CHURCH AS JESUS PRAYED FOR IN JOHN 17

Film “The Last Reformation – The Life”

It is now available for everyone to watch on YouTube for free. You can see the movie with subtitles in around 30 different languages. Since the premiere in Holland, a little more than a month ago, there have been over 1000 screenings all over the world and the response has been amazing. People really loved the movie and after watching the movie many people experienced healing, deliverance, repented, got baptised in water and received the Holy Spirit.

Now it is time to share it with everyone out there, so they can see church  as God intended.

 

SPEAK THE MORALITY OF GOD AND THE SCOFFERS WILL HATE YOU

How do we react to the scoffers and wicked people? The Bible gives us clear instructions:

“He who corrects a scoffer gets dishonour on himself, and he who reproves the wicked man gets insults for himself. Do not reprove a scoffer, or he will hate you, reprove a wise man and he will love you. Give instruction to a wise man and he will still be wiser, teach a righteous man and he will increase his learning. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom and the knowledge of the Holy One is understanding.” Proverbs 9:7-10

“Do not correct a scoffer… do not reprove a wicked man” We are not to try and teach God’s laws to unbelievers. It is counter productive! Sadly, the majority have become scoffers. Why? Because they no longer believe the Bible is literally true. This includes pastors and Bible teachers leading entire denominations into unbelief. They do not care what God says about morality.

Ten Commandments

“A natural man does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.” 1 Corinthians 2:14

Look what James says about confrontations:

“Everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; for the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God… If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless.” James 1:19-20,26

What would listening to and understanding our “cultural” enemies look like? What would listening to homosexuals and alcoholics look like to understand their struggles? What would listening to liberals look like? How might we reach out to these groups with the love of Christ? How might we serve them? Remember the job of the Holy Spirit is to convict them of their sin. We need to be sensitive to what the Holy Spirit is doing, if anything, in their lives.

James then gives a second piece of advice:

“Pure and undefiled religion in the sight of our God and Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their distress, and to keep oneself unstained by the world. James 1:27

It is loving others as ourselves and living pure before Him despite what the world does that is what impresses our Heavenly Father. This is also what makes Christianity attractive. God does not win His battles through political means. He won and He wins by means of the Cross; self denial and love. Political activism won’t do it.

LOVE ONE ANOTHER AS I HAVE LOVED YOU

Consider how easy it is to tell the religious faith of many people in the world by their dress or actions. One religion’s members shave their heads, wear saffron-colored robes, play musical instruments, and chant and sing in public. The faithful of another religion stop and kneel for prayers, wherever they are, five times a day. Another religion’s orthodox members wear black coats and hats, white shirts, and have long, curly locks of hair or beards.

hindusburqa image

There is only one mark Jesus asked His followers to display to the world: the mark of love. He told His disciples,

“By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another” (John 13:35)

It is not if we dress or speak a certain way or act religious in a certain way, but if we have love for others. Loving people the way Jesus loves people is the true mark of His followers. Love is the highest kingdom value (see Romans 14:17; 1 Corinthians 13:13).

Let our love and service for Christ be translated today into love and service for others.

Does John Lennon offer any answers in “IMAGINE”?

In the wake of the recent tragic terrorist attacks, a popular video on You Tube with nearly a million views shows an unnamed pianist before a crowd on the street in Paris playing a piano with a giant ‘peace sign’ painted on it. He’s playing John Lennon’s song, “Imagine”—a song with a strongly secular humanist, antireligious message. In the lyrics, Lennon writes:  Imagine there’s no heaven, It’s easy if you try, No hell below us, Above us only sky, Imagine all the people,  Paris-attack-John-LennonLiving for today …, Nothing to kill or die for, And no religion too, Imagine all the people, Living life in peace.

Lennon was blind to the implications of this humanistic worldview he was promoting. If there is no heaven or hell, that means there is no ultimate reward or punishment for anything you do while living on this earth. This was what the apostle Paul meant when he wrote, “What do I gain if, humanly speaking, I fought with beasts at Ephesus? If the dead are not raised, ‘Let us eat and drink, for tomorrow we die.’” (1 Corinthians 15:32)

What does a world look like with no moral constraints from God? Far from the peaceful paradise that Lennon ‘imagines’, the history of the 20th century bore out the results, as the Marxist, atheistic communist regimes took over and committed murder and genocide on a mass scale never before seen in history. The simple fact is, the true morality of the Bible looks absolutely nothing like the actions taken by militant Islamists.

When terrible things like this happen, people always are moved to ask why a good God would allow such evil things to take place; but what people sometimes fail to realize is the very idea of ‘good’ and ‘evil’ that they are using to judge the situation comes only from God in the first place. Take this as an opportunity to share the Good News with those who are looking for answers!

