No Such Thing

as a

Liberal Christian

We seem to be hearing more and more today about liberalism or conservatism in many areas of life.  Now we are hearing the news media and others talk about liberal Christians versus conservative Christians. This view should never arise when pertaining to Christianity.

Listen carefully: There should be no such thing as a “liberal Christian”!

Even a so-called “conservative Christian’s” view could be messed up – depending on whom or what they always base their views on.

If asked what type of Christian you are, our response should be – I follow Jesus.  I believe and do just what Jesus did.

Whatever our ideas were before becoming a Christian – that was the past.  We are now required to change.
Rom. 12:2 tells us to “be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.”

We are to change and become like Christ – period!

John 12:50 – And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: whatsoever I speak therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak.

This is Jesus speaking!  He wasn’t liberal in His thinking or speaking – He was one with the Father.

Do you recall what Jesus said when Philip asked Him to “show them the Father?”

John 14:9 – Jesus said unto him, have I been so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip? He that hath seen me hath seen the Father.

The same should be true of our lives.  When people see us they should know what we believe and think by what we do and say every day.  We should not waver due to what is, or is not happening in the world.

God DOES NOT change – EVER!  When we follow God and put Him first place in our lives, in all we do, then we will be blessed.  The same is true of the world.

John 14:31 – But that the world may know that I love the Father; and as the Father gave me commandment, even so I do.

If this was good enough for Jesus, then this should be good enough for us.  It does not matter what century we live in and how times have changed!  God knows just where this world stands and He knows what works to get us out of trouble.

John 14:10 – Believe thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me?  The words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwells in me, he doeth the works.

John 14:23 – Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

We are the light of the world –our light cannot be out part of the time.  The world has to know where to come to get help – at all times!

If the airport turned its runway light out just as a jet was coming in for landing, the pilot would not know where to go.

If a lighthouse turned off its light at night, then ships may become shipwrecked.

The church (the body of believers) cannot, and must not be divided – on anything.  The Bible says that a house divided cannot stand!

Paul lets the readers of his epistles know that he worked very hard at writing down the whole will of God.  And when a person knows the whole will of God, then that should be, and must be our will also.

The world cannot get saved, healed and delivered when the church is wishy-washy, or liberal in their beliefs!

Once a person gets saved and begins coming to church, we, the church, cannot give him or her mixed signals.  Well – anything is OK – as long as you don’t hurt anyone.  NO!  The church must lead that new believer into all the good that God has for him or her.  We must teach them how to stay under the protective covering of Almighty God.

John 17:14-16 – I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world. I pray not that thou should take them out of the world, but that thou should keep them from the evil. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.

That doesn’t mean to go live on another planet, or tuck ourselves away and become a hermit.  We still live in the world, but we do not have to join in on the world’s way of believing and doing things.

When we were born again, we came out of the stinking kingdom of darkness, with all its evil, and we came into the Kingdom of God, with all its rights and privileges that Jesus, Himself, obtained for us.

Whom do we want to please – God or the world?  It’s our choice.  And remember, one day we will stand – alone without anyone else beside us and give an answer to Jesus for how we thought and conducted ourselves in this world.

So, I pose this question to you again – what kind of Christian are you?   I want each an every one of us to be a light to the world so they can see Jesus and God in us every time we respond to anything   So we should respond – I follow Jesus in everything.  What He says in the Word of God (the Bible) that is what I believe, follow and do.

Window On The Word — by Marcia Greenwood

Subscribe to this blog's RSS feed

Physicists recalculate, find chance of sustainable black holes at Swiss supercollider facility

Article from “America’s Right” Jeff Schreiber

(At the very least, it’s an opportunity to once again showcase my artistic … uh … ability.)

If a tree falls in a forest, but nobody is there to hear it [because the Earth had just been consumed by a man-made and supposedly harmless black hole], can you still hear the slightly-pudgy conservative from Philadelphia say “I told you so?”

This past fall, we watched as the Large Hadron Collider, a device buried far beneath Switzerland and designed to recreate an environment as last seen in the instant following the Big Bang, was being slowed down shortly after being started up preliminarily for reasons and complications far beyond my understanding.

In the weeks and months leading up to the September 10, 2008 power-up day, I had spent a good deal of time trying to raise awareness about the device, citing the ever-so-slight possibility that the LHC could create a planet-swallowing black hole as good reason not to go ahead with the experiments. On September 2, 2008, I wrote the following:

I may be stubborn, and I know I’m ill-informed, but I don’t like this thing.

I fail to see, for instance, the practical benefits of recreating the universe in the moments following its creation, and I lack any confidence whatsoever in the scientists who have designed the machine, as not even they know what it can or will do.

