Showing posts with label David Hamilton. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Hamilton. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Why Give Thanks on Thanksgiving Day?


An interesting article from http://www.wnponline.org/ to read as you prepare for the Thanksgiving holiday. You can get the booklet here and subscribe to this blog for more stories like this here. and for more in-depth reading on Thanksgiving's history click here


Why Give Thanks on Thanksgiving Day?
A commentary by Jerold W Aust Good News magazine Senior Writer, Mobile, Alabama
In a modern world filled with fast cars, fast money, fast foods and more—all lavished so liberally on the self—why consider a national occasion to pause and give thanks? Is it really that important? If it is, whom should we thank—and for what?
The North American 'Thanksgiving Day' was likely first held in Newfoundland in 1578 by an English minister named Woolfall, then in Virginia in 1607 and then again in Plymouth in 1620. These days of thanksgiving—held currently in Canada on the second Monday in October and in the U.S. on the fourth Thursday of November—are officially designated national occasions for giving thanks to God.
America 's first president George Washington proclaimed Thanksgiving Day in 1789; and the sixteenth U.S. President, Abraham Lincoln reaffirmed it in 1863. Since then it has been an official U.S. holiday. But how well do North Americans observe their days of thanksgiving? For that matter, how common is it for people around the world to take special time to give thanks to their Creator for providing the physical blessings they enjoy? Unfortunately, expressing thanks seems to be a diminishing custom.
Giving thanks is mentioned in the Bible at least 140 times. The word praise, which is similar in meaning to thanksgiving, is used many more times in Scripture. Praise means to appreciate, to prize—to consider precious, worthy of honor and/or thanksgiving. The Bible is replete with occasions of thanksgiving and praise, from Moses to Malachi, from Jesus to John's epistles. The Bible is also the source of early North American customs for celebrating occasions of thanksgiving.
The insightful words of Abraham Lincoln should resonate with all nations today: "The year that is drawing towards its close, has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added, which are of so extraordinary a nature, that they cannot fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever watchful providence of Almighty God" (Lincoln's papers, Library of America series, Volume 2, pp. 520-521).
God's sobering thanksgiving instructions to ancient Israel are applicable to all human beings. After all, He is the Creator of all human life.
Perhaps Mr. Lincoln drew on the scriptural passage: "Be careful that you do not forget the Lord your God, failing to observe his commands, his laws and his decrees that I am giving you this day.
"Otherwise, when you eat and are satisfied, when you build fine houses and settle down, and when your herds and flocks grow large and your silver and gold increase and all you have is multiplied, then your heart will become proud and you will forget the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. He led you through the vast and dreadful desert, that thirsty and waterless land, with its venomous snakes and scorpions. He brought you water out of hard rock. He gave you manna to eat in the desert, something your fathers had never known, to humble and to test you so that in the end it might go well with you.
"You may say to yourself, 'My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me.' But remember the Lord your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today. If you ever forget the Lord your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed. Like the nations the Lord destroyed before you, so you will be destroyed for not obeying the Lord your God" (Deuteronomy 8:11-20, New International Version).
The whole idea of giving thanks turns on at least two great spiritual principles. First, a great God created and sustains life on earth and provides the abundance of resources that most people now tend to take for granted. Second, the vanity of human nature leads human beings to want to take credit for producing all they enjoy, leading them to ignore, or even forget, the real Source of their existence and blessings.


God blesses those who humbly acknowledge and serve Him and, at times for His own purposes, some of their distant descendants. So it is with the English speaking North American nations. To learn why they received greater blessings than most other nations, request or download now our free booklet: The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy.


Related Resources
Thanksgiving Day: More Than Just Being ThankfulAmericans celebrate the Thanksgiving holiday every November. Perhaps this is the appropriate season to wonder if there is a difference between being thankful and giving thanks.
Why Give Thanks?What is thankfulness and to whom should it be given? Are we truly grateful for our blessings? Should a nation give thanks?

The Sacrifice of ThanksgivingWhat is the origin of the Thanksgiving holiday? What biblical lessons should we learn from it?
An American Thanksgiving Every year Americans gather on the fourth Thursday of November to give thanks for a land of plenty and a year of blessings. What if Americans truly gave thanks to God for their blessings? Could it make a difference for the future?
Thanksgiving: A Timeless LessonAre we aware of the true source of blessings and wealth?

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

An American Thanksgiving


An interesting article from http://www.wnponline.org/ to read as you prepare for the Thanksgiving holiday. You can get the booklet here and subscribe to this blog for more stories like this here. and for more in-depth reading on Thanksgiving's history click here


An American Thanksgiving
Every year Americans gather on the fourth Thursday of November to give thanks for a land of plenty and a year of blessings. What if Americans truly gave thanks to God for their blessings? Could it make a difference for the future?
by Darris McNeely
Last month my wife and I made a trip to Canada and spent a week with friends in Newfoundland. As we were leaving, Canada was about to celebrate its national day of Thanksgiving. Theirs falls a little more than a month before we celebrate ours in the United States. I felt like staying over another day just to celebrate with our friends, but home called me back.
I have always been in love with the American Thanksgiving. As the fall season comes to a close and a nation gathers for a celebratory meal with family and friends, the romantic within me is unleashed. For a day I can imagine a land and its people turning their faces to God—all in their own way acknowledging something larger, more expansive, than the narrow confines of daily life.
Sometime in my youth I saw an old Currier and Ives engraving of a New England farmhouse with smoke curling out of its chimney. Lights were on inside, and people were arriving in buggies all laden down with baskets of food. Was it a homecoming? Were children coming home to Grandma's house?
I would put myself into that picture and desire the same for my family. For a time in my youth we did go to Grandma's home on Thanksgiving and gather with our large family of cousins, aunts and uncles for a day of feasting. My wife and I have tried through the years to keep this tradition going in our growing family by gathering with our parents and bringing along the children and grandchildren. It gets harder as the years go by, but we make every effort to gather on this day.
History and hope
The origins of the day are well known. The first year in the new world for pilgrim settlers in New England was rough, and they gathered with Native Americans to have a meal and give thanks. Later, it became customary for nearly every U.S. president to call for an annual day of thanksgiving. The proclamations began with George Washington. But it was during Franklin Roosevelt's second term that the fourth Thursday in November was fixed as the national day of Thanksgiving.
Today Thanksgiving remains popular as a holiday of traditional foods, family gatherings and football. This marvelous day of collective family and national bonding hints of an underlying spirituality even though secularism is making inroads into the character of the people. Ironically, the popularity of the day is in part because it is a national rather than a religious day of Thanksgiving. This is not lost on many observers.
That the day is still so popular throughout the nation is a sign of hope. There is a remnant within the land who recognize there is something more to America than just being one large consumer for the world's goods. Materialism alone, some understand, does not satisfy the deepest human needs for meaning and purpose in life.
Reflecting on the year
It has been a tough year for the world's economy. In the United States, upwards of one third of the wealth has been wiped off the books. Housing prices have plummeted, the stock market has lost billions of dollars of value, and the retirement accounts of the aging baby boomers were turned upside down. And while the entire system did not collapse and the market did make some modest gains, there is a sense of unease about the future. Those who stop to consider have a sense that things will not be the same going forward, but they do not know just what to expect.
Like many of you, I look at my financial statements each month and see the erosion. It is as if I have put my money into bags with holes. It fell right through and has disappeared, never to be found again.
We are living a perfect example of God's words through the prophet Haggai: "You have sown much, and bring in little; you eat, but do not have enough; you drink, but you are not filled with drink; you clothe yourselves, but no one is warm; and he who earns wages, earns wages to put into a bag with holes" (Haggai 1:6).
This Thanksgiving, like last, offers an opportunity to reflect that the good times may not last forever. The signs of the times tell us there are other nations and peoples who sense America has been weakened and are circling like predators desiring to seize the moment and wrestle her power, might and strength away for their own use.
Many say that great powers rise and fall and that America is declining along the natural way of nations. The time has come, they say, for America to exit the stage and give way for others on the ascent.
God's blessing
There is one thing wrong with this picture. The power and wealth America has held during its history is not something that was gained by its own exceptional abilities. The great national blessings celebrated each year at Thanksgiving were granted by God through a series of promises and blessings that stretch back in time to the biblical patriarch Abraham.
America's position in the world for more than 200 years is due more to the faithful promises of God than to anything done through its national experience. The wealth and power from God will not flow to others in the same way. It cannot be taken as the great nation stumbles.
The biblical details behind this key of understanding are told in our booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy. It is worth reading, especially at this season of Thanksgiving. For those who want to open a window of revealed understanding, it offers another dimension to world history. Your love for God and for America will be magnified through this booklet.
America is exceptional because God made her so. It is wealthy beyond any other empire in history because God prepared this land in advance and gave it to the descendants of Abraham in fulfillment of His pledge.
Its liberty and freedom are rooted in a biblical ethic well understood by the founding fathers. Imbedded in a unique form of governance, it has spread this freedom to many places throughout the world. Where the American and British form of law and economics were planted, people prospered, more than under any previous system. When the day comes that this influence is removed from the world, a different form of power will arise. The results will not be the same.
How stands the land?
On this American Thanksgiving, what do we see as we look out across the broad land?
We see a people searching for a way forward during a time of growing doubt and uncertainty. In 10 years, will America still hold its present role as the guarantor of freedom for a growing global economy, or will other powers rise to eclipse this long-held role? Will Americans enjoy the world's highest standard of living, or will increasing national debt cripple the nation beyond recovery?
It is time we Americans consider our ways, bend our knees to the God of heaven and confess we need a new beginning and a new heart. It is time we take a fresh look at the Bible and seek a new national character forged in righteousness and humility. Before He completely removes His hand of blessing, it is time to seek God with our whole heart.
God will hear the prayer of one who is chastened and sincerely seeking Him. He can hear your prayer. He is closer than you think.
Use this year's Thanksgiving season to consider a new and better understanding of the God who has blessed this great land. Lift your hands and your heart in grateful thanks for what you have and ask this God to reveal Himself to you. WNP

