FREE AT LAST

After reading Acts chapters 15 and 16 the other day, I was reminded that these are two of many powerful chapters in the Scriptures about salvation as well as about what is not required of us as believers. First, we see clearly from 15:9,11 and 16:30-31that salvation comes by faith alone, not by any work or act that one can do. Christ alone did it all for us. All that one has to do is to accept that truth. Cut and dried. Plain and simple.

Then second, as a believer, what a relief it is knowing that we do not have to keep the law of Moses, which Paul calls “a yoke upon the neck of the disciples” (15:10), a “trouble” (15:19) and a “burden” (15:28) to those Gentiles who “are turned to God”. This “yoke”, “trouble” and “burden” consists of commands of “Touch not; taste not; handle not” (Colossians 2:21); of observing “an holyday or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days” and “days, and times, and months, and years” (feasts, festivals and other observances) (Colossians 2:16 and Galatians 4:10). It’s interesting to note that in Galatians 4:9, Paul calls these things “the weak and beggarly elements” that many “desire…to be in bondage” to. While many believe that doing these things will earn them favor with God, the sole rewards are “the satisfying of the flesh” and a mere outward shewing of the “neglecting of the body” (Colossians 2:23).

What a reminder it is as well from these chapters that not only is the word of God “able to save your souls” (James 1:22) but that it “is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” (Hebrews 4:12).

What a loving and caring God indeed.

How To Change a Society for Christ

"No man that warreth entangleth himself with the affairs of this life; that he may please him who hath chosen him to be a soldier." (2 Timothy 2:4).

"For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war after the flesh: (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)" (2 Corinthians 10:3-4).

Brothers and sisters in Christ, Daniel and the faithful Hebrew men lived their lives for God, never wavering from their faith even when the rulers and their surroundings were evil. As a result, they obtained favor with man and, in their cases, were elevated in the kingdom to prominent positions.

The apostles Paul, Peter and others focused on serving and living for their Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. They did not involve themselves with the political or social causes of their day but, instead, taught the brethren to obey those that ruled over them and to live peaceably with all men, "if it be possible" (Romans 12). Their faithfulness not only resulted in their testifying before kings and rulers but also in their martyrdom.

No matter what was taking place around them, these men of God continued to testify to their cultures of their need to serve the living God, with the apostles testifying to the world (the lost) of their need for the Saviour. They all allowed God and the Holy Spirit to do Their work through their lives via their words and actions.

May we as Christians do the same and not allow ourselves to get distracted by the temporal things of this life, no matter how wicked or immoral those temporal things may be AND no matter what may befall us. Furthermore, may our words, actions and attitudes be such to where God can affectively use us to touch the lives of others.

That, my friends, is how God will be able to change lives and possibly even a culture -- one life at a time -- for the cause and in the name of Jesus.

Blind Trust: A False Security

"Public school is bad. Home school is good." This is the mantra that many more Christians are saying these days for obvious reasons. The public school system continues to dive deeper into the cesspool of biblical immorality with it's promotion of sexual promiscuity, abortion, same-sex relationships and other perverse lifestyles, and so forth. With their desire to expose their children only to those topics and environments which THEY choose, parents are becoming more proactive and taking the education of their children into their own hands. For those parents who are able to do this, I applaud you. Keep in mind, however, that this DOES NOT mean that those parents who cannot home school are bad parents. Viable reasons exist as to why Christian parents -- including single Christian parents -- cannot home school. To those I encourage you to stay involved with your children's education. You will have a profound positive effect on your children's public school influenced lives.

What I would like to highlight in this posting is the existence of what I would call a blind trust -- or a blind faith -- that many Christian parents place in their church and in the Christian schools to which their children attend. To believe that one's child is safe in the Christian school and even in the church they attend is a false belief that the Devil would like for you to have and even to promote. More damage can be done and has been done to children via a child's Christian school education and church education/instruction than what can occur in a public school setting. Am I suggesting that parents not place their children in private Christian schools or in a church setting involving age appropriate departments like Sunday schools or church services? Not necessarily. However, as is advised to parents who place their children in public schools, I advise the same to parents in these settings as well. Be involved in your children's education, especially when that education is spiritual in nature.

