Reasons Christians use for sending their children to government schools

This is an excellent article on why Christians should not send their children to public (government) schools written by Gary DeMar of americanvision.org.

http://americanvision.org/7001/reasons-christians-use-for-sending-their-children-to-government-schools/

God has given us the responsibility to train our children, not that we can't employ other people to help out now and then. 

All of life, including academics, is training.

As a Christian, it doesn't  make sense to me to send them into a lion's den, the government school system, when they are suppose to be at the most tender and impressionable stage of being shaped and molded, which in my opinion and from personal experience is well into their teen years.

Here's a strange objection I have heard someone say, "Children need to go to school so that they don't acquire their parents' idiosyncrasies."

Really?!! So they should acquire someone else's idiosyncrasies? 

The bible has plenty to say about who you hang around with. We tend to become like those people we hang around. In our frailty as sinners we tend to be attracted to the baser elements of human nature.

Not only is the whole structure of government education set up for being anti-God, but being around a lot of other foolish children (yes, my children are foolish. The bible says so) for long periods of time is detrimental to your training of your children in the Christian faith and in good manners.
And don't even get me started on the high school experience. UGH!

Even the teachers can be a foolish influence. 

Out of 12 years (kindergarten through 12th grade) of my government education, I have only one teacher that I can remember that made a good impression on me. That was my 2nd grade teacher.

Most of my teachers weren't bad and I'm sure part of it was me, but there were a couple of mean ones.

Actually, I don't know if I can blame them; having a room full of rambunctious kids.
The most important objection, though, is that their end goal and their worldview may be different than what you want for your children as Christians.

I sent my oldest two children to a small Christian school. They only attended there for a few years before we decided to homeschool.

The teachers that my children had were good teachers, in the academic department and more importantly in the character department. But that does not excuse me from my responsibility.

One of the issues Mr DeMar brings up is that public schools are funded by taxpayers.

The government is forcing us to pay taxes for the education of other people's children.

That's pure socialism. The funny thing is that people who are against socialsim and would like to see their tax burden reduced, think it acceptable for the government to extort our money to educate their children.

Guess what? I am paying for their children's education, but they aren' paying for my children's education. I am paying for both.

We are never going to be perfect, even as Christians who walk with the Lord. We are all sinners. We parents are going to make mistakes and the public school teacher is too, even with the best of intentions.

But I know with all of my heart that the precepts in the bible convict me to homeschool and not send my children to a government, socialistic, propagandistic school system.

Let me use an example my husband uses in determining doing what's right, for the way I feel about homeschooling:

"When I was running around with the neighborhood kids, we came to a house under construction. They wanted to throw rocks at the new windows. But I knew that I shouldn't. My dad never told me NOT to throw rocks into a window. But I knew my father and what else he had taught me. And from that I knew he wouldn't want me to throw rocks and break someone's windows."

I know my heavenly Father and the precepts he teaches us in His word well enough to know that sending my kids to get educated un an atheistic environment would be sin.

I like this quote from the article:

"What do you think Jesus would have said if Jewish parents were sending their children to the local Roman schools?"

Here is the article:

Reasons Christians use for sending their children to government schools

A short video clip of me putting my finger on one of the main reasons America is in spiritual, moral, educational, and political decline is that more than 90 percent of Christian parents send their children to government-regulated, State-run schools.

I’ve been asked by a few people to comment on objections that are often raised against abandoning the government school system in America. The no-public-education view isn’t popular with the majority of Christians. Speaking out against public (government) education in America is for some akin to blaspheming all that’s deemed holy. What would communities do without their high school sports teams and their “free” education?

In order to justify the continued support of government education, the following arguments are often made:

“We can’t afford to send our children to private schools.”

It’s hard for me to believe that 90 percent of families that send their children to government schools do so because they can’t afford the biblical alternative. I know better. Non-government education does not have to be expensive. You don’t even need an accredited school to get into college. Your church is vacant most of the time. Why can’t it be used as a school? Homeschooling is always an option. Educational co-ops and internet educational curricula are available for most subjects. There are homeschooling companies that will mail you an entire curriculum. All you have to do is teach it.

There’s the issue of the money being used to fund government schools. Where does the money come from? It’s taken from property owners, many of whom do not have children in government schools. Is this morally justified? Why should I be paying for the education of somebody else’s children?

If Christians pulled their children out of government schools, voted down every tax increase having to do with education, repealed the education portion of the property tax, and supported candidates who would cut every dollar from education funding, then most families could afford the costs involved.

The money spent on trying to “save” public schools would go a long way to establish scholarship funds for families who cannot afford a private-school education. Yes, it may even take some sacrificing on the part of some. Drive a fourteen-year-old car like I did while my wife and I sent our children to non-government schools. Live in a smaller house. Don’t eat out as much. There are many ways to cut spending to fund the real necessities of life. When your children get older, have them work to share the financial load for the younger children.

“Only a few things need to be fixed to make Government Schools Better.”

There still government schools paid for by confiscated money from people who don’t use the government schools. In addition, the entire government school paradigm is warped.

Laura Mallory is a concerned mother of three. She wanted the Harry Potter books removed from the library of J. C. Magill Elementary School in the Gwinnett County, Georgia, public school system where her children attended because she said the books, which have world-wide sales of more than 500 million, glorify witchcraft. Mallory first took her complaint to the county school board in September 2005. In May of 2006, the board decided that the books should remain in the library. Malloy then took her concerns to the state board where a decision would be made.