Monday, November 23, 2009

What's Ahead for America?


An interesting article from http://www.wnponline.org/ to read as you prepare for the Thanksgiving holiday. You can get the booklet here and subscribe to this blog for more stories like this here.


What's Ahead for America?
Sensing a weakness of will, hostile nations appear to be ganging up on America. Some consider the United States a second-rate power. What are some of the specific problems, internationally and domestically, and how will they affect America's future?
by John Ross Schroeder
Late last year Harvard historian Niall Ferguson labeled America as "the nation that fell to earth." In terms of dwindling domestic and international support, the war in Iraq is gradually becoming another Vietnam. In addition, what is currently occurring elsewhere on the international stage highlights the overall problem.
What are the Russians up to?
Recently Russia's President Vladimir Putin traveled to Tehran, where he declared that no other country should interfere militarily or politically in the affairs of the five Caspian bloc nations. Some observers understand this as a clear warning that the United States should not carry out any military action against Iran.
President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has been invited to Moscow for further talks. Only a short time ago the Iranian president was allowed to vent his anger against America inside its own borders, during a visit to the UN headquarters in New York City. As U.S. News and World Report editor-in-chief Mortimer Zuckerman observed, "Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad came to America to stick his thumb in our eye and deliver a sanitized version of 'Death to America and the Holocaust Never Occurred'" (Oct. 8, 2007, emphasis added throughout).
Russian aid to Iran is nothing short of astonishing. For instance, it is a massive supplier of arms to Tehran, including a $700 million air-defense system.
Naturally both Russia and Iran oppose the eastward movement of NATO. Iran is counting on both Russia and China to oppose any future rounds on sanctions from the UN Security Council.
According to The Guardian, a resurgent Sino-Russian political embrace is already well under way: "Moscow and Beijing are closer now than in the Communist period…They have frustrated Western hopes for sanctions or other tough action on disputes ranging from Burma and Darfur to Iran. They are blocking a solution on Kosovo" (Jonathan Steele, "The Sino-Russian Embrace Leaves the U.S. Out in the Cold," Oct. 12, 2007). Russo/American tensions are clearly on the rise, alarmingly so.
On another issue, Russia is not budging on the American plan for missile defenses in Eastern Europe. A communiqué to USA Today (Oct. 26, 2007) quotes Russian Defense Minister Anatoly Serdyukov as saying, "We are sticking to our position." The report continued: "The United States says its plan is aimed at Iran. Russia says Iran is years away from being a threat and the U.S. plan undermines Russian military strategies."
Robert Kagan is a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. He recently analyzed threats to world peace by writing:
"Many hoped the end of the Cold War might herald a genuinely new era in human development. But those expectations proved misplaced. China has not liberalised, but has shored up its autocratic government. Russia has turned from imperfect liberalism decisively towards autocracy… It is folly to expect China to help undermine a brutal regime in Khartoum [Sudan] or to be surprised if Russia rattles its sabre at pro-western democratic governments near its border" ("The World Divides…and Democracy Is at Bay," The Sunday Times, Sept. 2, 2007).
The Turkish conundrum
Turkey, a longtime American ally, is on the point of hindering American plans and intentions in Iraq. A large-scale Turkish incursion into northern Iraq to thwart Kurdish rebels may be imminent. Turkish jets have already attacked Kurdish bases from the air (The Daily Telegraph, Oct. 25, 2007). Clearly any large-scale attack would complicate Washington's plans in this strife-torn country.
At this crucial time of policy differences between the United States and Turkey, the Democratic Party-controlled House of Representatives tried to formally condemn the World War I-era massacre of Armenians by Turks as genocide. However valid the facts may be, the time is highly inopportune. So President George W. Bush has asked the House to think again, and the measure failed. These are not the easiest days for American diplomacy.
A fraying Anglo-American alliance
Another disturbing setback has been a cooling of the normally stable Anglo-American alliance. Gordon Brown is no Tony Blair. The new prime minister is not seen as fully supporting America in the same way.
Increasingly Britain is being sucked into Europe with more concessions of British sovereignty now in the offing should the new EU treaty be approved. As it stands now, the British people will apparently be denied a referendum. Yet only an independent Britain can fully stand shoulder to shoulder with America as new and more deadly challenges to Western civilization present themselves in the months and years ahead.
In 1940 Winston Churchill warned that unless the English-speaking countries triumphed over Nazism, the world would "sink into a new dark age." How much more would this be the case if the West should utterly fail in its war on terrorism?
America and Britain eventually prevailed in two 20th-century world wars. Our own century is not without its own civilizational showdowns. Albeit in different ways, recent trends show America and Britain are gradually being boxed into a corner and that should deeply concern us all.
Most do not understand the crucial importance of the origins of the English-speaking peoples around the world. The historic and prophetic implications will yet prove to be enormous. To understand just how, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy.
We've looked at the international front. Now consider briefly what is happening on the American domestic scene.
America becoming a second-rate power?
Alan Webber is founding editor of the business magazine Fast Company. On a recent business trip to Europe he heard some disturbing thoughts about the United States. At one gathering in Austria the comments came in the form of laments. "You used to be such a great country…What happened to the great idea that once defined America?"
Consider Mr. Webber's personal comment on America, looking at the country from afar: "You realize how far the United States has drifted from its promise, how large the gap is between what we profess and what we do…how diminished our economic superiority has become; and how worn our once impeccable image has become."
The dollar is currently viewed as a second-rate currency in Europe. The euro is looked at as towering over the once vaunted American dollar. Alan Webber asked: "Is there a point where diminished prestige actually becomes diminished economic leadership?"
Summing up, he concluded: "In America, it's business as usual. We've simply learned to accept our way of life, rather than confronting the reality of our decline. Maybe that's what happens to once-rich, once-powerful superpowers as they gradually decline. They lose track of their own standards" ("From Afar, America Resembles a 2nd-Rate Power, USA Today, Oct. 19, 2007).
Confronting the decline of American values
We are all familiar with the length and breadth of the United States (the Atlantic to the Pacific), its fabled strength in diversity, the capacity of one section of the country to come to the aid of another and an awesome ability to bounce back from adversity. Witness the America of the '40s and '50s and briefly even in the '80s. For a brief period after 9/11, moral standards actually improved.
What is disturbing is the persistence of serious moral problems: abortion, pornography, adultery, a growing gay movement and out-of-control personal debt—to name just a few.
In response to the tragedy at Virginia Tech, one reader wrote to a major newsweekly: "Why does it perplex us when these violent eruptions take place? One needs only to channel surf the television any night of the week to see show after show dealing with murder, rape, stalkers, violence toward police, gangs, war and domestic violence" ("Nation in Mourning," Time, Nov. 9, 2007).
America doesn't want the Ten Commandments in its schools or in its public buildings. Yet these laws are the master key to a much-needed moral revival. Summing up God's spiritual law, as revealed in the Bible, they reflect love for both God and neighbor.