A surprising statistic exists which states that over 70% of Christian church raised children leave the church environment upon graduation from high school. The reasons vary, but one reason which could greatly reduce this percentage relates to parents' involvement in the lives of their children, especially on the spiritual side of things. Too many parents turn the spiritual education of their children over to church leaders. From 2-3 church services a week to Sunday school and other church classes to weekly church functions, parents can easily allow themselves to get lulled into a spiritual sleep. Many falsely believe that their children are being spiritually well-fed when in fact what the parents have wrongly done is to shirk their spiritual rolls and responsibilities onto others. The results are a spiritual anorexia. Children are being taught false or watered down doctrines and, in essence, are thrown into a state of spiritual confusion -- knowing full well that those who should be responsible for their spiritual education are being negligent. Thus, children are being passively taught by their parents that they can shirk their spiritual responsibilities as well. Furthermore, children are being passively taught by their parents to look to others for their spiritual instruction, resulting in many a misplaced emotional and spiritual connections. When children begin to rely on others to be their parents on spiritual matters, disaster is just around the corner.

I understand that exceptions may exist in some children's lives, but I am not referring to these exceptions. I am solely referring to parents who are spiritually lazy and spiritually blind to their actions. I am referring to those parents who think that because their children attend Christian schools or God fearing, Bible believing, evangelical, soul-winning churches that what goes on in these institutions is 100% correct. I am referring to those parents who drop off their children to others for spiritual instruction all the while not questioning -- or even correcting -- what their children learned. I am talking to those parents who provide less to no spiritual instruction at home compared to what their children receive at church or in their Christian school.

Christian parents......WAKE UP to the damage you are creating in the lives of your children.  First and foremost, our desire should be for our children to develop a thirst and longing to have a close and personal relationship with God. Secondly, we should want our children to look to us for their spiritual instruction. When a child begins to look to someone else as their spiritual parent, something is obviously wrong in our lives. That may sound conceited to some, but the Bible is clear as to our role as parents as being the spiritual leaders in the lives of our children. This role is not simply left to the confines of our house walls, as some preachers would want you to believe. Stop shirking your roles as spiritual leaders of your children's lives. The training of your children especially includes the spiritual.

The Untold Story of American Independence - Part 11

The following address was made by some Pennsylvania Quaker (Religious Society of Friends) leaders to a colonial assembly in early 1775. Once again we see another example of what steps and trials some take and go through to stand for the true gospel and teachings of the Holy Scriptures. Upon reading this address, notice the mention of the well-documented fact that the King of Great Britain was the true authority over the colonies, an authority of which the colonists had no biblical justification of overthrowing. In doing so, they were in disobedience to God.

"Having considered, with real sorrow, the unhappy contest between the legislature of Great Britain and the people of these colonies, and the animosities consequent therein, we have by repeated public advices and private admonitions, used our endeavors to dissuade the members of our religious society from joining with the public resolutions promoted and entered into by some of the people, which, as we apprehended, so we now find, have increased contention, and produced great discord and confusion.

"The Divine Principle of grace and truth which we profess, leads all who attend to its dictates to demean themselves as peaceable subjects, and to discountenance and avoid every measure tending to excite disaffection to the king as supreme magistrate, or to the legal authority of his government; to which purpose many of the late political writings and addresses to the people appearing to be calculated, we are led by a sense of duty to declare our entire disapprobation of them - their spirit and temper being not only contrary to the nature and precepts of the gospel, but destructive of the peace and harmony of civil society, disqualifies men in these times of difficulty for the wise and judicious consideration and promoting of such measures as would be most effectual for reconciling differences or obtaining the redress of grievances.

"From our past experience of the clemency of the king and his royal ancestors, we have grounds to hope and believe that decent and respectful addresses from those who are vested with legal authority, representing the prevailing dissatisfactions and the cause of them, would avail toward obtaining relief, ascertaining and establishing the just rights of the people, and restoring the public tranquillity; and we deeply lament that contrary modes of proceeding have been pursued, which have involved the colonies in confusion, appear likely to produce violence and bloodshed, and threaten the subversion of the constitutional government, and of that liberty of conscience for the enjoyment of which our ancestors were induced to encounter the manifold dangers and difficulties of crossing the seas and of settling in the wilderness.

"We are therefore incited, by a sincere concern for the peace and welfare of our country, publicly to declare against every usurpation of power and authority in opposition to the laws and government, and against all combinations, insurrections, conspiracies, and illegal assemblies; and as we are restrained from them by the conscientious discharge of our duty to Almighty God, “by whom kings reign and princes decree justice,”4 we hope, through his assistance and favor, to be enabled to maintain our testimony against any requisitions which may be made of us, inconsistent with our religious principles, and the fidelity we owe to the King and his government, as by law established; earnestly desiring the restoration of that harmony and concord which have heretofore united the people of these provinces, and been attended by the divine blessing on their labors."

The Untold Story of American Independence - Part 10

The following material excerpted from a fifth grade social studies course produced by Christian Light Publications shows some of the biblical stands taken by Christians during the American Revolutionary War. Like in most cases, a minority will truly take a stand for what is biblically right and not fall prey to pressure or to the popular movements of the time.

