A Leader For This Time, For His People

   

     There has been a lot of controversy and opposing opinions over the efficacy of Israel's Prime Minister speaking before the combined Houses of Congress.  Regardless of whether you think it was warranted or not, one cannot deny the historic significance.  Benjamin Netanyahu shares with another Prime Minister, Winston Churchill, the record for the number of times to speak before the Legislative bodies of the United States Congress.
     Not only do the two Prime Ministers share the unequaled honor of appearing three times, but they found common ground in the immediacy and purpose of their visits.   In the case of Churchill, he undertook a dangerous transatlantic journey on the HMS Duke of York, within days of the Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor.  He arrived in America on December 22, in time to spend Christmas at the White House. On December 26, Churchill gave an historic address to a joint session of Congress to win support for his concept of the war.  WW II was in full swing, and the Allies desperately needed the U.S.'s participation in order to defeat the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy and Japan.
     Yesterday, Prime Minister Netanyahu came to the Hill to present his case for avoiding WW III.  At the center of the debate is the negotiations between the U.S. and Iran over the latter's development of nuclear weapons.  In his remarks, he said, "I've come here today because, as prime minister of Israel, I feel a profound obligation to speak to you about an issue that could well threaten the survival of my country and the future of my people: Iran's quest for nuclear weapons."  There was no pandering, no fawning, or ingratiating flattery.  He was there to state his purpose, and it was clear what that was ... to call on his ally, the United States, to stand with him and protect his people.
     His people ... there was no doubt that this Leader was there on behalf of his people, not to increase his own power or fame; not to propagandize on behalf of his personal political agenda -- he was there to lay out his opposition to any negotiations with a terrorist state that threatened the existence of his people.  Perhaps his passion lies in the fact that he is the first Prime Minister born in Israel after the establishment of the State.  Perhaps his enthusiasm comes from his military experience.  He served as a member of Israel's special forces unit, leading many commando raids during the Yom Kippur War in 1967, among other missions.  Perhaps his emotion comes from losing his older brother during an Israeli commando operation to rescue hostages at the Entebbe airport in Uganda in 1976.
     But, as he pointed out, Iran's nuclear potential is not only an immediate threat to Israel and her people, but to the entire world -- including the United States.  I found it sad that he had to school our own legislators on the important factors they should be considering before signing any deal with the terrorist state of Iran.  "Just last week, near Hormuz, Iran carried out a military exercise blowing up a mock U.S. aircraft carrier. That's just last week ... while they're having nuclear talks with the United States! But unfortunately, for the last 36 years, Iran's attacks against the United States have been anything but mock. And the targets have been all too real.
     Iran took dozens of Americans hostage in Tehran, murdered hundreds of American soldiers, Marines, in Beirut, and was responsible for killing and maiming thousands of American service men and women in Iraq and Afghanistan.
     Beyond the Middle East, Iran attacks America and its allies through its global terror network. It blew up the Jewish community center and the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires. It helped Al Qaida bomb U.S. embassies in Africa. It even attempted to assassinate the Saudi ambassador, right here in Washington, D.C."
     Yet, we continue to negotiate with a nation that shouts "Death to America!" and calls us "The Great Satan".  Why does it take the Prime Minister of Israel to point out "Iran and ISIS are competing for the crown of militant Islam. One calls itself the Islamic Republic. The other calls itself the Islamic State. Both want to impose a militant Islamic empire -- first on the region, and then on the entire world. They just disagree among themselves who will be the ruler of that empire."
    Mr. Netanyahu wanted it understood that "in this deadly Game of Thrones, there is no place for America OR Israel; no peace for Christians, Jews or Muslims who don't share the Islamist medieval creed; no rights for women; no freedom for anyone."
     Is Iran someone we, the American people, want to negotiate with?  We can't even recognize or pronounce ISIS as an authentic threat, and as Netanyahu pointed out, "The difference is that ISIS is armed with butcher knives, captured weapons and YouTube, whereas Iran could soon be armed with intercontinental ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs. We must always remember -- I'll say it one more time -- the greatest dangers facing our world is the marriage of militant Islam with nuclear weapons. To defeat ISIS and let Iran get nuclear weapons would be to win the battle, but lose the war. We can't let that happen!"
     He went on to reiterate the numerous times Iran has refused the U.N. inspectors access to their military nuclear program, and the unimaginable consequences of letting the so-called "Sunset Clause" remain on the negotiating table.  In essence, this means that virtually all the restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will automatically expire in about a decade.  Think about that!  Think ten years is a considerable amount of time to rectify this issue?  On March 19th, it will be 12 years since the U.S. invasion of Iraq.  And has that "issue" been resolved to everyone's satisfaction?  As Netanyahu bluntly explained:  "[Ten years] is the blink of an eye in the life of a nation. It's a blink of an eye in the life of our children. We all have a responsibility to consider what will happen when Iran's nuclear capabilities are virtually unrestricted and all the sanctions will have been lifted. Iran would then be free to build a huge nuclear capacity that could produce many, many nuclear bombs."
     If the American people were smart enough to listen to this address by the Israeli Prime Minister, they would have heard facts that are seemingly impossible to get from our own government.  "Iran's Supreme Leader says that Iran plans to have 190,000 centrifuges, not 6,000 or even the 19,000 that Iran has today, but 10 times that amount -- 190,000 centrifuges enriching uranium. With this massive capacity, Iran could make the fuel for an entire nuclear arsenal -- and this in a matter of weeks, once it makes that decision.  Iran could have the means to deliver that nuclear arsenal to the far-reaching corners of the earth, including to every part of the United States."
     We are told that the power behind our negotiations is economic sanctions.  But who believes that this will in anyway stall Iran's plan to light the fuse on a nuclear tinderbox in that volatile region of the world?  Or that we can stem the tide of their aggression and dominance in the region with threats of trade barriers or financial restrictions?
    But what impressed me the most about this historic speech on the floor of Congress was the pride and forcefulness with which the Prime Minister represented his country.  He made it perfectly clear that Iran not only needed to stop supporting terrorism around the world, and stop its aggression in the Middle East; but it absolutely had to stop threatening to annihilate his country, Israel; the one and only Jewish state.  Most importantly, he clearly stated that "the days when the Jewish people remained passive in the face of genocidal enemies, those days are over!  If Israel has to stand alone, Israel will stand!"  
     I cannot help but admire his boldness in this, his nation's hour of crisis.  And I am unapologetic about my Biblical worldview when it comes to the nation of Israel and the Jewish people.  The West has been vocal in their criticism and restraint of Israel when it comes to defending herself.  But, as a believer in the Bible, I know that God will not allow Israel to be destroyed, and He will be her shield, her fortress, and her Deliverer.  The world would do well to keep that in mind.
     And then Benjamin Netanyahu closed his speech by pointing out to the Congress, the American people, and the world that our seat of government displays an image of Moses, the ancient Israelite leader who delivered his people from slavery to the gates of the Promised Land.  He then mentioned the message that Moses conveyed before the people of Israel entered the land of Israel.  It has become a significant theme for the Jewish people and has steeled their resolve for thousands of years.  "I leave you with [the words of Moses] today, (SPEAKING IN HEBREW), "Be strong and resolute, neither fear nor dread them."
     In the end, the real issue is whether our leaders will consider the warnings of the Leader of Israel.  Do any in our leadership still recognize the Biblical and historical significance of Israel?  Will they take the bold stand of hardline negotiations with Iran, or will they seek compromise and concession, thereby endangering Israel's very existence?  The answer to those questions will have significant and long-term effects for both Israel and America.  No matter what our nation's decision may be, one thing is for certain ... Israel will survive; God will make sure of that.