As far as I understand it, one of the goals of the device is to bridge the intellectual gap between theories about the interrelationships between small objects and those between large ones — apparently, the theories which Albert Einstein developed with regard to making rules for particle physics don’t seem to add up when the rules are applied to much larger objects. In order to answer these questions, so puzzling and frustrating to those much smarter than I, scientists plan to recreate the condition of the universe a millisecond after the Big Bang.

This involves the use of ten dimensions, far beyond the three spatial dimensions known to humankind. It involves the creation of miniature black holes and the search for the elusive Higgs’ Boson, a massive particle only predicted to exist and named after the guy–Higgs, I guess–who did not discover the particle, but rather was the first to float the idea that the particle might possibly exist.

Here’s the thing: While I’d rather Iran, for instance, never be permitted to possess working nuclear weapons, I have little problem with them conducting research regarding such weapons systems. The way I look at it, should one of their scientists have a crappy weekend and mess something up, the disastrous consequences will be somewhat localized. I am comforted that the consequences of any short-sightedness or stupidity will be relatively small. I do have a problem, though, with the possible instantaneous GLOBAL consequences of any short-sightedness or stupidity on the part of CERN and its network of brilliant scientists.

Here are people–mere humans–who, while much, much more intelligent than I, admittedly are only postulating–GUESSING, that is– with regard to much of the role, capabilities and potential of the Large Hadron Collider. Here are people who admitted that the chances of it causing a “global catastrophe” are slim. Here are people who, according to one nuclear physicist and Nobel Peace Prize winner quoted in the New York Times, are more “concerned with public relations impact of what they, or others, say and write, than in making sure that the facts are presented with complete scientific objectivity.”

Here’s more from that April 2008 Times piece:

One problem is that society has never agreed on a standard of what is safe in these surreal realms when the odds of disaster might be tiny but the stakes are cosmically high. In such situations, probability estimates are often no more than “informed betting odds,” said Martin Rees, a Cambridge University cosmologist, the astronomer royal and the author of “Our Final Hour.” Adrian Kent, also of Cambridge, said in a paper in 2003 reviewing scientists’ failure to calculate adequately and characterize accurately risks to the public, that even the most basic question, “ ‘How improbable does a catastrophe have to be to justify proceeding with an experiment?’ seems never to have been seriously examined.”

That’s scary as hell, isn’t it? Isn’t it?

Independent studies, it seems, have placed the chance of a Collider-produced strangelet instantaneously turning the planet into a “dead, dense lump” at perhaps 50 million to one, less than one-half the odds of buying a single, winning Powerball ticket.

If the only thing at stake were, say, the immediate vaporization of the scientists and the facility, I’d give them a hearty “go for it.” However, because the entire planet may or may not be in jeopardy, I’d really like for everyone to be 100 percent certain of the device’s safety, and the odds of a global catastrophe to be absolutely zero.

Think about it — what other experiment, anywhere on Earth and in any field of study, has even a remote possibility of destroying the entire planet?

Some people have dismissed protests of CERN and its Large Hadron Collider as a function of the religious. For me, this has nothing to do with religion. I am a spiritual man, but this is more to do with ego, with negligence, and with potentially dangerous scientific enthusiasm and a “well, they say they’re experts” dismissive attitude gone unchecked in a case when the stakes are far too high.

Scientists are putting the entire planet and its six billion lives at risk so they can search for things which are only thought to exist. At what point does the rest of the world put aside the leave-it-to-the-experts apathy and stand up against unchecked fanaticism in the name of scientific progress? At what point do we leave some questions unanswered? At what point do we question people who are willing to bet everything to confirm a theory about a theory about something which may or may not provide any benefit of consequence?

While it is true that we would not have the Internet had it not been for the efforts of the people at CERN, and while it is true that this machine may very well produce benefits to all of the world’s problems, at this point in time, not even those who laid the groundwork for the Large Hadron Collider know for sure what it will do. What we do know, though, is that there is some risk to the entire planet. I am not anti-progress, but I certainly believe in erring on the side of humanity as we know it when it comes to the cost-benefit tradeoff.

There is so much concern right now as to how carbon emissions or styrofoam cups or oil drilling will slowly harm the Earth over the next 50 or 100 or 1000 years — where’s the same concern for the potentially catastrophic actions of overzealous scientists guided by enthusiasm and conjecture?

At some point, even the brightest minds in the world need to step back, look at those around them, walk outside and interact with the men, women and children of Earth, and decide that some things are better left alone.