Here is an indication of her naïveté, believing that if Harry Potter is banished all will be right in the public schools and that the schools and all the teachers will have the best interest of the children at heart. She says:

“When my children are at school, I’m trusting them to the teachers and that school. They are my most precious things in the entire world to me. I surely don’t want them indoctrinated into a religion whose practices are evil.”^[1]

Why would anyone trust their children to an educational system that is diametrically opposed to a Christian worldview and using stolen money to pay for it?

She has embarked on a fool’s errand. I’m always amazed when I read stories about well intentioned parents who want this book removed or that course dropped as if these minor changes will result in an educational reformation. It’s not going to happen. The sooner parents learn this, the sooner they will save their children from things worse than witchcraft — like the belief that public education is a neutral endeavor designed to equip young people to be objective learners.

Based on what the courts have decided over the years, the public schools are “religious (Christian)-free zones.” In a word, they are officially atheistic. You would think that most Christian parents would be concerned about this. They’re not. They continue to believe that public education can be saved. It can’t. It’s not meant to be.

Mrs. Mallory is spitting in the wind when she doesn’t have to. Her children are being co-opted everyday by a more subtle type of witchcraft, the “philosopher’s stone” of the magic-laden and irrational worldview of materialism. Her children are being taught that they’ve descended from animals, that they are animals. “When it comes to DNA,” the people at Timemagazine tell us, “a human is closer to a chimp than a mouse is to a rat.”^[2] This is first-rate paganism. Gone is the belief that we are endowed by our “Creator with certain inalienable rights.” This concerned mother is more concerned what sits on the library shelves than what is actually being taught in the classroom.

Public schools have become the new worldview battleground. Christians are fighting on the enemy’s turf when they should be building their own educational kingdom. Harry Potter is a symptom of a larger crisis that is easily fixed if parents take the responsibility of educating their own children and refuse to turn them over to the State for secular propagandizing.

“It’s not the church’s job to educate.”

I’ve heard this one a lot. Christian school critics balk at turning over the church’s facilities for educational purposes because the tithe is designed to support the church’s work, not the education of children. “That’s why we pay taxes,” I’ve been told. The church building is vacant six days a week. Sunday school classrooms are used for forty-five minutes a week! What a waste of God’s money.

Our church supports numerous missionaries. Many of the missionaries we support build schools. Why is it OK to build schools in Africa with our tithe money but not in our own backyard? Would we want these new Christian converts to be taught by the secularists from whom they were redeemed? It makes sense in pagan lands to build and fund alternative schools, but not in the United States.

So we send our children to public schools where they are indoctrinated for thirty hours of classroom instruction each week for ten months each year for at least twelve years in the latest non-Christian propaganda. To combat secularized education, Christian school critics develop “youth programs” for Wednesday and Sunday evenings. These kids are getting at most two hours of weekly second-rate religious instruction, while a child in a Christian school receives thirty hours of training from a biblical perspective. There’s no comparison. Most church “youth programs” are entertainment gatherings with a “devotional” to give them religious legitimacy. With all generalizations, there are exceptions.

When I attended Catholic school, there was no Sunday school instruction for students who attended. The assumption was that religious instruction was woven into the curriculum. When my parents sent me to public school in the sixth grade, I had to attend religious instruction on Saturday morning to make up the deficiency. There is no way that the 45-minute instruction period could compensate for what I was and was not receiving at the local government school.

“My child is a witness for Christ in the public schools.”

He or she may be. But I wonder how much witnessing actually takes place in public schools. Most of the time children are sitting at their desks listening to a teacher lecturing on a secularized curriculum. From the time I entered public school in the sixth grade, no one ever presented the gospel to me. It’s the friendships that are developed after school that lead to witnessing opportunities. Witnessing can take place anywhere. Jesus met people at work and in their homes. He even went into the temple. If you want to follow Jesus’ example then go witness to Jews in their local houses of worship. Jesus never witnessed in a school. What do you think Jesus would have said if Jewish parents were sending their children to the local Roman schools?

“Our school is different.”      

I heard this one from the head of a prominent Christian ministry. I told him that it’s a common response. In fact, as much as I hear it, it seems that no one’s school is bad. It’s always some other community’s school system that’s in need of reform. My guess is that most parents have no idea what’s going on in their child’s school. If they don’t hear any bad news, they assume that all is well. Keep in mind that public school children are not comparing their education with the public school education that was prominent forty years ago. And it wasn’t that great back then. The education students are receiving right now is normal for them. It’s the only standard they know, and it’s not a very good one. Anyway, a school that does not teach from a Christian perspective is at best third-rate and dangerous.

I’m also aware that not all private Christian schools are perfect, but at least you have a choice, and homeschooling is always an option.

“I want my children exposed to the ‘real’ world so they will be ‘socialized.’”

Who defines what constitutes the “real world”? The real world is where Christ dwells and where His Word is taught. Christianity is not unreal. If it is, then why not worship with pagans since their domain is the “real world.” Remember, Adam and Eve “fell” from what was normal, that is, from a world where they were in intimate fellowship with their Creator. A world without Christ is an insane and irrational world as we see all around us. The Christian school is a place of re-creation, a redemptive attempt to get back to the original design. Christians should be setting the agenda for what’s real, honest, and good so as to be a light for those who are in darkness.

The socialization argument is another red herring. Home schooled kids are probably more socialized than government educated kids. Homeschoolers are around children and adults. They learn how to deal with competition among children of various ages. Their interaction with adults gives them confidence. Consider the following from an interview with Jeremiah Lorrig, spokesman for the Homeschool Legal Defense Association (HSLDA):

“’Homeschoolers have one benefit everyone acknowledges is a benefit,’ Lorrig says. ‘It’s that parents who are involved in their kids’ lives enable and empower them to be all they can be. Having parents involved in their kids’ lives helps them to succeed both academically and socially, so that they can become people who will ultimately help to shape our culture and our future.’”