For a full transcript of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech, click here.

Psalm 25:22   "Redeem Israel, O God, out of all his troubles."


   

The History of American Education: From Classical Learning to Moral Relevancy

     I am often dumbfounded when I stop to consider the difference in my own middle and high school education as compared to what's taught these 35-40 years later.  I can remember studying and memorizing Lincoln's Gettysburg address.  I loved the long and exhaustive studies of Alfred, Lord Tennyson's Idylls of the King -- the epic twelve poems that retold the tales of the legendary King Arthur, his knights, his love for Guinevere and her tragic betrayal of him, and the rise and fall of Arthur's kingdom.

     But the terms of my education were nothing compared to the studies during the generation of our Founding Fathers.   As the website, Memoria Press, recounts ... Thomas Jefferson received early training in Latin, Greek, and French from Reverend William Douglas, a Scottish clergyman.  At the age of fourteen, Jefferson’s father died, and, at the express wish of his father, he continued his education with the Reverend James Maury, who ran a classical academy. After leaving Douglas’ academy, Jefferson attended the College of William and Mary, where his classical education continued along with his study of law.
     When Alexander Hamilton entered King’s College (now Columbia University) in 1773, he was expected to have a mastery of Greek and Latin grammar, be able to read three orations from Cicero and Virgil’s Aeneid in the original Latin, and be able to translate the first ten chapters of the Gospel of John from Greek into Latin.
      When James Madison applied at the College of New Jersey (now Princeton), he was expected to be able to “write Latin prose, translate Virgil, Cicero, and the Greek gospels and [to have] a commensurate knowledge of Latin and Greek grammar.” Even before he entered, however, he had already read Virgil, Horace, Justinian, Nepos, Caesar, Tacitus, Lucretius, Eutropius, Phaedrus, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Plato.
     So, what exactly is a "classical education"?  Historically, it was a course of study that was to develop exemplary citizens equipped with analytical thinking skills, virtuous character, and a passion for learning, all built upon a solid foundation of knowledge.  Sadly, these characteristics are disappearing from our modern educational system; especially as our kids are being threatened with the Common Core curriculum.
     Consider this op-ed in The New York Times by philosopher Justin McBrayer.  He states that he already knew that many of his college-age students did not believe in moral facts.  He says, "Philosophy professors with whom I have spoken suggest that the overwhelming majority of college freshman in their classrooms view moral claims as mere opinions that are not true or are true only relative to a culture"; the culture of Christianity, for instance.  Subsequently, this has led to an abiding belief in moral relativism, which is a philosophy that asserts there is no global, absolute moral law that applies to all people, for all time, and in all places. 
     You should know that Mr. McBrayer is an associate professor of philosophy at Fort Lewis College in Durango, Colorado, where he works in ethics and philosophy of religion.  So this is naturally an ideology that interests him and which he has seen often among his students.  But he wasn't prepared to see its tenets being conveyed in his son's second-grade classroom!  During the schools open house he "found a troubling pair of signs hanging over the bulletin board. They read:

Fact: Something that is true about a subject and can be tested or proven.

Opinion: What someone thinks, feels, or believes.

     So, what's the big deal, you might ask?  To cut to the chase, students are taught that claims are either facts or opinions.  And Professor McBrayer says that's a dangerous road that leads to moral relativism.  There are instances in which a person's opinion (or belief) is also a fact for him; his ideology can't be divided into fact OR opinion; it's both.  He prove's his point in this conversation with his young son:

Father: “I believe that George Washington was the first president. Is that a fact or an opinion?”

Son: “It’s a fact.”

Father: “But I believe it, and you said that what someone believes is an opinion.”

Son: “Yeah, but it’s true.”

Father: “So it’s both a fact and an opinion?”  The blank look on his son's face told the story.

     Do you see where he is going with this?  Can you see how the effort to separate a belief from a fact, could affect morality?  Every thought (or belief) that has some kind of value attached to it, could only be an opinion, never a fact.
     Now consider this Common Core worksheet, in which students were asked to label the following claims as either FACT or OPINION:
                                                •  Copying homework assignments is wrong.
                                                •  Cursing in school is inappropriate behavior.
                                                •  All men are created equal.
                                                •  It is wrong for people under 21 to drink alcohol.
                                                •  Drug dealers belong in prison.
     

     The answers?  Each one of these was labeled an opinion.  Since none of these could be tested or proven, then they must be subject to opinion only, and there is no truth in any of them.  Do you see the danger in this?  Ultimately, this is teaching our kids that anything that can be labeled good, bad, wrong, or right is not a fact.  Think how this mode of thinking affects our society.  When there is no consistency between what people decide is good or moral -- that it is all subject to one person's opinion versus another -- how do we ever raise children into moral citizens with critical analyzing skills and virtuous character?  If there is no moral standard that can be declared a fact for all, then anything goes, and there is no acceptable code of honor or behavior among a community.  Not only does the quality of living in that community subside, but chaos and confusion are the natural result.
     Just take a moment and consider that our Founding Fathers were fluent in Latin and Greek, could translate Books of the Bible, and were capable of defending themselves in a spirited debate.  Now realize that our public school systems are on the brink of failing our children.  They can hardly spell; their reading skills are poor; they can't divide or subtract without a computer; and they are lacking important critical thinking skills.  You might think that this is a different time, and the education that our Founding Fathers undertook does not relate to these times.  But it was the education they received that reinforced the knowledge, the skills, and the courage they would need to create this great nation. Are we giving our kids the education to carry on their moral values and traditions, and preserve the country?

1 Timothy 4:12   "Let no one despise you for your youth, but set the believers an example in speech, in conduct, in love, in faith, in purity."

Purim 2015: Historical Significance?

     Tomorrow will likely be an historic day in the relationship between the United States and its only democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel.  Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is scheduled to speak before Congress tomorrow.  It will be historical in light of the obvious rebuff by the White House and the contentious dialogue between the two leaders of state.
     This speech takes place at a time in the reborn nation of Israel's short history when all of its surrounding neighbors have declared their intention to "drive the Jews into the sea", and when even its Western allies seem to have abandoned them in their hour of strategic need.  The United States appears to be courting a "soft" negotiation with Israel's staunch enemy, Iran, over its development of nuclear weapons; a move that surely endangers Israel's security.
     But there is a deeper and far-reaching reason that this visit is historical.  Prime Minister Netanyahu's visit occurs one day before Purim, the Jewish holiday that commemorates the salvation of the Jewish people in ancient Persia from Haman’s plot “to destroy, kill and annihilate all the Jews, young and old, infants and women, in a single day.” (Esther 3:13).  In case you don't make the connection ... modern-day Iran is ancient Persia; and should Iran gain nuclear weapons they could certainly accomplish Haman's ancient plan in a single day.

