effect of the Tower of Babel in any number of ways, and He can do it anytime He chooses. Not only in the realm of astrophysics, but also in the realm of medical technology (cloning) do we see man lining up for this kind of disaster.
Something to think about.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Happy Thanksgiving!
Today is Thanksgiving and I wish you a wonderful day. Remember, it is not enough to be thankful. We must be thankful to God!
Here are a couple quotes from a John MacArthur sermon on being thankful. This message was based on I Thessalonians 5: 18 which says "in everything give thanks."
First regarding the unsaved man:
"In all of the litany of what defines unregenerate people, right in the middle is thanklessness. The unsaved man goes through life complaining, going through life bitter, angry. His life moves along a path of trying to manipulate the world around him to satisfy, as we said, the matrix of his own passions and whenever he can do that he has something to be happy about., whenever he can't, he is entrenched in bitterness and disappointment, sadness."
A brief section on the Christian's perspective:
"the believer operates in a completely different world, a completely different realm. We can rejoice always because of what we know to be true about God and His plan for us and we can be thankful for everything for the very same reasons. So the message tonight really builds on what we said this morning. Since we know that all things are being worked together by God for our eternal good, we can be thankful for everything. There is nothing outside the 'all things' that are working together for good because God is making that happen. There's nothing outside those all things. Because God is working all things for our good, there is cause for joy. In the end there is the same cause for gratitude."
I hope there is a challenge and a blessing in there for you today.
Happy Thanksgiving and God bless you,
Dennis
Here are a couple quotes from a John MacArthur sermon on being thankful. This message was based on I Thessalonians 5: 18 which says "in everything give thanks."
First regarding the unsaved man:
"In all of the litany of what defines unregenerate people, right in the middle is thanklessness. The unsaved man goes through life complaining, going through life bitter, angry. His life moves along a path of trying to manipulate the world around him to satisfy, as we said, the matrix of his own passions and whenever he can do that he has something to be happy about., whenever he can't, he is entrenched in bitterness and disappointment, sadness."
A brief section on the Christian's perspective:
"the believer operates in a completely different world, a completely different realm. We can rejoice always because of what we know to be true about God and His plan for us and we can be thankful for everything for the very same reasons. So the message tonight really builds on what we said this morning. Since we know that all things are being worked together by God for our eternal good, we can be thankful for everything. There is nothing outside the 'all things' that are working together for good because God is making that happen. There's nothing outside those all things. Because God is working all things for our good, there is cause for joy. In the end there is the same cause for gratitude."
I hope there is a challenge and a blessing in there for you today.
Happy Thanksgiving and God bless you,
Dennis
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
PECANS IN THE CEMETERY
On the outskirts of a small town, there was a big, old pecan tree just inside the cemetery fence. One day, two boys filled up a bucketful of nuts and sat down by the tree, out of sight, and began dividing the nuts. "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me," said one boy. Several dropped and rolled down toward the fence.
Another boy came riding along the road on his bicycle. As he passed, he thought he heard voices from inside the cemetery. He slowed down to investigate. Sure enough, he heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you,one for me." He just knew what it was. He jumped back on his bike and rode off.
Just around the bend he met an old man with a cane, hobbling along. "Come here quick," said the boy, "you won't believe what I heard! Satan and the Lord are down at the cemetery dividing up the souls." The man said, "Beat it kid, can't you see it's hard for me to walk."
When the boy insisted though, the man hobbled slowly to the cemetery. Standing by the fence they heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me..." The old man whispered, "Boy, you've been tellin' me the truth. Let's see if we can see the Lord." Shaking with fear, they peered through the fence, yet were still unable to see anything.
The old man and the boy gripped the wrought iron bars of the fence tighter and tighter as they tried to get a glimpse of the Lord. At last they heard, "One for you, one for me. That's all. Now let's go get those nuts by the fence and we'll be done."
They say the old man made it back to town a full 5 minutes ahead of the kid on the bike.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Another boy came riding along the road on his bicycle. As he passed, he thought he heard voices from inside the cemetery. He slowed down to investigate. Sure enough, he heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you,one for me." He just knew what it was. He jumped back on his bike and rode off.
Just around the bend he met an old man with a cane, hobbling along. "Come here quick," said the boy, "you won't believe what I heard! Satan and the Lord are down at the cemetery dividing up the souls." The man said, "Beat it kid, can't you see it's hard for me to walk."
When the boy insisted though, the man hobbled slowly to the cemetery. Standing by the fence they heard, "One for you, one for me. One for you, one for me..." The old man whispered, "Boy, you've been tellin' me the truth. Let's see if we can see the Lord." Shaking with fear, they peered through the fence, yet were still unable to see anything.
The old man and the boy gripped the wrought iron bars of the fence tighter and tighter as they tried to get a glimpse of the Lord. At last they heard, "One for you, one for me. That's all. Now let's go get those nuts by the fence and we'll be done."
They say the old man made it back to town a full 5 minutes ahead of the kid on the bike.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Harry Reid Speaks - but don't listen!
Below are portions of Harry Reid's radio address. In case you are still blinded, I've added a few comments in color. Black text is that of Harry Reid.
After years of partisan fights and political attacks, the people have spoken. It's time for us to govern, and move America forward.
First, bipartisanship.
In the weeks and months ahead, we intend to reach out to President Bush and our Republican colleagues in Congress. The last four years-in which Republicans controlled the House, the Senate and the White House-have shown that a political party in Congress acting alone can accomplish nothing. [The Republicans certainly did not accomplish what they should have, but there is no evidence that having more Democrats around would have helped.]
America always works best when Congress and Washington operate as the Founding Fathers intended: with bipartisanship, and a Congress that serves as a separate but equal branch of government, and not a rubber stamp for the Executive. [The liberal Democrats have absolutely no interest in what the Founding Fathers intended.]