Well, Fox News is reporting today that a trio of physicists have reexamined the mathematical aspects of the LHC’s proposed creation of miniature black holes, and have decided that they are NOT, in fact, so sure that the device will not cause a cataclysmic reaction which could destroy the Earth.

Where the scientists at CERN were so positive that the black holes would almost instantaneously disappear–sorry, but even that isn’t good enough for me–the trio of physicists have determined that, in fact, the black holes could stick around for as long as a second, if not longer, and because of those conclusions have expressed worry that other scientists may have underestimated the potential for catastrophe.

This uncertainty was at the heart of my worry and my argument that, for once, we should leave things well enough alone. First, we do not know for certain what benefits, if any, will come from the Large Hadron Collider; second, and far more important, we don’t know for sure that bringing the device to its capacity will be safe for the planet.

Many of you were comfortable with the results and statements put forth by the CERN scientists. I was not, and I hope that these alternative results are enough to show that, gee whiz, perhaps nobody is as certain as they should be given what’s at stake. For once, let’s put ego aside and err on the side of caution, on the side of life. Please. At some point, enough has to be enough. When it comes to the entire planet, even the slightest of risk should outweigh any benefits, determined or indeterminate.

At the very least, before the scientists at CERN attempt to crank up the device this summer, we should send a little note into outer space along with Gene Roddenberry’s ashes. It could be short and sweet:

“P.S. Don’t Build a Large Hadron Collider.”

www.americasright.com

Rev. Ed Bacon

By Drew Zahn

On the third day of her televised “Best Life” week-long series, even Oprah Winfrey was stunned to hear one of her pastor panelists, Rev. Ed Bacon, declare, “Being gay is a gift from God.”

With wide eyes, Winfrey responded, “Well, you are the first minister I’ve ever heard say, ‘Being gay is a gift from God,’ I can tell you that.”

The comment was made earlier this month on the “Your Spiritual Journey” segment of Winfrey’s “Best Life Week” by Rev. Bacon of the All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena, Calif., a church described by Pasadena Weekly as “one of the most socially progressive religious institutions in America.”

The comment was so controversial that Winfrey invited Bacon back four days later via video link to explain himself.

“Tell us, what did you mean by that comment?” Winfrey asked.

“I meant exactly what I said,” Bacon responded with a wide smile. “It is so important for every human being to understand that he or she is a gift from God, and particularly people who are marginalized and victimized in our culture. Gay and lesbian people are clearly outcasts in many areas of our life, and it is so important for them to understand that when God made them, God said, ‘You are good.’”

The video of both Bacon’s original statement and his follow-up interview with Winfrey can be seen below:

During the original broadcast, Bacon’s comment was applauded by another member of Winfrey’s panel, Michael Bernard Beckwith, founder and spiritual director of Agape International Spiritual Center in Los Angeles, who agreed and gave a high-five to Bacon.

“You … you are the first two ministers I have ever heard say, ‘Being gay is a gift from God,’” said Winfrey.

As Winfrey explains on the video above, however, Rev. Bacon’s comment – and Beckwith’s agreement – generated a massive viewer response.

“You don’t know how freeing it felt to hear that statement, and I was sure any gay person that heard it was in awe,” one of Winfrey’s Internet message board writers reportedly responded. “I want to thank both of them for letting my heart lift up and feel like something in this life, not an abomination.”

“On today’s show,” another viewer commented, “I was appalled by the pastor’s remark that being gay is a gift from God. How many gay people did this man of the cloth lead down the wrong road with his comment?”

Rev. Bacon, as well, confessed that he received an avalanche of e-mail and voice mail response, which he says was 30-to-1 appreciative of his comment.

“What I gather is that [the comment] simply unleashed a flood of healing throughout the country,” Bacon said. “People were talking about their hearts being healed, and their hearts leaping.”

Bacon also acknowledged that he received criticism over the remark.

“Ironically,” Bacon said, “the most meanspirited e-mail I received was from Christians who interpret the Bible – from my perspective – in a condemning way.”

Bacon further explained that he perceives some Christians use the Bible to condemn people, while others use it to love.

“Everyone has to make a decision about how they use the Bible, if they’re biblically oriented like I am,” Bacon said. “You have to take the orientation of compassion and inclusion to the Bible, or you’re going to have to use it as a way to beat people up and condemn them and judge them.”

Bacon further addressed the issue at All Saints Episcopal Church the Sunday between his two appearances on Winfrey’s program.

Referring to critical e-mail received after his remark, Bacon said from his church’s pulpit, “Some of it is the most vitriolic stuff I have ever read, calling for the rescission of my ordination, saying I didn’t know what I was talking about and saying, ‘Show me where in the Bible it says that being gay is a gift from God.’”

