Test All Things Pt. 12 – Sunday School & Youth Ministry

robertraikes

The acceptance of social norms in the church without examination is helpful for maintaining peace, and unity, but, at the same time, it can be a source of harm to the church, and its members. A couple of these social norms, which deserves scrutiny, is Sunday school and youth ministry as a whole. These ministries in the church, which are geared toward its younger members comes with well intentions for many of its leaders. Nevertheless, they contradict Scripture’s teaching on how children are to be raised in the fear, and admonition of the Lord. The Bible repeatedly places this responsibility on Fathers, and not the church’s institution of youth pastors, and youth leaders.

The Sunday school concept can be traced back to Robert Raikes’ Sunday School movement in England in the 18th century. Raikes’ Sunday School movement was an attempt at social reform in Gloucester, England, which pre-dated state schooling, and became very popular throughout the country. However, his movement was not received well by everyone. One of the objections raised to the movement was the concern that it would interfere with religious home-based education, which was the norm at that time. Much has changed since then. Today, it isn’t the norm for fathers to be the teachers to their children on religion. Instead, the children are handed over to church institutions, just as they are handed over to the public school systems for education. The parents have forgotten their God-given duties to their families, and have grown accustomed to the new social norm of trusting institutions with the raising of their children.

Nevertheless, it is God’s desire, in these last days, that the church turns the hearts of the fathers to the children, and the hearts of the children to their fathers.

Malachi 4

5    Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD:
6    And he shall turn the heart of the fathers to the children, and the heart of the children to their fathers, lest I come and smite the earth with a curse.

Ephesians 6

1    Children, obey your parents in the Lord: for this is right.
2    Honour thy father and mother; (which is the first commandment with promise;)
3    That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long on the earth.
4    And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.

Colossians 3

20    Children, obey your parents in all things: for this is well pleasing unto the Lord.
21    Fathers, provoke not your children to anger, lest they be discouraged.

Therefore, churches should build up the fathers in the faith so that they will be equipped for the work of ministry to their own families (Hebrews 12:12-13). The church should empower men to obey Scripture’s commands to them, and it should be careful not to be overly helpful by taking up the responsibilities that God has clearly assigned to others. To make that mistake could disrupts the harmony, and structure which God designed families to have.

Many of these institutions, which claim to be modern day churches, are not churches at all, but corporations that aims to grow their businesses buy meeting the needs of the customers. This seeker sensitive model of religion is not run by pastors, but businessmen, who do not have the best interest of Christ’s sheep in mind, but, instead, are hirelings. To learn how to shepherd Christ’s sheep by modeling one’s church after their example will only produce a seeker sensitive corporation that is incapable of submitting to Scripture’s commands and guidance, because the goal of such models is not evangelism, discipleship, and loving God’s people, but mere earthly success that is based upon meeting people’s desires. To learn more about this seeker sensitive consumer driven church model, click on the link entitled, “Church of Tares“.

Advertisements

Changing Laws Pt. 15 – Obama’s Gun Measure Defeat

obamasgunmeasuredefeat

In President Obama’s “Today Is A Shameful Day for Washington” speech, the Senate was criticized for not approving of the new bill for gun control, and were blamed for being intimidated by a minority of voters who would no longer support the various senators if they approve of the new gun measures. But is this really the case? President Obama claims that the bill would not violate any constitutional rights. But can this claim be taken serious? Could the Senate, and their alleged fear of a minority of voters, actually be the reason for the lack of cooperation with Obama’s gun control agenda? Or is it more likely that the president’s stretching of the laws, and his changing of the laws, to work in favor of radical liberal agendas has cost him credibility with many Americans, who now are convinced that the president has little to no concern for the constitution, and, therefore, cannot be trusted, nor cooperated with, in cases of gun laws, and constitutional rights?

There have, in fact, been times when the president has violated American’s trust, and has shown himself to be a radical liberal, who is willing to work in secret against the people of the U.S. and engage in subtle doubletalk, in his speeches, to fool unsuspecting people into thinking that he is only trying to do what’s best for the country. Examples of these would be his administrations’ labeling of Christians as possible domestic terrorists, the many promises which he both made and broke in his first term, his willingness to work with the U.N. on gun safety, his efforts to have the unjust law of the NDAA passed, which allows for American citizens to be detained for an indefinable  amount of time without first committing a crime, his radical support of, the Islamic Brotherhood controlled, Egypt, his weak stance on real terrorism, his radical liberal, socialist, healthcare bill, and the Give Act, just to name few.

Therefore, the Senates lack of willingness to submit to “common sense” in regards to Obama’s gun measures cannot be perceived by these same American’s, who no longer have any confidence in Obama as a fellow American, but instead, is now viewed by them as a communist, or communitarian, as negligence, and fear of a minority of voters. Instead, to these Americans, who are not liberals, the Senate’s lack of cooperation should  be viewed as true common sense, and gratefully welcomed.

