Life, Death, Family and the Christian Voice

Looking back on the Presidential Election, I still don't know who I would have voted for had I voted on November 4th. It seems odd to say, but my vote did not seem to be as important for the issues I care about as the upcoming run-off election on December 2nd. 

This isn't a partisan decision at all, this is a Pro-Life, Pro-Faith  and Pro-Family issues. In regards to 'Same-Sex Marriage Rights', I believe this term is a misnomer. I don't think a 'Marriage' should ever be referred to as a 'Right'. A Marriage is an 'ability'. We know that 'abilities cannot be legislated, and therefore the ability of a man and a woman to be wed is therefore not a right. To imply that marriage is a right would be to imply that this is something to be granted by man.

A marriage is a blessing by God. He defines that a marriage is to be between a man and a woman and the government has no right to legislate on anything that supersedes its authority or jurisdiction. The extant that the government has can legislate is simply to recognize a Union formed by a higher authority.

In regards to the impact Christians have had on our government just in the last 6 years, consider the following:

There are roughly 60 million evangelical Christians in America.
In 2002, Christian voters led the way in voting in 36 new House members that were pro-life, pro-faith, and pro-family. Likewise, their were 8 new Senators who were also pro-life.

In 2004, Christian voting turnout increased by 93%! This increase gave pro-life candidates huge majorities in the House and Senate. In fact, 25 of the 40 new House members were pro-life and 7 of the 9 new Senators were pro-life, pro-faith, and pro-family.

Historian David Barton summarizes: "The result was the congressional enactment of the first four major stand-alone pro-life laws since Roe v. Wade:
1. Infants Born Alive Protection Act
2. Unborn Victims of Violence Act
3. Partial-Birth Abortion Ban
4. Fetal Farming Ban

Furthermore, the addition of so many new pro-life Senators resulted in the confirmation of two new pro-life Supreme Court Justices and dozens of pro-life court of appeals and federal district court judges."

- In 2006, 92.5% of homosexual men and 91% of lesbian women voted.
- Plus, a 30% drop in Christians voting.

RESULT - The Baltimore Sun reported that America voted in "The most pro-choice Congress in the history of the Republic."

Only 17 of the 54 new House members were pro-life (30%)
Only 1 of the 10 new Senators was Pro-Life (10%).

In another post, I stated that Homosexuals were against Human Rights for their support of Proposition 8. This would have legalized marriage between members of the same sex and further promoted a medical condition that, in essence, is against the natural laws of human progression.

While proponents of Proposition 8 wonder why people are against something that doesn't seem to affect anyone else; I wonder why it seems that Homosexuals find it necessary to exercise their voice in relation to procreation? This obviously is an issue that shouldn't concern them.

These are the reasons why I'm voting for (R) Sen. Saxby Chambliss on December, 2nd. 

Powered by ScribeFire.

How to Prove the Validity of the New Testament

There's thousands of answers given that prove the validity of the New Testament. I admit that I never needed this type of proof myself to believe, but maybe one day this may provide ample evidence to someone who is skeptical about the validity of the Bible. Hopefully, this may give someone a reason to reconsider their skepticism.

2 Peter 1:16-21
16 For we did not follow cleverly devised tales when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of His majesty.
17 For when He received honor and glory from God the Father, such an utterance as this was made to Him by the Majestic Glory, "This is My beloved Son with whom I am well-pleased"--
18 and we ourselves heard this utterance made from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain.
19 So we have the prophetic word made more sure, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. 20 But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one's own interpretation,
21 for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God.

In the Bible, the word "Christian" is first mentioned in Acts 11:26: "For a whole year they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch Jesus' disciples were first called Christians" (Gr. χριστιανοί, from Christ Gr. Χριστός, which means "the anointed")

The New Testament was originally written in Greek, of which 5,650 handwritten copies have survived. When other languages are included, the total of ancient copies approaches 25,000.

Sir Frederic Kenyon, former director of the British Museum, says… "in no other case is the interval of time between the composition of the book and the date of the earliest manuscripts so short as in that of the New Testament."