You need our free booklet, simply titled The Ten Commandments. This publication shows how we break all 10 in ways we don't even realize anymore. You can obtain your free copy by mail or view it on the Internet at www.ucg.org/booklets . WNP

Friday, November 20, 2009

A World Without the United States?


A timely archive post from http://www.gnmagazine.org/ to read in this Thanksgiving season with everything else going on. Some people might actually relish if this happened.
You can subscribe to this blog here and get the free booklet here

Behind the Headlines...A World Without the United States
by Melvin Rhodes
Imagine the unimaginable: The president, in the White House, the vice president, at the National Observatory, and all Cabinet members, in their respective agency headquarters, are killed in a terrorist attack on downtown Washington. So are all members of Congress, except the few who happen to be out of town.
"What happens to the Republic? At the moment, the answer is alarming: chaos."
So began a disturbing article in the Dec. 10 Washington Post.
Continuing, the writer added: "The Sept. 11 attacks and subsequent release of anthrax on Capitol Hill have left many lawmakers and constitutional experts concerned that the federal government does not have adequate succession and continuity plans in place to recover from a catastrophic terrorist attack on Washington."
Pause for a moment and consider: What would the world be like without America? Can you imagine what our lives might be like without the superpower on which the world relies so much?
A world without America
The world has not been the same since Sept. 11. The possibility of an even deadlier terrorist attack on Washington in the foreseeable future cannot be ruled out. If such an attack were to take place, it is difficult to imagine how the United States could continue to be the leader of the free world. The consequences would be unimaginable—except that the Bible prophesies such a time.
The biblical book of Revelation reveals that the world will come under the domination of a union of 10 "kings" (rulers or heads of state) immediately before the return of Jesus Christ (Revelation 17:12-14). What could precipitate the transfer of dominance from the United States to this European-centered group of nations, which "will give their power and authority" to a leader the Bible calls "the beast"?
Since World War II the United States has been the undisputed leader of the Western world. Before the United States, the British Empire was the world's leading power for well over a century. The United States and Great Britain share similar values. Nobody alive can remember a time when one of these nations was not the major force in the world.
Certainly neither the United States nor Britain has been a perfect world leader. But it is equally certain that domination by other nations would have made the world an entirely different place. A look at fairly recent history well illustrates this.
Before the supremacy of the English-speaking powers, the major Western player was France, whose King Louis XIV (1643-1715) vainly declared, "I am the state." The concept of the divine right of kings was essential to centralized state power. Before France, Spain was dominant. "His Most Catholic Majesty," the king of Spain, saw himself and his country as instruments of God in spreading the faith of the "one true catholic church" to the four corners of the earth. If people did not willingly convert, then there were other means of persuasion.
England and her colonies were to struggle against these forces of despotism for more than 250 years, from the time of Queen Elizabeth I (1558-1603) until the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, when Napoleon's dreams of world conquest were finally defeated.
A century later Germany's kaiser and later Hitler made further attempts at world conquest. Japan was also set on imposing her will on the world. Afterwards, Russian and Chinese communism threatened the peace of the planet.
For most of this time a "multitude of nations" (Genesis 48:19), biblically prophesied though rarely recognized as such, was the primary force that defended liberty. After Pearl Harbor that was to change, with the United States taking over from Great Britain and its Commonwealth associates the role of the leading military power. However imperfectly, both Britain and America based their political, economic and religious systems on the value and freedom of the individual.
In contrast, most continental-European nations historically have placed little value on individual freedom; they have subscribed instead to variants of Louis XIV's famous dictum emphasizing strong central government at the expense of individual liberty. In Western Europe this has been tempered since World War II during America's period of supremacy.
A post—Anglo-Saxon world is frightening to contemplate. Whoever takes over as the dominant power will not share the values of the United States and Britain. Maybe some of those principles would remain, but certainly not all.
How it might happen is a topic for another discussion. But, for the moment, imagine the unimaginable—Washington gone. What would happen?
Who would lead the West?
"The West" is an all-encompassing term that goes back to the Western Roman Empire. When the military and political empire collapsed in the fifth century, the church became the empire. As historian Paul Johnson put it in his 1972 book The Offshore Islanders: "The Church was the continuation of the empire." He added: "Politics and religion were inseparable."
The Roman Empire was the fourth empire of Daniel's vision of Daniel 2 and one of the four beasts of Daniel 7. For 12 centuries, from the time of Emperor Constantine (306-337), when the Roman church became the state church, until the Protestant Reformation in the 16th century, the Catholic Church was a powerful force in the history of the West.
During the Protestant Reformation, England broke with the church of Rome. Theoretically it was now free to act independently of Rome. But, until its ascendancy was fully realized, England had to defend herself against continental Catholic powers that were willing to use force to subdue her. In the course of time Britain became the dominant Western power. Her multitude of nations girdling the globe were to become the defenders of the West against the French emperor Napoleon and Germany's kaiser and Hitler. America was to continue that role as the leader of the free world.
What, then, is the West?
To people in Britain and the United States, as well as the peoples of northwestern Europe, the emphasis is on freedom of the individual, freedom of expression, freedom of religion, democracy, human rights, economic freedom and property rights. Neither country has been perfect in these areas, but this is where most people would put their emphasis.
But, in a wider sense, the West comprises all the nations that can trace their history and culture back to the nations that were once part of the Western Roman Empire. England and some other countries of northwestern Europe separated themselves from the Western church in the 1500s. These states went on to embrace democratic systems of government, with emphasis on basic freedoms for individual citizens.
Most of the other Western nations, however, maintained their loyalty to the "mother church" and, until well into the 20th century, retained strictly hierarchical, monarchical forms of government.
But their common cultural heritage goes back to Rome. Interestingly, the 1957 Treaty of Rome began the long and arduous process of bringing most of these nations back together in the European Union.
These nations make up the majority of Western nations. They have tacitly recognized the American leadership of the West since 1945. But, if America were to suffer devastating setbacks, what would these nations do? Would they sit back and let themselves be defeated by the forces of militant Islam, a force that has threatened them previously in their history? Would they wait and see if somebody else replaced the United States as leader of the "free world"? What is the free world, anyway?
Uppermost in their minds would be the need to preserve their independence, economic well-being and way of life. Western nations are trading nations. They depend on trade, business and the prosperity of the capitalist system. Never mind freedom of religion or freedom of the individual. Historically, those values became important only during Britain's and America's preeminence. With America gone, who would care about such expensive niceties? The security of the state would be of paramount importance.
Jobs and the economy would be next on the list.
Daniel 11 states that, at the time of the end, a powerful force known as the king of the South will push against or attack the king of the North (verse 40). This threatens the security and prosperity of those under the king of the North. They react with massive military force, suggestive of advanced technology, which is not possible without wealth.
The United States and Canada are presently in alliance with the other Western nations. But they will not be a part of the 10 nations that come together in the prophesied revival of the Roman Empire. These nations most likely will come from the same geographical area as the nations that made up the original Roman Empire, nations that have signed the Treaty of Rome, the economic union that is rapidly being transformed into a political and military union.
An ever-closer union
In recent months some of these countries have made a dramatic and unprecedented change—the replacement of their national currencies with one multinational currency, the euro. Of the 15 European Union (EU) nations, 12 have become a single market to a greater degree than ever before. At the same time, the 15 are busy negotiating with 10 other European nations that are likely to be members of the EU by 2005. France and Germany have proposed a new European constitution that would also unite the EU nations politically.
Militarily, a significant step has been taken as a direct consequence of the events of Sept. 11. To the surprise of everyone concerned, all 15 members of the EU agreed to send troops as part of the international security force for Afghanistan. This is unprecedented. Three of the 15 are neutral countries. Never before have all 15 agreed on anything militarily. This is a reflection of the dramatic shift that has changed thinking around the world since the terrorist attacks on America.
At the present, most of the nations of the EU are also members of NATO, the military alliance that links North America and Western Europe.
After Sept. 11 the United States asked NATO to invoke Article 5 of the NATO Treaty. This enables any member country to claim the military support of other members when attacked by a nation from outside the alliance. Originally this was intended to help any European nation attacked by the Soviet Union or its allies. Article 5 had never before been invoked. It is of supreme irony that the first nation to request the invoking of Article 5 was the United States, until now the ultimate guarantor of the freedom of the other member states.
It has often been said since the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington that the world will never be the same. Yet it will be some time before the implications and consequences will be fully realized.
Sept. 11 is frequently compared to the 1941 attack on Pearl Harbor, America's second-biggest loss of life in one day. That attack awoke a sleeping giant, the United States. By the end of the war less than four years later, America was the world's greatest military power.
Could it be that one of the consequences of Sept. 11 will be the awakening of another sleeping giant, the European Union, out of which will rise the final resurrection of the Roman Empire? We shouldn't rule out this possibility. Make no mistake about it, the prophecies of Daniel and Revelation concerning the rise of a new end-time superpower will come to pass. It's our responsibility to watch world trends and events so we will not be caught unprepared. GN
Recommended Reading
What does the Bible prophesy about our geopolitical scene at the time of the end? Never before has mankind so needed to understand the eye-opening truths you'll discover in the free booklets The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy, The Book of Revelation Unveiled and You Can Understand Bible Prophecy.

