Tuesday, December 22, 2009

UCG Blogs!!!!!- Bumped

I wanted to let you know about some UCG blogs.The first list is by some who are not ministers that you might want to read to understand how lay people follow God. Most of these weave a member's other interests into how they follow God. The other is by ministers or from the official church, so that you can be in the know. You can subscribe to these by RSS feed, like you can with mine here.Also if I missed one, let me know and if you start one yourself, definitely let me know!For either of these, please reply in the comments section!! And if you link your blog to twitter, let us know also!!
Lay Members
http://itsapaulworld.blogspot.com/
http://bloggingmilford.blogspot.com
/http://myittybittylittlecorner.blogspot.com/
http://braveanonymousposter.blogspot.com/
http://contenttowait.blogspot.com/
http://nathanalbright.blogspot.com/
http://thisisrich.blogspot.com/
http://uycjordan08.blogspot.com/
Ministers & Official UCG
http://feeds.feedburner.com/United-Church-of-God
http://feeds.feedburner.com/GoodNewsMagazine
http://feeds.feedburner.com/VerticalThought
http://www.beyondtoday.tv/
http://members.ucg.org/fathersbusiness/
http://wnponline.wordpress.com/
http://www.kubik.org/
http://vkubik.livejournal.com/
http://www.lifenets.org//
http://ucgmikebennett.wordpress.com

And, of course, my own blog here http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/
By the way, I've included all of the ones listed above on the "Check this out" portion of my own blog in case you misplace this.

How Christmas Grew


An interesting research article from http://www.gnmagazine.org/ about Christmas and a Patriotic take on it! If you want to order a free book about this topic click here and for more interesting stories like this click here to follow this blog.


How Christmas Grew
In view of centuries of criticism of the commercialization of Christmas, it is interesting to note that the holiday's secular, not its religious, aspect, has been most responsible for its popularity. In the United States "retailers have come to count on yuletide sales for up to 50 percent of their annual profits. The shopping season now pumps an estimated $37 billion into the nation's economy—making the American Christmas larger than the gross national product of Ireland" (Jeffery Sheler, "In Search of Christmas," U.S. News and World Report, Dec. 23, 1996, p. 64).
The lure of profit has proven so strong that, since the 1870s, merchants have vigorously promoted Christmas. Initially they even laid out their stores with more religious trappings, such as pipe organs, choirs and statues, than some churches could muster. Convinced of the economic impact of Christmas, President Franklin Roosevelt moved Thanksgiving from Nov. 30 to Nov. 23 to add another week of shopping before Christmas (p. 62).
"What many historians find most fascinating about the reinvention of Christmas is that its commercialization, now so frequently denounced, is what spawned the transformation in the first place. The 'commercial forms' associated with Christmas and other holidays, says Schmidt of Princeton [Lee Eric Schmidt, Consumer Rites, 1995], 'have become integral to their survival.' The consumer culture 'shapes our holidays,' Schmidt says, 'by taking in diverse, local traditions and creating relatively common ones.' To turn Christmas into a purely religious celebration now might cheer those who want to 'take back Christmas,' he says. But such an observance 'would lack the cultural resonance and impact of a holiday deeply rooted in the marketplace.' If Christmas came to that, adds Restad [Penne Restad, Christmas in America, 1995], 'we probably wouldn't keep it as a society'" (p. 64).


For More on this, click here

AMERICA: ROACH MOTEL


An archived article from http://www.anncoulter.com/ when W was president that explains why the current groundswell wasn't there then or in the 2008 elections. Hopefully in 2012 there is a better candidate to support! :)

For more on this click http://brianleesblog.blogspot.com/2009/09/while-america-sleeps-how-islam.html and for more articles like this click here

BUSH'S AMERICA: ROACH MOTEL

June 6, 2007

Republicans' defense of President Bush's immigration bill is more enraging than their defense of Harriet Miers. Back then, Bush's conservative base was accused of being sexist for opposing an unqualified woman's nomination to the highest court in the land. Now we're racists for not wanting to grant amnesty to millions of illegal aliens.I don't know why conservatives like Linda Chavez have to argue like liberals by smearing their opponents as racists. Oh wait, now I remember! Their arguments are as strong as liberals' arguments usually are.Apart from abortion, no subject produces so much disingenuousness as America's immigration policy, both legal and illegal. For nearly 50 years, Americans have been intentionally lied to about our immigration laws.In 1965, Teddy Kennedy overhauled immigration law with the specific purpose of effecting a dramatic change in the nation's demographics. Bobby Kennedy had civil rights, so Teddy needed something big: He would preside over a civil rights bill for the entire Third World! My word, but that man could drink in those days.With his 1965 immigration act, Kennedy embarked on entirely transforming American culture for no good reason. (You know how people always say the same arguments against illegal immigrants today were once made about the Irish to show how silly those arguments are? If only the U.S. Senate had had an "Irish Need Not Apply" sign!)


