God Save America

WASHINGTON, April 10 /Christian Newswire/– On her television show Oprah Winfrey has been pushing a new book by Eckhart Tolle called A New Earth.  In fact, Oprah has now taken up preaching as a new past time and has determined in her own mixed-up mind there are now millions of ways to get to heaven.

This is so sad because Oprah is a hero of tens of millions of television viewers and she is expressing her own Biblical beliefs without any understanding of the Bible.  Oprah has in effect denied the teachings of the Bible and of Jesus Christ by asking her viewing audience, "How can there be only one way to heaven or to God?"

When a lady in her audience asked, "What about Jesus?"  Oprah defiantly answered her by repeating the question, "What about Jesus?" Oprah went on to explain how she had been a Baptist until she heard a charismatic Pastor make the statement that God was a jealous God.  She told her viewers in her opinion God was simply love and God being described as a Jealous God made her really stop and think. 

Don Swarthout, President of Christians Reviving America's Values said, "Oprah Winfrey has in reality just exposed her own lack of understanding about the God of Christianity.  God may be a God of love, but he is also a God of justice and judgment." 

Don Swarthout said, "The point is there are millions upon millions of Christians in the United States who thoroughly believe what Jesus taught in the Bible and for Oprah to come out against that teaching so strongly is simply appalling.  Oprah should really stop to think before she goes off preaching her own unfounded beliefs to the world on her show."

Rebecca Chadwick, a news contributor for CRAVE said, "All cults share the same premise; they misrepresent the nature of God.  Let's pray for Oprah and Tolle… and all those who are lost."

Contact: Don Swarthout, President, Christians Reviving America's Values, CRAVE, 859-219-1222, 859-619-2811 Cell

David Barton of WallBuilders reports on the following legislation pending in Congress (more information is available through the WallBuilders):

In the latter months of 2007, there was a flurry of incidents attempting to censor America's religious heritage (e.g., the capstone at the Washington Monument, the flag folding ceremony in the Veterans' Department, the flag certificates from the Architect of the Capitol, etc.). In each case, citizens learned of the incidents and in large numbers made their feelings known; each policy was promptly reversed.

In response to those (and other) incidents, Congressman Randy Forbes of Virginia has introduced a Congressional Resolution affirming America's Godly heritage through dozens of documented historic examples.That measure,

H.Res.888, declares its two-fold purpose:

Affirming the rich spiritual and religious history of our Nation's founding and subsequent history and expressing support for designation of the first week in May as "American Religious History Week" for the appreciation of and education on America's history of religious faith.

The House has agreed to consider and debate this excellent resolution. There are three things you can do to help:

Call your Member of Congress and ask him or her to co-sponsor H.Res.888

Call Randy's office (202.225.6365) and thank him for standing up for our religious heritage. (All folks appreciate encouragement, but especially those on the front lines of battle.)

It will remind Americans what God has done for them and instruct the next generation about God's hand in America's history.

Justice served!

Williamsburg, VA – Gene R. Nichol, president of the College of William and Mary, submitted a resignation letter yesterday after receiving notice that his contract would not be renewed by the college’s Board of Visitors. Several appointees to the board, who were pending reconfirmation, recently appeared at hearings before the Virginia House of Delegates’ Privileges and Elections Committee.

During the hearings, Nichol was strongly criticized for controversial decisions during his short reign as president. Committee Chairman Mark Cole stated that “a set of recent events warranted a more thorough review” of the Board of Visitors. The events cited as concerning were Nichol’s removal of the cross from Wren Chapel, the resulting loss of a $12 million gift and allowing a “Sex Workers’ Art Show.”

The confirmation hearings focused mainly on Nichol’s controversial actions. “If any university president in the Commonwealth has put a bad light on the Commonwealth … it’s Mr. Nichols,” said Del. Jeffrey Frederick. Del. Clarence Phillips asked the appointees for a commitment to ensure the college is known for “all right and good things,” to “do what’s necessary through your leadership and through your good name.” Committee Chairman Cole warned the appointees: “Everything that happens at William and Mary will rest on your shoulders.”

Click to read more …

Copyright © 2007 Ed Bagley

Many who read the title to this article might think that the second most controversial topic in America today is whether the United States should continue its war in Iraq.  Those who thought that would be, in fact, dead wrong.

This article is really about facts, not about our involvement in trying to make Iraq and its people adopt a democratic society, but to revisit the place God occupies in our public institutions and in our society.

Oliver "Buzz" Thomas explored this topic recently in USA Today (10-15-07), America's largest daily circulation newspaper.  Thomas is a minister, lawyer and author of 10 Things Your Minister Wants to Tell You  (But Can't Because He Needs the Job).