Thursday, November 19, 2009

America at a Dangerous Crossroads


A timely archive post from http://www.gnmagazine.org/ to read in this Thanksgiving season with everything else going on. You can subscribe to this blog here and get the free booklet here


America at a Dangerous Crossroads
The mass media's relentless emphasis on bad news from Iraq has led to a major shift in U.S. political fortunes and demands for withdrawal. But this hasn't happened in isolation. Let's review some aspects of 20th-century warfare, diplomacy and current affairs—and most important of all, where the Bible indicates America is headed.
by John Ross Schroeder


America's last few elections have shown it is obviously divided on its direction, values and future. Never before has it seen its national leaders so denigrated, mocked and attacked—a constant, unrelenting assault from the mass media and many foreign countries.
Yet paradoxically the United States is still clearly the most powerful nation in the world. Its economy, even in spite of the enormously expensive war on terror, remains the powerhouse of the world. The U.S. gross domestic product—its total output of goods and services—accounts for almost a third of the output of the entire world. Its economy is 2 1 / 2 times larger than Japan's, 8 1 / 2 times that of China and 30 times that of Russia.
America's military budget is greater than that of Russia, China and the European Union combined. And with the United States accounting for almost 80 percent of the world's military research and development expenditures, it clearly possesses the world's most advanced weaponry—as demonstrated in its lightning-quick victories in toppling hostile regimes in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003.
And yet why does a superpower nation like the United States seem unable to quell the ongoing turmoil in Iraq and Afghanistan? Why has history's most powerful nation appeared so impotent in enforcing its will on Iran and North Korea in their pursuit of nuclear weapons? And most important of all, what do these critical dilemmas portend for the future of America and the rest of the world?
Troubled recent military history
One can open the pages of a popular American newsweekly from the year 1964 and find some of today's sentiments about Iraq expressed about Vietnam. The Aug. 7 issue of Time magazine that year described the Southeast Asian conflict as a "dirty, ruthless, wandering war, which has neither visible front lines nor visible end . . . Now there is no more talk of being out by 1965—or any other year in the foreseeable future."
Conditions in Vietnam were to get much worse with the conflict dragging on another decade until the mid-1970s. Today's president has to live with the fact that the patience of the American Congress and citizenry has grown much thinner than in earlier conflicts.
For example, while America has suffered nearly 3,000 battle deaths in Iraq, that 3 1/2 -year total, while tragic, is barely larger than the number of U.S. servicemen killed in one day during the D-Day invasion. It's dwarfed by the 426,000 U.S. combat deaths in World Wars I and II, Korea and Vietnam, which took place when America's total population was much smaller than today. Yet seldom do we see such numbers put in perspective. As happened with Vietnam, it appears that most of America no longer has the stomach for a protracted, bloody conflict.
Many Americans' perspective on America's place in the world has also changed—in many ways quite dramatically.
When World War II ended in 1945, the United States, Britain and the Soviet Union dominated the world, having defeated the Axis Powers of Germany, Italy and Japan. Yet within a decade the British Empire, long a stabilizing force throughout the world, had been virtually dismantled (with few exceptions like Gibraltar and Hong Kong, the latter returned to China only recently in 1997). Drained by the cost of a long war, Britain could simply no longer afford to maintain its empire.
The Soviet Union and the United States soon entered the long Cold War that didn't end until the epochal fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 along with the attendant collapse of the iron curtain.
David Rothkopf, a former national security adviser to the U.S. government, comments on U.S. constraints: "During the Cold War, the power of the United States to act internationally was constrained by the countervailing interests and strengths of the Soviet Union. We could act, but we always had to anticipate and compensate for a reaction from our large adversary" (Running the World, 2004, p. xiii).
Out of this atmosphere grew the concept of limited war, that the stakes were too high for America to risk all-out war again. The Berlin Airlift of 1948-49, the U2 spy plane embarrassment involving an American pilot shot down over Soviet territory in 1960 and held for two years, and the Cuban missile crisis of 1962 were three highly dangerous incidents that brought America into potential nuclear conflict with the Soviet Union.
Change of fortunes in Korea and Vietnam
In the early 1950s North Korea tested America's will to keep peace in the world and to thwart a communist threat in Southeast Asia.
To end the Korean War (1950 to 1953), the United States settled for a stalemate— one that, considering North Korea's recent test of a nuclear weapon, proved how shortsighted anything but the clear-cut victory that U.S. Gen. Douglas MacArthur wanted would produce. Considerable American military forces remain stationed in South Korea to this day to maintain an uneasy peace.
The Korean stalemate was followed by the debacle in Vietnam in the 1960s and 1970s. Again, American will to police the world was at stake. Supporters of the war cited the domino theory, that Southeast Asia could follow North Vietnam's lead into communism without firm U.S. intervention.
During that conflict U.S. President Lyndon Johnson observed, "Our will is being tried." The most telling images of the end of that draining conflict were U.S. helicopters evacuating South Vietnamese military and governmental personnel and their families from the roof of the American embassy as Saigon fell to the onrushing forces of Ho Chi Minh from the North. Soon after, neighboring Cambodia and Laos likewise fell to the communists.
As historian Niall Ferguson points out, "The doctrine of limited war led to a draw in Korea and a defeat in Vietnam" (Colossus, 2004, p. 287). Millions died in Southeast Asia as a result.
New leadership challenges
Coming into office after the defeat in Vietnam, U.S. President Ronald Reagan embarked on a massive military spending program to reestablish American supremacy. The Soviet Union, trying to keep pace, soon bankrupted itself, leading to the collapse of the iron curtain and freedom for the former Warsaw Pact nations of Eastern Europe. America soon found itself the sole global superpower.
Rothkopf sums up the situation that would now challenge American leadership: "Indeed, in a new global environment, not only was the power of the U.S. leadership unprecedented, it was also unanticipated . . . American leaders were effectively making decisions affecting the lives and fortunes of tens and hundreds of millions, of billions, who did not choose them, did not understand what they were doing or how they were doing it . . . We were the defacto leaders of the global community, crowned by history and circumstances . . . " (Running the World, p. xiii).
No nation should let adverse circumstances and setbacks in the United States lead it to underestimate the awesome power America still holds—even if the nation sometimes lacks both the political will and biblical wisdom in using that power.
President John F. Kennedy once promised in a speech to "fight any foe" in the interest of liberty and justice in the world. He belatedly recognized that there were limitations to American power and that he could not intervene in every conflict in the world. Even those with awesome power have to hold their fire and wisely select when and where to intervene in the perceived national interest.
Returning to the present, the most disturbing new challenge to U.S. leadership occurred on Sept. 11, 2001, with the suicide airplane attacks on the World Trade Center in New York City and the Pentagon in Washington D.C. with a tragic loss of some 3,000 lives. Only then did the United States wake up to the fact that the Islamic terror machine had been warring with America for 20 years (remember Beirut in 1982, the attack at the Twin Towers in 1993, embassy bombings in Africa in 1998 and the 2000 attack on the U.S.S. Cole—just to name a few).
What we fail to appreciate
Historian Andrew Roberts articulates a much-needed counter perspective of events in the war on terror. "Those who accuse Bush and Blair of exacerbating Islamicist terrorism through their invasions of Afghanistan and especially Iraq fail to appreciate that murderous and pitiless war-making was already underway long before 2003.
"If anything, the War against Terror was a belated response . . . Only after 9/11 were the English-speaking peoples finally prepared to fight the struggle properly and employ every element of national power to form a coherent and strong response" (A History of the English-Speaking Peoples Since 1900, 2006, p. 601).
Truly 9/11 stunned the world. Many cheered in third world countries. Initially much of the rest of the world rallied around America. Now, just a few years later, the United States can count its friends in the world virtually on one hand. Even friendly governments are paying a price for their loyalty to America and have to bravely withstand the outcries of opposing partisan groups within their own citizenry.
America's reliable allies consist of only a few mostly English-speaking nations: Britain, Australia, Canada and Israel. In reality these friends aren't just friends, but are truly blood brothers. (To understand the vital historical connection between these nations, request or download our free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy. Without this essential biblical and historical knowledge, you really cannot truly understand current affairs affecting the English-speaking world.)
Facing a stacked deck
The nature of America's foreign ventures in Southeast Asia and the Middle East has worked against it. As a feature article in the October 2006 issue of Le Monde Diplomatique explains: "If the 20th century is any guide, no low-intensity guerrilla war or insurrection has ever been won on foreign soil. The US, like the Soviets in Afghanistan, the French in Algeria and its own forces in Vietnam, might possess far more advanced and destructive firepower, but it is far less committed than its opponents and is far more fragile and prone to losing momentum.
"In a conflict perceived as being between a selfish crusade and selfless jihad, highly trained, paid and equipped US, Israeli and British soldiers strive to stay alive as they fight wars of choice against low-tech volunteer militants who are ready to sacrifice themselves and die as martyrs in a confrontation of necessity. The U.S. mourns its dead; resistance groups celebrate theirs" (Marwan Bishara, "US: World Empire of Chaos").
U.S. historians Steven Ambrose and Douglas Brinkley point out the nobility of American aims as professed by the nation's leaders: "From 1961 onward, American presidents never tired of proclaiming that the United States was making sacrifices in Southeast Asia only for the good of the people of that region. The United States had no territorial objectives, nor did it wish to replace the French as the colonial masters of the Vietnamese" (Rise to Globalism, 1997, p. 241).