“As an illustration of how homeschoolers are already impacting the nation, Lorrig points to current Congresswoman Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-WA), considered to be one of the ‘rising stars’ of the Republican Party, elected in 2010. Beutler is also the first homeschooled member of Congress in recent history.

“Lorrig challenges the myth that homeschooled children are not ‘socialized.’”

“The numbers indicate the opposite,” he states. “Homeschoolers are more likely to be involved in communities, churches, scouts, and politics. They tend to outperform public school children, even after school is officially over, when they are out living their lives.”

The Supreme Court as Balaam’s Donkey

I believe God has been giving us a very clear message through the modern-day equivalent of Balaam’s donkey: The United States Supreme Court and nearly every lower court. Balaam was called on by Balak, the king of Moab, to prophesy against Israel. God had warned Balaam to stay away from Moab. Balaam refused. The Angel of the Lord met Balaam on the road as he was going down to meet Balak. Balaam’s donkey refused to confront the Angel of the LORD. Balaam struck his donkey three times to force him ahead. Finally, Balaam realized that it was the Lord who was directing him to turn around.

Repeatedly the Supreme Court has ruled against Christians and their attempts to bring Christianity back to the classroom. Like Balaam, a majority of Christians refuse to heed the message that God is giving through the Court: Seek a different route.

Saying prayers at sporting events, reciting “under God” in the Pledge of Allegiance, praying around a flag pole once a year, and having the right to “a moment of silence” do not constitute a Christian education. The entire curriculum must be Christ-centered. God is speaking to us through the Court. Do we have the sense to listen to what God is telling us?

When Disappointment Turns to Discouragement

Great article in http://www.thenewamerican.com/
written by Sterling Lacy who serves as county judge in Bowie, TX.
http://www.thenewamerican.com/culture/faith-and-morals/item/14281-when-disappointment-turns-to-discouragement

What patriot is not disappointed with the recent election results? The prospect of four more years of the same old, same old is enough to dampen the spirit of even the brightest-eyed optimist. Any constitutionalist has to wonder just how far outside the boundaries of the written law and moral truth we can wander before something finally snaps. Historians tell us no nation has ever slid this deep into collectivism and amorality and pulled out. Prophets of doom are claiming we are already past the point of no return.

But the gravest danger on the horizon is not coming from outside the circle of Americans fighting for less government. The gravest danger is a growing discouragement within our own ranks. Sometimes within one’s own self. Many, Christians especially, have just given up. Some believe the battle is lost: Obama and agnostics are successfully implementing laws to eliminate religious freedoms almost at will, and culturally, sex, smut, and immorality rarely ever rate public condemnation. When condemnation does happen, it is often directed at Christians, not at “wrong.” Others believe that modern events match well with biblical prophecies that indicate we are at the “end times,” the times immediately preceding the second coming of Christ. In either case they have adopted the credo, “Why bother?”

Well, I want to tell why we should bother and tell how to be effective.

Why Bother                                                                                            

Let me start with two reasons that Christians should get involved. First, absent action, things can always get worse. Isaiah 5:13 teaches that a nation can be taken into captivity because the people, even God’s people, lack knowledge and understanding. As government power rises, so inevitably does oppression. Take for example government mass murder in Cambodia, Russia, Germany, China, Guatemala, Uganda, and elsewhere, as well as Europe’s increasing use of “hate speech” laws to persecute Christians in those nations.

Assuredly, America’s first president would concur. A statement attributed to George Washington that encapsulates his view is: “Government is not reason, it is not eloquence, it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” Benjamin Franklin, too: “No man’s life, liberty or property is safe as long as the legislature is in session.”

Second, since, as it says in Matthew 25:13, “ye know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh,” Christians must not shirk our responsibility to help fulfill God’s plans on Earth as long as we are needed. In the manner of our Founding Fathers, let us do our duty to God and trust Him to provide miraculous results.

When Jesus walked the Earth and performed miracles, He required humans to trust Him and do the part they were told to do. Then the miracle came. For instance, at the wedding feast in Cana, Jesus required men to fill pots with water before He would provide more wine for the wedding party. If those men had not done their duty, it is unlikely Jesus would have added His part, the miracle.

What about the miracle of feeding 5,000 people with five loaves and two fishes? If the little boy had refused to share his lunch with Jesus, there would have been no miracle. There is no doubt that the Son of God could have created the loaves and fishes out of nothing if He wanted. But what He wanted was a person who would make the sacrifice that invites the miracle.

Before Jesus raised Lazarus from the dead, He told some men to roll away the huge stone closing the grave. No doubt if He could raise to life someone who had been dead four days, He could move a stone, no matter how large. But Jesus required human agents to be involved. No matter how mi­nute a part a human being plays in God’s miracles, God chooses to make us an essential part of His greater plan.

Did you note that in each of these examples, Jesus did not expect people to work miracles? America needs a miracle! God is in the miracle-working business. The first ingredient of miracles is for man to invite the miracle and assist in the receiving of the miracle by hopefully and dutifully doing his part. If America’s enemies succeed in discouraging America’s patriots, if they can trick us into giving up hope and walking off the battlefield, how can we expect a miracle from God?

James A. Garfield as a young minister had an aversion to politics. But being a truth-seeker, he eventually saw in his Bible God’s instructions for civil government. He became convinced that a Christian’s duty was to participate in public affairs. Before becoming president in 1881, he wrote on the 100th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence the following insightful and prophetic message: “Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless, and corrupt, it is because the people tolerated ignorance, recklessness, and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave, and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature. If the next centennial [1976] does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation did not aid in controlling the political forces.”