Second, open and honest government.
The just completed election was a declaration to all that now is the time to change direction in Washington. No longer can we allow special interests and lawmakers to conspire behind closed doors. [How about that bridge from Arizona to Nevada? Pretty nice Harry?]
We need transparency, new restrictions on lobbying and lawmakers, and a commitment to fiscal responsibility so our government stops bleeding red ink.
Third, results.
For years, Congress has sat on the sidelines, doing nothing - while challenges in Health care, energy, the economy, and Iraq have grown worse.
We believe it's time Democrats and Republicans worked together to achieve results.
One result Democrats will fight for next Congress is an economy that lifts working Americans and the squeezed middle class. [First order of business is to have Obama and Edwards attack Wal-Mart]
Today in America, the rich are getting richer. The poor are getting poorer. And the middle-class is being squeezed, between higher every day expenses and jobs that pay less and less. [Forget what Democrats say, everything they do works against the middle class.]
To help, Democrats will reach out to Republicans to raise the minimum wage, provide tax relief for working families, [Do you believe that? Wake Up! The Democrats campaigned against Bush's tax cuts that have strengthened the economy. Charles Rangel can't wait to increase taxes. What is this nonsense about providing tax relief?] cut the cost of health care, and make college more affordable.
Another result we'll seek is the expansion of stem cell research.
There are millions of Americans suffering from debilitating diseases, like Parkinson's and Diabetes, that advances in stem cell research could potentially treat. [Wake up! 'potentially treat' There are many success stories using adult stem cells, and none using embryos. This is not about healing, this is about abortion.] For these Americans, stem cell offers so much hope, if only we in Washington would allow it to expand.
Democrats will reach out to Republicans to pave the way for new cures.
We also want results for America's seniors.
After nearly a year, the flaws of the Medicare drug benefit are clear. It's confusing. It has gaps in coverage. And it doesn't allow the government to negotiate for cheaper prescription drugs.
Democrats will reach out to Republicans to fix these flaws. [Those Democrats are so wonderful - only they reach out, only they care]
And finally, from day one, we'll lead the way for new results in Iraq.
For too long, our troops have borne the burden of carrying out a flawed policy set at 16th and Pennsylvania Avenue here in Washington. On behalf of our troops, the American people, and the Iraqi people, it is time to change course.
I am encouraged the President is finally listening to outside experts and members of Congress. Changing the defense secretary was a good start. Now, working together, we must craft a new way forward - one that allows Iraq to be stabilized, and our troops to begin to come home. [Iraq will not be stabilized, and if we are going to cut and run anyhow (no desire to win), then get the troops home for Christmas! Then let our nation live with the consequences of quitting.]
On Iraq, and elsewhere, Democrats pray [Democrats pray - what happened to separation of church and state?] the President will work with us, because we're ready to work with him.
We want to put politics aside, and put bipartisanship, open government, and results in its place.
I'm Senator Harry Reid. Thanks for listening
You can see how my inserts really messed up the flow of this text. That is the way it is. A stream of lies and garbage will get blown up by the truth, every time. And I have only scratched the surface.
After years of partisan fights and political attacks, the people have spoken. It's time for us to govern, and move America forward.
First, bipartisanship.
In the weeks and months ahead, we intend to reach out to President Bush and our Republican colleagues in Congress. The last four years-in which Republicans controlled the House, the Senate and the White House-have shown that a political party in Congress acting alone can accomplish nothing. [The Republicans certainly did not accomplish what they should have, but there is no evidence that having more Democrats around would have helped.]
America always works best when Congress and Washington operate as the Founding Fathers intended: with bipartisanship, and a Congress that serves as a separate but equal branch of government, and not a rubber stamp for the Executive. [The liberal Democrats have absolutely no interest in what the Founding Fathers intended.]
Second, open and honest government.
The just completed election was a declaration to all that now is the time to change direction in Washington. No longer can we allow special interests and lawmakers to conspire behind closed doors. [How about that bridge from Arizona to Nevada? Pretty nice Harry?]
We need transparency, new restrictions on lobbying and lawmakers, and a commitment to fiscal responsibility so our government stops bleeding red ink.
Third, results.
For years, Congress has sat on the sidelines, doing nothing - while challenges in Health care, energy, the economy, and Iraq have grown worse.
We believe it's time Democrats and Republicans worked together to achieve results.
One result Democrats will fight for next Congress is an economy that lifts working Americans and the squeezed middle class. [First order of business is to have Obama and Edwards attack Wal-Mart]
Today in America, the rich are getting richer. The poor are getting poorer. And the middle-class is being squeezed, between higher every day expenses and jobs that pay less and less. [Forget what Democrats say, everything they do works against the middle class.]
To help, Democrats will reach out to Republicans to raise the minimum wage, provide tax relief for working families, [Do you believe that? Wake Up! The Democrats campaigned against Bush's tax cuts that have strengthened the economy. Charles Rangel can't wait to increase taxes. What is this nonsense about providing tax relief?] cut the cost of health care, and make college more affordable.
Another result we'll seek is the expansion of stem cell research.
There are millions of Americans suffering from debilitating diseases, like Parkinson's and Diabetes, that advances in stem cell research could potentially treat. [Wake up! 'potentially treat' There are many success stories using adult stem cells, and none using embryos. This is not about healing, this is about abortion.] For these Americans, stem cell offers so much hope, if only we in Washington would allow it to expand.
Democrats will reach out to Republicans to pave the way for new cures.
We also want results for America's seniors.
After nearly a year, the flaws of the Medicare drug benefit are clear. It's confusing. It has gaps in coverage. And it doesn't allow the government to negotiate for cheaper prescription drugs.