In short, only true Americans, who do not violate traditional constitutional values, can be cooperated with, and trusted, by the country on gun control laws, and not radical liberals, who use Saul Alinsky tactics to manipulate ignorant people into radically changing the country for the worst.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Radical Takeover Pt. 4 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control
  2. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 12 – Gun Control
  3. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

War on Consciousness Pt. 31 – Gosnell Trial Media Cover-Up

gonsell

LifeNews.Com

The cat is finally out of the bag. A blogger for the liberal Huffington Post has finally admitted that liberal mainstream media outlets made a conscious decision to ignore the Kermit Gosnell abortion-murder trial.

In a HuffPost Live segment today on the issue, host Marc Lamont Hill admitted what many pro-life advocates have been thinking:

“For what it’s worth, I do think that those of us on the left have made a decision not to cover this trial because we worry that it’ll compromise abortion rights. Whether you agree with abortion or not, I do think there’s a direct connection between the media’s failure to cover this and our own political commitments on the left. I think it’s a bad idea, I think it’s dangerous, but I think that’s the way it is.”

Other liberal media outlets and pro-abortion bloggers have also begun admitting there was a blackout on covering Gosnell.

For information, click on the link entitled “Is the Media Ignoring the Gosnell Story“?

Related articles are listed below:

  1. 3801 Lancaster Abortions
  2. Black Genocide in 21st Century America
  3. Eugenics and its Strange Advocates

Worldview Weekend Radio Commentary on Common Core Curriculum

commoncore

WorldviewWeekend.Com

Topic: Brannon explains why he is thankful for the “Baby Boom” generation of Christians and what will it mean for the church if the Lord does not return before this generation goes on to glory? Topic: Home-school publishers and private Christian schools are conforming to federal education standards tied to United Nations. What many of us that were writing and predicting in regards to Goals 2000 and America 2000 some twenty years ago is now coming to pass. Topic: A U.S. Army Reserve Equal Opportunity training report describes “evangelical Christianity” as examples of religious extremism. While Christians that stand for Biblical truth will be persecuted according to 2 Timothy 3:12; is it possible that the rhetoric of some of the New Religious Right plays right into the hands of the government? Topic: Hear the audio of what is reported by Right-wing Watch to be a talk show host for the American Family Association and Radio Network. In this audio this host makes a statement that Brannon believes could give the government cause to label Christians as “extremists when such statements are made. Brannon also believes the statement by this talk show host is a very poor witness to the unsaved world and a bad example to other Christians. Brannon describes that such a statement might reveal a real problem with how many self-professing Christians think. Brannon explains why such a statement is completely unacceptable and should be rejected and seen for what it is.

To listen to the program, click on the link entitled, “Commentary on Common Core Curriculum“.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. War on Consciousness Pt. 30 – The Mainstream Media’s ‘Group Think’ Conditioning
  2. Radical Takeover Pt. 1 – CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America
  3. War on Consciousness Pt. 17 – IB’s “World Peace” Indoctrination

War on Consciousness Pt. 30 – The Mainstream Media’s ‘Group Think’ Conditioning

MelissaHarrisPerry

Below is a small example of the mass conditioning efforts by the mainstream media to conform western society to a form of “group think”, in which liberal ideology is accepted as the norm. They are quotes from the MSNBC talk show host, Malissa Harris-Perry, who’s political, and social, views lean toward communism, and socialism.

Malissa Harris-Perry on “Parenting” –

We have never invested in public education as much as we should have, because we’ve always had kind of a private notion of children. Your kid is yours, and totally your responsibility. We haven’t had a very collective notion of “These are our children”; so part of it is that we have to break through our kind of private idea that kids belong to their parents, or kids belong to their families, and recognize that kids belong to whole communities. Once it’s everybody’s responsibility and not just the household’s, then we start making better investments.

On “Communism” –

The trolls have been really busy the past two weeks calling me disgusting, evil & communist.

On “Abortion” –

Oh, no. That might be bad. I seemed to have popped open the fertilized egg. We’ll put that back together. But the very idea that this would constitute a person, right? And that some set of constitutional rights should come to this.  Look, I get that that is a particular kind of faith claim. It’s not associated with science. But the reality is that if this turns into a person, right, there are economic consequences, right? The cost to raise a child, $10,000 a year up to $20,000 a year. When you’re talking about what it actually costs to have this thing turn into a human, why not allow women to make the best choices that we can with as many resources and options instead of trying to come in and regulate this process?