Until that point, immigration law basically took a laissez-faire approach, with country quotas attempting to replicate the traditional immigration patterns. Most immigrants to America had historically come from Great Britain, Germany and Scandinavian countries.Consequently, immigration quotas roughly reflected that balance, with smaller numbers of immigrants admitted from other countries.But in an angry, long-awaited payback to WASPs, Kennedy decided he was going to radically transform the racial composition of the country. Instead of taking 15 immigrants from England and three from China, America would henceforth take three from England and 15 from China. Payback's a bitch, Daughters of the American Revolution!Some of those hardworking immigrants who just want a chance to succeed were arrested in a plot to blow up JFK Airport last week.Most immigrants still come from a handful of countries; Kennedy simply changed which countries those would be. In 2005, according to the Department of Homeland Security, the overwhelming majority of immigrants came from only 10 countries, none of which had sent a lot of immigrants to America for the country's first 200 years: Mexico (161,445), India (84,681), China (69,967), the Philippines (60,748), Cuba (36,261), Vietnam (32,784), the Dominican Republic (27,504), Korea (26,562), Colombia (25,571) and Ukraine (22,761).In 1960, whites were 90 percent of the country. The Census Bureau recently estimated that whites already account for less than two-thirds of the population and will be a minority by 2050. Other estimates put that day much sooner.One may assume the new majority will not be such compassionate overlords as the white majority has been. If this sort of drastic change were legally imposed on any group other than white Americans, it would be called genocide. Yet whites are called racists merely for mentioning the fact that current immigration law is intentionally designed to reduce their percentage in the population.We needed to have "more discussion" about Iraq for nearly two years before finally invading. When will we be allowed to begin discussion of a government policy enacted by stealth 40 years ago specifically intended to decimate one particular ethnic group in our own country?If liberals think Iraqis are genetically incapable of pulling off even the most rudimentary form of democracy, why do they believe 50 million Mexicans will magically become good Americans, imbued in the nation's history and culture, upon crossing the Rio Grande? Maybe we should dunk Iraqis in the Rio and see what happens.And as long as we're adopting an open borders policy for immigration, how about opening the borders for emigration? As it stands, anyone can come in and start plotting terrorist attacks or collecting government services right away. But the rest of us can never escape having to pay for it.You can leave the country, you can renounce your citizenship — but you still owe taxes for 10 years. The government does not allow us to stop supporting welfare recipients in America, millions more of whom it plans to import under Bush's bill. That's not a free market — it's a roach motel.If these free-marketeers at The Wall Street Journal want the free movement of people, how about letting us freely leave after they've wrecked the country?In Samuel P. Huntington's book "Who Are We: The Challenges to America's National Identity," he asks: "Would America be the America it is today if in the 17th and 18th centuries it had been settled not by British Protestants but by French, Spanish or Portuguese Catholics? The answer is no. It would not be America; it would be Quebec, Mexico or Brazil."I don't want to live in Mexico, Quebec or Brazil. But now I guess I have no choice, since "open borders" means I can never leave.See also here for the book http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/54400099&referer=brief_results

Senate amnesty targets‏

A very interesting and timely post from www.numbersusa.com about Senators that are worth targeting in the 2010 midterm election. For a take on the house click here and for more interesting articles like this click here.