Nonetheless, "Vinegar Joe" Stilwell, a U.S. general based in China before and during World War II, is chiefly remembered for advising his American compatriots not to get involved in land wars in Asia. He knew the "terrain"—the difficulty of fighting a determined foe on his own ground halfway around the world.
American interventions—a mixed record
In 1939 America had a relatively small army with few if any real military alliances and virtually no troops stationed in any foreign countries. Except for a venture or two in Mexico and Cuba and of course World War I, wars with foreigners had been rare in American history, especially compared to Europe. The dominant national mood veered towards isolationism.
However, with enormous American involvement in World War II after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in late 1941, all that changed rather rapidly. Since then the United States has had a fairly large standing army, navy and air force with huge military budgets to support their activities. Technologically, its weaponry is even more impressive.
Major interventions in Korea, Vietnam and in the Persian Gulf have been punctuated by minor ones at various locations in the Americas like Grenada and Panama. America has forged military alliances with many nations and has sent huge amounts of armaments to those perceived as friendly governments.
Yet American national security has been constantly in jeopardy, perhaps never more so than now with the ongoing war on terror. In spite of heavy U.S. military intervention in the first Gulf War in 1991, in Afghanistan in 2001 and in Iraq in 2003, the problems haven't gone away. America showed its powerful military could win the war, but couldn't win the peace.
Overall, U.S. foreign interventions have not had successful outcomes since World War II. Indeed, that's an understatement. Current conditions at home and abroad might cause us to ask a crucial question: Has America won its last war?
Taking our quest for understanding all these events to a higher level, could there be an all-important, highly significant dimension we have not considered in taking America's temperature as a nation?
The national motto of the United States, as found on its currency, is "In God we trust." Yet have not far too many left God out of the picture? Is there a moral dimension that is having a far greater effect on America's national fortunes than we now realize?
We need to diligently consult a valuable and reliable source that most Americans have somewhere in their homes. It is, of course, the Bible, which U.S. President Andrew Jackson called "the rock on which our Republic rests." Consider a passage from Deuteronomy 32:7-9: "Remember the days of old . . . When the Most High divided their inheritance to the nations . . . He set the boundaries of the peoples, according to the number of the children of Israel. For the Lord 's portion is His people; Jacob is the place of His inheritance."
God had His eyes on ancient Israel, and that has not changed when we understand who Jacob's descendants are today. And yet He is concerned for all nations and all peoples.
"Righteousness exalts a nation"
King Solomon, ruler of Israel at the zenith of its power, recorded a great principle of national life: "Righteousness exalts a nation . . ." (Proverbs 14:34). This is true of any nation!
God has blessed America with freedoms and material prosperity perhaps beyond any country in all of history. (Why else do so many people in economically deprived countries want to uproot and move to the United States?)
There has been a measure of biblical understanding in American history. Indeed, some U.S. presidents like George Washington and Abraham Lincoln were truly men of great integrity and respect for the Bible. Lincoln even called his countrymen to a national fast and established a national day of thanksgiving. A French author and traveler once remarked that "America is great because America is good." Perhaps he knew that "righteousness exalts a nation."
However, there is another side to that same proverb. It continues, ". . . But sin is a reproach to any people." Somehow we Americans have let righteous conduct slip through our fingers, particularly in the recent decades since the end of World War II.
Our pioneer ancestors in America wouldn't understand our current behavior as a nation. Most of them would be appalled by our lack of morals. They would say that we have turned our backs on God. And they would be right.
Indeed, we are denying our Creator and removing Him from public life. Prayer and the Bible have been banned from public schools. Some have tried to take "under God" out of the Pledge of Allegiance. There is a concerted and growing effort to remove the Ten Commandments from the public sphere.
As a nation we have allowed and tolerated rampant sexual immorality, financial impropriety, theft, pornography—the list seems endless. We have already legalized homosexual behavior and in some places have even legalized same-sex marriage. We have aborted our unborn children by the millions, usually for our own convenience.
Blessings and curses
Believe it or not, what is happening to our English-speaking peoples was forecast in the pages of the Bible a long time ago. You should read carefully the blessings and curses listed in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28. God had greatly blessed ancient Israel just as He has also blessed their descendants residing principally in the United States, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, parts of South Africa and Northwest Europe.
Notice another passage in Deuteronomy: "But Jeshurun [another name for Israel] grew fat and kicked . . . Then he forsook God who made him, and scornfully esteemed the Rock of his salvation" (Deuteronomy 32:15).
One of America's founding fathers, John Adams, said that "riches, grandeur and power will have the same effect upon American as upon European minds." He meant it as a stark warning. He understood the patterns of history.
The blessings, obligations and warnings—clearly reminiscent of our modern plight today—reside in an earlier chapter of Deuteronomy. There God, through Moses, addressed the Israelites as they stood poised to enter the Promised Land and its abundant natural resources:
"For the Lord your God is bringing you into a good land, a land of brooks of waters, of fountains and springs, that flow out of valleys and hills; a land of wheat and barley, of vines and fig trees and pomegranates, a land of olive oil and honey; a land in which you will eat bread without scarcity, in which you will lack nothing; a land whose stones are iron and out of whose hills you can dig copper" (Deuteronomy 8:7-9).
In principle this passage describes America even more accurately than ancient Israel.
Though geographically they occupied only a very small region of the earth, the Israelites of old were actors on a larger stage. Their audience was the whole human race and their time frame projected itself far into the future.
Not giving credit to God
God's divine instructions and warnings followed: "When you have eaten and are full, then you shall bless the Lord your God for the good land which He has given you. Beware that you do not forget the Lord your God by not keeping His commandments, His judgments and His statutes which I command you today. Lest—when you have eaten and are full and have built beautiful houses and dwell in these . . . and all that you have is multiplied, when your heart is lifted up . . . Then you say in your heart, ‘My power and the might of my hand have gained me this wealth'" (verses 10-17).
Later God said through the Hebrew prophet Jeremiah that "My people have forgotten Me days without number" (Jeremiah 2:32). The tragic results are everywhere to be seen today. In fact, the book of Leviticus talks about Israel's power being broken. We still have that power in America for now, but our pride has been shaken to its roots by the events of the last 50 years.
God is the unseen actor on the world stage. He simply stated: "I will break the pride of your power" (Leviticus 26:19). Do we think that our Creator doesn't have the power to do it? Jesus referred to the Father as "Lord of heaven and earth" (Matthew 11:25). He is all-powerful! The Bible and history are a record of empires and kingdoms that rose and fell at His command!
The Bible also talks about a coming "time of Jacob's trouble" (Jeremiah 30:7) in which our English-speaking nations—the modern descendants of Jacob—will undergo a period of indescribable pain and suffering because of our disobedience to God's laws. This will happen during the period Scripture calls "the time of the end." (To learn more, request our free booklet Are We Living in the Time of the End?)
Is there a way of escape?
Is it too late for the United States of America? Or is there a way out? Can we still avert a future national disaster of unbelievable proportions? We have been given plenty of warnings. Do we really think that our Creator God was powerless to prevent 9/11?
Noted author Samuel Huntington says this: "All societies face recurring threats to their existence, to which they eventually succumb. Yet some societies, even when so threatened, are also capable of postponing their demise by halting and reversing the processes of decline and renewing their vitality and identity" (Who Are We?, 2004, p. xviii).
God is even more encouraging! "If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land" (2 Chronicles 7:14).
America is truly at a momentous—and dangerous—crossroads. The clear message sent by the latest election results, and the increasingly loud demands that the United States withdraw its forces from Iraq, show that American patience and commitment in Iraq are likely nearing an end. Indications point to America trying to find a way to exit without losing too much face.
But ominously, these things also show something else—that should America turn its back on its commitment to Iraq at this point, it's almost certain that no future U.S. administration, regardless of party, will soon commit American military power overseas for anything short of an attack on U.S. soil that could dwarf the devastating 9/11 attacks.
This almost certainly ensures that the world will soon become an even more dangerous place. Regimes like North Korea and Iran, long supporters of international terrorism, are actively developing nuclear arms and the means to deliver them. At the same time they openly threaten to destroy the United States.
What message will lack of American resolve, real or perceived, in dealing with rogue states and terrorists send to the rest of the world? If the United States won't stand up to them—and the United Nations' track record in dealing with such problems is abysmal—who or what will head off an explosion of global instability?
In times like these the utter foolishness of rejecting God and His ways should be evident. On the one hand we seek to remove Him from our public life and shrilly demand that we don't want Him around, and then we wonder why He doesn't respond when tragedy strikes.
Nevertheless, He will hear those who sincerely seek Him with all their hearts, and will aid and comfort those who put their trust in Him. "Seek the Lord while He may be found," He tells us in Isaiah 55:6-7, "call upon Him while He is near. Let the wicked forsake his way, and the unrighteous man his thoughts; let him return to the Lord, and He will have mercy on him; and to our God, for He will abundantly pardon." GN
Recommended Reading