     That is why, before his historic visit, Prime Minister Netanyahu paid a visit to the Western Wall.  I think it is important for all Americans to understand the significance of this holiest site in Judaism.  That's why I went to Aish.com, a leading Jewish website, to be able to explain to you why the Prime Minister of Israel went there.  Here is what you need to know:
     The Western Wall is a surviving remnant of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which was destroyed by the Romans in 70 AD. The Temple was the center of the spiritual world, the main conduit for the flow of Godliness. When the Temple stood, the world was filled with awe of God and appreciation for the genius of the Torah (which is specifically, the first five books of Moses; Genesis - Deuteronomy -- and sometimes, in general terms the Torah is considered the entire Old Testament).
     Although other parts of the Temple Mount retaining wall remain standing, the Western Wall is especially dear, as it is the spot closest to the Holy of Holies, the central focus of the Temple, and where God's presence dwelt.  The Temple Mount is also where Isaac was bound for sacrifice.  And it is here that his son Jacob dreamed of the ladder ascending to heaven.  As you can see, this site has great historic significance, as well as religious magnitude for both the Jewish and Christian faiths.
     In ancient Israel, men from across the vast breadth of the Land God had given them were commanded to travel to Jerusalem to worship at God's Temple.  Each time the Temple was destroyed throughout the centuries, and through all their captivities and exiles, Jewish prayers from around the world have been directed toward the Temple Mount.  The Western Wall also became known as "The Wailing Wall" because of the centuries of endless tears, shed by Jews yearning to rebuild Jerusalem.
      Finally, in establishing the eternal covenant with Abraham, God promised that the Jewish people will never be destroyed (Genesis 17:7). In this way, the Wall is a symbol of the Jewish people: Just as there have been many efforts to destroy the Wall and yet it remains eternal, so too the Jewish people have outlived their enemies and remain eternal.  Now, can you see why Netanyahu might want to visit this important site before coming to state his nation's purpose before Congress?
     With Iran as a nuclear threat, it is no mere photo op that finds Mr. Netanyahu at the Western Wall. The Wall has been the focal point of those who have fought for Israel in the past -- during the Bar Kochba revolt, Israel's heroes fought like lions for every stone of the Temple. When the Maccabees defeated the Syrian-Greeks, the first thing they did was to purify the Temple and light the holy Menorah.  In the 1948 Arab-Israeli war, when the ceasefire lines were drawn, Jerusalem was divided and Jews were once again banished from the Western Wall, permitted only to gaze across the barbed wire from afar.  In the 1967 Six Day War, Israeli paratroopers entered the Old City through the Lion's Gate. "Har Habayit b'Yadeinu!" – came the triumphant cry – "The Temple Mount is in our hands!" Amidst shofar blasts, grown men wept and danced at the Western Wall.  After 2,000 years, Jerusalem was finally united under Jewish control, with free access for all.  The Western Wall defines the tenacity of the Jewish people to survive against all odds, and it is fitting that Israel's national leader would visit it before appealing to its Western ally to reconsider any concessions they might make to Israel's ancient enemy.
     It is also fitting that at this time in Israel's history, their leader's name is Netanyahu, which is the Hebrew form of the name Nethaniah, which means "YAHWEH has given".  It is also fitting that after his speech to Congress and a meeting with bipartisan leaders, Mr. Netanyahu will fly back to Israel in time to begin the Purim observance and the celebration of his nation's salvation from the ancient Persians.  Just as the ancient Israeli Prime Minister, Mordechai, stopped the anti-semitic actions of the evil Haman, this modern Prime Minister is standing up for the right of the Jews to defend themselves against their enemies.  May God bless his mission tomorrow!

Esther 10:3    "For Mordecai the Jew was next to King Ahasuerus [as Prime Minister] and great among the Jews, and was a favorite with the multitude of his brethren, for he sought the welfare of his people and spoke peace to his whole race."
   

1 Peter 3:18-22 ... Baptism Is Spiritual Warfare!

18 For Christ [the Messiah Himself] died for sins once for all, the Righteous for the unrighteous (the Just for the unjust, the Innocent for the guilty), that He might bring us to God. In His human body He was put to death, but He was made alive in the spirit,

19 In which He went and preached to the spirits in prison,

20 [The souls of those] who long before in the days of Noah had been disobedient, when God’s patience waited during the building of the ark in which a few [people], actually eight in number, were saved through water.

21 And baptism, which is a figure [of their deliverance], does now also save you [from inward questionings and fears], not by the removing of outward body filth [bathing], but by [providing you with] the answer of a good and clear conscience (inward cleanness and peace) before God [because you are demonstrating what you believe to be yours] through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

22 [And He] has now entered into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with [all] angels and authorities and powers made subservient to Him.

     This is a controversial passage in the Bible for a number of reasons; and you will often find the shepherds of Jesus's flock ignoring it because they do not understand the full significance. But we should not be afraid to tackle Scripture, even if it means setting aside the theological traditions of our particular denominations.  Let's let Scripture say what it says.
      By bringing it to your attention, I do not intend to create friction or conflict within the Body of Christ.  Rather, I would like to share a very important point that I have recently come to understand about this vital passage... Baptism is actually a declaration of spiritual warfare!  Let me explain how this particular Scripture teaches us this important concept...

     Whenever one studies the Word of God, we must be careful to discern the whole counsel of God; in other words, consider a passage within the context of the entire chapter or the particular book of the Bible.  In 1 Peter, which is only 5 short chapters, the Apostle is speaking about the role persecution will play in the lives of new Christians, and how we must persevere in our faith.  He makes it clear that our response to persecution is all-important.  In fact, we are to imitate Christ, who suffered for us, and is in turn, our living Hope.  And out of our perseverance we will develop character that is rooted in submission throughout our lives ... submission to the government; submission in business; submission in marriage -- submission in all of life, which includes suffering and persecution.

     Then he tackles an important consideration.  How are we to conduct ourselves in our suffering? In Chapter 3, he gives us these curious verses that give us Christ's example that we are to follow.  But what does the inclusion of spirits in prison, Noah and the ark, the Flood, and Baptism in this passage signal to us?  How does this point to the example Christ gave us in regards to suffering/persecution?  And how do we link Christ's suffering in verse 18, with his glorification in verse 22?  Remember ... our response is very important.  Let me see if I can explain...