HERE IS WHAT WE ARE UP AGAINST TO STOP THE AMNESTY IN THE SENATE

DEAR AMNESTY OPPONENTS,
One of our members called this morning wanting the list of Senators in the 'amnesty bubble' -- those who are most susceptible to changing their action on the potential amnesty vote in early 2010.
Those of us who made it to the office in the middle of the DC blizzard shutdown today came up with lists of one-third of the U.S. Senators where your pressure could be the most influential and crucial.
See the names of the 38 targeted Senators here.
As yet, no bill has been introduced in the Senate, but here are links about the amnesty bill that was introduced in the U.S. House last week:
Joe Jenkins' blog.
Section-by-Section analysis of the bill.
PRO-AMNESTY SENATORS FELL 14 VOTES SHORT IN 2007
Let's start with the fact that the U.S. Senate on June 28, 2007 voted 46-53 on a cloture motion to end the filibuster on the Bush/Kennedy amnesty. That means massive constituency pressure achieved a majority vote (53) for our side during a time of low unemployment (but of stagnant wages for most working-class Americans). It also means that the pro-amnesty Senators were 14 votes short of the 60 needed to stop the filibuster and allow a vote to pass the amnesty. Those of us fighting to protect the economic interests of 15 million jobless Americans must concentrate on keeping the pro-amnesty forces from adding 14 more votes.
'BUBBLE SENATORS' WHO COULD CLOSE THE 14-VOTE GAP AND PASS AN AMNESTY
15 Democrats defied their Party leadership in 2007 and voted AGAINST the amnesty. How many of them will again courageously stand for American workers and how many will switch sides in favor of illegal foreign workers and the outlaw businesses that hire them? If all 15 follow their Party leaders and turn against us (and nothing else changes), the amnesty would pass.
See the list of 15 here.
7 Democrats since the 2007 vote have replaced 7 Republicans who voted AGAINST the amnesty. Will they come to see that the voters of their state expect their Senators -- regardless of Party affiliation -- to continue to oppose amnesty ? Or will they feel that their higher loyalty is to the Democratic Party leaders and their desire for millions more legal workers to compete against unemployed Americans?
See the list of 7 here.
1 Democrat who was up for re-election in 2007 didn't vote because of illness. His state is solidly against the amnesty, but he usually goes with the Party leadership and doesn't face re-election for five more years.
See him here.
A CHANCE TO PICK UP VOTES AGAINST AMNESTY FROM THESE 'BUBBLE SENATORS'
7 Republicans who followed Pres. Bush and voted FOR the amnesty in 2007 remain in office. Now that there are no Party leaders strong-arming FOR the amnesty, will some of these 7 Republicans rejoin the rest of their Party and oppose it?
See the list of 7 here.
4 new Republican Senators have replaced Republican Senators who voted FOR the amnesty in 2007. What is the chance of moving those votes over into the AGAINST column?
See the list of 4 here.
2 of the Democrats who voted FOR the amnesty in 2007 have been replaced by new Democrats who are facing contested elections next fall. Can they come to feel that opposing an amnesty would be a better re-election strategy?
2 other Democrats who voted FOR the amnesty in 2007 are up for re-election next fall and behind in the polls. Can the voters in their states persuade them that approving an amnesty would be bad for their chances of staying in the Senate?
NET ADVANTAGE? THE PEOPLE HOLD THE POWER
In the big struggle over whether the pro-amnesty forces can gain a net of 14 votes, the victory is the people's to lose. But if the people sit back and expect that these 38 Senators will primarily just do the right thing, an amnesty will pass. Tens of millions of dollars of contributions to the Senators and to pro-amnesty lobbyists ensure that the amnesty will pass without massive public opposition. With a concerted and steady public engagement with these 38 Senators, I don't see how we can fail. Then, the math works in our favor.
Be sure to read my blog today for all the names and further analysis on all of them.
For those of you who are looking for a way to start fighting now (even before the holidays are over), I wanted to get to you the most important names right away. Over the next couple of weeks we will begin to offer you specific faxes, phone notes and event notes to help you magnify constituent pressure on these Senators.
If you are ready to start calling their DC offices now, here's the number: 202-224-3121

Monday, December 21, 2009

Does It Matter to God?


An interesting research article from http://www.gnmagazine.org/ about Christmas and a Patriotic take on it! If you want to order a free book about this topic click here and for more interesting stories like this click here to follow this blog.