First off, we have the oldest written constitution in the world, however, the United States Constitution was not the first constitution written in this country, that distinction belongs to the Fundamental Orders of Connecticut, written in 1639.

The U. S. Constitution was written in 1787, was ratified and went into effect in March 1789, exactly 150 years after Connecticut's constitution.

Very few of our citizens could tell you when our Constitution came into being, and even fewer could tell you much about God's place in our U. S. Constitution.

Thomas says many Americans do not know what our Constitution says about our first freedom: religious freedom.

Ask most Americans what the Constitution says about God, and their answer may surprise you.

"One nation under God?"  No, that is in our Pledge of Allegiance.

"Endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights?"  No, that is in our Declaration of Independence.

A recent survey by the First Amendment Center asserted that 55% of Americans believe the our Constitution establishes us as a "Christian nation" and while nearly all Americans say freedom of religion is important, only 56% of the survey respondents think it should apply to all religious groups.

The plain truth is that the U. S. Constitution says nothing about God.  There is not a single reference to "God" in our Constitution.

Click to read more …

By Robert E. Meyer

Numerous skeptics and modern historians raise an interesting question that has been hotly disputed in recent years; whether or not America was founded as a "Christian Nation."

Generally, secular humanists have tried to refute this claim by contending that certain key Founders believed merely in a deistic God which didn't intervene in human affairs.

They would be on safer ground if they had instead said that there were strains of religious unorthodoxy in the thinking of certain key Framers. The problem is that when those who claim the Founders were deists, define deism, they can't make that definition fit the concept of God expressed by the Framers themselves. It is clear that there was a solid belief in a God who actively manages and intervenes in human affairs.

Thomas Jefferson reflecting of the injustice of slavery stated…

"Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep forever."

This indicates a God who judges the deeds of humanity.

Benjamin Franklin, considered one of the least religious Founders, made this observation during the constitutional convention…

"In the beginning of the contest with Britain, when we were sensible of danger, we had daily prayers in this room for divine protection. Our prayers, sir, were heard and they were graciously answered. All of us who were engaged in the struggle must have observed frequent instances of a superintending Providence in our favor… Have we now forgotten this powerful friend? Or do we imagine we no longer need His assistance? I have lived, sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth: that God governs his affairs of man. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, it is probable that an empire can rise without His aid?"

Notice here that as Franklin approached the end of his life he found convincing proof that God was actively involved in human interventions.

Click to read more …

By Christopher Adamo

Thus far in the 2008 presidential campaign cycle, "religion" has played a far bigger role than in any recent elections. This does not necessarily translate to actual issues of importance to one religious constituency or another, but rather that the religion of individual candidates themselves is a major topic. And as this pattern continues, a glaring hypocrisy is emerging. In short, all religions are to be beyond criticism or question, with the sole exception of Biblical Christianity.

At the slightest suggestion that a candidate’s religion might call his or her judgment or fitness for office into question, the instant and universal response from across the political spectrum is a chorus of accusations of "religious bigotry" and intolerance. No less an icon of punditry than Robert Novak made essentially that case in his October 4, 2007 column. Unless, of course, the religion in question is Southern Baptist and the principal involved is Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee, at which point the preacher becomes fair game.

To be sure, Mike Huckabee has his political liabilities. His record on taxes is abysmal, and past philosophies on border control and illegal immigration are completely out of sync with mainstream America. Yet this is not the basis on which some of his loudest critics assail him, but rather on matters of faith. And the situation is particularly discouraging since such castigation now comes at him from the right.

In his December 11 article, nationally syndicated columnist Rich Lowry, editor of the monumental conservative publication National Review, asserts that primarily as a result of Huckabee’s religious beliefs, Republican support for the Arkansas Governor, would amount to party "suicide." Lowry then proceeds to deride Huckabee on several issues, including his belief in the Biblical account of creation.

It needs to be recalled here that at the recent CNN/Youtube debate, when Republican candidates were asked to explain their views on the significance of the Bible, all who were allowed to answer asserted, in one form or another, that they regarded it as the Word of God.

Apparently, in Lowry’s world, such statements are just fine as long as they are clearly presented only as platitudes for the cameras. But let a candidate suggest that he really meant what he said on the topic, and he is ever after classified as unfit to hold office in modern, secular America.

Lowry goes on to warn that Huckabee’s hayseed religion would be a turn off to those whom he euphemistically describes as "upper income Republicans," a group more accurately termed as northeastern liberals. Moreover, that was precisely the group who were first to rail against Christian conservatives who refused to support Rudy Giuliani when his standing in the polls appeared to make his nomination inevitable.

In other words, if Giuliani gains the nomination, the only appropriate response of Christian conservatives is to abandon every precept of right and wrong that they hold dear, in order to maintain "unity" with the liberal wing of the party.