Extracted from article by Paul Price http://www.creation.com

Answering an atheist on meaning and purpose of life

I hope this article “Answering a reasonable atheist on deep philosophical questions” from Creation Ministries International (CMI) 30th September, 2012 provides helpful answers for Christians and unbelievers as well.

To demonstrate that not all of CMI’s opponents are hostile and unreasonable, we publish feedback by Tim W. of the USA to our article – Answering the ‘new atheists’ (interview with Doug Wilson). In this, Tim W. sought to defend the proposition that atheism can provide meaning and purpose. Tim W.’s email is printed in its entirety  (red), and then followed by point-by-point responses by Dr Jonathan Sarfati.

This is an interesting article. I think you are on the right track when you suggest that modern atheists are worried at the resurgence of conservative Christianity in the United States. Frankly, it concerns me that so many politicians have anti-abortion views with which I strongly disagree. Part of my moral beliefs value limited rights of women to choose the fate of their unfertilized eggs, embryos and their own bodies. Similarly, I understand that Christians have legitimate reason to be concerned that unbelievers will influence a policy or social climate that permits the destruction of actual or potential human organisms. The stakes are high so it should be no surprise that the voices of atheism rise to compete with the voices of religion.

I also agree with the author, and with Hume, that one cannot infer what ought to be, in a normative sense, from what is, was or will be the case. In this way, it is reasonable to say that naturalism or ‘scientism’ cannot suggest a specific theory or morality. However, that does not mean that morality is not compatible with materialism, naturalism or atheism. It only means that morality must come from philosophy (ethics) rather than from theology. There is no reason why an atheist cannot have a more sophisticated ‘sense’ or theory of morality than someone who bases their beliefs of right and wrong conduct (or thoughts) on the teachings of a formal religion. My own beliefs are more consistent with a general sense of basic ‘fairness,’ than obedience to the demands of a deity.

Lastly, I don’t understand the basis of a statement such as “The atheist cannot put forward, within his own framework, a justification for why reasoning is trustworthy, or even worthwhile,” or “the atheist can’t account for reason if there is no God.” These are philosophical questions that do not seem to be contingent on the existence of a God. Is reasoning trustworthy or meaningful? Those are matters of epistemology, not theology. Moreover, I think it is far from obvious that neither life, nor anything else for that matter, can have meaning unless one believes in God. God may give your life meaning, but that does not mean that nothing can provide meaning for an atheist’s life. I can imagine an atheist saying that her daughter, for example, gives her life meaning. Would you call her a liar?

Response

Dr Jonathan Sarfati replies: Thanks (on behalf of CMI and the article author).

TW: I think you are on the right track when you suggest that modern atheists are worried at the resurgence of conservative Christianity in the United States.

JS: What is really striking is how many modern atheists have become such delicate little flowers. They are hurt and offended by plastic baby Jesuses at Nativity scenes and are in danger of having a stroke if they hear a student-led prayer at a football game. (But of course, anyone objecting to obscenity or porn should just look the other way or change channels.) Even leading atheist Richard Dawkins is not such a wimp; he joins in Christmas celebrations. What a contrast the modern activists are with the far more robust atheists of yesteryear who vigorously debated the formidable G.K. Chesterton, and remained good friends even after finishing second.

TW: Frankly, it concerns me that so many politicians have anti-abortion views with which I strongly disagree.

JS: It would concern me if we didn’t have that many. Once we dehumanize one class of humanity, there is no limit. See for example article – Unborn babies may “be planning their future”: What now for the abortion lobby?

TW: Part of my moral beliefs value limited rights of women to choose the fate of their unfertilized eggs, embryos and their own bodies.

JS: Well, there’s the problem: the unborn is not part of a woman’s body. A reductio   ad absurdum I’ve explained is: this would entail that a mother carrying a son must have a penis.

TW: Similarly, I understand that Christians have legitimate reason to be concerned that unbelievers will influence a policy or social climate that permits the destruction of actual or potential human organisms.

JS: Yes, that’s exactly the issue. Without the protection of life, no other right, real or assumed, has any meaning. ‘Rights’ to private property, housing, employment, medical care, or anything else, mean nothing if one is not alive to exercise them.

TW: The stakes are high so it should be no surprise that the voices of atheism rise to compete with the voices of religion.

JS: The problem arises when voices of atheism try to silence the voices of Christianity. This includes university ‘speech codes’, ‘hate speech’, the persecution of Christians in atheistic communist regimes, and the GayStapo attacks on the Church and family. See Gay marriage, politicians, and the rights of Christians.

TW: I also agree with the author, and with Hume, that one cannot infer what ought to be, in a normative sense, from what is, was or will be the case.

JS: A key point.

