Source: FoxNews.com
U.S. Congressmen are now being prohibited from using references to God in official correspondence from the Capitol building including, "under God" in the pledge, "God bless you," or "in the year of our Lord".
Washington, DC: Recently, Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave (R-Colo) was astonished when she flew a flag over the U.S. Capitol Building as a tribute to a senior citizen, and the accompanying certificate she received was edited with all religious references removed.
The Congresswoman was more astounded when, upon further investigation, she discovered the certificate was censored by order of the Architect of the Capitol, an unelected official who manages the flag office and other various operations within the Capitol Building.
Responding to a request for a flag flown over the United States Capitol in honor of a World War II veteran's 81st birthday, the Congresswoman ordered the flag and a certificate to state: "This flag was flown for Mr. John Doe on the occasion of his 81st birthday, the eleventh day of July, in the year of our Lord, 2007. Thank you, Grandpa, for showing me what it is to be a true patriot -- to love God, family, and country. We love you!"
When the flag and certificate came back from the flag office, each reference to the Lord and God were removed.
In response, Congresswoman Musgrave alerted two of her colleagues. Joining her were Congressman Randy Forbes (R-VA) and Congressman Michael Turner (R-OH). This group of lawmakers confronted Architect Stephen Ayers seeking to find the authority he was given to restrict their freedom of speech and religious expression.
Failing to provide the lawmakers a clear justification of his authority, the Architect has stood his ground and warned that because reference to God and the Lord may offend some Americans he prohibits them from being placed on official documents such as flag certificates.
"Our Founding Fathers fought against this sort of tyranny so every American citizen could freely express themselves and practice their religion. It's unfathomable that a bureaucrat in Washington today would think it is acceptable to silence the religious expression of lawmakers," said Musgrave.
"Flying flags over the Capitol is a traditional way to honor local residents. I was shocked when it came back with a censored certificate. I was even more shocked by the lack of reason the Architect has shown. He clearly has no basis for his actions and has displayed poor judgment on this matter," continued Musgrave.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Wednesday, October 3, 2007
Why Have Doctrines?
I came across an old letter written by Dr. Opal Reddin in response to some A/G ministers asking this question years ago. Given the current struggle that many face as to why it is important to believe the right things about Christianity and the Bible - thought this letter brings up some great points:
"Do we want doctrinal purity? Do we want doctrines? Referring to Pentecostals and Charismatics, one very popular speaker/author recently said that "people don't want doctrine, they just want Him (God)." The writer seems to believe that people can experience God without all the fuss about doctrine.
The Assemblies of God has been delineated as being strong on Experience and weak on Doctrine. Admittedly, we have been too busy trying to evangelize the world to take time to write many "scholarly" tomes, but we have known what we believe. In my time at Fuller Theological Seminary, I was often asked, "What does the AoG believe about this?" I suffered no embarrassment whatever as I always had an answer for any who asked about any doctrinal belief.
It's true that when the 300-plus Pentecostals met in Hot Springs, April 2, 1914 to form the General Council of the Assemblies of God they disdained a formal doctrinal statement. It indeed was a biblical experience they could not deny that had caused them to be driven out of their respective denominations. Since the majority were already "Bereans" and well grounded in the Word, they saw no need for a rigid creed.
(However) It was new "Revelation" that made the young movement realize the need for written "Statement of Fundamental Truths". The (new) "Revelation" was also termed "The New Issue", "Jesus Only", "Oneness", and "Pentecostal Unitarianism". To counteract what the majority could not accept, sixteen doctrines were enunciated at the fourth General Council in 1916. The second doctrinal statement, "The One True God", is almost as lengthy as all the others combined because of the need to defend Trinitarian doctrine against the errors of Unitarianism.
In Anointed To Serve, Dr. William Menzies wrote, "It is remarkable after all of these years the Statement of Fundamental Truths, as it was called, has remained virtually unchanged, with but minor rewording for the sake of clarification in recent years." (GPH, 1971, 119). Presently we face a deja vu: Many Pentecostals and Charismatics are saying ones belief about the Godhead does not matter. I urge each of you to review your understanding of the Trinity. In fact, since many of the "Latter Rain" false teachings are being recycled, why not teach our 16 fundamental doctrines to your congregation? A member of the board of directors told me last week that he's teaching them in Sunday school and the class is growing! They love doctrine, well taught."
In Spirit and Truth,
Opal Reddin
My note: We are definitely having deja vu again today! This time around I would urge our ministers to review their understanding of the Virgin Birth, Substitutionary Atonement, Inerrancy of Scripture and the reality of Hell, just to name of few. Because there are so called "Evangelicals" today who are questioning the veracity of these core doctrines of Christianity. People do love doctrine well taught. We've been doing a Wednesday night study of these 16 fundamental truths and the groups are growing. In fact, we've had better attendance for this study than any other - and folks even had to buy a book for their study groups. I think too often pastors underestimate the desire their people have to learn Biblical doctrine and be versed well enough to never "suffer embarrassment" from not being able to answer a question about their faith. In fact such knowledge may just keep them out of divorce court, the counselor's office, the Kingdom Hall, the Mormon Temple....