Democrats will reach out to Republicans to fix these flaws. [Those Democrats are so wonderful - only they reach out, only they care]
And finally, from day one, we'll lead the way for new results in Iraq.
For too long, our troops have borne the burden of carrying out a flawed policy set at 16th and Pennsylvania Avenue here in Washington. On behalf of our troops, the American people, and the Iraqi people, it is time to change course.
I am encouraged the President is finally listening to outside experts and members of Congress. Changing the defense secretary was a good start. Now, working together, we must craft a new way forward - one that allows Iraq to be stabilized, and our troops to begin to come home. [Iraq will not be stabilized, and if we are going to cut and run anyhow (no desire to win), then get the troops home for Christmas! Then let our nation live with the consequences of quitting.]
On Iraq, and elsewhere, Democrats pray [Democrats pray - what happened to separation of church and state?] the President will work with us, because we're ready to work with him.
We want to put politics aside, and put bipartisanship, open government, and results in its place.
I'm Senator Harry Reid. Thanks for listening
You can see how my inserts really messed up the flow of this text. That is the way it is. A stream of lies and garbage will get blown up by the truth, every time. And I have only scratched the surface.
Saturday, November 18, 2006
Teaching Nancy
One interesting observation on the Washington scene this week was seeing Nancy Pelosi taken down a notch. She has been touted as the wonderful queen bee, and it was kind of nice seeing her own people sting her.
The backdrop here is, to quote her "it's going to take a woman to clean that house". She has promised to rid the house of the Republican Culture of Corruption and to establish a higher than ever ethics standard in the house. There you have it - her perspective on the current House and what she is promising to do about it.
Her first, and I do mean first, decision was to select the majority leader for the House. She chose John Murtha. Shall we ask why? First he his a personal friend, and second of all him and Nancy had teamed up against Steny Moyer in 2001 political race and Pelosi won. So not only is Murtha a friend, but Moyer is certainly not a friend.
Next of course would be Murtha's anti-war noise. Once again, you must appreciate the context. Murtha has a filthy history and as a matter of fact has been quoted as saying that Pelosi's new ethics standard is a bunch of 'crap'. He was nearly indicted in the Abscam scandal. Others took the bribe money, he only had the intention of taking it. The truth is that if it had not been for a fellow democratic senator campaigning hard to save his bottom, Murtha would also have been indicted. There is plenty of other corruption also. So now you have this 74 year old member of the House who basically sits in the background and doesn't say much. One day he turns on the TV and he sees that the news of the day is 'cut and run' from the Iraqi war. They are playing his two favorite songs, so he decides its time to dance. First, he has a long military history, and because of that anyone who has not been in the military is nothing, a nobody. He is on record of even saying that to other House members. Secondly, he is a liberal democrat, so 'cut and run' fits like a glove.
Murtha seizes the opportunity and boldly speaks out against the war. All of a sudden the Democrats see a use for this guy, since 'cut and run' is the main election promise for the Democrats. Murtha is bold, arrogant and rude so he gets the message out there. On the other hand, he is not much of a speaker and embarrasses the party a few times.
Nancy puts her foot down and says Murtha will be the next Majority speaker in the House - forget the ethics business for now! What happens next is just amazing. First of all while Nancy was making this decision, quite a number of seasoned House Democrats had decided to stand by Steny Moyer for the position. They were not of a mind to bend to Pelozi on this, so they began to tear Murtha down from his peak. There was a tape from the Abscam investigation that showed Murtha turning down the bribe, but letting his intent be known. The Republicans have tried to use this tape in campaigns, but can never get the media to play it. Well, now, all of a sudden this tape is all throughout the media and the liberal democrats are writing about how Murtha has too many ethical problems to be put in this position. Apparently he had served the purpose they had intended, and now they needed him no more. (I expect Jim Webb will get the same message some day). One another note to avoid confusion: The liberal democrats really do not care about ethics, they just don't want to slap their new found electorate this soon.
Two thirds of the House voted for Steny Moyer. The vote was not even close. The Democrats want Pelosi to be the face and image of the party, only. Can you see that she is not calling the shots? Can you also see that whoever is leading the Democrats is also telling the media what to do?
This clear example indicates the power struggles going on. It's nice to see Pelosi get her liberal butt kicked, and as she said, "It's now time for healing"
God Bless You and pray that the Republicans wake up before it's too late.
Dennis
The backdrop here is, to quote her "it's going to take a woman to clean that house". She has promised to rid the house of the Republican Culture of Corruption and to establish a higher than ever ethics standard in the house. There you have it - her perspective on the current House and what she is promising to do about it.
Her first, and I do mean first, decision was to select the majority leader for the House. She chose John Murtha. Shall we ask why? First he his a personal friend, and second of all him and Nancy had teamed up against Steny Moyer in 2001 political race and Pelosi won. So not only is Murtha a friend, but Moyer is certainly not a friend.
Next of course would be Murtha's anti-war noise. Once again, you must appreciate the context. Murtha has a filthy history and as a matter of fact has been quoted as saying that Pelosi's new ethics standard is a bunch of 'crap'. He was nearly indicted in the Abscam scandal. Others took the bribe money, he only had the intention of taking it. The truth is that if it had not been for a fellow democratic senator campaigning hard to save his bottom, Murtha would also have been indicted. There is plenty of other corruption also. So now you have this 74 year old member of the House who basically sits in the background and doesn't say much. One day he turns on the TV and he sees that the news of the day is 'cut and run' from the Iraqi war. They are playing his two favorite songs, so he decides its time to dance. First, he has a long military history, and because of that anyone who has not been in the military is nothing, a nobody. He is on record of even saying that to other House members. Secondly, he is a liberal democrat, so 'cut and run' fits like a glove.