TW: In this way, it is reasonable to say that naturalism or ‘scientism’ cannot suggest a specific theory or morality. However, that does not mean that morality is not compatible with materialism, naturalism or atheism. It only means that morality must come from philosophy (ethics) rather than from theology.

JS: It certainly can’t come from the axiom ‘God does not exist.’

TW: There is no reason why an atheist cannot have a more sophisticated ‘sense’ or theory of morality than someone who bases their beliefs of right and wrong conduct (or thoughts) on the teachings of a formal religion. My own beliefs are more consistent with a general sense of basic ‘fairness’, than obedience to the demands of a deity.

JS: But where does the notion of ‘fairness’ come from in an evolutionary world? Surely it’s just a delusion caused by certain neurochemical activity that happened to be useful for our ancestors to survive. Just like rape was useful to spread our genes, as two evolutionists seriously argued in a book (look how one squirmed to justify why rape should be considered ‘wrong’). Similarly, the article Bomb-building vs. the biblical foundation documents how leading atheistic philosopher/logician Bertrand Russell could not explain why right vs. wrong was any different from choosing one’s favourite colours.

Think of consistent evolutionist and atheistic philosopher Peter Singer, who justifies infanticide, euthanasia, and bestiality. It’s also notable that some critics of my article Abortion ‘after birth’? Medical ‘ethicists’ promote infanticide claimed that Singer was an anomaly among atheists. Yet I showed that his pro-infanticide views were shared by the Journal of Medical Ethics and the vocal antitheist P.Z. Myers. See also Bioethicists and Obama agree: infanticide should be legal. He also wrote the major Encyclopaedia Britannica article on Ethics (1992), and earlier this year, the Australian Government gave him Australia’s highest honour, Companion of the Order of Australia.

TW: Lastly, I don’t understand the basis of a statement such as “The atheist cannot put forward, within his own framework, a justification for why reasoning is trustworthy, or even worthwhile,” or “the atheist can’t account for reason if there is no God.” These are philosophical questions that do not seem to be contingent on the existence of a God.

JS: I would say they are, as natural selection explains only survival value, not truth and logic. In Canada, one atheistic philosophy professor argued that these things would have selective value. I responded that this is not necessarily so under his belief system. After all, he must regard theistic religion as one thing that evolved for survival value, yet he would regard this as false and illogical. Thus survival, under his perspective, can be enhanced by the false as well as the true.

TW: Is reasoning trustworthy or meaningful? Those are matters of epistemology, not theology. Moreover, I think it is far from obvious that neither life, nor anything else for that matter, can have meaning unless one believes in God. God may give your life meaning, but that does not mean that nothing can provide meaning for an atheist’s life.

JS: One of my colleagues wrote in Answering life’s big questions: Only the Bible provides the answers:

Today we are effectively told, in the evolutionary story, that life is a fluke, a cosmic accident. In this case our existence lacks any purpose, so life is a farce. And where are we going, in this view? Fertilizer! In short, life is: Fluke … farce … fertilizer.

Evolutionist Richard Dawkins said that we live in a universe that has “no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference”. The evolutionists’ universe has no purpose because it is an accident; a cosmic accident. With evolution so widely taught in schools and universities, is it any wonder that so many lack any purpose or meaning to their lives?

As Susan Blackmore, psychologist and disciple of Richard Dawkins said, “If you really think about evolution and why we human beings are here, you have to come to the conclusion that we are here for absolutely no reason at all.”

TW: I can imagine an atheist saying that her daughter, for example, gives her life meaning.

JS: But hardly ultimate meaning, since both mother’s and daughter’s entire lives are just a blink of an eye in the uniformitarian cosmic scheme. Bertrand Russell said in his anti-Christian book Religion and Science:

Man, as a curious accident in a backwater, is intelligible: his mixture of virtues and vices is such as might be expected to result from fortuitous origin.

TW: Would you call her a liar?

JS: Not at all. A lie implies intentional deception, not just falsehood. As you could see from searching our site, we are very sparing with accusations of ‘lying’ (although some evolutionists justify deception and are just being consistent), as opposed to having a faulty interpretive framework. (However, we won’t deny that this prior adoption of this faulty framework is culpable according to Romans 1:20 and 2 Peter 3:3–7 and foolish (Psalm 14:1). But the point remains that a valid deduction from a faulty framework is not a lie.)

Ben Carson Calls America’s Relationship With Faith ‘Schizophrenia’.

GOP Presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson vowed to wage a war on what he called “Politically Correct (P.C.) police” before the Free Chapel megachurch in Gainesville, Georgia, on Sunday morning. He also described America’s relationship with faith as “schizophrenia,” noting that faith-positive messages are displayed on U.S. currency, yet there is an aversion to talk about religion.