Staying Motivated

But, you say, it’s hard to stay involved in a losing effort. True, if you perceive it to be a losing effort. But how you perceive events is up to you.

When I was elected in 2010 to be a Texas county judge, I closed a 35-year family counseling practice. As a counselor I served over 10,000 clients. Most of those people had one thing in common: They had allowed life’s disappointments to turn into personal discouragement.

It is one thing to experience disappointment. That can be painful enough. But it is a much more serious matter to allow those disappointments to eat away at our resolve. When we allow a dark cloud that is over us to move inside us, we have moved from a manageable problem to a seemingly overwhelming and insurmountable disaster.

Please note that disappointments by themselves cannot overwhelm us. We cannot be overwhelmed until we allow the problems pressing on us to take root in us. Once we have moved from being disappointed to the point of being discouraged, we have started down the path that robs us of our courage to act. That is what the word discourage means: to deprive of courage.

If disappointments automatically caused discouragement, then someone like Mother Teresa should have died the most discouraged person on Earth. Her decades-long battle against poverty and disease ended with a larger portion of the world’s population in poverty and disease than when she began. However, she did not die discouraged, but joyful. How did she keep so many of life’s disappointments from turning into discouragement? Obviously she did not stick her head in the sand or walk through a world of hurt wearing self-deceiving, Pollyannaish blinders. No, Mother Teresa faced the reality of grave disappointments without succumbing to debilitating discouragement for two primary reasons. First, she committed her sacrificial works in order to please God. Second, she took joy in serving each impoverished person that she could.

This leads to the all-important question: How do we keep our disappointments about what is happening in the political arena from turning into a personal discouragement that paralyzes us into inaction and defeat? Are we supposed to go through life with a Pollyannaish denial of the reality surrounding us? No, of course not. Pollyannaish denial also leads to inaction and defeat. This head-in-the-sand approach to politics was one of the main issues causing the disastrous results of the recent election.

Unconcerned people don’t investigate the truth of things and don’t view events historically. They do not know what happens to a people when their government is allowed to exceed its boundaries. Indifferent people do not take the time to stay informed. That is why they are not motivated to take action.

Not only must we avoid “denial,” but we must develop a capacity for seeing the big picture, in order to be able to offer solutions to problems and generate hope in others.

Have you ever heard the old saying, “He can’t see the forest for the trees?” The obvious point is that a person can be so close to a small clump of trees that he can no longer see the larger forest.

When applied to counseling, this describes nearly everyone I have ever counseled. In effect each one had put his nose up against an ugly, rotten tree in the forest of his life (a happening in his life). Losing the larger view of life led to an inability to think of a workable solution. Often they had become depressed and lost hope that there was even a solution.

When applied to patriotism, this describes the average American today. Most have never been given the larger picture. I sometimes refer to this bigger picture as the “hillside view.” Having had public education, most Americans have never received the sweeping historical picture of mankind’s struggle to find a governmental system that allowed the most personal liberty while protecting them from tyranny. In their religious training, most never received the Judeo/Christian view of the unprecedented God-given blessings received when the free-market economic system is practiced.

Winning Strategy

The aforementioned counseling principle also suggests the obvious first step to winning the battle to restore Americanism: Before we can expect consistent wins at the ballot box, we must win the battle in the minds of our friends and neighbors. Before we can win elections, we must win the electorate. We win the electorate by educating them about both what built up America and what is tearing down America, not by giving up or ignoring the problem.

The essential foundational victory will not be won in Washington or in our state capitals. It must be won first among our friends and neighbors in our houses, schools, churches, and towns. And remember, what we are “for” always has to be more important than what we are “against.” Our approach must always include the hillside view.

If I approach my neighbor with a serious problem but I don’t tie my concerns to the freedom principle being violated, then I may have helped America’s enemies by inviting my neighbor to stick his nose against one ugly, rotten tree in a beautiful forest. If I don’t keep the big picture in mind, if I don’t express opposition from the perspective that this is a bad idea because it violates a good principle, I could find myself squarely in the middle of a big dose of discouragement. When working to reach a neighbor who has had his head in the sand, there has to be a balance between focusing on what is destroying America and what made her great.

This is why I have been such an ardent reader of The New American magazine from its very first issue: In the framework of what is right about America, I get the unvarnished truth about the destructive actions our current leaders are taking. While the magazine educates me about the ugly, rotten trees, I am constantly reminded of the beautiful forest planted by America’s Founding Fathers.

Moreover, it must be made clear that in politics all outcomes are planned: Stalin and his henchmen planned to take over Russia, Hitler and his helpers planned to rule Germany, President Wilson and his mentor Edward Mandell House planned to bring about socialism in this country, FDR worked to discard the Constitution and embroil us in a world governing body, the European Common Market was meant to become a regional Europe-wide government (something nearly everyone admits nowadays, but for decades denied), and Goldman Sachs works to place its executives in important positions throughout government to influence financial laws and government spending. If people think that the repercussions of political events are merely unintended consequences or naively conceived plans, they will feel helpless to change things. If they feel that a plan can be laid and followed to unmake mistakes, they will likely feel empowered.

There are two basic views of world history: the accidental view of history and the conspiratorial view of history. And actual political history, as has been made clear, has been the result of groups of individuals working secretly toward a common, illicit goal — such as enveloping all nations in a world government.