Murtha seizes the opportunity and boldly speaks out against the war. All of a sudden the Democrats see a use for this guy, since 'cut and run' is the main election promise for the Democrats. Murtha is bold, arrogant and rude so he gets the message out there. On the other hand, he is not much of a speaker and embarrasses the party a few times.
Nancy puts her foot down and says Murtha will be the next Majority speaker in the House - forget the ethics business for now! What happens next is just amazing. First of all while Nancy was making this decision, quite a number of seasoned House Democrats had decided to stand by Steny Moyer for the position. They were not of a mind to bend to Pelozi on this, so they began to tear Murtha down from his peak. There was a tape from the Abscam investigation that showed Murtha turning down the bribe, but letting his intent be known. The Republicans have tried to use this tape in campaigns, but can never get the media to play it. Well, now, all of a sudden this tape is all throughout the media and the liberal democrats are writing about how Murtha has too many ethical problems to be put in this position. Apparently he had served the purpose they had intended, and now they needed him no more. (I expect Jim Webb will get the same message some day). One another note to avoid confusion: The liberal democrats really do not care about ethics, they just don't want to slap their new found electorate this soon.
Two thirds of the House voted for Steny Moyer. The vote was not even close. The Democrats want Pelosi to be the face and image of the party, only. Can you see that she is not calling the shots? Can you also see that whoever is leading the Democrats is also telling the media what to do?
This clear example indicates the power struggles going on. It's nice to see Pelosi get her liberal butt kicked, and as she said, "It's now time for healing"
God Bless You and pray that the Republicans wake up before it's too late.
Dennis
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
God Help the Supreme Court
Last week the Supreme Court of the United States was reviewing a 2003 case that dealt with a ban on partial birth abortion. Now of course the main focus of the esteemed judges is legal protocol and procedure. Their purpose is to see that the laws of the land are legal, and if so, executed in a just manner. I know that and not being a lawyer, I only understand the legalese to a certain extent.
After reading some pieces of the court proceedings that were released in the newspapers, I found that there is probably a need for one more person on the court. That person would just be an ordinary man, relatively well educated and smart and a good moral man. Hopefully he would be a Christian that would also be sensitive to the religious freedoms due all people. If this guy were there now, things would be better.
I have only seen what was released to the papers (will be looking for more later), but what I did see was a lot of back and forth technical discussion about the fetus and the difference of killing the fetus when it is totally outside of the womb, as opposed to when the head (and only the head) has not been delivered.
To listen to the pro-abortion side of the argument, you would think they were removing a tumor from the woman. Since they do not assign life to an infant in the womb, I suppose you could call the fetus a tumor - just a hunk of biological cells that needs to come out.
Those technical discussions then lead into the issue about protecting the mother's health during a partial birth abortion. That is absolutely nuts! There is no concern about protecting the health of the mother when the baby must be turned breach. How is that done? The doctor uses both internal and external manipulations to turn the baby feet first. There is no concern for the mother's health when the feet, legs, butt, shoulders and arms are delivered - right up to the neck. At this point one quick tug and the baby would be born. This would take less time than the murder of the baby.
Murder by scissors is the norm. Shove that scissors into the back of the baby's skull - there is a soft spot there. Then open the scissors and twist - kind of mashes up the brain. If that does not seem to work, then pull out the scissors and put a suction tube into the hole. I know a lot of people that could not even due that to a puppy.
I challenge anybody to show me how it is of benefit to a mother to have the head still inside her when her baby is brutalized in this way.
Did you know that your neighbors are the kind of people that would do that to a baby (any Democrats on your block)? Would you send your kids over there to play? The unbelievable destruction of lies. The lie that we do not know when life begins, so we will say it is when the baby is completely born. How do you explain the perfectly formed little feet of a 10-week old in the womb? How do you explain the changes that continue to happen every week? Changes that are not haphazard, but beautifully orchestrated. When a doctor performs surgery on a baby that is still in the womb, have you ever asked yourself why? If the baby is not alive don't operate on it.
We call the baby a fetus, and we call the murder pro-choice. Are the Supreme Court justices of this country so caught up in the legalities that they will support partial birth abortion?
God Bless You if you are seeking Him,
Dennis
After reading some pieces of the court proceedings that were released in the newspapers, I found that there is probably a need for one more person on the court. That person would just be an ordinary man, relatively well educated and smart and a good moral man. Hopefully he would be a Christian that would also be sensitive to the religious freedoms due all people. If this guy were there now, things would be better.
I have only seen what was released to the papers (will be looking for more later), but what I did see was a lot of back and forth technical discussion about the fetus and the difference of killing the fetus when it is totally outside of the womb, as opposed to when the head (and only the head) has not been delivered.
To listen to the pro-abortion side of the argument, you would think they were removing a tumor from the woman. Since they do not assign life to an infant in the womb, I suppose you could call the fetus a tumor - just a hunk of biological cells that needs to come out.
Those technical discussions then lead into the issue about protecting the mother's health during a partial birth abortion. That is absolutely nuts! There is no concern about protecting the health of the mother when the baby must be turned breach. How is that done? The doctor uses both internal and external manipulations to turn the baby feet first. There is no concern for the mother's health when the feet, legs, butt, shoulders and arms are delivered - right up to the neck. At this point one quick tug and the baby would be born. This would take less time than the murder of the baby.
Murder by scissors is the norm. Shove that scissors into the back of the baby's skull - there is a soft spot there. Then open the scissors and twist - kind of mashes up the brain. If that does not seem to work, then pull out the scissors and put a suction tube into the hole. I know a lot of people that could not even due that to a puppy.
I challenge anybody to show me how it is of benefit to a mother to have the head still inside her when her baby is brutalized in this way.