Does It Matter to God?
We have a choice. We can choose the feast days instituted by God or the holidays substituted by men. The choices we make affect our destiny and impact our relationship with our Creator.
Over the last two millennia, traditional Christianity has systematically laid aside the "feast days of the Lord" and established its own holidays. Christmas was established to enable pagan converts to come into church fellowship without forsaking their heathen customs and practices. Easter is a replacement for the biblical Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread.
Even the weekly Sabbath was abandoned in favor of Sunday, the pagan day of the sun, supposedly to commemorate Jesus' resurrection (though, as we demonstrated earlier, it took place not on Sunday morning but at the end of the weekly Sabbath at sunset Saturday).
Although we should immediately recognize that overruling God's instructions is dangerous behavior, let's consider, from the biblical record, whether such inventions and alterations are acceptable worship to our Creator God.
Changing God's instructions
When God began working with the ancient Israelites, He intended they set an example of obedience to Him for the nations around them (Deuteronomy 4:1, 6-8). They were to be a model nation, showing other peoples that God's way of life produces abundant blessings. Their experiences serve as continuing examples for us (1 Corinthians 10:1-11).
During their years in Egypt, the Israelites were exposed to Egyptian culture and worship. Notice what Unger's Bible Dictionary says about this culture: "The Egyptian religion was an utterly bewildering polytheistic conglomeration in which many deities of the earliest periods, when each town had its own deity, were retained …
"Every object beheld, every phenomenon of nature, was thought to be indwelt by a spirit which could choose its own form, occupying the body of a crocodile, a fish, a cow, a cat, etc. Hence the Egyptians had numerous holy animals, principally the bull, the cow, the cat, the baboon, the jackal, and the crocodile" (1966, p. 291, "Egypt").
Shortly after miraculously delivering the Israelites from their bondage in Egypt, God instructed them how He wanted to be worshipped. He gave them His commandments (Exodus 20), along with statutes and judgments detailing how to apply them (Exodus 21-22). God revealed His feast days (Exodus 23:14-17; Leviticus 23) and gave directions regarding a priesthood, tabernacle and offerings (Exodus 25-31). God told Moses to climb Mount Sinai and gave him two tablets of stone engraved with the Ten Commandments (Exodus 24:12; 31:18).
When Moses didn't come down from Mount Sinai for some time (Exodus 32:1), the people prodded his brother Aaron into fashioning an idol for them to worship. They essentially mixed the Egyptian form of worship with the instructions they had just received from God. The practice of blending religious beliefs and practices is known as syncretism.
After creating a golden image of a calf, Aaron proclaimed the next day a holiday—"a feast to the Lord" (verses 4-5). They then "rose early and sacrificed burnt offerings and presented fellowship offerings. Afterward they sat down to eat and drink and got up to indulge in revelry" (verse 6, NIV). This celebration combined God's instruction with Egyptian religious practice and tradition.
We are not told why the Israelites chose this mix of worship. Perhaps they thought it was not a good idea to abandon all the familiar forms of worship at once and they simply practiced what they were accustomed to from their years immersed in Egyptian culture. Whatever their thinking, God was not pleased. He told Moses: "Go down, because your people, whom you brought up out of Egypt, have become corrupt. They have been quick to turn away from what I commanded them" (verses 7-8, NIV).
God shows from His Word that He expects more from those who claim to follow Him. He wants people to worship Him "in spirit and truth" (John 4:23-24)—not with corrupted, vile practices rooted in the worship of other gods.
Consequences of futile worship
The Israelites were in no way justified in departing from the God-ordained instructions introduced in the wilderness. God was so angered by their actions that He was ready to destroy the nation (Exodus 32:10). Only on Moses' pleadings did God relent and spare them (verses 11-14).
Ancient Israel's experiment with combining parts of God's instruction with pagan customs and elements was a disaster. In punishment for this sin, 3,000 men lost their lives (verses 27-28). Those who weren't killed had to drink water polluted with the ground-up idol, pulverized into powder (verse 20).
Being presumptuous—taking unauthorized liberty to do things such as altering God's instructions for worship—is sinful. The Bible describes the Israelites' actions as "a great sin" (verses 21, 30, 31). God's law is clear concerning presumptuous behavior (Numbers 15:30-31).
The principle holds true today among God's people. Once we come to understand His truth, we have an obligation to take steps to obey Him. We recognize that the instruction and examples in His Word were recorded for our spiritual instruction and benefit (1 Corinthians 10:6, 11; Romans 15:4).
Additional warnings for Christians
The generation of Israelites who called for the golden calf apparently never learned to trust and obey God. Only a short time later, while preparing to go into the land God had promised them, they grew afraid of the land's inhabitants and refused to enter (Numbers 13-14). As a result, God told them they would wander 40 years in the wilderness until all those who had refused to follow His instructions had died (Numbers 14:33). After their deaths, God then began preparing the next generation to enter Canaan.
Part of God's instructions included an explicit warning against incorporating pagan customs into their worship. Here are His exact words:
"When the Lord your God cuts off from before you the nations which you go to dispossess, and you displace them and dwell in their land, take heed to yourself that you are not ensnared to follow them, after they are destroyed from before you, and that you do not inquire after their gods, saying, 'How did these nations serve their gods? I also will do likewise.'
"You shall not worship the Lord your God in that way; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates they have done to their gods; for they burn even their sons and daughters in the fire to their gods. Whatever I command you, be careful to observe it; you shall not add to it nor take away from it" (Deuteronomy 12:29-32).
Regrettably, the Israelites often failed to heed God's warning. Time and time again they let their fascination with the religious practices of those around them get the better of them as they lapsed into idolatrous worship.
In the 600s B.C. God gave three more warnings against this kind of behavior. First, through the prophet Jeremiah, God said, "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles; do not be dismayed at the signs of heaven, for the Gentiles are dismayed at them" (Jeremiah 10:2). Here God cautioned His people against following the gentile (non-Israelite) practices of worshipping the heavenly bodies (like the sun on Dec. 25) and against astrology in general.
In the following verses (3-9), God describes some of their idolatrous customs. They cut a tree from the forest, prop it up and decorate it with precious metals.
Although this account is specifically referring to setting up an object of idolatrous worship (verses 6-8), God's command here, "Do not learn the way of the Gentiles," applies to all pagan religious customs. Christmas trees, mistletoe and colorful lights that come from pagan winter-solstice celebrations, rabbits and Easter eggs as fertility symbols, and demonic concepts at Halloween, all fit this prohibition. Likewise a number of other modern traditions, such as New Year's Day celebration and Valentine's Day, also fit the prohibition—as they, too, originate in pagan worship. (You can search for more information on these at our Web site, www.ucg.org .)
In giving this instruction against learning the way of the gentiles, God wanted His people to avoid the type of sin their forefathers had committed with the golden calf.
A few years after the statement in Jeremiah, God again expressed His anger with His people: "For they have committed adultery, and blood is on their hands. They have committed adultery with their idols, and even sacrificed their sons whom they bore to Me, passing them through the fire, to devour them. Moreover they have done this to Me: They have defiled My sanctuary on the same day and profaned My Sabbaths. For after they had slain their children for their idols, on the same day they came into My sanctuary to profane it; and indeed thus they have done in the midst of My house" (Ezekiel 23:37-39).
Here it appears that Israel practiced one of the customs like those originally associated with the Saturnalia and worship of Saturn—the sacrificing of children—and then came to worship God on one of His Sabbaths!
Through the prophet Zephaniah God decried "those who worship the host of heaven on the housetops; those who worship and swear oaths by the Lord , but who also swear by Milcom" (Zephaniah 1:5). God is not pleased when people are double-minded (James 1:8; 4:8) in their worship—accepting false religions and customs while professing to worship Him.
A consistent message throughout the Bible
Some people wrongly assume that Old Testament prohibitions against mixing paganism with godly worship were annulled during apostolic times. Nothing could be further from the truth.
To prove the continuity of God's teaching in the New Testament, let us consider the city of Corinth. Here we find one of the most instructive examples about incorporating paganism into Christianity.
Strategically located just south of the narrow isthmus connecting central Greece with the Peloponnesus, this city sat on an important trade route. Its inhabitants grew rich by transporting goods across the four-mile isthmus, which saved merchants a 200-mile trip by ship. Worship of Aphrodite (the Greek goddess of love) had long been part of the city's history. It also boasted a temple to Apollo, the Greek sun god.
What was Corinth like in the first century? "[Here] the apostle Paul established a flourishing church, made up of a cross section of the worldly minded people who had flocked to Corinth to participate in the gambling, legalized temple prostitution, business adventures, and amusements available in a first-century navy town …
"The city soon became a melting pot for the approximately 500,000 people who lived there at the time of Paul's arrival. Merchants and sailors, anxious to work the docks, migrated to Corinth. Professional gamblers and athletes, betting on the Isthmian games, took up residence. Slaves, sometimes freed but with no place to go, roamed the streets day and night. And prostitutes (both male and female) were abundant. People from Rome, the rest of Greece, Egypt, Asia Minor—indeed, all of the Mediterranean world—relished the lack of standards and freedom of thought that prevailed in the city.
"These were the people who eventually made up the Corinthian church. They had to learn to live together in harmony, although their national, social, economic, and religious backgrounds were very different" (Nelson's New Illustrated Bible Dictionary, "Corinth").
Paul's instruction regarding other religious practices
Writing to this diverse group, primarily gentiles with a tradition of idol worship (1 Corinthians 12:2), Paul addressed the issue of whether outside religious customs and practices had any place among God's people:
"What fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness? And what accord has Christ with Belial? Or what part has a believer with an unbeliever? And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: 'I will dwell in them and walk among them. I will be their God, and they shall be My people.'