A good example of this comes from Arnold J. Toynbee, historian, Royal Institute of International Affairs (RIIA). The RIIA is the British sister organization to America’s Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). Writing in 1931, Toynbee stated, “I will merely repeat that we are at present working, discreetly but with all our might, to wrest this mysterious political force called sovereignty out of the clutches of the local national states of our world. And all the time we are denying with our lips what we are doing with our hands.”

David Rockefeller, chairman emeritus of the CFR, wrote in his autobiography Memoirs about his family’s political agenda, saying, “Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure — one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it.”

Of course, plans that would be unpopular with the masses when they are initiated are often hidden in plain sight merely through denying the obvious. In a letter to the editor of the New York Times on August 25, 1980, 22 years before his admission in his autobiography, David Rockefeller scoffed at the idea that he and other powerful Americans were working in concert to establish a one-world political and economic structure. He began the letter, “I never cease to be amazed at those few among us who spot a conspiracy under every rock, a cabal in every corner.”

Knowing that people are instigating strife to benefit their own ends allows patriots to create effective countermeasures; we can stop villains’ destructive behavior. If we fail to see determined, organized efforts at work, over time patriots will be discouraged, lose hope, and retreat from the fight.

Keeping a good balance in our lives is another essential to fighting off discouragement and winning the battle for freedom. The most effective warrior will treat our struggle to restore and preserve freedom as if it is a marathon, not a sprint.

The person who wages the battle for freedom while nurturing his marriage and family, while being a good worker on his job or in his business and being a great neighbor, over time makes the best patriot.

The most effective talk I ever heard on balancing one’s life so that no major God-given responsibility is allowed to fall through the cracks was given in St. Louis, Missouri, in 1967 by Ezra Taft Benson, former secretary of agriculture during the Eisenhower administration. Two key points helped prepare me to ward off discouragement: “Don’t neglect your family while striving to increase your income,” and “Be willing to make sacrifices to preserve the freedom principles that allow you to have a family and have a means to personally provide for them.”

Following in Benson’s footsteps, turn your disappointment into a renewed determination to sustain your hope, do your duty, and hear those words, “Well done, thou good and faithful servant.”

The Honorable Sterling Lacy serves as county judge in Bowie County, Texas, and has been an ordained minister for over 50 years.

Is Satan The God of This World?

Good article by Gary DeMar of americanvision.org
http://americanvision.org/6612/is-satan-the-god-of-this-world/

And though this world, with devils filled, Should threaten to undo us, we will not fear, for God hath willed His truth to triumph through us.

The prince of darkness grim we tremble not for him; his rage we can endure, for lo! his doom is sure, one little word shall fell him. [1]

Christians will use all types of excuses to keep themselves out of today’s religious-moral-cultural battles. One of the most diabolical excuses is to claim that Satan is the rightful god of this world. This translates into believing that this world is demonic. Let’s see what the Bible actually says about this.

Satan is a creature. Like all creatures, he has certain limitations. Even under the Old Covenant, Satan had to be granted permission by God before he could act (Job 1:6-12; 2:1-7). Satan’s limitations have been multiplied since the crucifixion, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus.

The Bible shows us that if we “resist the devil he will flee from” us (James 4:7). The only power that Satan has over the Christian is the power we give him and the power granted to him by God (2 Cor. 12:7-12). Scripture tells us that Satan is defeated, disarmed, and spoiled (Col. 2:15; Rev. 12:7; Mark 3:27). He has “fallen” (Luke 10:18) and was “thrown down” (Rev. 12:9). He was “crushed” under the feet of the early Christians, and by implication, under the feet of all Christians throughout the ages (Rom. 16:20). He has lost “authority” over Christians (Col. 1:13). He has been “judged” (John 16:11). He cannot “touch” a Christian (1 John 5:18). His works have been destroyed (1 John 3:8). He has “nothing” (John 14:30). He must “flee” when “resisted” (James 4:7). He is “bound” (Mark 3:27; Luke 11:20). Finally, the gates of hell “shall not overpower” the advancing church of the Lord Jesus Christ (Matt. 16:18).[2] Surely Satan is alive, but he is not well on planet earth.

So then, what does Paul mean when he describes Satan as “the god of this world,” actually, “of this age”? (2 Cor. 4:4). To hear some people tell it, this verse teaches that Satan has all power and authority in this dispensation and in the locale of planet earth. Where God is the God of heaven and of the age to come, Satan is the god of this world and this present evil age. This dualistic view of the universe may be part of Greek philosophy, but it has no place in biblical theology.

While it’s true that the devil is said to be the god of this age,[3] we know that God is “the King of the ages” (1 Tim. 1:17). Paul is simply stating that Satan is the chosen god of those who deny Jesus as God’s rightful heir of all things (Matt. 22:1-14). These are the true antichrists (2 John 2:7; 1 John 2:18). Jesus is in possession of “all authority,” in both heaven and earth (Matt. 28:18-20). In addition, we know that Satan’s power has not increased since Job’s day. He is still a permission-seeking creature. This is especially true under the new and better covenant inaugurated by Jesus Christ. As the above verses make clear, Satan is a second-class creature who has been cast out and judged: “The ruler of this world shall be cast out” (John 12:31); “the ruler of this world has been judged” (16:11).

What, then, does the apostle mean when he describes Satan as “the god of this age”? First, we must never allow one passage to finalize our understanding of a particular doctrine. Scripture must be compared with Scripture. There are no contradictions. Therefore, we can’t have the Bible saying of the one true God, “I am the LORD, and there is no other; besides Me there is no God” (Isa. 45:5) and then making Satan a rival god. Paul must have something else in mind. We can’t say that Satan has been judged and cast out, something that does not happen to gods, and still maintain that he is the god of this world similar to the way Jehovah is God of this world. Paul is making a theological point. For example, Jesus tells the Pharisees that the devil is their father (John 8:44). We know that Satan is not their biological father. Rather, he is their spiritual father in that they rejected their true Father and His Son, Jesus Christ.