     First, we have the declarative statement that Christ died for our sins; for the sins of all -- righteous and unrighteous; just and unjust; innocent and guilty.  The Scripture makes it clear that His human body was killed, but His spirit was alive and he "preached to the spirits in prison."  What does this refer to?  Well, 2 Peter 2:4 spells it out pretty clearly ... "For God did not [even] spare angels that sinned, but cast them into hell, delivering them to be kept there in pits of gloom till the judgment and their doom."  Sounds like "spirits in prison" to me!
     We should also be able to agree that some time between His death and resurrection, Jesus visited the realm of the dead where He delivered a message to spirit beings.  This is referenced in Ephesians 4:8-10 (Therefore it says, “When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.” In saying, “He ascended,” what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fulfill all things).  We know that he took the righteous with him to Heaven when he ascended after His resurrection. (He tells the thief on the cross, "Today you will be with me in Paradise"- Luke 23:43). But what about the unrighteous who are mentioned in Luke's account of the rich man in Abraham's bosom (Chapter 16) -- or the fallen angels who did not "keep to their first estate (heaven)" and to whom "He has reserved in custody in eternal chains (bonds) under the thick gloom of utter darkness until the judgment and doom of the great day" (Jude 6)?
     It is very important that we recognize that the "angels that sinned" mentioned in 2 Peter 2:4 and Jude 6 are one and the same; they are fallen angels -- the very ones that Genesis 6:1-4 is talking about.  They are the ones that came to earth and mated with human woman, producing Nephilim (hybrid) offspring.  Subsequently, these are the "spirits in prison" mentioned in 1 Peter 3:19.  And Peter identifies them as such in the very next verse!  They were the "disobedient" ones in the days of Noah (referring to Genesis 6:1-4 again); in the days that God was patient while Noah built the ark.  And then we all know what happened after that, right?  God wiped all the corrupt flesh and the disobedient ones off the face of the earth with the Flood.
     Only Noah and his family survived God's punishment.  As those last words in 1 Peter 3:20 say, "they were saved by water."  The following verse makes it very clear that Baptism is "a figure" of the Flood -- an illustration or a representation of the same effect of the Flood.  Very simply, it is a theological analogy.  And we must understand that Baptism is not an act that yields salvation.  Being baptized does not offer or result in the act of salvation from the justified wrath of God for the commission of sins.  The Scripture tells us in verse 21 what it saves us from -- it saves us from ever doubting or fearing our salvation.  Baptism does not involve the washing of our robes to white (or the cleansing of our souls), but it is actually done as a declaration of what you have gained through your faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ as your Savior.  It is your response to the free gift of salvation, and a proclamation to the spiritual realms , telling them who you belong to; to whom you are obedient.   In fact, the Greek translation of verse 21 says Baptism is "the witness" of a good conscience toward God -- by being baptized, you are witnessing to the spiritual realms that once again God has buried sin (through water) to give rise to another soul that is regenerated.  It is something you do to present yourself as belonging to God; it declares your witness TO the spiritual realm and your pledge BEFORE God.
     To put it in simple terms, verse 19 says that Jesus preached to "the spirits in prison".  What did He preach?  He told them that they were still defeated despite His crucifixion, and they would remain there until the Great Day of Judgment.  When we are baptized, it once again declares to those spirits that they are still defeated ... that Jesus has risen and He is the agent of our Salvation!  Our baptism represents Victory (just as did Jesus's resurrection) over every demonic spirit, whether imprisoned below, or in the spiritual realms.
     And to seal the deal, verse 22 announces His resurrection and that Our Lord has entered Heaven, sits at the right hand of the throne of God, and [all] angels and authorities and powers [are] made subservient to Him!  If you doubted that Baptism is part of our spiritual warfare, please note the language that Peter uses here ... angels, authorities and powers.   This is the same language that Paul uses in his letter to the Ephesians as he instructs them in spiritual warfare ... For our struggle is not against enemies of blood and flesh, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the cosmic powers of this present darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly places.
     It is important as modern Christians, that we make this connection ... this kind of language was common and well-understood in the first century Church.  It has been all but lost in today's culture ... except for Satanists, occultists, witches, and the like who understand that there are rulers, authorities, powers, and spiritual forces of evil!
     Think how much more effective we could be as Christians if we recognized that we are in a spiritual war for men's souls!  Think about what it says to the spiritual forces of evil when you make the heart decision to pledge your allegiance to the risen Lord through the act of Baptism ... you are saying that you are on the Lord's side in the cosmic war of Good and Evil!  Every baptism is a further renunciation of those fallen angels, still in prison, and who sought to corrupt mankind.  In the Early Church, baptism rites included a formal rejection of Satan and his angels, for that very reason! Believers were asked, ""Do you renounce Satan, and all his angels, and all his works, and all his services, and all his pride?" They were then asked, "Do you unite with Christ?" The renunciation of Satan and the union with Christ expressed faith that the newly-baptized person had been transferred from one master (the Prince of this world) to another (Jesus Christ, Lord and Savior, and Son of the Living God).  At that time, baptism was clearly part of spiritual warfare ... it still ought to be recognized as such today!


    

"I Will Not Back Down"