Did you know that your neighbors are the kind of people that would do that to a baby (any Democrats on your block)? Would you send your kids over there to play? The unbelievable destruction of lies. The lie that we do not know when life begins, so we will say it is when the baby is completely born. How do you explain the perfectly formed little feet of a 10-week old in the womb? How do you explain the changes that continue to happen every week? Changes that are not haphazard, but beautifully orchestrated. When a doctor performs surgery on a baby that is still in the womb, have you ever asked yourself why? If the baby is not alive don't operate on it.
We call the baby a fetus, and we call the murder pro-choice. Are the Supreme Court justices of this country so caught up in the legalities that they will support partial birth abortion?
God Bless You if you are seeking Him,
Dennis
Sunday, November 12, 2006
On the Flip Side
In the aftermath of the election, the arguments and discussions are not the final say of the matter. Fortunately, as a Christian, I can be assured that my God who is absolutely Sovereign, has directed the outcome in the way he chooses. This brings peace in the midst of the storm. Now when I say God, let me be clear that I am talking about the God described in the Holy Bible between Genesis 1:1 and the end of The Revelation. This one God, God Almighty is the ultimate power and authority. Even when we see Iran, North Korea and Venezuela combine all of their resources, they are no match for God's little finger.
Then does that mean the United States has absolutely nothing to worry about. No, I did not say that. God has made an everlasting covenant with only one nation, and that is Israel. He has expanded that covenant to now include the spiritual Israel, which is the church, the body of Christ. There are no other covenants established with nations.
The United States, like all nations, can only rely on God's mercy to escape judgment. The U.S. is continuing to move away from all the things that honor God, both in government and people's lives. God has blessed our country, and if it is due to anything, it is the Christian foundation of our nation. However, that history will not hold back God's wrath, when He decides it is time.
Act 4:11, 12 ESV
11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.
12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
Every Christian must then find the balance between leaving it all up to God and each of us doing our part. I won't attempt to tell you where that line is, but I will tell you to commit yourself to glorify God as you make that determination.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Then does that mean the United States has absolutely nothing to worry about. No, I did not say that. God has made an everlasting covenant with only one nation, and that is Israel. He has expanded that covenant to now include the spiritual Israel, which is the church, the body of Christ. There are no other covenants established with nations.
The United States, like all nations, can only rely on God's mercy to escape judgment. The U.S. is continuing to move away from all the things that honor God, both in government and people's lives. God has blessed our country, and if it is due to anything, it is the Christian foundation of our nation. However, that history will not hold back God's wrath, when He decides it is time.
Act 4:11, 12 ESV
11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone.
12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved."
Every Christian must then find the balance between leaving it all up to God and each of us doing our part. I won't attempt to tell you where that line is, but I will tell you to commit yourself to glorify God as you make that determination.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Changes brought about by the Election
No doubt I was disappointed by the results of last Tuesday's elections. First in Ohio, where it appears that only Democrats live, and then on the national scene.
As I've been considering the outcome and trying to keep up with some of the media coverage, I see some key facts that should not be forgotten.
Even though the Democrats took the House by a number of seats, there is no way this should be viewed as a great sweep or tidal wave. It was really a series of individual elections many of which were extremely close. You can say the Democrats landed more votes than the Republicans, but not by much.
Amazingly enough, and opposite of what you would find in the main stream liberal media, the real winner in the election was conservatism. You say, "But wait, the Republicans lost." That's true, and the reason they lost is that they got lazy in their Washington politics and forgot what they stood for. At the same time, those apparently shrewd Democrats, found conservatives in key states that would run as Democrats. Those two factors combined did the trick. In reality, the Republicans have no one to blame, but themselves. The strategy of the Democrats was from the party leadership, even though by this strategy they made enemies with the traditional liberals in the party. The libs say it was not necessary to dress up like conservatives.
This is not a new phenomena. The only time Bill Clinton talked about real family values was shortly before each of his Presidential elections ( I don't know about his gubernatorial campaigns). Other than election time, Democratic family values are fine - abortion and sleeping with interns. What is most disturbing with this election is the appearance that uninformed voters are stupid enough to fall for this masquerade.
In light of post election discussions it does appear that the "cut and run" conservatives did just that. Their logic, be it ever so warped, was that they will punish the Republicans for not doing as had been expected by either not voting or voting for a Democrat. We should all be concerned at the ignorance of the American Voter.
Even the Democratic voters are ignorant. They just elected a whole bunch of leaders on the platform of 'change' and 'we hate Bush'. That's it! Nothing about what they could do different to make things better. If you have watched American politics at all, you know the likelihood of Democrats improving our country is nil.
Now is the time to watch every move of the Democrats. Every lie and every screw-up needs to be logged and publicized. Of course, the mainstream media will not do that. Dems are not so likely to go hog wild liberal, because they are focused on the 2008 Presidential campaign. They will continue to play the conservative card (and it is phony) as long as they perceive it is working.
If the Democrats make any changes to taxation, it will certainly mean an increase in taxes for all those people they say they represent. (Considering the amount of government waste, that is a crime in itself). They are prone to screw up Iraq, although their softness is already starting to show. The enemy nations and terrorists organizations are quite elated to have the Democrats on board, so expect more terrorist activity on our soil. There are a number of new Democratic committee heads that are giddy with excitement over liberal agendas.
The Republicans are going to have to provide something better for the American people, or they will not have a chance in 2008. If not, they can only hope that the folly of Democrats will make Americans ready for change in two years.
So much to say, so little time.
Have a great day,
Dennis
As I've been considering the outcome and trying to keep up with some of the media coverage, I see some key facts that should not be forgotten.
Even though the Democrats took the House by a number of seats, there is no way this should be viewed as a great sweep or tidal wave. It was really a series of individual elections many of which were extremely close. You can say the Democrats landed more votes than the Republicans, but not by much.