To the last challenge, Bacon replied, “Well, if those folks would read the Bible, they would see that in Genesis it says that when God created humankind, God said that we are good – all good, didn’t mention any exceptions.”

A video of Bacon’s pulpit comments, made available by All Saints Church, can be seen below:

Rev. Susan Russell, associate pastor at All Saints, further backed Rev. Bacon and his comments.

“We take for granted that a message of toleration and inclusion is what God’s message is about, but a lot of people have never heard this,” Russell told Pasadena Weekly. “What I find so wonderful is that Ed Bacon [is] able to use this national stage for an inclusive message about the love of God.”

She continued, “Ed said he meant that we’re all created in God’s image. We invite those who thank us to come see us, and we explain the background of our positions to those who disagree. We think it’s an opportunity for dialogue even with those who think we’ll burn in the lake of fire.”

The United States Supreme Court fired the first warning shot over the bow of the U.S.S. Obama on January,7th 2009.
Although this was not a shot heard around the world, it should be. What am I talking about you ask? The controversy over whether President Elect Obama is a natural born citizen according to article II, section I of the United States Constitution. If you are unaware or haven’t heard there is a problem, blame the media. If you don’t know what the key issues are, then you are way behind the learning curve.

Let me get straight to the point, Dr. Orly Taitz filed suit with the U.S. Supreme Court, Lightfoot v. Bowen (www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm) on December,12th 2008. It was denied by Justice Kennedy and refiled with Chief Justice John Roberts. Chief Justice Roberts distributed it for conference and will be discussed January 23, 2008.

Why is this important?

There have been other cases filed with SCOTUS and three of them have been conferenced, then dismissed without comment, needless to say, IT IS NOT A NEW ISSUE before the court. The interesting thing about this is the Chief Justice himself has referred this case to be conferenced. I promise you, the Chief is not one who takes things lightly and when the Cheif speaks, everyone in the tribe better be listening.

As mentioned above this is not a new issue in front of the Court. To date the cases that have made it to conference by Leo Donofrio, Phillip Berg and Cort Wrotnowski have been dismissed by a legal term called standing or so it was assumed. Because the cases were dismissed without comment you are left to wonder the reason. However all of these cases are technically still alive. Phillip Berg has two scheduled for conference on January 9th and the 16th (www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm) The results for the one on the 9th were not in at the time of this post. The results should be available on Monday the 12th.

Here is how I view this situation.

I, like many others have been following this controversy since it started. Everyday it takes a new course and has so many twists and turns it becomes stranger everyday. I understand how people who voted for Obama think all of us have tin foil hats. Let me suggest that if this is how you feel, you must feel the same about some of the Justices of the Supreme Court. I believe the Supreme Court has been playing a game of chess and as any good chess player knows, the position and moves your opponent makes determines your strategy and movement. With the Chief Justice sending this case to be conferenced, I believe he is setting up his opponent to call, CHECK. We now know that Scalia, Thomas and Cheif Justice Roberts have recommended these cases for conference. If four of the nine justices believe this or any case has merit they can go to the next step and move to oral arguments.

Why is this my view?

It is no secret that President elect Obama has hired three law firms to defend these suits. The suits they are defending are based on his place of original birth or whether he had dual citizenship at birth. Obama has already answered the dual citizenship question on his own Fight the Smears website where he states his father( Obama Sr.) was a Kenyan and any children born to him at that time were governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 making Obama II a British National at the time of his birth, hence dual citizenship. The remaining question is, original place of birth. People who voted for President Elect Obama are quick to point out he was born in Hawaii and has a birth certficate to prove it. Again, if you haven’t been following this story you are behind the learning curve.

Allow me to share with you a court case that happened, Keyes v. Lingle back in early December. The case was dismissed on a technicality and not on content. However, the bigger story to this lawsuit is the fact that forensic document examiner, Sandra Ramsey Lines has documented in an affidavit the following. Keep in mind that Factcheck.org is an offshoot from the Annenberg Foundation and from 1995 the chairman of Annenberg Challenge was none else, but Mr. Barack Obama

Sandra Ramsey Lines :

I can state with certainty that the COLB presented on the internet by the various groups, which include the “Daily Kos,” the Obama Campaign, “Factcheck.org” and others cannot be relied upon as genuine. Mr. Polarik raises issues concerning the COLB that I can affirm. Software such as Adobe Photoshop can produce complete images or alter images that appear to be genuine; therefore, any image offered on the internet cannot be relied upon as being a copy of the authentic document.