On “Social Justice” –

What in the world is riskier than being a poor person in America? I live in a neighborhood where people are shot on a street corner. I live in a neighborhood where people have to figure out how to get their kid into school because, maybe, it will be a good school, and maybe it won’t. I am sick of the idea that being wealthy is risky. No! There is a huge safety net, that whenever you fail, will catch you, and catch you, and catch you. No! Being poor is what is risky. We have to create a safety net for poor people, and when we won’t because they happen to look different from us…it…it…it is the pervasive ugliness! We cannot do that!

This sort of “group think” reflects the ideals of Roman Catholic social teaching, which was created by Dominicans, and Jesuits, by way of the philosophy of Thomas Aquinas. It is also seen in liberation theology.

This kind of rhetoric goes beyond mere talk show social activism. It is social conditioning which people, who do not have a Biblically based morality, are not prepared to discern right from wrong, and, therefore, will fall prey to the outspoken, deceptive reasoning. Talk shows such as this is part of the reason why Americans will grow to believe that its constitution should be revised, if not completely abandoned for a form of Socialism.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Radical Takeover Pt. 6 – Rome’s Social Justice & Communism
  2. Radical Takeover Pt. 1 – CULTURAL MARXISM: The Corruption of America
  3. War on Consciousness Pt. 29 – Arts & Entertainment & The Homosexual Agenda
  4. War on Consciousness Pt. 28 – Undermining Parental Rights
  5. War on Consciousness Pt. 26 – The Collective Salvation of the Superior Group

Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 15 – U.N.’s Approval of Global Arms Trade Treaty

global arms trade treaty

Reuters.Com

The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the first treaty on the global arms trade, which seeks to regulate the $70 billion business in conventional arms and keep weapons out of the hands of human rights abusers.

The National Rifle Association (NRA), a powerful U.S. pro-gun lobbying group that has opposed the treaty from the start, said it was a sad day for the United States, which joined the vast majority of U.N. member states by voting for the pact.

Iran, Syria and North Korea cast the sole votes against the treaty. The same three states last week prevented a treaty-drafting conference at U.N. headquarters from reaching the required consensus to adopt the pact.

The official U.N. tally showed 154 votes in favor, three against 23 abstentions, though diplomats and U.N. officials said the actual vote was 155-3-22. They said Angola was recorded as having abstained, though it had attempted to vote yes.

Iran, which is under a U.N. arms embargo over its nuclear program, is eager to ensure its arms imports and exports are not curtailed, while Syria’s government is embroiled in a two-year civil war and relies on arms from Russia and Iran, envoys said.

North Korea is also under a U.N. arms embargo due to its nuclear weapons and missile programs.

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon welcomed the vote, saying the treaty “will help to keep warlords, pirates, terrorists, criminals and their like from acquiring deadly arms.”

The treaty will be open for signature on June 3 and will enter into force 90 days after the 50th signatory ratifies it. Mexican U.N. Ambassador Luis Alfonso de Alba told reporters it normally takes two to three years for a treaty to come into force, but said he hoped it would happen sooner in this case.

Major arms producers China and Russia joined Cuba, Bolivia, Nicaragua and other countries in abstaining. Although a significant number of countries abstained, putting the treaty to a General Assembly vote was the only way its supporters could get it adopted after the treaty conference collapsed last week.

NRA: ‘A SAD, YET TELLING, DAY’

Many of the countries that abstained, among them India, complained the treaty favored exporting over importing states. Russia said Moscow would take a hard look at the treaty before deciding whether to sign it.

Several delegates told Reuters the treaty’s effectiveness would be limited if major arms exporters refused to sign it.

The United States, the world’s No. 1 arms exporter, voted in favor of the treaty despite fierce opposition from the NRA, whose lobbying wing – the NRA Institute for Legislative Action – issued a statement condemning the U.N. vote.

“This treaty disregards the Second Amendment to our Constitution and threatens individual firearm ownership,” said Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA. “It is a sad, yet telling, day when the president of the United States and his administration refuse to defend America’s Constitution on the world stage.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in a statement the U.N. adopted “a strong, effective and implementable Arms Trade Treaty that can strengthen global security while protecting the sovereign right of states to conduct legitimate arms trade.”

“Nothing in this treaty could ever infringe on the rights of American citizens under our domestic law or the Constitution, including the Second Amendment,” he added, referring to the U.S. Constitutional amendment that guarantees the right to bear arms.

The NRA has vowed to fight to prevent the treaty’s ratification by the U.S. Senate when it reaches Washington.

Syrian U.N. Ambassador Bashar Ja’afari repeated that his government opposes the arms trade treaty because it does not ban the sale of weapons to non-state actors and “terrorists” like those it says are active in Syria. The civil war there has claimed at least 70,000 lives, according to U.N. estimates.

Syria routinely refers to rebels trying to oust President Bashar al-Assad as “terrorists” backed by foreign governments.

The treaty does not ban transfers to armed groups, but says all arms transfers should be subjected to rigorous risk and human rights assessments first.