     Yesterday, I talked about the very real danger of this nation losing its identity as independent free-thinkers and upholders of our inherited freedoms.  But I'd like to tell you two stories of individuals that have decided to stand up for our fading values.
     You might recall an essay I wrote last summer that involved William Baer, who appeared at a meeting of his local School Board to protest a book that had been assigned to his 14-year-old daughter.  Mr. Baer stood up to say that he felt the sexual content of the book was inappropriate, and he wanted to voice his objection.  However, the members of the school board didn't want to hear it, and asked him to sit down.  Apparently he wasn't being "respectful" of other audience members.
     Understandably, this offended the conscientious parent and he said he didn't appreciate the school being disrespectful to his daughter by requiring a book (that he clearly felt was immoral) to be read.  He was then told that he had violated the 2-minute rule for speaking and was escorted out of the room and arrested.
     As World Net Daily reports, his "unlawful arrest" and the criminal charges that were filed against him were eventually thrown out of court, but Mr. Baer has decided that "it’s time for elected leaders to stop trampling the First Amendment rights of citizens," and he is fighting back with a lawsuit against the officer who made the arrest, then-acting Police Chief James Leach.  For the past seven months, Leach, along with the subsequently appointed Police Chief, continued to prosecute the case against Mr. Baer, until County Judge James Carroll tossed the case out of court.
     Baer said his lawsuit is as much about stopping the national trend as it is seeking justice for himself.  “These men abused their authority and their positions under color of law. The ‘law enforcers’ became lawbreakers and must be held to account.”
     Mr. Baer is among a growing number of law-abiding citizens who have been arrested for speaking up for their principles.  Parents who disapprove of the Common Core educational system are being harassed at public meetings, and in one such case, in Baltimore County, Maryland, a parent was approached by a burly security guard, pushed, shoved, threatened and eventually handcuffed and forced to leave the meeting.
     It is just such treatment that is behind Mr. Baer's lawsuit.  Baer maintains that the three charges of disorderly conduct brought against him were unwarranted and he wants justice for himself and his family.  “After seven-and-a-half months of being pursued by the State of New Hampshire, through the Gilford Police Department and School Board, I am obviously pleased that all charges have been dismissed. Belknap County Judge James Carroll showed me there still is some justice in our system,” he said.  But he makes it clear that this is not about vindictiveness ... it's about standing up for our First Amendment rights.
     I also want to tell you about the story of a 70-year-old Christian florist in Washington state who is being sued for refusing to provide floral arrangements for a same-sex wedding.  Although she offered to help the couple find a florist who would service them, that wasn't good enough.  The inevitable lawsuit was filed and Barronelle Stutzman was found guilty of violating Washington's nondiscriminatory statute.
     But here's what is so disturbing to me about this story ... According to The Christian Post, the man filing the lawsuit has been a customer of Stutzman's for the past nine years!  She had built great rapport with the customer and an obviously satisfactory business relationship.  But when she honestly confided that due to her faith, she felt she had to decline his request for his wedding, any friendship went out the window.  The "guilty" sentence and summary judgment could involve Stutzman losing not only her business, but her home and savings.
     The state's Attorney General offered Barronelle a way out of the overwhelming judgment ... simply pay $2001 in fines and legal costs -- and agree to service gay weddings in the future -- and it would all go away.  But Ms. Stutzman is no "luke-warm" Christian.  In response to the Attorney General's letter, she replied with a letter of her own:  "Washington's constitution guarantees us 'freedom of conscience in all matters of religious sentiment.' I cannot sell that precious freedom," Stutzman's letter asserts. "You are asking me to walk in the way of a well-known betrayer, one who sold something of infinite worth for 30 pieces of silver. That is something I will not do."
     She also managed to school the AG on exactly what the word "freedom" means.  "Your offer reveals that you don't really understand me or what this conflict is all about. It's about freedom, not money," Stutzman wrote. "I certainly don't relish the idea of losing my business, my home, and everything else that your lawsuit threatens to take from my family, but my freedom to honor God in doing what I do best is more important."
     This florist certainly has the courage to stand behind her faith and convictions.  "I pray that you reconsider your position. I kindly served Rob for nearly a decade and would gladly continue to do so. I truly want the best for my friend," Stutzman's letter stated. "I've also employed and served many members of the LGBT community, and will continue to do so regardless of what happens with this case. You chose to attack my faith and pursue this not simply as a matter of law, but to threaten my very means of working, eating and having a home."
     Not only is she clear about how she wants to be understood, but she speaks for me and, I believe, many more Christians across this nation when she says, "Our state would be a better place if we respected each other's differences, and our leaders protected the freedom to have those differences," Stutzman wrote. "Since 2012, same-sex couples all over the state have been free to act on their beliefs about marriage, but because I follow the Bible's teaching that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, I am no longer free to act on my beliefs."  Well said!
     In the stories of these two people, we have excellent examples of standing for our principles and values, as well as our religious beliefs.  It would be simple for each to accept the olive branch that has been offered after the miscarriage of justice against them.  For each, it is not about profiting from injustice, but about fighting back against a system that is one-sided and tyrannical.  It is about standing up for their God-given and Constitutional rights.  It's really that simple ... and that necessary.

Proverbs 25:26   "Like a muddied spring or a polluted fountain is a righteous man who gives way before the wicked."
   


   

   

The Indoctrination Of Our Children

     I'd like to know what comes to your mind when you read this radical statement ... You can't make socialists out of individualists.  Children who know how to think for themselves spoil the harmony of the collective society which is coming, where everyone is interdependent."  How about Constraint? Regulation? Dominance?

     It might surprise you to know that this statement was made by John Dewey, a well-known American philosopher, psychologist and educational reformer.  From his statement, it doesn't take a genius to figure out that he was progressive, a socialist, and often credited with fathering the 20th century rift between religion and science.  Furthermore, it probably wouldn't surprise you to find out that he was an atheist and a secular humanist, which means he gave no credence to faith as the basis for morality and decision-making.

     Which brings us back to his corrupting influence on this nation's educational system of the last 100 years.  He made the disparaging statement (which I cited above) in 1896, when he signed on to the Humanist Manifesto, a document that elaborated on a philosophy and value system which does not necessarily include belief in any personal deity or "higher power".  Combine this anti-God ideology with socialism and you can easily see why free-thinking and self-reliance could never be tolerated in our society.  And more importantly, you can see how far down that road we've come.

     I have said all this to bring us up to speed in regards to our current situation.  John Dewey's philosophy has been the impetus for our rulers for the last century; while discreet at the beginning, they were successful in stealthily leading us down this path towards collectivism, entitlement and shared community.  But there's a funny thing about Americans.  At the core of their makeup is the unique DNA that just cannot be filtered out.  That's why we see our current state of affairs ... executive orders and blatant violations of the Constitution are becoming commonplace because the remnant of the "historic America" is awakening to the plans to control us, regulate us, and steal our freedoms. 

     We are wise to the out-of-control spending, the over-stepping of authority, and our declining stature in the world.  You can sense the near panic and anxiety that time is running out to completely transform America.  The last great gasp of hope before it all caves in is to gain the hearts and minds of our kids.  If they can indoctrinate them, us older individualists will be dying off, and there will be no one to recall the true meaning of freedom.

     So, how do they accomplish that?  First of all, by implementing programs that show the kids that the government is responsible for caring for them.  Remember when you used to bring your sack lunch to school and every kid had something different to trade?  You could always get a Hostess cupcake in exchange for a bag of Cheetos.  Now, the government prohibits bringing your own brown bag lunch and standardizes the amount of sugar and fat allowed.  In the guise of "healthy lunches", the kids are actually receiving smaller portions of highly processed foods.  But that's not the point ... the real issue is that our kids are getting used to being told what to eat, and discouraged from making their own decisions.

     Secondly, can you remember when your teacher was due respect at school, but your mom and dad were the ultimate authority in your life?  Now, our kids are being told that their teacher is the authority figure in their lives, and their parents aren't really qualified to teach them about the important things .... like sex education, religion and faith, global warming, gun control, free speech.  You name it -- if different opinions from the "accepted government" positions are expressed, students are discouraged and often penalized for voicing them.  

     Your child is being told that opposing opinions are not only invalid, but dangerous to the harmony of the collective.  Anyone hearing such opinions is encouraged to report it to their teacher.  Are your parents, grandparents, or neighbors storing extra food?  Have a concealed handgun license?  Oppose same-sex marriage?  Make "disparaging remarks" against anyone of another race or religion?  Think how easy it is to manipulate kids into talking about what is said at home ... a lecture on love and respecting each other can quickly become a re-education session on why there is no difference between Tommy's two mothers and little Janie's mom and dad.  They are never schooled in the fact that the conception process for Tommy and Janie are profoundly dissimilar -- one is a natural function of our bodies; the other is scientifically generated.   

     And by casting aspersions on parental authority and opinions, it is not hard to conceive that our children are becoming defacto followers of the state; like sheep being led to the slaughter.  Just think about it ... one more generation and the brainwashing could be complete.  