Physically these Jews, to be sure, are children of Abraham; but spiritually and morally–and that was the issue–they are the children of the devil.[4]

Jesus is describing the devil as one who gives birth to a worldview, a worldview that includes lying and murder. In this sense, Satan is their spiritual father. In the same way, Satan is a god to those who cling to the fading glory of Moses, “the ministry of death” (2 Cor. 3:7). This is the age over which he is a god, an age that “has no glory on account of the glory that surpasses it” (v. 10).

Second, the devil is chosen as a god by “those who are perishing,” and he must blind them before they will follow him: “The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God” (2 Cor. 4:4). This passage teaches that unbelievers are fooled into believing that “the old covenant” where the “veil remains unlifted” is the way to life (v. 14). Satan is the god of the “ministry of death.” The “god of this age” keeps them in bondage, “but whenever a man turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away” (v. 16). Liberty from the ministry of death only comes where the Spirit of Lord is: “Now the Lord is the Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty” (v. 17). But Satan has blinded the eyes of the unbelieving so they cannot see the lifted veil. They are still trusting in the shadows of the Old Covenant.

Third, like idols in general, the devil is “by nature” not a god (Gal. 4:8; cf. Deut. 32:17; Ps. 96:5; Isa. 44:9-20; 1 Cor. 8:4; 10:20). This includes the devil. In Philippians 3:19, Paul tells us that those who are “enemies of the cross of Christ” worship “their appetite”: “For many walk, of whom I often told you, and now tell you even weeping, that they are enemies of the cross of Christ, whose end is destruction, whose god is there appetite, and whose glory is in their shame, who set their minds on earthly things.” The appetite is not a god, but it can be chosen as a god.

Fourth, the only way Satan can pass himself off as a god is to first blind his victims. Keep in mind that Jesus described the devil as “a liar, and the father of lies” (John 8:44). Though Satan masquerades as a god, this does make him a god.

Satan wishes, albeit vainly, to set himself up as God, and sinners, in rebelling against the true God, subject themselves to him who is the author of their rebellion. The unregenerate serve Satan as though he were their God. They do not thereby, however, escape from the dominion of the one true God. On the contrary, they bring themselves under His righteous judgment; for Satan is a creature and not a God to be served (cf. Rom. 1:18, 25). Just as there is one in the world and every pretended alternative to it is a false no-gospel, so there is only one God of the universe and every other “deity” whom men worship and serve is a false no-god.[5]

When all the evidence is in we learn that Satan is the god of an age that was passing away. “This age” and “this world” are used “in an ethical sense,” denoting “the immoral realm of disobedience rather than the all-inclusive, extensive scope of creation,” representing “the life of man apart from God and bound to sinful impulses, a world “ethically separated from God.”[6] Calling Satan the “god of this age” is more a reflection on the condition of “this age” than the real status of the devil. Chrysostom comments that “Scripture frequently uses the term god, not in regard of the dignity that is so designated, but of the weakness of those in subjection to it; as when he calls mammon lord and belly god: but the belly is neither therefore God nor mammon Lord, save only of those who bow themselves to them.”[7]

When the church makes Satan the “god of this age,” it has fallen for one of the devil’s schemes–giving him a lot more credit and power than he deserves. He is quite satisfied in having anyone believe one of his lies.

The Woes of having to buy a new bible

Yes, it seems woeful to have to buy a new bible.
Because it's going to be troublesome to transfer all my notes onto a new one.

I like my compact bible. It's not big and bulky. I can tote it in my purse.
This one has just big enough print to be able to read comfortably. Of course, bifocals help.

It's been slowly falling apart, but the other day the cover came off.
I finally ordered a new one that looks similar to the one I have.

To be truthful, it is not really woeful. It is a blessing and a privilege.

Good Sermon

One good thing about staying home from church with a sick child is now that I have unlimited internet I can listen to sermon audio without worrying whether or not I go over my bandwidth.
This is a good sermon by Kevin Swanson:

http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=22012105470

GOOD ATTITUDE

Remember Scott Hamilton, the olympic gold medalist ice skater?
He's been through some really tough times and comes through it all with a good attitude.
From the article, How Olympic Gold Medalist Scott Hamilton Found Jesus, Scott says,"I just learned that the only true disability in life is a bad attitude."

You know, I think he's right.

http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-olympic-gold-medalist-scott-hamilton-found-jesus-68160/

Why Ron Paul? by Voddie Baucham

http://www.gracefamilybaptist.net/voddie-baucham-ministries/blog/why-ron-paul-2012-01/

Let me say ahead of time that I do not believe that politics will save America. Nor do I believe there are any perfect candidates. There never have been, and there never will be. Moreover, it is not my goal to answer every objection to the Paul candidacy as I know that there are those who, for various reasons, will not be persuaded, and more importantly, that’s not my job. My goal here is to offer insight in to my own reasoning as I wade through another political season and make a personal choice.