Upon a cursory inspection of the internet COLB, one aspect of the image that is clearly questionable is the obliteration of the Certificate No. That number is a tracking number that would allow anyone to ask the question, “Does this number refer to the Certification of Live Birth for the child Barack Hussein Obama II?” It would not reveal any further personal information; therefore, there would be no justifiable reason for oliterating it.

In my experience as a forensic document examiner, if an original of any document exists, that is the document that must be examined to obtain a definitive finding of genuineness or non-genuineness. In this case, examination of the vault birth certificate for President-Elect Obama would lay this issue to rest once and for all. [emphasis mine]

The importance of the the statement above is, the certificate posted online has the certificate number blacked out. At the bottom it clearly states that ANY ALTERATION INVALIDATES THIS CERTIFICATE. By blacking out this number he has created more questions than answers. The only question one needs to ask is why hire three law firms and spend untold amounts of money verses allowing the state of Hawaii to release the original vault certificate with the certification number. (SEE SPIFFIES COMMENT BELOW ON THIS ISSUE)

Lastly i would like to mention that some in the military are beginning to get involved. Phillip Berg, one of the attorneys mentioned above has now filed another case for a retired Colonel Gregory S. Hollister on December 30, 2008.
Dr. Orly Taitz has made reference she has another case ready to be filed on behalf of another group of military men and this letter was recently posted on her site: Drorly.blogspot.com

Lieutenant-Colonel Dr. David Earl- Graef

To All Americans,

This is not about sore losers, this is not about race. This about the
very foundations of our Nation. It is not about fear of change. I for one do not fear change but
only fear change that is not given the careful consideration our
founding fathers would have afforded it.

This is about America and the ability of our military to defend her and possibly much more. As a US military officer, I am just beginning myself to see the potential problems that may be
facing us. Before you discard any of this information please take the time to verify on OFFICIAL US Government sources such as the site for our United States Supreme Court.

FACT: Chief Justice John G. Roberts has agreed to hear Bowen vs
Lightfoot. A case challenging the constitutional qualifications of
Barak H. Obama aka Barry Soetoro to be POTUS. Check the court Docket.

http://orgin.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a524.htm

Comment- If the Chief Justice did not think we have a problem he would NOT distribute this case let alone give it to the full court to read. He does not want to look dumb or waste the time of the court after all he is the Chief.

FACT: Congress did not listen and hear this very loud signal he sent
to them yesterday but it rang a warning shot through many of the United States Armed Forces
more like a loud bomb. If I heard it, I KNOW the Joint Chiefs of the Military heard it.

Fact: Unfortunately you will have to take this as true on its
merits. But I assure you The Joint Chiefs as military officers take the
constitution very seriously.

FACT: If only ONE of the Joint Chiefs of Staff balks we lose an
entire arm of our military ! He can not nor will not give the order
to mobilize the forces if he has a reason to question the validity of that order. In
fact he himself is duty bound to not obey this if not given by a “legal” President or at a minimum is conflicted as to the right thing to do !! The Oath states he will obey the lawful orders of those above him not ANY order. Chief Justice Roberts has as much as told them by distributing this case we may have a constitutional problem with Obama. So at this very moment our Military leaders are likely conflicted. Not a good thing.

*****The words of JOE BIDEN. He warned of an international crisis
soon and implied it would be of immense proportion soon after Obama took office may . ****** Have you
already forgotten ????? Have you been distract by the economy. Did Biden know something ??? Has anybody bothered to ask him??

And he thinks Barak can handle it. Do you ??? Let Obam face down Putin without the Navy or maybe the
Air Force or maybe the Army or mayybe ALL of them to back him up. I suppose some of you out there
still believe in a Superman. Reality check. He was a comic book
character and Obama is not a Superman like some of you believe. He is not the messiah otherwise he would not be giving us doom and gloom for the economy. He would waive his hand and fix it. Please wake
up !!

We are not asking Obama for the moon only that he give us some
additional information to assure us he is who he says he is AND qualify under the Constitution and we in the military will do whatever he asks us to do to protect this country. This is what we do.

This is reasonable and prudent but Obama is refusing and fighting this with
everything and I mean everything in his power.

To my Fellow Officers and Enlisted who are required to lay their lives at the very feet of Liberty.

Do not despair but take good faith. Remember those who came before. He is not our President yet so you still have a right to raise concerns all the way to the Pentagon. Let the Officers in your command know that Justice Roberts has taken the first stand to insure the Constitution is followed. Let our Chief Justice know you support him and appreciate him for HIS courage valor to stand up for us. Call/ write your congressman. Pass this letter to every blog you can. Ask your family to do the same we are a mighty voice and it can be heard.

From: Newsvine.com