Amazingly enough, and opposite of what you would find in the main stream liberal media, the real winner in the election was conservatism. You say, "But wait, the Republicans lost." That's true, and the reason they lost is that they got lazy in their Washington politics and forgot what they stood for. At the same time, those apparently shrewd Democrats, found conservatives in key states that would run as Democrats. Those two factors combined did the trick. In reality, the Republicans have no one to blame, but themselves. The strategy of the Democrats was from the party leadership, even though by this strategy they made enemies with the traditional liberals in the party. The libs say it was not necessary to dress up like conservatives.
This is not a new phenomena. The only time Bill Clinton talked about real family values was shortly before each of his Presidential elections ( I don't know about his gubernatorial campaigns). Other than election time, Democratic family values are fine - abortion and sleeping with interns. What is most disturbing with this election is the appearance that uninformed voters are stupid enough to fall for this masquerade.
In light of post election discussions it does appear that the "cut and run" conservatives did just that. Their logic, be it ever so warped, was that they will punish the Republicans for not doing as had been expected by either not voting or voting for a Democrat. We should all be concerned at the ignorance of the American Voter.
Even the Democratic voters are ignorant. They just elected a whole bunch of leaders on the platform of 'change' and 'we hate Bush'. That's it! Nothing about what they could do different to make things better. If you have watched American politics at all, you know the likelihood of Democrats improving our country is nil.
Now is the time to watch every move of the Democrats. Every lie and every screw-up needs to be logged and publicized. Of course, the mainstream media will not do that. Dems are not so likely to go hog wild liberal, because they are focused on the 2008 Presidential campaign. They will continue to play the conservative card (and it is phony) as long as they perceive it is working.
If the Democrats make any changes to taxation, it will certainly mean an increase in taxes for all those people they say they represent. (Considering the amount of government waste, that is a crime in itself). They are prone to screw up Iraq, although their softness is already starting to show. The enemy nations and terrorists organizations are quite elated to have the Democrats on board, so expect more terrorist activity on our soil. There are a number of new Democratic committee heads that are giddy with excitement over liberal agendas.
The Republicans are going to have to provide something better for the American people, or they will not have a chance in 2008. If not, they can only hope that the folly of Democrats will make Americans ready for change in two years.
So much to say, so little time.
Have a great day,
Dennis
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Are Gays Taking Us to Hell?
I recently read an article where the author was adamantly protesting the notion that God's judgment is coming toward us much more quickly and severely because of the sin of homosexuality, than because of all the other sins. The author specifically went through the ten commandments to show the prevalence of many other sins in our culture.
The author never clearly declared himself a Christian or a homosexual. The intensity of his arguments certainly suggest that he is homosexual, or at least someone very close to him is. I could not say if he is a Christian, more likely he is just a religious person.
Debating others is not my strong point. I am too slow of a thinker and am more likely to say the wrong thing in an actual debate. However I am grateful when I see discernment in my life that allows me to spot weak arguments. No matter how adamantly someone can argue their point, if their foundation is crumbling, they will eventually crash and burn.
Let me show you a few of his challenges and what I see wrong with them.
1. The 'religious right zealots' are aggressively attacking homosexual people with judgment of their sin, while the breakers of the ten commandments get none of this.
It is never valid to use the abundance of other types of sin from other people to defend a different sin amongst a different group of people. Each person will be held accountable for their sin, whether others are winning the fight against sin or not. In addition, their is an active minority attempting to force their homosexual agenda into our society as a norm. Their aggressiveness merits aggressive resistance from others. There is no such group promoting the other sins (no group needed).
2. With all the sins being committed throughout our country, it is absurd to think that God will more intensely judge against homosexual sin.
Nothing can be said to lessen the significance of one person's sin compared to that of another. However, I cannot ignore the fact God has at times judged homosexuality very severely (Sodom and Gomorah is first to mind, also see Romans 1). God has not changed. The sin of homosexuality could be the shortcut to severe judgment.
3. If in fact this author thinks he is a Christian (I am not sure), then you might ask if he has read his Bible?
He apparently has read some of the Bible, however he has some huge filters in place that shred the word of God and replace it with his thoughts.
4. When discussing the references to homosexuality in the Old Testament, the author dismisses those first 39 books in this manner:
"There are some other references spread throughout the Old testament, but let us remember that this is all part of Mosaic Law. For the uninformed out there, Mosaic Law was the law given to rule the ancient Hebrews. " His position is clearly that the Old Testament is merely an interesting historical text that was for the Hebrew people, therefore we can ignore it.
He then has another statement to diss the OT: "the reason Christians do not worry about Mosaic Law anymore is that common thought dictates that a) it was more of a societal code for the ancient Hebrews and b) Jesus created a new greater Law for humanity.
This is the first of his two major foundational problems. God's Word, both OT and NT, is one entire book given to us by God. The 66 books of the Cannon are all God's word - carefully recorded and carefully preserved by God's sovereignty. Certainly there is a need for biblical understanding to avoid misrepresenting the OT. But it is still the word of God, and it reveals a whole lot about our Supreme and Invisible Heavenly Father. We need all of the Bible so we can continue to know Him better. Also, if one reads the words of Jesus in the New Testament, it is obvious that he honors it and does not replace it.
5. Having dumped the OT, the author now turns to the New Testament. He seems to like the Gospels, the reason in his own words, "Does Jesus Christ - THE Lord and Savior - ever say one stinking word about homosexuality? NO."
The apostle Paul gave some pretty clear instruction about homosexual sin. The author gets around these by stating that Paul was a fallible mortal like all of us. His words simply do not carry the weight of Jesus or Moses.