I. Ron Paul is a Christian Conservative

While I am not looking for a “Pastor-in-Chief,” it is important to me that the man for whom I cast my vote be a Christian, if at all possible. And though I recognize that there is not always a clear Christian choice (i.e., the 2008 election), I agree with Chief Justice John Jay who wrote, “Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty as well as the privilege and interest of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers."[1] For indeed, “Before any man can be considered as a member of Civil Society, he must be considered as a subject of the Governour of the Universe.”[2] John Witherspoon concurs: “Those, therefore, who pay no regard to religion and sobriety in the persons whom they send to [public office] are guilty of the greatest absurdity and will soon pay dear for their folly.”[3] I think we are seeing this on display right now.[4]

My desire is not to see a president who will usurp the authority, responsibilities, or privileges of the Church. However, I do not wish to see those things hindered either. I also want to know that the foundational ideology motivating a man’s decisions is biblical. I know it will not always mirror my own, but I trust God’s word, and appreciate those who look to it for aid in making decisions. To that end, I support Dr. Paul because he is not just a conservative, but a Christian Conservative.

Dr. Paul does not beat his Christian faith like a drum in his public/political life. Unfortunately, that is off-putting for the “Christian Right”. However, in a world full of ‘posturing’ in an effort to win over evangelicals, I find Paul’s public demeanor refreshing. And it is not as though he is a ‘closet Christian,’ either. “I have accepted Jesus Christ as my personal Savior, and I endeavor every day to follow Him in all I do and in every position I advocate,” wrote Paul on his Web site.[5] I have also had the privilege of talking with both him, and one of his five children about his faith and how it influences his policy positions.

Nevertheless, the more important aspect is the fact that this Southern Baptist (raised Lutheran) is a regular church attender. What would motivate a man to attend church, but not beat a drum about it in an effort to win over evangelicals in an age when political figures play at Christianity (while living totally contradictory lives, and holding heterodox beliefs) in order to assuage the fears of the Christian Right? Having met and talked to Dr. Paul, I would say it is authenticity, and humility more than anything else. He wants “to avoid any appearance of exploiting [his faith] for political gain.”[6]

II. Ron Paul is a Constitutional Conservative

Not only is Ron Paul a Christian Conservative; he is also a Constitutional Conservative. He holds himself accountable to the Constitution of the United States, even when it means he has to vote against legislation that may be otherwise beneficial. This has cost him on numerous occasions as people use the “Ron Paul voted against so-and-so” tactic to paint a caricature of him and play “gotcha” politics.
This is actually an important quality in a President. I don’t want a man in the White House making decisions based on what “feels” right. I’m not looking for a conscientious King; I want a Chief Executive. I want a man whose decisions are predictable because of a long track record of constitutional conservatism. I may not always agree with a man like that, but I will always know why he did what he did, and I can live with that. Especially in several crucial areas facing our Republic, like money, war, States’ Rights, and foreign policy, for example.

Constitutional Money

I support Ron Paul because he has a constitutional view of money. He is the only candidate consistently to confront the Federal Reserve Bank (which is not federal, has no reserves, and is not a bank), and address the issue of fiat currency (a.k.a. unjust weights and measures; Lev 19:36; Prov 16:11), which debases the dollar, manipulates business cycles, creates inflation, and always benefits the rich at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised. And he talks about the issue in just those terms.

Congressman Paul is also the only candidate who has a budget that will cut a TRILLION DOLLARS in spending in year one.[7] He is the only candidate who has committed to defund and eliminate expensive, unconstitutional agencies. This is crucial for a country headed for an economic cliff. Our debt is larger than our GDP and we simply must address it NOW (Luke 14:28)! This is arguably the most important issue we face, and while others want to tinker with the status quo, Dr. Paul wants to do the hard thing; the right thing; the biblical thing; the constitutional thing.

Constitutional War

I support Ron Paul because he is a military veteran (yup... he refuses to beat that drum too, which is why you may not have known that little tidbit). And though I do not believe it is necessary for a man to have served in the military for him to serve as President, the fact that Congressman Paul knows and hates war lends credibility to his desire and commitment to ending the wars and bringing our troops home. Moreover, he has a constitutional understanding of war (only Congress can send us to war), and a Christian commitment to historic Just War Theory (rooted in the Sixth Commandment... HIS WORDS).[8] He, unlike other candidates, can be counted on not to commit to acts of war without congressional authority (i.e., unilaterally deciding to bomb a sovereign nation if they advance their weapons technology in a region several thousand miles away from the U.S., under the watchful eye of a nation with over 300 nukes who can stop them in a heartbeat... but I digress).

There is a reason Dr. Paul has received more support from members of the military than all other candidates (Republican and Democrat) COMBINED! The top three employers of Ron Paul’s donors are the U.S. Army, Navy, and Air Force, respectively. Dr. Paul will not use our military to hunt down and overthrow heads of state without Congressional authority (i.e., Libya), kill American citizens without warrant,[9] detain citizens indefinitely without benefit of a trial,[10] or chase warlords in central Africa.[11] When it comes to war, Dr. Paul understands that, “Whoever meddles in a quarrel not his own is like one who takes a passing dog by the ears.” (Proverbs 26:17)

Constitutional States’ Rights

I support Ron Paul because he not only understands, but believes in the Tenth Amendment. I know many Christians have been scared off by the “Ron Paul wants to legalize drugs, gay marriage, and abortion” rhetoric. However, looking beyond the rhetoric reveals Paul’s true constitutional conservatism (and biblical understanding of jurisdiction). He has personal convictions, but those will not be allowed to steer him away from his constitutional oath. The presidency, and the Federal Government have limits.