He continues by adding, "The last foundation for any doubt that the scriptures have come down to us substantially as they were written has now been removed."

In terms of physical evidence that agrees with the eyewitness testimony?
To date, there have been ~ 23,000 archaeological findings directly related to and showing proof of the truths found in the Bible.

The next ancient text to come close to rivaling that number is Homer's Iliad which is thought to have survived in 643 ancient copies.

~ Recognizing this, F. E. Peters remarked:
"On the basis of manuscript tradition alone, the works that make up the Christians' New Testament texts were the most frequently copied and widely circulated books of antiquity."

The most important discovery in the history of biblical archaeological findings has been the Dead Sea Scrolls in 1948. Within these scrolls was found a complete scroll of the book of Isaiah, which is dated to about 100 B.C.

This is where it gets interesting, since scholars can see how well the Massoretic scribes had preserved the OT text. As scholars compared the two Isaiah texts (from 900 A.D. & 100 B.C.), they were startled by the precision of copying.

Isaiah 53, for example, has 166 words, and there are only 17 letters that differ. Ten are just spelling differences. Four are "minor stylistic changes, such as conjunctions." The three remaining letters that differ are the word "light," added in verse 11, which does not affect the meaning.

Of course this predates the time of the New Testament, so how does this go about proving the writings of the NT?

If you cross-reference Isaiah 53:7-9 with Acts 8:32-40 you can see that this is how Phillip preached Jesus to the Ethiopian who received the gift of Salvation.
This act is also repeated in Matthew, Chapter 5, by Jesus to His disciples.

This is just one example out of hundreds that tie the validity of the NT in with the validity of the OT.

Apologetics, NT Proof, Christianity, Bible

Powered by ScribeFire.

Political Correctness vs. Political Politeness

The term "Political Correctness" originated as something of a joke,
literally in a comic strip. Too often "political correctness"
camouflages an underlying disease like racism and sexism.

The word Correctness is derived from the Greek term ὀρθοπραξις. Literally, this word is translated Orthopraxy
which means "correct action/activity" in rules of ethics and behavior
and extends to the actions of daily life and social obligations. In
essence, Correctness is an ideology.

What's so wrong with living "idealistically" one might say?
Once the term "PC" became an ideology,
it became a disease, in fact "PC" became deadly serious. It is the
great disease of our century, the disease that has left tens of
millions of people dead in Europe, in Russia, in China, and around the
world.

All ideologies are totalitarian because the
essence of an ideology (note that conservatism correctly understood is
not an ideology) is to take some philosophy and say on the basis of
this philosophy certain things must be true – such as the whole of the
history of our culture is the history of the oppression of women. Since
reality contradicts that, reality must be forbidden. It must become
forbidden to acknowledge the reality of our history. People must be
forced to live a lie, and since people are naturally reluctant to live
a lie, they naturally acknowledge this as untrue. Then the power of the
state must be put behind the demand to live a lie. That is why ideology
invariably requires a totalitarian state.

How do we cure
ourselves of this disease? Just like "alcoholism" we need to identify
it for what it is, a disease. Next, just like any other type of
disease, once we know what it is we can prescribe an effective
treatment.

Since untruths lie at the core of what makes "PC" deadly, I propose that an effective cure begins with telling the truth.

This
may seem like too large of a step for society to embrace, so why not
just begin with replacing "Correctness" with "Politeness"?

"Politeness" is best expressed as the practical application of good manners or etiquette. Politeness is a culturally defined phenomenon. The goal of politeness is to make all of the parties relaxed and comfortable with one another. To be polite is an attempt to save face for another.
Of course we know that politeness doesn't infer what is true, just simply that it is pleasant. Therefore politeness will never be mistaken as a "truth".

POLITICAL POLITENESS
is simply an action that seeks to establish a positive relationship
between parties; respects a person's need to be liked and understood.

While keeping "PP"
in mind we can effectively discuss what is true and therefore discover
a cure for other diseases such as racism and other forms of social
inequality diseases.

Political Speaking

Powered by ScribeFire.