"Therefore 'Come out from among them and be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, and I will receive you. I will be a Father to you, and you shall be My sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.' Therefore, having these promises, beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God" (2 Corinthians 6:14–18; 7:1).
Instead of renaming some of the pagan customs as Christian or allowing the new converts to retain some of their former practices, the apostle Paul commanded them to leave behind all of these forms of worship. He condemned the sexual immorality that was a common part of the fertility rites in honor of the goddess Aphrodite (1 Corinthians 6:13, 18; 1 Thessalonians 4:3). No doubt the new church did not participate in winter-solstice celebrations honoring the sun god Apollo. Nor did they imitate these to honor Christ—as this would not have honored Christ at all.
Christianity that is faithful to the Bible teaches its followers that "our old man was crucified with Him [Jesus Christ], that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin" (Romans 6:6). If someone is strongly committed to following Christ, "he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new" (2 Corinthians 5:17).
Paul explains that we are not to retain our favorite past religious traditions. Indeed, "all things have become new"! As part of the "old man" (Ephesians 4:22; Colossians 3:9), our former styles of worship must go.
As Jesus taught, we simply cannot serve two masters (Matthew 6:24; Luke 16:13). We cannot simultaneously embrace two competing systems of worship.
We see the obvious continuity between the Old and New Testaments of the Bible; the new also forbids mixing pagan tradition with the "worship in spirit and truth" God commands (John 4:23-24).
Authority from man or God?
Since God is so strongly opposed to altering His revealed days of worship (Deuteronomy 12:32; Revelation 22:18-19), by what authority did human beings change the days we observe? Here is what The Encyclopaedia Britannica says about some early Christians: "Though many of [Jesus'] disciples continued to observe the special times and seasons of the Jewish Law, new converts broke with the custom because they regarded it as no longer needful or necessary" (15th edition, Vol. 4, p. 601, "Church Year"). Notice the lack of divine authorization. The people decided to make this change.
One humanly devised change in the early centuries after Christ was to worship on Sunday rather than the seventh-day Sabbath, the day authorized in the Bible. The same source acknowledges that "the New Testament writings do not explain how the practice began" (ibid., p. 603). Though some have theorized this change occurred in honor of Christ's resurrection, we have already seen that this rationale is flawed because Christ was resurrected near sundown on Saturday rather than on Sunday.
Replacing God's annual feast days with pagan holidays was also done in the same spirit. This same encyclopedia article makes this frank admission: "Unlike the cycle of feasts and fasts of the Jewish Law, the [modern] Christian year has never been based upon a divine revelation. It is rather a tradition that is always subject to change by ecclesiastical law. Each self-governing church maintains the right to order the church year" (p. 601).
When the kingdom of Israel divided after Solomon's death, King Jeroboam of the northern 10 tribes soon changed the date of the annual autumn festival from the seventh to the eighth month of the Hebrew calendar (1 Kings 12:32-33). So the first king of the new northern Israelite dynasty established a corrupting pattern in the nation's religious life, one that eventually helped lead to the northern tribes' destruction at the hands of the Assyrian Empire.
Throughout the northern kingdom's history, the political and ecclesiastical leadership stubbornly persisted in "the sins of Jeroboam" (1 Kings 13:34; 15:30; 16:2-3, 19; etc.), one of which was his unauthorized alteration of the date of a God-ordained religious festival.
Time to leave nonbiblical religious traditions behind
As creatures of habit, we can find ourselves following traditions that are contrary to God's instructions. Almost 2,000 years ago Jesus Christ pointed out that a devoutly religious group, the Pharisees, was in just such a situation. He told them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: 'This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men … All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition" (Mark 7:6-9).
Just proclaiming that something is Christian does not make it so. No matter what our traditions have been or what rationalizations we may employ, the Bible is clear that we must follow our Creator's directions on His days and forms of worship.
In Colossians 2:8 the apostle Paul warns, "Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ."
Similarly, one of the last messages in the Bible reveals this warning for people caught up in a great worldwide system that established itself in opposition to God: "Come out of her, my people, lest you share in her sins, and lest you receive of her plagues. For her sins have reached to heaven, and God has remembered her iniquities" (Revelation 18:4-5).
We have a choice. We can choose the feast days instituted by God or the holidays substituted by men unwittingly deceived by Satan. The choices we make affect our destiny and impact our relationship with our Creator.
We can take great comfort in the meaning of the days of worship revealed in the Bible, since they represent the magnificent plan of God, who will give every human being an opportunity to understand and accept His way of life either now or, for the majority of human beings, in an age yet to come. If your eyes have been opened, you have a clear responsibility to make the right choice today. Will you now act on what you know?