How did the United States rise from a lowly backwater colony hugging the eastern seaboard to become the most prosperous and powerful country history has ever known? What's behind the remarkable story of how immigrants and refugees inherted a continent blessed with abundant water, astounding mineral wealth and millions of achres of the world's best farmland? Does Bible history shed any light, and does Bible Prophecy indicate what lies ahead? You need to read our eye-opening booklet The United States in Bible Prophecy. Request or download your free copy today!

Wednesday, November 18, 2009

America's Culture War: Threat to Homeland Security?




A timely archive post from http://www.gnmagazine.org/ to read in this Thanksgiving season with everything else going on. You can subscribe to this blog here and get the free booklet here




America's Culture War: Threat to Homeland Security?
While the U.S.-led war on terror continues worldwide, another war—of colliding cultures—heats up in the courts of America. Where will this lead the country? Could this war be a greater threat than terrorism?

By Darris McNeely

Last month U.S. President George W. Bush traveled to Great Britain for a controversial state visit. His goal was to restate his case for the war against terror in general and the invasion of Iraq in particular. He spoke of the historic ties between America and Britain, particularly during the 20th century battles of aggression on the European continent. As expected, he was greeted with loud protests from those who do not share his vision of the mission he articulates for the United States and Britain in the world.
While he was abroad, the Massachusetts supreme court handed down a landmark ruling which stated that homosexual couples have the right to marry. By a 4-3 decision, the court not only bypassed federal courts, but also all other state and federal legislative bodies, to decree a new definition of marriage.
By this ruling the court declares that marriage is no longer defined as a union between a man and a woman. With one decision, likely to be followed by other states, the divine institution of marriage has been legally redefined by human beings. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney has vowed to fight this ruling with an amendment to the state's constitution.
Not only is this decision undemocratic—having been made by judges rather than citizens' elected representatives—it is ungodly. It raises itself against and above the laws of God regarding the sacred marriage covenant between a man and a woman given by Him at creation.
The homosexual marriage debate is another battle in an ongoing war that weakens the moral fabric of society. This war, a clash of cultures, threatens the long-term survival of the United States as much as does the war on terror—indeed, more so.
It is vital that you understand the extent of this war and where it will lead. It may be too late to reverse the outcome, but we can be forewarned of its consequences and pray for our merciful God to stay His hand of judgment.
Battle lines being drawn
History chronicles the efforts to fashion the world according to various religious or political ideologies. Most of these ideologies center on creating a governmental structure that establishes universal peace and freedom. The yearning of individuals to live peacefully, free from oppression of any sort, is universal. People, and the nations they create, hunger for the freedom to live as they choose.
Yet we also see the field littered with the wreckage of countless failed designs to create or impose such a world. In America today the battle between those who desire to maintain a religious foundation to the laws of the nation and those who want a society free of religious influence is reaching a critical level. This is where the battle lines are drawn.
These issues are worthy of our examination in light of what the Bible says about the role of God in the public life of any nation. Both sides need to heed what the eternal Creator says about His law and truth. Neither side will escape the judgment God will bring on a world that has both ignored and forgotten the basis for true liberty and freedom.
Religious freedom under attack?
The recent controversy over the Ten Commandments in Alabama highlighted an ongoing battle, largely in the courts, over the separation of church and state in the public life of America. For refusing to obey a federal court order to remove a granite monument inscribed with the Ten Commandments from the state judicial building, Judge Roy Moore was recently removed from his post as chief justice of the Alabama supreme court.
In refusing to remove this monument, Judge Moore defied a federal judge's order, a very dangerous precedent for any magistrate. However, his supporters remained outraged by the lack of respect for the religious roots of the U.S. legal system, which they saw symbolized in this drama. His action fed the flames of a hotly debated issue in American public life. Many people, of differing religious persuasions, are deeply concerned about the erosion of both the moral foundation of the nation and their freedom of religious expression.
America has now reached the bizarre point where judges have discerned in the U.S. Constitution prohibitions against public display of the TenCommandments while simultaneously finding constitutional rights to homosexual sex, gay marriage and dismemberment of unborn babies.
John Adams, second president of the United States, is famously quoted as saying the U.S. Constitution "was made only for a moral and religious people" and "is wholly inadequate to the government of any other" (quoted by William Federer, America's God and Country Encyclopedia of Quotations, 1996, pp. 10-11).
Adams' friend Thomas Jefferson, who authored the Declaration of Independence and later became the third American president, wrote: "The Christian religion is the best religion that has ever been given to man and I as Chief Magistrate of this nation am bound to give it the sanction of my example" (quoted by David Limbaugh, Persecution: How Liberals Are Waging War Against Christianity, 2003, p. 320).
Judge Moore is not the only religious official to come under attack for publicly affirming his personal faith. U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft, an openly religious man, is the target of many who feel his deeply held religious convictions make him unsuitable for the nation's top legal post.
Mr. Ashcroft, a former U.S. senator and an evangelical Christian and political conservative, is constantly accused of overstepping civil liberties in enforcing the Homeland Security Act. This unwarranted criticism is not surprising given the complexity of today's political and social environment and the needs of fighting the war on terror. Libertarians are concerned that American civil liberties not be sacrificed as terrorists are hunted within American borders.
America in 2004 is a divided country when it comes to interpreting the laws of the land in light of changing morals.
The 2000 presidential election exposed a nation broadly divided into two cultures. One is generally rural, conservative and religious, while the other is mostly urban, liberal and secular. Those in the former tended to vote for Republican George W. Bush while the latter group leaned in favor of Democrat Al Gore. It appears that the 2004 election will continue to highlight the differences between these two Americas.
Supreme Court overturns longtime moral standards
In his recent book Persecution, best-selling author David Limbaugh highlighted the depth of this rift in the legal arena of courts and judges. Mr. Limbaugh tells the story of increasing discrimination against religion and religious expression in American society.
In presenting his case he chronicles numerous examples in the courts, mainstream media, Hollywood entertainment, public education and the private sector.
This process is especially clear in the courts, where great strides have been made in creating vast social change by striking down laws dealing with issues of religion, sex and gender. The effect is nothing short of a consistent and persistent attack on God and His laws.
Legalized abortion continues to be a major issue driving ever deeper into the rift of American society. In 1973 the U.S. Supreme Court, in the landmark Roe v. Wade case, overruled many existing state laws by declaring that abortion was a constitutional right. This became the de facto law of the land in spite of the fact that the Constitution says nothing about abortion or the so-called "right to privacy" on which the justices made their decision.
Since then more than 40 million abortions have been carried out in spite of opposition, debate and many attempts by state legislatures to restrict this "legal" infanticide.
Former President Ronald Reagan was on record as opposing abortion and on this issue aligned himself with millions of Americans who feel abortion is murder and a blight on society. Abortion is legal in America only because of Roe v. Wade. Neither state legislatures nor the U.S. Congress have enacted a law that legalizes the procedure. It is "law" only because of the Supreme Court ruling.
In June 2003 the Supreme Court issued another landmark ruling involving a Texas law that forbade two persons of the same sex from engaging in intimate sexual conduct. In Lawrence v. Texas the court in effect declared any state law forbidding sex between homosexuals to be invalid and unconstitutional.
Speaking for the majority opinion, Justice Anthony Kennedy said homosexuals "are entitled to respect for their private lives. The state cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime" (Los Angeles Times, "Bans on Gay Sex Ruled Unconstitutional," June 27, 2003).
Justice Antonin Scalia spoke for the minority, saying the court "signed on to the so-called homosexual agenda" and that its ruling "effectively decrees the end of all morals legislation" (ibid.). By court decree the United States, like Canada, is legalizing marriage between homosexual partners. Scalia's warning has come to pass in November's Massachusetts supreme court ruling regarding gay marriage.
Courts restrict religious freedom
Judicial activism in determining the moral law of the land is alarming many who see this as contrary to what the framers of the Constitution intended. It is also seen as a deliberate attack on religious values in American society.
In 2000 the Supreme Court decided a case involving public prayer in a school before a football game. A chaplain gave a prayer over the school's public-address system. Some students were upset and sued. In Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, the court struck down a school district policy that allowed student prayer before activities. The court said students should not have to face "personally offensive religious ritual."
David Limbaugh writes in his book: "Chief Justice William Rehnquist got to the real nub of the problem when he commented on the majority's overt antipathy toward religion in public life, an antipathy—as this case alone shows—that has permeated the highest reaches of our judicial system.