US Anabaptists during the Revolutionary War

Not Everyone Favors Independence

The Loyalists. Not all the people could say "Amen" to independence. A sizable minority stayed loyal to King George. These loyalists were called Tories by the revolutionaries.

Why did the Tories stay loyal? Some Tories supported the king because they thought the revolutionaries were rabble-rousers. In their minds democracy meant mob rule, tarring and feathering, and destruction of property. Other loyalists agreed with the patriots about "no taxation without representation." But they wanted to solve the dispute in such a way as to remain in the British Empire. Independence went too far for them. The patriots considered all loyalists traitors. Most of the new states passed laws taking away the loyalists' property. Patriot mobs attacked prominent Tories. Those found helping the British were imprisoned.

To escape mistreatment, many loyalists fled to areas held by the British army. Around 100,000 went to Canada. But most stayed and tried not to attract any notice. To uncover these secret Tories, the states required everyone to swear an oath of allegiance. Some angry loyalists served in the British army. The Revolutionary War was actually America's first civil war in which brother killed brother.

The Liberties of Nonresistant Christians. Some Americans supported neither side in the Revolution. Instead, as Mennonite and German Baptist leaders said in 1775, "We have dedicated ourselves to serve all men in everything that can be helpful to the preservation of men's lives, but...we are not at liberty in conscience to take up arms to conquer our enemies, but rather to pray to God, who has power in heaven and on earth, for us and them." Chief among these nonresistant Christians were the Quakers, Mennonites, German Baptists, Moravians, and Schwenkfelders.

Most nonresistant Christians were quite content with their lot as British subjects. As three Mennonite bishops in Pennsylvania wrote in 1773, "Through God's mercy we enjoy unlimited freedom in both civil and religious matters." Ironically, once the fight for liberty started, the freedom of nonresistant Christians became sharply limited. (Underline emphasis mine.)

Militia Duty. The first issue that peace-promoting Christians faced was militia duty. After Lexington and Concord, patriot committees called all able-bodied men to join a voluntary association "to learn the art of war." The associators noticed that the nonresistant Christians did not join in the drills. They demanded laws requiring everybody to serve.

In November 1775, Mennonite and German Baptist ministers sent A Short and Sincere Declaration to the Pennsylvania assembly. They suggested an alternative to militia duty. They would donate money to help poor families left destitute because their men were off fighting. Instead Pennsylvania passed a law levying a special war tax on all non-associators. Later it said nonresistant Christians could hire substitutes or pay a fine. Most nonresistant Christians refused to do either, because as the Short and Sincere Declaration stated, they found "no freedom in giving, or doing, or assisting in anything by which men's lives are destroyed or hurt." Therefore, Patriot officials confiscated their property to pay the tax and fines.

Free Quakers. A small number of Quakers abandoned their nonresistant convictions to fight for liberty. But most Quakers did not consider these to be real Quakers. They disowned any members who took up arms. In Philadelphia a group of disowned Quakers formed a new church, the Free Quakers.

Who is Caesar?

Independence created another problem for the nonresistant Christians. Was King George III or was the Continental Congress the Caesar they were to obey? Many of them had promised obedience to the king when they came to America. Breaking their word was seen as a serious sin. Also, the king had protected their liberties. Now the patriots were taking them away.

In the end the nonresistant Christians put their trust in the words of the prophet Daniel in the Bible, "He removeth kings and setteth up kings" (Daniel 2:21). They patiently waited for the outcome of the war to find out who God would set up as Caesar. In the meantime they followed a pattern of strict neutrality. They refused to help either side to fight.

However, when hungry, sick, or wounded soldiers, whether patriot or redcoat, needed aid, the nonresistant Christians gave it. As a Hessian officer said, "They are the most hospitable to us." The patriots did not understand this impartial love. They threatened men like Mennonite Christian Weaver with a whipping for feeding runaway British prisoners even though he had done the same for Continental soldiers. (Underline emphasis mine.)

The Test Acts. In 1777 most states passed Test Acts. They required everyone to take an oath of allegiance promising to defend the revolutionary cause with arms. Pennsylvania law decreed banishment and confiscation of all property for those who refused the oath.

Fanatical patriots used the Test Act against nonresistant Christians. In Northampton County, officials left "not a morsel of bread" for the children of ten Mennonite men who refused to take the oath. The authorities threw the men into jail at Easton. Two of the men's wives, Eva Yoder and Esther Bachman, appeared before the assembly and begged for mercy. Moved by the women's plight, the assembly revised its Test Act. It reduced the penalties to double taxation and loss of citizenship.