     The question now becomes, "are there enough of us to stall this covert takeover of our kids and our nation?"  Are there any willing to do the hard, dirty work to stand up and voice their God-given right to be individualists, independent, self-sufficient , and able to self-determine their lives?  Tomorrow, I will share the stories of two such people who are refusing to bow to the pressure.  These are the real role models for our youth!

1 Timothy 6:20-21   "... guard the deposit entrusted to you. Avoid the irreverent babble and contradictions of what is falsely called “knowledge,” for by professing it some have swerved from the faith."

The Cause and Effect of Our Economic Decline

     I can remember being a senior in high school in the early 70's and the endless possibilities that lay before me.  My future was only limited by my ability to dream big.  Anything I wanted to do or become was possible.  A college education was expected, and with a little hard work, and the availability of low-interest educational loans, I was able to get my degree in four years, and was gainfully employed within 2 months of graduation -- actually employed in a profession that pertained to my degree.  And that was at the beginning of the Carter Administration and the subsequent years of recession!

     Today, I know so many young adults that are struggling under the heavy financial burden of school loans, with no jobs in sight.  First of all, I sometimes wonder at the lack of perception of parents who did not guide their children towards degree plans that reflected the changing dynamics of the American economy.  Couldn't parents discern that jobs in social work or psychology or the liberal arts  aren't exactly abundant in this economy?  I can't tell you how many college graduates I know who have heaped more debt on themselves by opting to go to graduate school because of the lack of jobs in their field.  Does that make any sense to you?  

     Now, if you listen to the policy makers in Washington, they will tell you that our high unemployment rate is due to the lack of skilled labor in this country.  But that's a ridiculous argument when you consider that many of the people serving you coffee each morning at the local McDonald's have at least an associate's degree; with many of them bachelor's or master's degrees.  The real truth is that according to the Economic Policy Institute (a non-profit, non-partisan think tank), for every two American college graduates with degrees in science, technology, engineering, or mathematics, only one of them is hired into a job in their field.  Why?  Because the jobs are simply not there. Did you know that 30% of college graduates are consistently underemployed?  So,  it's not that we don't have the skilled labor, or the smart labor, or the educated labor ... it's that these jobs no longer exist in the United States.  Did it ever occur to you that the high rate of unemployment is because the U.S. is no longer the major innovator that it once was?  That the jobs have been exported, while our products are increasingly imported?
     The truth is that companies can no longer afford to invest in training; and benefit packages are becoming a thing of the past.  Promotions are fewer, while hiring and wage freezes are now commonplace.  As if that is not depressing enough, machines are predicted to replace human jobs at an ever-increasing pace.
     Let's face it.  We have become both a "service-oriented" economy and a nation where the government is one of the biggest employers.  We are no longer the manufacturing powerhouse we once were.  Economics 101 tells us that the manufacturing sector began hiring cheaper overseas labor, which resulted in higher domestic numbers of unemployed; and eventually the manufacturing itself went overseas and we began importing our products -- "made in America" became a rare slogan.
    Common sense tells us that a healthy economy depends on its citizens having spendable income, and with unemployment at such high levels, there will soon be no one to take advantage of the services Starbucks, McDonalds, hair dressers, cosmetologists, or yoga instructors offer.  None of these businesses encourage innovation among their employees or customers.  I think that is why the TV show Shark Tank is such a huge hit.  It celebrates the creativity, ingenuity and inventiveness of the American entrepreneur.  It gives us hope that with some dedication, hard work, and a hand up, we can achieve great things; that we can once again become a nation who celebrates independent and successful businessmen.
    The bottom line is that 0% interest rates and added government entitlements is no way to "stimulate" an economy.  Until we become producers again, and teach the next generations to create their own futures, they may never know the success that is their birthright.  Finally, I can't help but see a correlation between the beginning of our economic decline and our departure from being a God-centered nation.  You would think someone besides me would make the connection ...

Proverbs 16:3   "Roll your works upon the Lord [commit and trust them wholly to Him; He will cause your thoughts to become agreeable to His will, and] so shall your plans be established and succeed."
   
       

     

In Defiance of the Culture

     It is becoming increasingly difficult to write about any advancement in the state of human affairs.  Every report, or announcement, or news item sounds as if mankind, those ruling over them, and the very planet itself have become disconnected from reality.  You have stories of giant sinkholes appearing around the globe; strange "booming sounds" being heard across the country; economic meltdowns forecast in Ukraine, Greece, Europe, and right here at home.
     Christians are being tortured, burned and crucified in the Middle East -- the very birthplace of our faith.  The fate of 90 more are in the balance after being abducted by ISIS fighters in northern Syria.  Historic Middle Eastern books, numbering over 8,000, have been burned in Mosul, Iraq in barbaric acts that have seen shrines, tombs, books, and ancient manuscripts destroyed in the effort to establish an Islamic caliphate.
     The very freedom of ideas is at stake as we await the ruling on net neutrality.  And the very existence of the world is at risk as nations are rightfully concerned about the terms of the Iran nuclear talks.  Will Iran be limited in their pursuit of nuclear capabilities?  At the same time, what does it mean that Russia’s state-owned defense conglomerate Rostec has offered to sell advanced anti-aircraft missiles to Iran?

     The freedom of speech and religion are under attack when a 70-year-old women can be threatened with the loss of her business, home, and personal assets for refusing to compromise her faith and sell flowers for a same-sex wedding.  At the same time Oklahoma law allows for religious statues as long as they are paid for with private donations.  So that's why The Satanic Temple intends to plant the goat god, Baphomet, on the lawn of the Oklahoma state Capitol, alongside a monument of the Ten Commandments.  This statue of Baphomet portrays him as a horned, winged, sexually ambiguous, goat-like deity, with a goat's body and cloven hooves; with a smooth and muscular chest, thin shapely lips and rectangular pupils.  A flame protrudes from the top of his head, and from his lap a staff with two snakes wrapped around it: a caduceus. When the piece is completed, Baphomet will be seated on a throne underneath an inverted pentagram. On either side of him, two children — a boy and a girl — will gaze up adoringly.  So I guess it depends on which religion you promote, whether you are free to express it, right?
     Let's not forget "designer babies", and babies born with three or more parents.  Nothing is impossible or forbidden!  And this is just scratching the surface!  What has happened to logic and order and morality?  What has happened to standards of decency and the recognition that "moral relevancy" is out of control -- that mankind is incapable of judging the right and wrong of his own selfish and depraved desires?
     I'm not saying that there is no good left in the world.  There will always be those who shine God's light into this dark world; and those who rise above humanity's baser tendencies.  God will see to that.  But I fear that rarely has history seen such a confluence of man's authority on this earth in such rapid decline -- whether it pertains to such spheres as societies, governments, political systems, militaries, religions, educational systems, scientific advancements, technological developments, medical imperatives, or how he perceives himself in relation to his Creator ... it all speaks to man's inability to look beyond his own narrow existence.  We have become products of our own self-centeredness, and our high opinions of ourselves.
    But the good news is that there is a noticeable shift and a rising up of people who are willing to become "counter culturalists" as author Joe Battaglia calls them.  There is a courage and a sense of power and strength in standing for one's holy convictions.  We are tired of the intellectual dishonesty, the unbridled pride of men, the overwhelming presence of unbelief ... and we are more than willing to speak in absolutes; categorical, unconditional, and incontrovertible truths.  We are not willing to compromise our words or morals to please the majority or a vocal minority.  I know that it is an unpopular stance in this day of "tolerance" and "equality".  And we can expect to be ostracized, excluded, shouted down, and eventually persecuted.  But there's one thing the Enemy can count on: we will be unmoved in our purpose and our intention.  We were created for this time, and no amount of deception will discourage us.