The President is not “Pastor in Chief.” It is not the President’s job (or the job of the Federal Government) to set such policies. The “War on Drugs,” for example, has been a monumental, unconstitutional, fiscal failure (to the tune of more than $3 BILLION)![12] The Federal Government must be held within the confines of its enumerated powers. This is important for Christians because we will not always have people in the White House with whom we agree (in fact, politicians will always let us down). What happens when we send a man to the White House with the express purpose of “changing the moral standards” of America in our favor, then, down the line we have a president who uses the same un-cheked powers to promote moral standards with which we disagree? How’s that workin’ for ya’?

But what about the moral issues to which we, as Christians, must speak? First, we must speak to them at the local level. I have no right to look to Washington, D.C. for remedies when I am not preaching on Mars Hill at every opportunity. The Roe v. Wade, for example, started in Texas; not D.C.. Furthermore, there is not a single institution more prolific in the spread of moral decay than the government education system, and Ron Paul is the only man who plans to get the federal government out of that business by ending the (unconstitutional) Department of Education IMMEDIATELY (Luke 6:40).

Beyond that, if there are issues we wish to address on a federal level, we have a federal remedy, and it is not the election of a President; it is the amendment process. This is less favorable to those who do not wish to do the hard work of changing hearts and minds in the marketplace of ideas. However, the alternative is a quasi-monarchy (or oligarchy) that changes with the wind, and a view of the presidency that is both unbiblical and unconstitutional.

Constitutional Foreign Policy

I support Ron Paul because he has a constitutional view of foreign policy. Ironically, our foreign policy has been so unconstitutional for so long that many people recoil at the idea of getting it back in line. Moreover, the semantic game Paul’s opponents play (using “isolationism” as opposed to “non-intervention” to define his position) doesn’t help. For most Christians, this is where they believe I’ve left the reservation. They may not say, “We have to be the world’s police force,” but I can’t tell you how many times I’ve heard, “Do you know his position on Israel?” “Surely you can’t support a man who doesn’t support Israel!”

Actually, nothing could be further from the truth. Ron Paul does support Israel. It is our current foreign policy that does not support Israel! However, there is a deeper issue here. There is a sort of misplaced Dispensationalism that governs people’s sentimental attitude toward Israel. Let me state clearly that I do not believe the Bible demands that the U.S. support Israel. I do, however, believe that it is wise to do so for geopolitical reasons. To do so for theological reasons, I believe, is actually misguided, and quite dangerous. Nevertheless, Israel is our only true ally in the Middle East, and that is important.

But there’s a more important question: “What does it mean to “support” Israel?” Does it mean that Israel remains God’s “Chosen People,” and we must stand with them in anticipation of the coming Armageddon? Is the President to act as “Commander in Chief of the United States Armed Forces” and “Supreme Defender of Israel”? Or are we simply to make sure the foreign aid dollars don’t stop flowing? Here are a few things I took into to consideration in evaluating Congressman Paul’s foreign policy.

1. Israel is the most powerful nation in the Middle East... BY A LONG SHOT! In fact, Israel could potentially defeat all the other military powers in the Middle East simultaneously if they had to.
2. We not only give money to Israel; we give money to their enemies as well. That is not supporting Israel! That is using money to buy influence in a region thousands of miles away from us in the name of oil, when we happen to have the largest repository of oil on planet earth right here in the US, but refuse to go and get it (in the name of Earth-worshipping environmentalism)!
3. Israel is a sovereign nation, and we have no right to treat her like a child. Our foreign aid has been a tool used to influence Israel’s domestic policy for far too long. If we are their friends, we should allow them to exercise their sovereignty without our interference, and certainly without our condemnation. Who do we think we are? No, I disagree with my Christian brothers and sisters who think a country who supports Israel’s enemies, interferes with Israel’s domestic policy, condemn’s Israel in efforts to keep ties with oil-rich countries in the region, and helps to destabilize and radicalize one of Israel’s historic foes lurking on her southern boarder is engaging in a foreign policy that supports Israel.

III. Ron Paul is a Consistent Conservative

Finally, I support Dr. Paul because he has been a consistent conservative. He has been married to the same woman for more than fifty years; delivered over 4,000 babies as an OB; never performed a single abortion; has never voted for an unbalanced budget, a tax increase, or a bailout; forecasted the economic debacle long before it happened;[13] and gave back $140,000 last year through his office to pay down the national debt (100,000 in 2010). This man is so principled that he refuses to claim his congressional pension!

Ron Paul is the real deal. He is not perfect. He needs a savior just like you and I do (as noted by his trust in Christ as his redeemer). But when it’s all said and done, he is a man with whom I agree in principle. I know where he’s coming from, and it’s not based on his “personal story,” or his sense of what’s going to get him elected. It’s the same thing he’s been running on (and governing from) for over three decades; the Constitution of the United States (viewed through the lens of a basic biblical world and life view). And I’m glad to support a man like that.

A Triumphant Christmas Message from Geoffrey Botkin

http://westernconservatory.com/article/2011/12/triumphant-christmas-message-geoffrey-botkin

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.
Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice from henceforth even forever. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will perform this.
– Isaiah 9:6-7

Mourning the Loss of Another Godly Man

The world has lost another Godly influence this week.

His name was David Hall.

He passed into eternity October 11, after a battle with cancer.

Even though his family and friends are grieving over their loss, they are also rejoicing that David is face to face with his savior, Jesus Christ.

No more pain, no more suffering.

David and his wife Phyllis will always have a special place in our heart. It was Phyllis who introduced us to the man that would become our son-in-law. Phyllis was convinced that Gabriel would be the right husband for our daughter, Elise. She was right.

Our prayers are with Hall family as they go through this difficult time.

http://www.proclaimliberty.us/blog/index.php/2011/10/11/david-hall/

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/bell-ringer-who-honored-vets-dies-of-cancer-131557568.html