"Do we want doctrinal purity? Do we want doctrines? Referring to Pentecostals and Charismatics, one very popular speaker/author recently said that "people don't want doctrine, they just want Him (God)." The writer seems to believe that people can experience God without all the fuss about doctrine.
The Assemblies of God has been delineated as being strong on Experience and weak on Doctrine. Admittedly, we have been too busy trying to evangelize the world to take time to write many "scholarly" tomes, but we have known what we believe. In my time at Fuller Theological Seminary, I was often asked, "What does the AoG believe about this?" I suffered no embarrassment whatever as I always had an answer for any who asked about any doctrinal belief.
It's true that when the 300-plus Pentecostals met in Hot Springs, April 2, 1914 to form the General Council of the Assemblies of God they disdained a formal doctrinal statement. It indeed was a biblical experience they could not deny that had caused them to be driven out of their respective denominations. Since the majority were already "Bereans" and well grounded in the Word, they saw no need for a rigid creed.
(However) It was new "Revelation" that made the young movement realize the need for written "Statement of Fundamental Truths". The (new) "Revelation" was also termed "The New Issue", "Jesus Only", "Oneness", and "Pentecostal Unitarianism". To counteract what the majority could not accept, sixteen doctrines were enunciated at the fourth General Council in 1916. The second doctrinal statement, "The One True God", is almost as lengthy as all the others combined because of the need to defend Trinitarian doctrine against the errors of Unitarianism.
In Anointed To Serve, Dr. William Menzies wrote, "It is remarkable after all of these years the Statement of Fundamental Truths, as it was called, has remained virtually unchanged, with but minor rewording for the sake of clarification in recent years." (GPH, 1971, 119). Presently we face a deja vu: Many Pentecostals and Charismatics are saying ones belief about the Godhead does not matter. I urge each of you to review your understanding of the Trinity. In fact, since many of the "Latter Rain" false teachings are being recycled, why not teach our 16 fundamental doctrines to your congregation? A member of the board of directors told me last week that he's teaching them in Sunday school and the class is growing! They love doctrine, well taught."
In Spirit and Truth,
Opal Reddin
My note: We are definitely having deja vu again today! This time around I would urge our ministers to review their understanding of the Virgin Birth, Substitutionary Atonement, Inerrancy of Scripture and the reality of Hell, just to name of few. Because there are so called "Evangelicals" today who are questioning the veracity of these core doctrines of Christianity. People do love doctrine well taught. We've been doing a Wednesday night study of these 16 fundamental truths and the groups are growing. In fact, we've had better attendance for this study than any other - and folks even had to buy a book for their study groups. I think too often pastors underestimate the desire their people have to learn Biblical doctrine and be versed well enough to never "suffer embarrassment" from not being able to answer a question about their faith. In fact such knowledge may just keep them out of divorce court, the counselor's office, the Kingdom Hall, the Mormon Temple....
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Fundamental Christians Cause Atheism?
From Newsbusters:
ABC may have set a loathsome new MSM low in insulting traditional Christians. On today's "Good Morning America," the network lumped the "Christan right" with the 9-11 Islamic terrorists as driving people to atheism.
ABC may have set a loathsome new MSM low in insulting traditional Christians. On today's "Good Morning America," the network lumped the "Christan right" with the 9-11 Islamic terrorists as driving people to atheism.
Keying off an atheists convention being held this weekend, GMA ran a segment on the "Rise in Atheism." Seeking to explain the phenomenon, as images rolled first of the WTC in flames and then of a man placidly holding a sign that simply read "One Nation Under God" and of a display at a demonstration of the Ten Commandments, ABC's Liz Marlantes stated:
Some are reacting to religious extremism, like the Islamic fundamentalism behind the terrorist attacks of 9-11, but also the rise of the Christian right in the U.S.
So there it is. To ABC, traditional Christians are as responsible for making people doubt God as the 9-11 terrorists. People peacefully exercising their First Amendment rights by displaying the Ten Commandments or a sign containing an excerpt from the Pledge of Allegiance as faith-shattering as terrorists who murder thousands by flying airplanes into buildings.
Does MSM anti-Christian bias get any worse than this? ABC owes an apology.
NOTE: In making the case that atheism is growing, Marlantes mentioned that "Congress now has its first self-proclaimed atheist." But while displaying his image [shown here], ABC didn't in any way identify him. He is Pete Stark (D-Calif.)
My note: In the future prepare for the harshest criticism of Biblical Christianity to come from within the 'church'. Articles like this will give illustrative rise to emergents and others of their ilk as to why we shouldn't take the Bible literally, and why all good Christians should shun the 'fundamental' label. They would never use the term 'dumb down the gospel' but that is what will be promoted as hell is deconstructed, the atonement is diluted, the virgin birth is written off and holy living is something for narrow minded legalists.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)