“The pledge of allegiance to our flag says we are one nation under God. Many courtrooms in the land, on the wall it says ‘In God We Trust.’ Every coin in our pocket, every bill in our wallet says ‘In God We Trust,’” Carson told the thousands who came to listen to his speech at the megachurch, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.

Carson took time to sign copies of his book, A More Perfect Union, and said that people have been asking him why he is entering the political fray after a successful career as a neurosurgeon.

Ben Carson A Perfect Union

“Well, I’ll tell you why: it’s because America is worth saving. If that means getting into a war with the PC police, I’m ready to fight that war. And I hope you will join me,” the GOP candidate said.

The retired neurosurgeon attracted controversy last week for comments he made about the Oregon shooting massacre, when he suggested he would have done more than the other students, had he been at the scene of the crime.

“I would not just stand there and let him shoot me,” Carson said on “Fox & Friends,” talking about the Umpqua Community College rampage that led to the deaths of 10 people.

“I would say, ‘Hey, guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all.'”

Only a man, with faith in God’s promise of eternal life, would confidently make such a comment.

 

 

Liberal Party decision has protected Australia from God’s judgment

Tony Abbott made a courageous, God honouring stand, to ensure there is no change to the Marriage Act in his term of Parliament. Nor can we forget the other 65 members that supported him.

Sadly the young activists supporting same sex marriage shown in the picture below marching in Brisbane August 8th, 2015 have no fear and knowledge of the one true God.

Same sex marriage

God is sovereign over nations. History shows that he uses nations for His purposes, raising up and deposing leaders, at will. King Nebuchadnezzar, greatest king of ancient Babylon (Daniel 2), is a good example as is King Cyrus (Cyrus the Great) founder of the Persian Empire (2 Chronicles 36:22) whom God used to bring the Jews back to Jerusalem and rebuild the temple.

These young people therefore have no understanding that Tony Abbott’s decision protected Australia from further judgment by God.

As the consequences of changing the Marriage Act in countries such as Canada, UK, Ireland and the USA unfold, including persecution of Christians who hold to God’s ordained role of marriage, hopefully Australia will remain a beacon of light, blessed by our Almighty God.

The church of Australia needs to understand what a blessing we have been given and therefore responsibility to pray for and support our Christian brothers and sisters in all the domains but particularly Government. As well as Tony Abbott, Glen Stevens, Governor of the Reserve Bank comes to mind, as does Mike Baird, Premier of N.S.W., all three are staunch Christians.

MARILYN MOSBY – GOD’S ESTHER for African Americans

Baltimore’s State’s Attorney Marilyn Mosby on Freddie Gray Case: God ‘Put Me in This Position for a Reason’

marilyn-mosbymarilyn-mosby (1)

Marilyn Mosby prays with church leaders, including Bishop Angel Nunez, during a prayer breakfast in Baltimore, Maryland, on April 28, 2014

Baltimore’s State’s Attorney Marilyn J. Mosby, the woman who criminally charged six police officers in the death of Freddie Gray on Friday, is a practicing Christian who declared at a recent prayer breakfast that God “put me in this position for a reason.”

“Mosby is a Christian, she loves the Lord. She’s part of our Multicultural Prayer Movement. I was in her office last week. I took her hands and we prayed together, and we wept and I prayed over her and I said: ‘God has raised you a woman of God for such a time as this. This is why God put you here and we stand with you.’ The woman depends on the Lord. This is a 35-year-old woman, an Esther in this hour,” said Bishop Angel Nunez, who leads Baltimore’s Multicultural Prayer Movement, in an interview with The Christian Post on Friday.

On Tuesday at the Bilingual Christian Church, Mosby spoke with members of the Multicultural Prayer Movement group, of which she is also a member. At one point church leaders, including Nunez who has been her friend for five years, gathered around her and prayed.

“I was reminded of Isaiah 41 verse 10,” Mosby, who recalled once having self-doubt while seeking election as Baltimore’s state’s attorney, told the congregants.

“Fear not for I am with you, be not dismayed for I am your God. I will strengthen you, I will help you, I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.”

And that is what kept me grounded whenever I had that self-doubt, whenever I said this is too much for me to handle as a wife, as a mother, as an attorney. I’ve got to tell you that God got me through and I have to believe that He put me here for a reason,” she said.

“So we will pursue justice by any and all means necessary. I appreciate your support Bishop [Nunez], you’ve been there for me from the very beginning,” Mosby added, before alluding to the riots which appeared to come to a halt after charges in Gray’s death were announced.

“Nothing transcends the power of prayer and let me tell you, our young people, I know that they’re called ‘thugs.’ Those are young people crying out; there’s a sense of hopelessness in this city and there’s nobody that can touch them the way that you all can, the way that we can …”