Yet if Huckabee prevails and Republican liberals flee simply because they disdain the personal views of one man’s belief on the origin of humanity, it would not be their fault but rather the fault of those who hold to such archaic views. No hypocrisy or double standards here to be sure.

Lowry’s ultimate message is simply that while the Republican Party has reaped "an enormous benefit" by its beneficent condescension to the Christians, such people need to understand that their rightful place, in the eyes of the patricians and elitists who make up its real core, will always be at the back of the bus. And keep the noise to an absolute minimum.

Click to read more …

Shootings in Colorado Highlight the Fact that Christians and Churches are the Overwhelming Target of Hate Crimes in America

MEDIA ADVISORY, Dec. 11 /Christian Newswire/ — The tragic shootings in Colorado highlight the fact that Christians and churches are the overwhelming target of hate crimes in America.

For example, between 1997 and 2007 there were 3,500 acts of either arson, attempted arson, bombings and suspicious fires at churches according to the National Coalition for Burned Churches.

The group also reports that 600 churches were subjected to arson alone between 2000 and 2006.

Commenting on the Christian faith being the number target for hate crimes and violence in America, Rev. Patrick J. Mahoney, Director of the Christian Defense Coalition, comments;  

"First of all, our prayers and thoughts go out the families and friends that lost loved during the deadly shootings in Colorado during the past several days.  These deaths in Colorado highlight the fact that Christians and churches are the overwhelming target of violent hate crimes in America.   

For many Americans, the fact comes as a surprise.  Most would believe that the groups or facilities most likely to be targets of hate crimes are persons of color, gays, Muslims or abortion clinics.  The reason for that is the national press, media, elected officials and special interest groups focus, dramatize and over report when those groups and facilities are subjected to violent acts.

Imagine the media outrage if over 600 mosques, abortion clinics, gay night clubs or NAACP offices were burned to the ground over the past several years.  It would be a major news story for weeks.  Yet, when hundreds of churches are burned and Christians are killed there is a much more limited and lukewarm response.

We must all work for an America where violence has no place and people are not targeted for acts of hate because of their skin color, religious beliefs or gender.  However, we must begin to recognize that the most serious problem regarding violent hate crimes America concerns churches and Christians."

by Sher Zieve

Who would have thought that, after the 9/11/2001 attacks on our country, all too many US citizens would run to both accept and embrace the religion of our enemy attackers? But, that is precisely what has happened. Since 9/11, Muslims throughout the US have demanded—and received—all manner of special privileges; from intimidating businesses into accommodating Muslim prayer rooms to said businesses setting aside portions of the workday for them to engage in prayer. Note: Suffice it to say, Christian prayer has been banned in the workplace and schools—for decades. The ACLU saw to that. But, the same ACLU that bans Christian practices hypocritically—perhaps illegally—either ignores or embraces special accommodations for Islam. Christian prayers—even non-denominational—have been forbidden in school classrooms and the workplace. But, everything Islam is being increasingly accommodated and adopted. Christmas has been branded "taboo" by public school administrators. But, the Islamic celebration of Ramadan is not only being instilled in an increasing number of public schools but, has even been celebrated at the White House.

Most recently, with yet another strong backhand applied to the faces of all non-Muslims (specifically Christians), the University of Michigan has become the latest public entity to make the decision to ignore the US Supreme Court ruling concerning the separation of church and state in the US. With their actions, its leftist/liberati administrators have also made the decision that the SCOTUS decision does NOT apply to the Muslim faith. Instead, these same officials are making increasing adjustments for Muslims and their "faith" in direct conflict with the aforementioned SCOTUS decision. This is yet another example of liberals, leftists and other enemies of the United States of America being allowed to break the laws of our land, while the rest of us are subject to arrest for not being duly submissive to the lawbreakers. As yet another example of school administrators caving to Muslims’ intimidation, 23 year old Stanislav Shmulevich was arrested for placing a copy of the Islamic Koran in a toilet at Pace University. After the originated-by-terrorist-Hamas-officials group CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) complained to NYPD, police authorities charged Shmulevich with a ‘hate crime’. A hate crime against a book? However, if one does the same to a Christian Bible the authorities traditionally and historically ignore it. In other words, desecrating the Bible—or for that matter the Torah—is not considered a crime by US officials. Said "hate crimes" only applies to the Islamic Koran; just as separation of church and state applies only to Christianity and Christians.