 

 

The Untold Story of American Independence - Part 9b

The truth, at times, can be like a good medicine and hard to swallow. However, in the end, it is healing and quite refreshing, quenching the thirst for real knowledge.

Watch this video on the real faith of the founding fathers of the United States of America. You won't hear this in any of your schools, colleges, universities or even churches.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU24fJ4NQxo

The Untold Story of American Independence - Part 9

Did you know that:

- those loyal to the Crown  were called Loyalists, Tories, Royalists or King’s Men and those opposed to the Crown were called Rebels, Patriots and Whigs?

- plenty of evidence exists to show that the percentage of colonists opposed to the rebellion against the Crown was possibly as high as 40%, and if Indians and blacks were added that the percentage of those in the colonies, opposed would near 65%?

- those opposed to the war were mainly Christians/Bible believers (i.e. Anglicans, Moravians, Ana-Baptists, German Baptists, Quakers, Mennonites), whereas those for the war were mainly non-Christian, non-judgmental sects [i.e. Deists (i.e. Ben Franklin, possibly George Washington) and a liberal form of Presbyterianism]?

- Loyalists, for simply holding to their political beliefs and not for any wrong acts, were commonly mistreated by the Rebels? Mistreatment occurred in the forms of Loyalist homes and themselves being attacked by mobs or property confiscated; homes ransacked and personal belongings stolen; Loyalist printing presses being destroyed for printing Loyalist pamphlets; railings*; tar and featherings**; being hoisted up a “liberty pole” with a dead animal on it; being forced to ride with one’s head at a horse’s tail and coat turned inside out; forced sitting on lumps of coal; being placed in the stockades and other humiliations; whippings; ears being cropped; blackmail and threatenings; imprisonments; forced disarmament; excommunication from districts; and even being murdered, to name a few?

* A “railing” involved placing an individual on two sharp rails - one leg on each - with each rail being carried on the shoulders of two men. One such Loyalist who was railed was a Connecticut farmer (Seth Seeley) who in 1776 was punished in this fashion for signing a declaration supporting the King’s laws. He was “railed” through the streets, put in stocks, smeared with eggs, and robbed of his money.

** The tarring and feathering of an individual involved tar being heated up and poured on the head, shoulders, chest and back of a naked individual. The victim would be covered in feathers, placed in a cart, and paraded around the streets.

- although this was previously reported, the Boston Massacre was instigated by the Rebels and that future American president, John Adams, defended the British troops and basically won his case?

 - that General, George Washington approved mob persecution of the Loyalists? Upon meeting a procession of the Sons of Liberty humiliating Loyalists who have been “railed”, Washington reprimanded a general of his, Israel Putnam, for attempting to halt this procession by saying to him, “…to discourage such proceedings was to injure the cause of liberty in which they were engaged, and that nobody would attempt it but an enemy of his country." 

- Thomas Hutchinson, the Lieutenant (Acting) Governor of Massachusetts, attempted to enforce the Stamp Act of 1770 and had his home and library destroyed by a mob which included Samuel Adams? Hutchinson had his doors axed in, his furniture destroyed, money and jewelry stolen, and walls and roof dismantled. His family barely escaped with their lives.

- Test Laws were enacted after the signing of the Declaration of Independence which required colonists to swear allegiance to the state in which they lived and promising  not to aid or abet the British troops? Records were kept of those who took the oath. A certificate of taking the oath was issued to the colonists to prevent them from being arrested. Those caught without a certificate would be considered an outlaw and not even have the right of a foreigner in the courts of law; had no legal redress to obtain money owed to them by their neighbor; could leave an orphaned child to a friend or relative for guardianship; could not be the administrator or executor of an estate; could often be denied to practice their law or medical or other professional degree; could possibly have property taken, be imprisoned or even killed?

- that after the Test Laws were passed other laws were passed in states which included prominent Loyalists exiled (9 states), and in most states Loyalists expelled from all offices or professions and forced to pay double or more taxes?

- that between 1780 and 1781 the Province of New York required colonists to turn in the names of Loyalists or face being imprisoned? (Sounds like what I learned today in Obama requiring federal workers to report suspicious activity by other federal workers or face fines or imprisonment.)

- that in spite of the Treaty of Paris which officially ended the war in 1783, many Loyalists were still not treated equally or justly according to Articles within the Treaty? Many still had their property seized and sold. Many did not have their personal property restored or debts owed to them repaid.

- that many Indians and blacks also left the colonies during or after the war, one reason being the unfair treatment by the Rebels?