Matthew 24:45    "Who then is the faithful, thoughtful, and wise servant, whom his master has put in charge of his household to give to the others the food and supplies at the proper time?"



 


     
     
   

Oprah Showcases The Church's Apostasy

     How does a so-called "Pastor" stray so far from God?  The Bible is very clear that every church needs a shepherd who will feed, and guide his flock to spiritual growth and service for the Lord Jesus.   God's Holy Book says a pastor "must hold fast to the sure and trustworthy Word of God as he was taught it, so that he may be able both to give stimulating instruction and encouragement in sound (wholesome) doctrine and to refute and convict those who contradict and oppose it [showing the wayward their error]." (Titus 1:9).
     Instead, The Christian Post featured an article showing just how far the "modern Church" has veered off the narrow path.  Recently, Oprah Winfrey featured radical churchman Rob Bell and his wife Kristen on her TV show.  They were there to promote their new book, The Zimzum of Love: A New Way of Understanding Marriage.  If you guessed that he is pushing an agenda for same-sex marriage, you would be correct.  In fact, they state that the Church is just "moments away from embracing gay marriage."  And, if you are wondering what in the world "Zimzum" is, you may be surprised to discover that it comes from the observance of Kaballah, the ancient Jewish tradition of mystical interpretation of the Bible.  In Hebrew the word Zimzum means "contraction".

     Rob Bell and his publishers define it this way: "Zimzum is a Hebrew term where God, in order to have a relationship with the world, contracts [pulls back] -- creating space for the creation to exist. In marriage, zimzum is the dynamic energy field between two partners, in which each person contracts to allow the other to flourish. Mastering this field, this give and take of energy, is the secret to what makes marriage flourish."
     First of all, where is God in this Zimzum ... this dynamic energy field between two partners?  Does this pastor truly believe that God is going to abandon His part in one of the most important relationships He has ever instituted?  Does that sound like the God of the Bible?  Doesn't His Word say He is Sovereign?  And who is Rob Bell to think that he can 1) re-define God's instruction for marriage, and 2) presume to suggest that God would change (or contract, or pull back on) His position of Authority to accommodate man's cultural desires?
     This is what angers me the most about the new crop of "culturally identified" ministers of the Gospel!  They no longer separate themselves from the world; and indeed, they cultivate a sympathetic connection with the culture and society, thinking that will make them more relevant and popular.  And who better than Oprah Winfrey to help spread the "new gospel"?
     What is the basis for his call to redefine marriage?  "One of the oldest aches in the bones of humanity is loneliness. Loneliness is not good for the world. Whoever you are, gay or straight, it is totally normal, natural and healthy to want someone to go through life with. It's central to our humanity. We want someone to go on the journey with."  Presented in this manner, his argument for same-sex marriage becomes all about LOVE.  He then asks, how could we, as Christians, deny another human being the opportunity to love?
     But he misses the bigger picture.  Yes, God designed us in His image; and the God of the Universe seeks not only an intimate, personal relationship (centered in love) with each of us, but desires that we express love to each other.  But here's the deal, when it comes to MARRIAGE, He gives us a very specific manner in which to conduct this sacred relationship.  And His Word is also very precise about how He feels about sex between two partners of the same gender.  But according to Rob Bell and pastors like him, “The culture is already there, and the church will continue to be even more irrelevant when it quotes letters from 2,000 years ago as their best defense [against same-sex marriage], when you have in front of you flesh-and-blood people who are your brothers and sisters, and aunts and uncles, and co-workers and neighbors, and they love each other and just want to go through life with someone.”
     So let me get this straight ... as the Church of Jesus Christ, we should follow the culture?  Whatever is accepted of the culture should be adopted and approved by the Church?  The Culture now outranks God?  As if that's not a big enough slap in the face to us Christians who seek to live God's values in the world, instead of being of the world, Bell has now decided that the word "Christian has so much baggage" that he doesn't wish to question whether his friend and mentor, Oprah, even is one.
     These issues of the approval of homosexuality and same-sex marriage are threatening to split apart the Body of Christ.  I want to make it clear ... In no way, do I sit here today and condemn a person for being homosexual.  That is not my place.  And a person's sexual preference does not dictate whether I like them, or whether I am able to love them.  (To the contrary, some of my dearest friends are gay and I honestly love them).  But I cannot deny what God's Word says, and I cannot compromise my faith and approve of homosexual relationships or same-sex marriage.  As a Christian, I must submit to the explicit, straightforward teaching of Scripture, and I will not be coerced to accept an unBiblical position in order to be "culturally acceptable or relevant."
     In this short video on the book they wrote together, Rob and Kristen Bell actually paint this picture of what a relationship should be ... about the "pull of dynamic energy" that draws two people together.  "The art of marriage is protecting that energy flow because it can become this extraordinary source of life."  Of course, this promo is designed to be vague (and non-threatening) about who the partners are, while at the same time, inclusive to embrace people of all gender combinations in this institution called "marriage".  Plus, did you notice that the primary "source of life" is the couple, and not God?  I don't know about you ... I love my husband more than anything or anyone on this planet, but we both agree that our "Source of Life" (with capital letters) is our Lord and Savior.  Without Him, our marriage is earth-bound.
     That's how Satan does it ... convincing us that marriage is meant to be about "protecting that energy" between two people, no matter who they are -- then get Christians to question each other about whether they are demonstrating love for their fellow man -- followed by a pastor or two who will accept same-sex marriage from the pulpit, thereby preaching false doctrine -- and, hey, even elect homosexual priests and pastors and clothe them in elegant robes and performing baptisms, weddings and sacred ceremonies.
     For instance, Episcopalian Bishop Gregory Rickel is quoted as saying, "Same-sex couples are not asking for special treatment.  They are asking for equal treatment.  They are asking to be accountable, as a couple, in community.  To me, this is a conservative proposal.  I am for it..."  But here's my question, Bishop ... aren't they forgetting who they are to be accountable to?  It's more than an issue of being answerable to each other, or the community in which they live ... ultimately, we all have to be accountable to the One who created us, and who gave us commandments on how we are to live our lives!  The modern Church only seems to be concerned with gaining approval from the culture ... nobody is looking UP!!!  So, do you see how it will work?  Before long, if you are not on that bandwagon, then you, my fellow Christian, will be declared irrelevant and intolerant.
     As sorrowful as I am about the apostasy of the modern Church, I am not surprised.  That same irrelevant book written 2000 years ago -- the very one that Rob Bell demeans -- told us we would face this.  But it also tells us that there will be a True Church that will not falter and will stay faithful to God's commandments.  And no matter what Mr. Bell or Oprah Winfrey think, God is still the Supreme Authority and Power in this world and the next.  One day they will see His "dynamic energy" and bow before His throne.