Currently, all that is Islamic or even radical Islamist is "okay" with the American Liberati. Even one of the Democrat press’ bastions of liberalism, the Washington Post, is now attempting to instruct its readers that radical Islamists are really ‘moderates’. One of that publication’s staff writers, Michelle Boorstein, tries to shove this concept down their throats in her article From Muslim Youths, a Push for Change. By their continuing capitulation actions, our feckless liberal "leaders"

appear to be her audience. Again, their appeasement-of-all-that-frightens-them mantra grows louder: "Anything and everything Islam is okay with us!" And perpetrated by these same groups, anything and everything Christian is in process of being removed from life as we know it. Christianity, which essentially preaches peace, is being barred from American life while Islam—that preaches war and death to all non-Muslims—is being deified. Note: Isn’t it the liberals and leftists who claim to be anti-war? If so, why do they support a movement—Islam and its Muslim religion—that bases its existence on death and war and ridding this planet of all non-Muslims? No wonder the Left is considered by an increasing majority of we-the-people to be insane. It is.

In regards to the above growing atrocities, we-the-people again have two choices. We can ignore these mounting perils to our existence—and choose to end our lives—or we can fight them. Unless Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and his minions are successful in shutting us up, we can still contact our elected officials—local, statewide and national—and tell them to stop this insanity! US laws either apply to everyone or they apply to no one. If our elected leaders don’t understand that—they shouldn’t be in office. We can still vote them out. And we-the-people need to continue to take a stand against all of the increasing atrocities being committed against us. If we don’t, it won’t be long before we can no longer stand at all.

References:

http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/asection/la-na-muslim30jul30,1,3405928.story?coll=la-news-a_section

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state

http://avoiceofreason.wordpress.com/2007/04/19/public-schools-embrace-islam/

http://www.riseofislam.com/western_world_03.html

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/188866.php

http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/07/cair_hamas_implications_and_an_1.php

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/07/moderate_islam_and_its_muslim.html

Sher Zieve is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. (www.thenma.org). The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.

by Thomas E. Brewton

Atheists thought that God really was dead

French revolutionary philosophers and the socialist theoreticians who followed them in the early 1800s were captured by what British socialist Graham Wallas called the liberal fallacy: the self-absorbed assumption that whatever their reasoning told them had, by definition, to be the truth and, furthermore, that everyone else on earth would naturally agree with their conclusions. It is a form of tunnel vision that ignores all factors other than what interests liberals.

We see this today in the prescriptions of liberal Republicans and liberal Democrats. They are confident that, because they abhor war, so too does Al Queda. Because liberals are willing to relinquish our national sovereignty to the UN, confident that every dispute can be resolved by rational discussion, they assume Islamic jihadists are wired the same way.

At the apogee of atheistic materialism, in the 1830s, Auguste Comte's well-intentioned expectation was that all the world would quickly recognize the superiority of his Positivistic philosophy and its Religion of Humanity. People from the rest of Europe, from America, and from Asia, he assumed, would all come to sit worshipfully at his feet to learn the proper new system of socialist government and its canon of materialistic ethics.

Click to read more …

New York, May 2, 2007 - Actor Kirk Cameron and best-selling author Ray Comfort will square off with two atheists in New York on Saturday, May 5. ABC originally planned to stream the 90-minute debate LIVE on their website, but decided to reschedule the broadcast to capture a larger audience. They will broadcast the entire debate on ABC.com on Wednesday, May 9 at 1:00 p.m. EST.

Comfort-who claims he can prove the existence of God, scientifically, without mentioning faith or the Bible-stated, "The network originally offered me only four minutes to present my case. After speaking with Kirk and conferring with the atheists, they settled on 13 minutes. I'm ecstatic. I can prove the existence of God in that amount of time.

"We are very grateful to ABC for taking this courageous step," Comfort continued. "As far as we know, nothing like this has ever been done before. ABC's website is already the 7th most visited news site, with 19 million visitors every month. But with more than 177 million people in the U.S. who call themselves Christians, we are sure that it will draw an even larger viewing audience. Is there actually evidence for God? That's the most important question any of us will ever consider."

Cameron added, "We are excited that the network has decided to do this, because we have something very relevant to present. Most people think that belief in God is simply a matter of blind faith, and that His existence can't be proven. We will not only prove that God exists, but as an ex-atheist I'll show that the issue keeping so many people from believing in God-Darwinian evolution-is completely unscientific. It's a fairy-tale for grownups."

The debate came about after ABC ran a story in January about hundreds of atheists videotaping themselves blaspheming the Holy Spirit.

"But," Comfort continued, "there is something more sinister here than a few people not believing in God. Why would so many be so bitter against Christianity in particular? Why aren't they making videos that blaspheme Buddha or Mohammed or Ghandi? We made our own video clip and posted it on www.Hollywoodblasphemy.com to expose why.

As of May 2 there is still an opportunity for people to join in the debate, by submitting questions that will be passed on to the panelists. ABC will limit the live audience to 100 people, evenly divided between atheists and believers. The debate will be moderated by Martin Bashir, and on May 9 a shortened version of the debate will be aired on Nightline.

For further information, contact mark@livingwaters.com