British Prime Minister David Cameron hailed the vote as a “landmark agreement that will save lives and ease the immense human suffering caused by armed conflict around the world.”

SCRUTINY ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Mexico issued a statement on behalf of 98 U.N. member states saying, “an effective implementation of this treaty will make a real difference for the people of the world.”

U.N. member states began meeting on March 18 in a final push to end years of discussions and hammer out a binding international treaty to end the lack of regulation over cross-border conventional arms sales.

Arms control activists and rights groups have said a treaty was needed to halt the uncontrolled flow of arms and ammunition that they say fuels wars, atrocities and rights abuses.

The Arms Trade Treaty aims to set standards for all cross-border transfers of conventional weapons. It would also create binding requirements for states to review all cross-border arms contracts to ensure that arms will not be used in human rights abuses, terrorism or violations of humanitarian law.

“The agreement of the Arms Trade Treaty sends a clear message to arms dealers who supply warlords and dictators that their time is up,” said Anna Macdonald of the global development group Oxfam.

The main reason the arms trade talks took place at all is that the United States, the world’s biggest arms trader, reversed U.S. policy on the issue after President Barack Obama was first elected and decided in 2009 to support a treaty.

Related articles are listed below:

  1. After Obama win, U.S. backs new U.N. arms treaty talks
  2. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 12 – Gun Control
  3. Crackdown on Liberty Pt. 3 – Domestic Terrorists
  4. Radical Takeover Pt. 4 – Rome’s Extreme Liberal Stance on Gun Control

War on Consciousness Pt. 29 – Arts & Entertainment & The Homosexual Agenda

bradybunch

Noise of Thunder Radio Show

Chris discusses a recent article in which Susan Olsen, star of the 70’s show “The Brady Bunch,” pays homage to her TV dad — the late Robert Reed — celebrating the fact that he was a homosexual, and blaming his death on Christians who preach against the gay lifestyle.  Her testimony is the latest in Hollywood’s ongoing war against the Christian faith.  Olsen goes out of her way to say that those who oppose homosexuality are “exactly like the primitive practice of people who killed babies” who were born with birth defects.  But is it really “Christianity” that causes the premature death of homosexuals?  Robert Reed’s death reveals the truth about the gay philosophy, and exposes the true culprits in what is devastating the homosexual community.

To listen to the show, click on the link entitled, “THE BRADY BUNCH & THE HOMOSEXUAL AGENDA“.

HuffingtonPost.Com

Susan Olsen, ‘Brady Bunch’ Star, On Gay Marriage, TV Dad Robert Reed

Add Cindy Brady to the slew of stars who have sounded off on their support of marriage equality.

“Brady Bunch” actress Susan Olsen, who played the character Cindy Brady on the iconic series, posted a cover photo to her Facebook page that has the caption, “Please God, let the Supreme Court know that you think it’s OK for gay people to marry.”

As Queerty points out, her fan page has also quoted her saying that her “gay TV dad would have been the best husband ever.” Of Robert Reed, who played Mike Brady, she reportedly writes:

“As a child, I was BLESSED to have another father figure in my life. He did not replace my own beloved, Norwegian version of Jed Clampett, nor would he have wanted to. He simply harmonized with all of my family values and brought his own heart to our table. This wonderful man was a giant in my world, a true king among men. His name was, and is, Robert Reed (OK that’s his stage name). This tempetuous actor who bottle fed puppies when he wasn’t quarreling with the heads of networks, shaped my heart as much as my biological parents did. So I really can honestly say, ‘My Dad was Gay.'”

She went on to note:

“‘I can also say that being gay killed him. Because it was so taboo, he could never make peace with himself. He never allowed himself to have a genuine love. He was forever taunted by his own disdain for the natural inclinations that he was BORN WITH. Bob was a family man. Had he been allowed to form a relationship with another man, he would have been the best husband ever and might still be alive.

To me, the vilification of homosexuality is exactly like the primitive practice of people who killed babies who were born with cleff palates or birth marks. It is a worship not of God but of fear itself in the form of a God who hates.”

You can read the full post here and here.

Reed, who was by all accounts a closeted gay man, died in 1992 of colon cancer. He was also revealed to have been HIV positive at the time of his death.

“Arrow” star Stephen Amell recently posted a message to his Facebook page in support of same-sex marriage. Beyonce and Madonna also posted supportive handwritten messages to their Instagram accounts.

This slideshow requires JavaScript.

 

Related articles are listed below:

  1. Evangelicals Face Growing Tension Between Political And Personal Views Of Gay Marriage
  2. Ted Haggard Says Gay Marriage Not Biblical, But Should Be Legal
  3. Tim Keller on Homosexuality and Biblical Authority: Different Crisis, Same Problem
  4. War on Consciousness Pt. 21 – The Jesuits & The Gay Rights Movement