Will the Tea Party Patriots help reverse the vote?


An interesting post from http://www.hughhewitt.com/ to read as a guide to monitoring health care reform. For more interesting articles like this, you can subscribe to this blog here.


Will the Tea Party Patriots help reverse the vote?
By: Hugh Hewitt Examiner Columnist December 21, 2009
Sen. Ben Nelson's, D-Neb., abandonment of his alleged "pro-life" commitment brought Harry Reid within reach of a Christmas Eve vote to approve a Senate version of Obamacare. When that happens, the political battles over the future of American medicine and especially the care of seniors will shift to the conference committee and then to the House.
Though many conservatives are demoralized, they should instead be gearing up to peel off enough votes from among the 220 who voted for Obamacare when it passed the lower chamber. If the 215 who voted "no" on the first round stay firm, only three Democrats need to be turned.
Those three are most likely going to be found among the 24 Democrats identified by the National Republican Congressional Committee's Reverse the Vote campaign. (See www.reversethevote.org/dems.html ) These are the two dozen Democrats judged most vulnerable on Nov. 2, 2010, because the beliefs of the voters in their districts do not square with their representatives' support for the federal government's takeover of health care. Thousands of small contributions have already flowed into a special fund to be divided among the eventual GOP nominees against these 24 constituent-ignoring liberals.
Even more money is needed of course, but much more than money as well, and that is where the Tea Party movement comes in.
First, though, what do we mean by "Tea Party movement?" The media don't seem to recognize the fact that there are many groups that wear the Tea Party mantle. Some are completely legitimate grass-roots organizations, like Tea Party Patriots (http://www.teapartypatriots.org/). Others are also completely legit. Still others are consultant-driven not-for-profits in name and tax status only, and they are actually just using the populist anger in the country to line their pockets.
What matters now is that the genuine grass-roots activists join in the effort to peel off at least three House Democrats from their original support for Obamacare. The Tea Party turnout has considerable overlap with the GOP, but they are very distinct efforts in many respects. Almost every member of both opposes the takeover of health care by the feds, and most are also opposed to the massive cuts in store for Medicare.
While the GOP busies itself raising money for the fall races, the Tea Party activists could be focusing on organizing efforts on a district-by-district basis. Imagine the impact over the next few weeks if the cash continued to flow into Reverse the Vote even as committees of Tea Party veterans presented themselves and their grievances in the local offices of these 24 Democrats.
Tea Party participants from districts with congressmen who have been opposing Obamacare and massive spending could become virtual members of one of the 24 efforts to turn a Democrat from a "yes" to a "no." The surge in opposition, if focused, could be very effective.
The GOP and the Tea Parties are not the same thing. But they want many of the same things, especially the defeat of Obamacare.
The time is now for the latter to target the same out-of-touch-with-their-district Democrats as the former. Such an alliance, even if only for a while, could save American medicine.
Some of the Tea Party participants will want to grouse about what the Republicans did -- or didn't do -- when they were in the majority before 2007. Some will worry about being co-opted or about losing their influence or position within the media spotlight as 2010 begins to shift to the elections, which inevitably highlight the two parties. Still others will be dreaming "third party" dreams and won't want anything to do with the Party of Lincoln.
A test of the movement is directly ahead. To defeat Obamacare, it is going to have to team up with the GOP. The next few weeks will tell us a lot about the motives, and staying power, of the new activists of 2009.
Examiner Columnist Hugh Hewitt is a law professor at Chapman University Law School and a nationally syndicated radio talk show host who blogs daily at HughHewitt.com.