"Rehnquist wrote: 'But even more disturbing than its holding is the tone of the Court's opinion; it bristles with hostility to all things religious in public life. Neither the holding nor the tone of the opinion is faithful to the meaning of the Establishment Clause, when it is recalled that George Washington himself, at the request of the very Congress which passed the Bill of Rights, proclaimed a day of "public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God."'"
Limbaugh comments, "This case dealt a significant blow to religious freedom by holding that a public school ... violated the Establishment Clause" (Persecution, pp. 23-24).
The Establishment Clause is the section of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution that says, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." In the area of public education, this statement against federal support of religion has been interpreted to some extreme ends.
Doing so has systematically removed much of the Judeo-Christian teaching on which the educational structure was founded. Mr. Limbaugh goes on to say that the void left by removal of religious influences has been filled with other values. "While the education establishment vigorously opposes the dissemination in schools of any value or belief that can be remotely traced to the Bible, it affirmatively endorses other values that many Christians find repugnant. Public schools are replete with values-laden curricula, from sex education and sexual orientation instruction to notions of self-esteem and death education" (p. 4).
In their effort to remove school prayer and other religious values and expressions from the school environment, the courts engage in lofty and erudite language to defend the modern interpretation of the Establishment Clause. The same reasoning is used to order removal of a monument containing the Ten Commandments from a public building.
A sound foundation undermined by evil
The U.S. Constitution is a noble document, forged by wise and understanding men who searched centuries of law codes to write the visionary legal foundation for a new nation. It can even be demonstrated that in the political writings of the Founding Era (1760-1800), that generation cited the Bible more often than any other source (Limbaugh, p. 312).
Yet the First Amendment, however understood, is only the writing of men and does not carry the same weight as the Word of God. When the judges of a nation hold their opinions and reasoning in higher regard than the Bible, in time there will come a divine judgment of terrifying proportions. God says, "But on this one will I look: on him who is poor and of a contrite spirit, and who trembles at My word" (Isaiah 66:2).
The apostle Paul said men "did not like to retain God in their knowledge," becoming "haters of God." Those with that attitude deserve the "righteous judgment of God" (Romans 1:28-32). If America is to retain its lofty status as the world's most powerful nation, it would do well to heed this warning.
It is plain that the governmental mechanisms established to ensure liberty are now being used to undermine the remaining values of faith and virtue in the nation's legal codes. The framers of the Constitution understood the need for a system of checks and balances to restrain human nature in government.
James Madison, known as "the father of the Constitution" and the fourth president of the United States, wrote in The Federalist 51: "If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary. In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself" (quoted by Limbaugh, p. 319).
This ideal state has never been achieved.
It could be argued that representative democracy has come closest. Yet even there, as British Prime Minister Winston Churchill observed, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others that have been tried from time to time."
In 1 Samuel 8 we find the story of the ancient nation of Israel rejecting God as their ruler and demanding a king like all the other nations. Samuel the prophet warned them of the problems that would eventually arise.
He foretold the ultimate downfall of every human form of government when he pointed out that the people inevitably would "be his [the king's] servants" (verse 17). In other words, human government inevitably regresses from serving the people who establish it. And when any government fails to serve the good of its people and places itself above the will of God, it is on the slippery slope of decay and decline.
Has popular culture defeated religion?
The French historian Alexis de Tocqueville toured America during the 19th century. He observed the unique religious nature of the people. He wrote: "For the Americans the ideas of Christianity and liberty are so completely mingled that it is almost impossible to get them to conceive of the one without the other ... Religion ... must be regarded as the first of their political institutions ... I do not know whether all Americans have a sincere faith in their religion—for who can search the human heart?—but I am certain that they hold it indispensable to the maintenance of republican institutions" (Democracy in America, Vol. 1, p. 316).
If America is a religious nation, why has its society seen such overwhelming transformation of its foundational institutions? For years observers have chronicled the decline of morality in the popular culture. Politicians, clergy and business executives, to name only a few, have come under the withering satire and denigration of movies, music and television. Marriage and traditional family and gender roles have been redefined before the catatonic eyes of a public amused into a near-comatose state.
The past 40 years have seen great social changes take place in the United States.
But where were the churches in all of this? Why hasn't religion, with all its megachurches and modern marketing techniques, stirred the country to another "great awakening"? Could it be that they have been asleep and that they lack the true power of the Holy Spirit?
In the wake of the impeachment and sex scandals of former President Bill Clinton in 1998, Paul Weyrich, a leader of the Christian political movement Moral Majority, wrote in the Washington Post that conservative Christians had "lost the culture wars." His words implied that religion does not exert a strong or life-changing influence on the national scene. This may seem contradictory in light of the public's perception of the influence of churches and religion.
Polls indicate 80 percent of Americans believe in God. Yet Gallup polling shows church attendance has actually declined since the 1960s and has remained level since 1980 with no appreciable growth. Two thirds of the population may claim membership in a church but that does not always translate into attendance, much less actually living in accordance with church teachings.
Some evidence suggests that Americans tell pollsters they attend church when they really don't. A recent article in The Atlantic Monthly quoted John Stackhouse Jr., a teacher of theology and culture: "Beginning in the 1990s a series of sociological studies has shown that many more Americans tell pollsters that they attend church regularly than can be found in church when teams actually count" (May 2003, p. 34).
For those who do attend, what do they believe and how does that translate into a living faith? Sociologist Alan Wolfe has written a book titled The Transformation of American Religion: How We Actually Live Our Faith. His conclusions, after traveling the country interviewing and observing churches and members, are enlightening and sobering. He says that American religion has become mainstream enough to look like the popular culture of the land. He concludes that American culture has triumphed over religion.
If so, then the power to halt societal decline does not rest in religion. It has lost its power. Wolfe says: "In the United States, culture has transformed Christ, as well as other religions found within these shores. In every aspect of the religious life, American faith has met American culture—and American culture has triumphed."
On matters of fundamental biblical doctrine, things have dramatically changed. "Talk of hell, damnation, and even sin has been replaced by a nonjudgmental language of understanding and empathy. More Americans than ever proclaim themselves born again in Christ, but the lord to whom they turn rarely gets angry and frequently strengthens self-esteem ... Far from living in a world elsewhere, the faithful in the United States are remarkably like everyone else" (pp. 2-3).
Many large popular evangelical churches do not systematically teach or clearly define their doctrines, because they want to attract the unchurched, the large mass of middle America who claims no attendance or affiliation. In a theological "catch 22," Wolfe states, "Evangelical churches lack doctrine because they want to attract new members. Mainline churches lack doctrine because they want to hold on to those declining numbers of members they have" (p. 87).
Are you willing to pay the price?
To benefit from faith, we must be willing to pay the price of repentance, commitment and conversion. If one wants inner peace, God's blessing and a strong, resilient, free country, there must be a turn to God and a true faith unlike any experienced before.
For the United States to experience a turnaround that will reverse its cultural and moral slide, there must be a recognition that change cannot take place without a transformation from the values of the society to the values of the Kingdom of God.
With God's help we can change ourselves, but we cannot change the world. Only God can do that, and the Bible shows us this will not happen until the return of Jesus Christ. Until then the message of the Kingdom is preached and those who seek it must strive to live by its values. That is a daunting task in today's world. The teachings of Christ shed an embarrassing light on those whose work mirrors the kingdom of darkness. And make no mistake about it: Darkness fights back to extinguish that uncomfortable light.
It is time for Americans to recognize the grave danger gathering on the horizon. In the immediate aftermath of the deadly Sept. 11 attacks, America experienced a brief revival in religious interest and church attendance—yet it quickly faded.
It may be too late to change the course of the nation and its drift from its longtime moral foundations. But it is not too late for you, the individual citizen, to turn to God in heartfelt repentance.
In Ezekiel 18:27 and verses 30-31, God through His prophet says: "... When a wicked man turns away from the wickedness which he committed, and does what is lawful and right, he preserves himself alive." To our nations today, the Almighty still speaks: "Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, so that iniquity will not be your ruin ... Get yourselves a new heart and a new spirit. For why should you die ...?" GN


