Showing posts with label #cuba. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 30, 2016

Jesus Christ, Ronald Reagan and Fidel Castro

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Fidel Castro and others. This follows this post about family estrangement. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Jesus Christ, Ronald Reagan and Fidel Castro

by Don Hooser Estimated reading time: 5 minutes

The fact that mainstream media and entertainment commonly portray all three with great dishonesty.
Jesus Christ is continually the target of those with an antibiblical bias. Ronald Reagan is belittled. Fidel Castro is whitewashed. The main problem? An overwhelming lack of truth .
Jesus Christ
Consider this outright blasphemy: the silly fiction that Jesus Christ was married to Mary Magdalene, a devout follower during His earthly ministry, and fathered a child by her. Not only is there no evidence of such events, there are clear biblical proofs against them. To entertain such a preposterous notion is a denial of the authenticity of the Bible as the Word of God. It is also a denial of Jesus Christ as mankind's Savior who is betrothed to His bride, the Church.
The current version of this accusation was launched by a novel, The Da Vinci Code , by Dan Brown. The novel's speculation about Jesus Christ is pure fiction. But what is much more disgusting is that ABC News on Nov. 3 devoted an hour-long TV program to this subject. Isn't “news” supposed to be non-fiction?
As with ABC's “Search for Jesus” a few years ago, the network seems determined to sell wild stories and conjectures about Jesus Christ.
Why is it that insulting biblical Christianity is in , but any realistic critique of Islam or other religions is out as politically incorrect?
In a culture infatuated with “reality shows,” there is no room for the ultimate reality of God and Jesus Christ. Consider the malicious attacks on Mel Gibson's upcoming film “The Passion.” It is too real for comfort for those who don't want any divine restrictions on their personal lifestyles.
The acceleration of this trend in our culture and media is sobering. The obsession with discrediting the Bible is so powerful that humanistic journalists and other elitists are willing to sacrifice professionalism and erode their credibility.
Ronald Reagan
CBS last week pulled the plug on “The Reagans,” a dishonest miniseries of “researched” character assassination. What was publicized to be an accurate biography of former U.S. President Ronald Reagan and his wife turned out to be largely demeaning and slanderous fiction. Massive protests erupted after the film's true nature was exposed by leaks of the manuscript.
Enemies of Reagan have always tried to portray him as a shallow-minded dolt. But he had an in-depth grasp of countless complex issues and was quite articulate and persuasive in explaining them. I personally used to listen to the many radio broadcasts that he made during the years between his being governor of California and being elected president of the United States. All who knew him testify that he wrote all those in-depth addresses himself from his own knowledge.
The show's producers did not even have the decency to wait for Ronald Reagan's death to try to rewrite his history. Suffering from Alzheimer's disease, he lies bedridden, unable to defend himself, and his grieving wife must feel immense pain at the smearing of their reputations.
Compare this with the CBS miniseries earlier this year on the German tyrant Adolph Hitler. Hitler, being portrayed sympathetically as having “humanity,” received more favorable treatment than America's much-loved former president!
The biggest problem with “The Reagans” is that apparently much of the film is absolutely untrue. Mrs. Reagan emphatically claims this. Family, friends and colleagues say there is no evidence for many of the statements, attitudes and actions portrayed in the film—and that they are completely contradictory to the character and record of his life. What justification could there be for such revisionist “history”?
Fidel Castro
Do our media portray every famous person in a negative light? Not at all. An example of the opposite extreme is reporting on Fidel Castro, a hero of the Hollywood elite. He is most often deferentially referred to as the “leader” or “president” of Cuba rather than the brutal Communist dictator he is.
U.S. media generally gloss over the harsh realities of life in Cuba. The many Cuban exiles in the U.S. are dismayed at the sympathetic and flattering treatment shown to that oppressive regime. They bring up the interviews with Castro by former CNN president Ted Turner and by CBS news anchor Dan Rather, in which normally hard-hitting news executives treated Castro as if they were talking to the Queen of England. El Jefe —“the Boss”—often gets a free pass in the U.S. press and is hailed as a hero in Hollywood.
More and more voices of alarm are being raised over the mainstream media and cultural bias. For example, a newly released book is titled Arrogance: Rescuing America From the Media Elite , by Bernard Goldberg. It is a sequel to his previous bestseller, Bias .
Jesus Christ, Ronald Reagan and Fidel Castro are only three examples of subjects that are commonly misrepresented by the media and entertainment industries. Many more could be cited. Much of the reporting and portrayals are not only inaccurate, they show of pattern of bias and personal agendas designed to influence your thinking.
A commitment to honesty and truthfulness is sorely lacking in the world today. The world needs seekers of truth—people who “test all things [and] hold fast what is good” (1 Thessalonians 5:21).
Jesus Christ, who died for our sins and who now lives to save us, said “you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32). He will one day return to set the world free from ignorance and deception.