If you were to ask me how it is that the author can claim to understand Scripture and at the same time endorse homosexual sin, I would say that he is way out of line with the scripture he claims to know. The root cause is that he does not understand what Scripture is, including that it is inspired by God and that God's word was not written by human men, but their pen was guided by God Almighty.
How important is it to understand the meaning of Scripture? Without that, this man is able to dismiss much of the OT testament as only applying to that time in history. Then he is able to dismiss the writings of Paul, because he was a fallible mortal like us. Paul knew his failings, but limitations only kept him dependent on the Lord as he lived to obey. The Bible is a whole, one unit - we cannot pick and choose.
So even if my debating skills are week, at least it seems that I can analyze an article and spot huge sections of the foundation missing.
God Bless You,
Dennis
The author never clearly declared himself a Christian or a homosexual. The intensity of his arguments certainly suggest that he is homosexual, or at least someone very close to him is. I could not say if he is a Christian, more likely he is just a religious person.
Debating others is not my strong point. I am too slow of a thinker and am more likely to say the wrong thing in an actual debate. However I am grateful when I see discernment in my life that allows me to spot weak arguments. No matter how adamantly someone can argue their point, if their foundation is crumbling, they will eventually crash and burn.
Let me show you a few of his challenges and what I see wrong with them.
1. The 'religious right zealots' are aggressively attacking homosexual people with judgment of their sin, while the breakers of the ten commandments get none of this.
It is never valid to use the abundance of other types of sin from other people to defend a different sin amongst a different group of people. Each person will be held accountable for their sin, whether others are winning the fight against sin or not. In addition, their is an active minority attempting to force their homosexual agenda into our society as a norm. Their aggressiveness merits aggressive resistance from others. There is no such group promoting the other sins (no group needed).
2. With all the sins being committed throughout our country, it is absurd to think that God will more intensely judge against homosexual sin.
Nothing can be said to lessen the significance of one person's sin compared to that of another. However, I cannot ignore the fact God has at times judged homosexuality very severely (Sodom and Gomorah is first to mind, also see Romans 1). God has not changed. The sin of homosexuality could be the shortcut to severe judgment.
3. If in fact this author thinks he is a Christian (I am not sure), then you might ask if he has read his Bible?
He apparently has read some of the Bible, however he has some huge filters in place that shred the word of God and replace it with his thoughts.
4. When discussing the references to homosexuality in the Old Testament, the author dismisses those first 39 books in this manner:
"There are some other references spread throughout the Old testament, but let us remember that this is all part of Mosaic Law. For the uninformed out there, Mosaic Law was the law given to rule the ancient Hebrews. " His position is clearly that the Old Testament is merely an interesting historical text that was for the Hebrew people, therefore we can ignore it.
He then has another statement to diss the OT: "the reason Christians do not worry about Mosaic Law anymore is that common thought dictates that a) it was more of a societal code for the ancient Hebrews and b) Jesus created a new greater Law for humanity.
This is the first of his two major foundational problems. God's Word, both OT and NT, is one entire book given to us by God. The 66 books of the Cannon are all God's word - carefully recorded and carefully preserved by God's sovereignty. Certainly there is a need for biblical understanding to avoid misrepresenting the OT. But it is still the word of God, and it reveals a whole lot about our Supreme and Invisible Heavenly Father. We need all of the Bible so we can continue to know Him better. Also, if one reads the words of Jesus in the New Testament, it is obvious that he honors it and does not replace it.
5. Having dumped the OT, the author now turns to the New Testament. He seems to like the Gospels, the reason in his own words, "Does Jesus Christ - THE Lord and Savior - ever say one stinking word about homosexuality? NO."
The apostle Paul gave some pretty clear instruction about homosexual sin. The author gets around these by stating that Paul was a fallible mortal like all of us. His words simply do not carry the weight of Jesus or Moses.
If you were to ask me how it is that the author can claim to understand Scripture and at the same time endorse homosexual sin, I would say that he is way out of line with the scripture he claims to know. The root cause is that he does not understand what Scripture is, including that it is inspired by God and that God's word was not written by human men, but their pen was guided by God Almighty.
How important is it to understand the meaning of Scripture? Without that, this man is able to dismiss much of the OT testament as only applying to that time in history. Then he is able to dismiss the writings of Paul, because he was a fallible mortal like us. Paul knew his failings, but limitations only kept him dependent on the Lord as he lived to obey. The Bible is a whole, one unit - we cannot pick and choose.
So even if my debating skills are week, at least it seems that I can analyze an article and spot huge sections of the foundation missing.
God Bless You,
Dennis
When Murder is Legal
Have you ever wondered what it would be like to live in a culture where murder is perfectly legal? It would give a whole new meaning to road rage or property line disputes with your neighbor. A concealed weapon would be a must. There was an elderly man who got so fed up with youth crossing his yard that he finally shot a fifteen year old boy and killed him.
Oh, that's right, murder is within his legal rights. Maybe it only works if the victim is mute and cannot plead the case for their life. That reminds me of abortion.
I was fortunate to come across this tasteful video that demonstrates the act of partial birth abortion. I posted it on my BlogFeast site and I recommend you take a look at it.
What is partial birth abortion?
Maybe we should all perform a similar procedure on a puppy just to make sure we understand.
A word for all my Democratic friends. No doubt you will get mad at me for saying it, but it is the truth. When you go to the polls next Tuesday, some of that baby's blood is likely to splash onto your hand and clothes. Of course you are not surprised, for Democrats are the Abortion Party.
May God Bless us sinners and save the babies.
Dennis
Oh, that's right, murder is within his legal rights. Maybe it only works if the victim is mute and cannot plead the case for their life. That reminds me of abortion.
I was fortunate to come across this tasteful video that demonstrates the act of partial birth abortion. I posted it on my BlogFeast site and I recommend you take a look at it.