For another well-written article on Rob Bell's latest attack on the Bible and the Church, click here.

2 Peter 2:1-2    "But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you, who will secretly bring in destructive heresies, even denying the Master who bought them, bringing upon themselves swift destruction.  And many will follow their sensuality, and because of them the way of truth will be blasphemed."

What Does It Mean?

     

   

     This post may have some of you thinking that PLW has fallen off his rocker -- or at least his studio chair.  He always waits an hour or more after we get up in the morning to tell me when he has had a strange dream; as if he is trying to discern whether it is spiritual or just the results of a late night snack before bed.  But a few mornings ago, what he had to tell me was different than any other "incident".
     It's a joke between us that no matter how hard he tries to stay awake and read with me before we turn out the lights, he is a lightweight.  He can't read for longer than a few minutes before he says, "I'm out" and he turns off his bedside light.  That night was no different.  He was reading his latest issue of International Artist, got sleepy, leaned over for his good-night kiss, and called it a night.  I watched him pull the blanket up to his neck, roll over, and he was out in a matter of seconds.  I quickly followed, as it had been a busy and tiring day.  Nothing unusual about our routine ... we both slept solidly until the alarm went off at 6 AM.  Only, it appears that something "out of the ordinary" took place during the night.
     As we began to share our plans for the morning, he told me that he thought something "supernatural" had happened while he slept.  I asked him if it was a dream, and he said, "No.  This was different".  He then proceeded to tell me that he woke up feeling pressure on his chest, as if something or someone was sitting on him.  As he came out of the grogginess of sleep, he discovered that there was a book laying on his chest.  It was not what he had been reading the night before ... remember that was a magazine ... and this particular book had been laying in a stack of books on the floor, beside the bed, and out of his reach.  It was a book he has been reading, off and on, over the past week or so, and between other material.  The title of the book is A Prophecy of the Future of America by Paul McGuire, an internationally recognized prophecy expert, author, and speaker.
      My husband tried to think if he had gotten out of bed to read this book, but knew that he had not moved all night, nor turned on the light; and he has never sleep walked that I know of in the 28 years of our marriage.  (Besides the fact, that he would have woken me up if he had done this on his own).
     As if all this was not strange enough, a bookmark had been moved from where he had placed it, to an earlier chapter that he had long ago read.  The title of the Chapter?  Syria, Russia, China, Iran, Israel, America and World War III!  So what do you think?  Was this a supernatural event?  The finger of God placing this particular book, and marking this particular chapter, for him to be aware of?  Are we supposed to read it again and warn others?  I have to tell you that PLW has received some pretty urgent messages in his dreams that we know have come from God.  But the instructions have always been clear and direct and personal.
     (SIDE NOTE:  Let me be clear in saying that in no way, do I think this event is a prophecy or "vision" from God. I believe that He still speaks to us through dreams and inspired imaginations, but today, we Christians do not have the supernatural abilities that the prophets of old did.  I do not believe there will be an Isaiah or Ezekiel or Daniel that will accurately predict the future.  That being said, I cannot ignore the "hints" and "warnings" that have come our way and obviously been spiritual in nature.)
     So, I decided to take a look at this chapter in the book, and see if I could discern anything you might need to know.  Just giving you the chapter subheads and a brief synopsis of each point would be enough to get your head spinning!  But what if you are supposed to hear this, and we were reticent in presenting it to you?  All I know is that this "event" the other night happened for a reason, and we feel we should be obedient in passing it on.
     So here goes ... the basic premise of this particular chapter is the recognition that the U.S. has involved itself in a Middle Eastern war.  The premise of the author is that throughout history "many great empires and world leaders have attempted to control this geographic region, because whoever controls this vital region controls world power!"  This was certainly evident when Alexander the Great conquered it, the Roman legions ruled over it, and appears to be at the center of history today. Now, let's take a look at some of the subheads within the chapter:
•  America and Regional Thermonuclear and Global Thermonuclear War.  A quote from Paul McGuire, the author:  "With China on the threshold of having the world's most powerful economy and military, along with Russia's extremely powerful military, there have been dangerous warning signs about the potential conflict between America and these nations".  Is there a massive military buildup coming against America?
•  Red Dawn, The Trans-Pacific Partnership, and the Rise of China.  In a 2011 article titled "The Pacific Century", then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, wrote that the U.S. was beginning a shift from involvement with Iraq and Afghanistan to "more involvement in the Asia-Pacific Region" with nations like China, India, Japan and South Korea, because we see a shift in the key engines of the global economy."  What does that mean for America's stature in the world and the future of our role in the world economy?
•  From Russia With Love:  Meteors and the Coming Nuclear Attack on America.  Paul McGuire points out that on February 15, 2013, two Russian nuclear-armed bombers circled the Western Pacific island of Guam, equipped with nuclear-tipped weapons.  U.S. jets were scrambled from an air base on Guam, but it is important to note that this event occurred just hours before President Obama's State of the Union address.  Was this a strategic message being sent from Russia to Washington, D.C.?  Is Russia the super-power mentioned in Ezekiel 38?  And is this why some Bible scholars maintain that America is not mentioned in the Bible?
•  Running the World On Science and Technology the World Does Not Know Exists.  This was the truly alarming section of the chapter.  As early as 1968, a very powerful politician in America (you will have to buy the book to find out who), wrote this concerning society being controlled by science and technology:  "The current transformation also poses profound philosophical issues concerning the very essence of social existence, since it is largely derived from an unprecedented expansion of scientific power over both man's environment and man himself).  That was 47 years ago, folks!  And look where we're at!  Google has been moving us down the path towards implantable chips inside our heads for the most effortless search engine imaginable!
     The rest of the chapter -- and the book -- warn that America must not accommodate itself to the "world spirit of this age".  The breakdown of our culture is evident, and the Body of Christ must take responsibility for allowing it to happen while on our watch.  We have not defended the Bible as the inerrant and inspired Word of God.  Instead, we have allowed science and technology to usurp the position of God; we have allowed false teachings to promulgate in the Church; and even the supernatural has been reduced to man's imagination.
     As I finish this post, I am left with wondering what, if anything, I am to take away from these strange interconnection of events.  Can the placement of the book on PLW's chest be easily explained away?  Is that book and that chapter accidental, or by design?  Is it all just a coincidence that my limited human brain cannot fathom?  All I know is that my spirit is telling me to prepare and ready myself.  I know that I am to listen to the Holy Spirit, and to encourage and inform those who will hear and see.  I know that God wants our attention on Him, and not the world.  We are to seek God in these days, and look heavenward, for our redemption is nigh.

1 Chronicles 29:11    "Yours, O Lord, is the greatness and the power and the glory and the victory and the majesty, for all that is in the heavens and in the earth is yours. Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and you are exalted as head above all."