Illegals win in Raleigh due to American apathy, lies, and tricks‏

A very timely post from http://www.alipac.us/ about the North Carolina position on illegal immigrants in their community college. Click the links that are referenced and for more interesting articles like this click here.

Illegals win in Raleigh due to American apathy, lies, and tricks‏
The December 18, 2009, public input meeting required by law on the matter of the N.C. Community College Board giving illegal aliens access to our colleges was rigged. It was rigged in several ways.
First, the meeting was placed on a workday morning the Friday before Christmas, when taxpayers that are working would be unable to attend.
Second, there were no N.C. Community College Board members even present at this meeting! It appears they could not even take time off to be there, and the crowd was assured that our comments would be delivered to the board members and they would receive and review all of our comments and letters. Pretty shabby that not one board member attended the meeting. Third, the illegal aliens and their supporters had special insider knowledge and treatment. They arrived and were allowed to sign in to speak at 8 a.m., or two hours prior to the advertised start of the meeting. When confronted with this information, the state employees running the meeting lied to citizens and the press. When I asked them what time sign-ups began, they claimed 9 a.m. I pointed out that was impossible since it was 9:03 a.m. and I was signing in as speaker #35! Their story then changed to the claim that sign ups started at 8:30 a.m. The meeting organizer and the women running the sign up table continued to lie and claim that sign-ups began at 8:30 a.m., even when confronted by Ron Woodard of NC Listen, Randy Dye of Randy's Right blog, and James Johnson of NC Fire who signed in as speakers 28, 29, and 30 at 8:25 a.m.! We have video evidence of an event organizer telling Randy Dye, who had signed in as speaker #29 earlier at 8:25 a.m., that sign ups began at 8:30 a.m. We gave the main event organizer on film making the same false claim and she is on record with WRAL making that 8:30 a.m. claim as well.
Another lie we were told was that nobody was allowed to sign up anyone else. I asked that question directly and was told "under no circumstances". Later, we found out that one of our supporters, Mrs. Norton (Speaker number 47) had been signed up by her young friend that assisted her at the event. Her young friend, who had signed her in and was handed a slip by the ladies at the table without Mrs. Norton present, had the appearance of a young and liberal college student much like the young protesters that were all signed in to speak prior to 8:30 a.m. We documented and can prove that middle-aged white males were told they could not sign anyone else, as the assigned speaking time was almost full, while a teenager, with a blue streak of hair similar in age demographic and social style to the pro-illegal alien protesters, was allowed to sign in another person. The fact that illegal alien supporters were indeed signing up other people was evidenced when speaker #25 was confronted by the presiding officer for not being the person signed up in that position after he announced his name. When confronted he responded "Oh she had to leave" and then was allowed to proceed. The young students and their handlers were well aware of their abilities to exploit the meeting rules with full assistance and cover from those conducting this political charade. Illegal alien supporters had special access to those planning this meeting and were aware that they could show up and sign in two hours in advance to fill up time and give a false impression of spontaneous support for illegals in our community colleges. The results were that the first 26 speakers, comprising the first 78 of 150 minutes of testimony to the N.C. Community College Board and the N.C. media were all in favor of illegal aliens attending our community colleges, which are currently turning innocent Americans away because they are over capacity. Six people, myself included, spoke out on behalf of the 70-81% of NC citizens who oppose illegal aliens being in our community colleges. Fifty-one people, mostly high school and college students, college professors, and college administrators, who are out on Christmas vacation, were present to support the illegal aliens. Of course, we would have preferred that more people that are against taxpayer benefits for illegal aliens had come to this meeting to speak out. We did our best to notify people five days prior, but we were heavily engaged fighting against the new Amnesty bill in Washington D.C. American apathy is a huge reason illegal immigration is rampant, but what we faced at the Dec. 18 meeting had been in the planning by the pro-illegal alien faction for many months. The illegal alien supporting faction had an advantage over us in numbers attending, insider connections and information, preferential treatment, time to prepare, funding, and staff dedicated to their goals. Many of the people who came to speak out against illegal aliens being granted access to our community colleges were not allowed to speak because the meeting ended at 12:30 p.m. and the event organizers made it clear they would not extend the time allowed. Anyone who signed up to speak at the meeting after approximately 9:20 a.m., for a meeting that was barely advertised to the public as starting at 10 a.m., was not allowed to speak. Many left the meeting early, realizing their time had been wasted and their participation had been blocked by the illegal alien supporter exploitation of the process, insider information, and preferential treatment. One such speaker deprived of a chance to present was a County Commissioner bearing a commission resolution opposing access for illegals to our colleges. Instead of using my three minutes to make my points on this matter, I spent my three minutes warning the public and the press that the political theater they were witnessing in the room was rigged and not representative of the views of the public. I had intended to use my time to point out to the N.C. Community College Board, media, and public that a decision to grant illegal aliens access to our community colleges was not a simple rule change to be approved by a board made up of appointees. A matter of this magnitude should require a debate and vote by the N.C. General Assembly to allow taxpayers the highest level of representation in this matter. Those of us who are aware that 70-81% of our legal American citizens oppose illegal aliens going to our colleges are quite aware that the N.C. Board of Community Colleges is doing the political dirty work here to avoid Democratic lawmakers from taking the heat for this unpopular and harmful move. I had also hoped to point out that millions of Americans are now aware that what behind-the-scenes powers are trying to do for illegal aliens here in N.C. is only a small part of a much larger plan that is in progress across the nation, and that the plans involving illegal aliens, taxpayer benefits for illegal aliens, and future voting rights for illegal aliens are all happening without public or Congressional approval and in violation of the existing laws of the United States. The bureaucrats who are formulating college access for illegal aliens are working hard not to alarm the public and to soothe any and all concerns while manufacturing appearances of broad support for their plans. Two consistent claims are that American students will not be treated unfairly and that illegal aliens will not be given any special or preferential treatment, and the illegals will have to pay out-of-state admission prices, which are very high. Yet, state employees overtly lied to the media and public on Dec. 18, 2009, and illegal aliens and their supporters were given both special information, support, placement, and treatment that were not afforded to the general public at this meeting. A large volume of those speaking out for the illegals also demanded in-state tuition rates for illegal aliens which was soundly defeated in 2005 when HB 1183 collapsed under massive public pressure. JWP Civitas polling later determined in 2006 that 81% of N.C. likely voters were less likely to vote for any state lawmaker who supported in-state tuition for illegal immigrants. So we learned for a fact on Dec. 18, 2009, that the state employees and agencies promoting illegal alien access to community colleges are lying, are working in collusion with the illegal-alien supporters, and the eventual goal is to give illegal aliens taxpayer subsidized in-state tuition, as we have seen in ten other states! The testimony and opinions of those that support in-state tuition and college access for illegal aliens has been sullied by the unethical tactics deployed by those conducting political theater with this meeting. This report is being sent to N.C. lawmakers, media, and members of the public to raise awareness of the deceptive, unethical, improper, and possibly illegal actions taken by state employees, agents of the N.C. Community College Board, and illegal-alien supporters on Dec. 18, 2009. On behalf of the vast majority of North Carolina citizens who do not want any non-emergency medical taxpayer benefits for illegal aliens, including no college access, licenses, or in-state tuition, that the N.C. Community College Board refer this matter to the N.C. Legislature immediately. We call on our elected officials at the N.C. General Assembly to call for the matter to be resolved via legislation, instead of bureaucratic orders from non-elected state employees. We would also like to see a full investigation into the public input meeting of Dec. 18, 2009, to determine which state employees gave special information, special treatment to the illegal-alien supporting faction and what power brokers behind the scenes secured this unfair advantage over the general public. State government and all government should be transparent and fair with equal access to all American citizens. All American citizens deserve fair treatment, the truth, and adequate representation on important matters such as illegal immigration. On Friday, Dec. 18, 2009, fair treatment, the truth, transparency, equal access, and adequate representation were all usurped by illegal aliens and their supporters, which apparently have more influence over our government that the American public at this time. It is heartbreaking to think of what our defenseless children are having to endure from this same kind of systematic abuse within our public schools. In this case, we have a clear example of state employees, teachers, and administrators encouraging their own students to lie and cheat for advantage with racist undertones.
William Gheen President,
Americans for Legal Immigration PAC
www.alipac.us