What is partial birth abortion?
Maybe we should all perform a similar procedure on a puppy just to make sure we understand.
A word for all my Democratic friends. No doubt you will get mad at me for saying it, but it is the truth. When you go to the polls next Tuesday, some of that baby's blood is likely to splash onto your hand and clothes. Of course you are not surprised, for Democrats are the Abortion Party.
May God Bless us sinners and save the babies.
Dennis
Wednesday, November 01, 2006
Election less than one week from today
The mid-term elections are one week from yesterday. Unfortunately, I have once again gotten caught up in this ugly exercise of American politics. Just like my Libertarian friends, I am totally sick of the political adds and cannot imagine another week of them.
I am discouraged for our country. Now, don't misunderstand, I am still confident that the Republicans will do well, and will keep control of the government. But at the same time, so many in our country have shown their true nature throughout the election process, and it leaves a stain on the clothing even if the Republicans win.
It is amazing how the media is so totally sold out to the liberal democrats. They do not even attempt to hide it anymore. There are a lot of Americans who are totally apathetic about the election, and there are a lot that only listen to the mainstream media. Both camps are so deceived that they can do nothing but hurt our country. The media has hurt our country and so disgraced our troops by refusing (for political reasons) to report the truth from Iraq. Those who have been over there are convinced that we have had many victories and are clearly succeeding in the mission. The press only reports the bad, and are clearly not of American interest.
I am shocked at the total hypocrisy of the Democratic group. They were united in their attack against Mark Foley and Dennis Hastert. They were consistent and longwinded. But when it comes to Jim Webb, they immediately get their brooms to sweep it under the rug. They rationalize Jim Webb with no sweat, and tell you how it was different with Mark Foley. As I have tracked media reporting, the Democrats used it as a rallying point. Jim Webb is their kind of man, he is who they are.
The truth of the matter is that the Democratic part is the party of porn writers. Imagine Jim Webb writing his next novel while sitting in the U.S. Senate. If he is not writing, he will be envisioning it.
Every year at election time, the Democrats will have to put on their Republican mask for a while so that the ignorant voters can be fooled for election day. Democrats talking family values, Ha!.
For whatever reason, when all the other liberal Democrats have been told to shut their mouths until after the election, John Kerry opens his and let's some of the Kerry heart be exposed. John Kerry has once again made it clear that he has no respect for the military and the people in it. Like a true Democrat, he would rather see us lose in Iraq, if that would assure a better election outcome. They won't admit it, but there is no doubt that Kerry speaks for the Democarats.
Back to Jim Webb. The Democrats are using him only to get this Senate seat in Virgiana. The guy spoke out against the war in Iraq (the same war that Kerry and many other democrats voted for) so he is their man. Their is nothing else Democratic in his past. After reviewing Jim Webb's website, all I could see was military service and then time off to write filthy novels. The guy has no experience in government.
God is sovereign, even over the sinful and deceptive tactics of man. May He control every outcome next Tuesday, according to His perfect knowledge. Every persons elected will be a sinner of the worst kind. At the same time, I would ask that every Christian know that they have a responsibility to be at the polls, voting against abortion. To choose not to vote against it, is to vote for it.
God Bless You,
Dennis
I am discouraged for our country. Now, don't misunderstand, I am still confident that the Republicans will do well, and will keep control of the government. But at the same time, so many in our country have shown their true nature throughout the election process, and it leaves a stain on the clothing even if the Republicans win.
It is amazing how the media is so totally sold out to the liberal democrats. They do not even attempt to hide it anymore. There are a lot of Americans who are totally apathetic about the election, and there are a lot that only listen to the mainstream media. Both camps are so deceived that they can do nothing but hurt our country. The media has hurt our country and so disgraced our troops by refusing (for political reasons) to report the truth from Iraq. Those who have been over there are convinced that we have had many victories and are clearly succeeding in the mission. The press only reports the bad, and are clearly not of American interest.
I am shocked at the total hypocrisy of the Democratic group. They were united in their attack against Mark Foley and Dennis Hastert. They were consistent and longwinded. But when it comes to Jim Webb, they immediately get their brooms to sweep it under the rug. They rationalize Jim Webb with no sweat, and tell you how it was different with Mark Foley. As I have tracked media reporting, the Democrats used it as a rallying point. Jim Webb is their kind of man, he is who they are.
The truth of the matter is that the Democratic part is the party of porn writers. Imagine Jim Webb writing his next novel while sitting in the U.S. Senate. If he is not writing, he will be envisioning it.
Every year at election time, the Democrats will have to put on their Republican mask for a while so that the ignorant voters can be fooled for election day. Democrats talking family values, Ha!.
For whatever reason, when all the other liberal Democrats have been told to shut their mouths until after the election, John Kerry opens his and let's some of the Kerry heart be exposed. John Kerry has once again made it clear that he has no respect for the military and the people in it. Like a true Democrat, he would rather see us lose in Iraq, if that would assure a better election outcome. They won't admit it, but there is no doubt that Kerry speaks for the Democarats.
Back to Jim Webb. The Democrats are using him only to get this Senate seat in Virgiana. The guy spoke out against the war in Iraq (the same war that Kerry and many other democrats voted for) so he is their man. Their is nothing else Democratic in his past. After reviewing Jim Webb's website, all I could see was military service and then time off to write filthy novels. The guy has no experience in government.
God is sovereign, even over the sinful and deceptive tactics of man. May He control every outcome next Tuesday, according to His perfect knowledge. Every persons elected will be a sinner of the worst kind. At the same time, I would ask that every Christian know that they have a responsibility to be at the polls, voting against abortion. To choose not to vote against it, is to vote for it.
God Bless You,
Dennis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