Recommended Reading
What's behind America's startling rise from a ragged collection of backwater colonies to global superpower in two short centuries? And what's the significance of its precipitous moral decline? The Bible gives us some incredible indications of where these trends are leading. You need to understand the remarkable story behind America's ascent to greatness and its prophesied decline as brought to light in our eye-opening free booklet The United States and Britain in Bible Prophecy. Download or request your free copy today!

Reading Material -- What would Reagan do?





























This is an archived article from http://www.anncoulter.com/ with some book recommendations that you can buy by clicking on the links or getting them from your closest library here http://www.worldcat.org/oclc.
It is timely because of the nomination of Judge David Hamilton another Leftist judge who is up for nomination.
Also, you can subscribe to this blog here


WHAT WOULD REAGAN DO?
September 21, 2005

Perhaps President Bush has inadvertently nominated a true conservative to the court with this Roberts fellow. I remain skeptical based on the following facts:
(1) Anita Hill has not stepped forward to accuse Roberts of sexual harassment.
(2) The Democrats did not accuse Roberts of having a secret life as a racist.
(3) We have no idea what kind of videos he rents.
Also, I'm still steamed that Bush has now dashed my dreams of an all-black Supreme Court composed of eight more Clarence Thomases. Incidentally, eight more Clarence Thomases is the only form of human cloning I would ever support.As liberal Hendrik Hertzberg wrote in The New Yorker, Roberts was a scared choice. After Hurricane Katrina, Bush was even more scared. So when he had to pick a chief justice, he renominated the Rorschach blot.
For Christians, it's "What Would Jesus Do?" For Republicans, it's "What Would Reagan Do?" Bush doesn't have to be Reagan; he just has to consult his WWRD bracelet. If Bush had followed the WWRD guidelines, he would have nominated Antonin Scalia for the chief justiceship.As proof, I refer you to the evidence. When Reagan had an opening for chief justice, he nominated Associate Justice William Rehnquist. While liberals were preoccupied staging die-ins against Rehnquist and accusing him of chasing black people away from the polls with a stick — something they did not accuse Roberts of — Reagan slipped Scalia onto the court.That's what Reaganesque presidents with a five-vote margin in the Senate typically do. Apart from toppling the Soviet Empire, Scalia remains Reagan's greatest triumph.Scalia deserved the chief justiceship. He's the best man for the job. He has suffered lo these many years with Justices Souter, Kennedy and O'Connor. He believes in a sedentary judiciary. He's for judicial passivism. Scalia also would have been the first cigar-smoking, hot-blooded Italian chief justice, which I note the diversity crowd never mentions.But most important, if Bush had nominated Scalia, liberals would have responded with their usual understated screams of genocide, and Bush could have nominated absolutely anyone to fill Justice O'Connor's seat. He also could have cut taxes, invaded Syria, and bombed North Korea and Cuba just for laughs. He could even have done something totally nuts, like enforce the immigration laws.Even if Roberts turns out to be another Rehnquist (too much to hope for another Scalia!), we don't know that, Bush doesn't know that, and Bush has blown a golden opportunity to make Chuck Schumer the public face of the Democratic Party. A few weeks of Schumer as their spokesman, and normal Democrats would be clamoring for Howard Dean to get back on the stick. Teddy Kennedy would start showing up at hearings actually holding a double scotch.


Inasmuch as Bush must still choose a replacement for O'Connor, it's important to remember the "Sandra Day O'Connor bylaw" to the WWRD guidelines: Never appoint anyone like Sandra Day O'Connor to any court at any level.Reagan had made a campaign promise to appoint a woman to the Supreme Court. He didn't say anything about appointing a ninny. But back in 1981, it was slim pickings for experienced female judges. O'Connor was a terrible mistake and will forever mar Reagan's record, but at least he did it only once.Bush has already fulfilled all his campaign promises to liberals — and then some! He said he'd be a "compassionate conservative," which liberals interpreted to mean that he would bend to their will, enact massive spending programs, and be nice to liberals. When Bush won the election, that sealed the deal. It meant the Democrats won. Consequently, Bush has enacted massive new spending programs, obstinately refused to deal with illegal immigration, opposed all conservative Republicans in their primary races, and invited Teddy Kennedy over for movie night. He's even sent his own father to socialize with aging porn star Bill Clinton.(Sidebar on the aging porn star: Idiot Republicans fraternizing with the Clintons has not harmed the decadent buffoon's reputation abroad. A Chinese condom manufacturer recently named one of its condoms the "Clinton," a fitting tribute to the man who had Monica Lewinsky perform oral sex on him in the Oval Office on Easter Sunday. Their advertising slogans are: "Always wear a 'Clinton' when you're getting a 'Lewinsky'!"; "I still believe in a place called the G-spot"; "Extra-thin skinned!"; "For when you really, really want to feel her pain." Note to Bush: This isn't Walter Mondale. How about sending Pops on the road with Joey Buttafuoco?)According to my WWRD wristwatch, it's time for Bush to invade Grenada, bomb Libya, fire the air traffic controllers, and joke about launching a first strike against the Soviet Union. In lieu of that, how about nominating a conservative to O'Connor's seat on the court? It would be a bold gesture.