ronald reagan lack of truth Jesus Christ in common Fidel Castro Jesus Christ Doctrinal Beliefs Goodness Faithfulness Fruit of the Spirit

You might also be interested in...

Don Hooser

United Church of God Pastor
Don Hooser is a minister and writer for the publications of United Church of God. He and his wife Elsie live in McKinney TX, a suburb of Dallas. He was born in Dallas and grew up mostly in east Texas. Elsie is from Detroit, Michigan. They have three grown children, Amy, Randy, and Danny. Mr. Hooser graduated in 1963 from Southern Methodist University with a degree in mechanical engineering, and graduated in 1966 from Ambassador College, Big Sandy. Don and Elsie married two days after Don’s graduation.

Thursday, November 10, 2016

The Early Church Was Not Communist - and Neither Was Jesus!

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Communism and Christianity. This follows this post about a nation being on fire. This follows this post about the immigration threat. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

The Early Church Was Not Communist - and Neither Was Jesus

by Don Hooser, Tom Robinson 21 comments Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

Add to my study list

The Early Church Was Not Communist - and Neither Was Jesus

Note Acts 2:44-45: “Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common, and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.”
But this was a unique situation that didn't last very long. We later see that elderly widows were to be financially provided for by a common church fund only if they had no family members in the Church who could privately support them (1 Timothy 5:3-16). Obviously, all members of the Church's congregations at this later time were not being provided for out of a common fund—only a select number in real need.
In considering Acts 2, we should note that Christians were being persecuted. Also, thousands of new believers, some from distant lands, had just been added to the Church at the Feast of Pentecost in Jerusalem.
No doubt many decided to remain in Judea at that time to learn more about their new faith and rely on one another through growing persecution rather than return to their homes far away. These people thus had an immediate need for food and lodging, and a voluntary pooling of resources took care of that.
The believers at the time felt extremely blessed, grateful, hospitable and generous. Many who had extra assets sold some of them to help finance the living expenses of others. The expression “all things in common” means this: “I love you, and therefore your needs are just as important to me as my own needs. I consider all that I have as being yours also.”
However, keep in mind that they could not sell what they did not own. They were voluntarily selling some of their privately owned property so they could help others. This was charity, not communism. No one was compelled to sell his property, nor did anyone confiscate one's property or income to give it to others, as many governments do today.
Acts 4:32-35, which follows shortly after in time order, shows that the pooling of resources was still going on. The account of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5:1-11 adds further clarity. God did not execute judgment on these two for their refusing to share, but for their telling a lie to make themselves look good.
The apostle Peter asked Ananias, “While it [their possession] remained [unsold], was it not your own? And after it was sold, was it not in your own control?” The couple was not obligated either to sell their land or to give away the proceeds. Again, this was not communism or socialism.
The words of Jesus Himself should make it even clearer. In His parables of the workers in the vineyard in Matthew 20, He portrayed God as a vineyard owner paying different employees the same agreed-on amount even if they worked for less time.
The employees who worked longer thought it unfair. But the owner, representing God, replies to one: “Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? Take what is yours and go your way. I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things?” (verses 13-15).
To the final question here, communists and socialists, and those with such leanings, would answer no —since in those systems the community or state decides. Jesus' statement, while figurative of spiritual principles, is nevertheless a ringing endorsement of both private ownership and free market exchange without wage control. He was certainly no communist—and neither were His followers.

communal socialism all things in common Acts 2 Service Christian Living

You might also be interested in...

Don Hooser

United Church of God Pastor
Don Hooser is a minister and writer for the publications of United Church of God. He and his wife Elsie live in McKinney TX, a suburb of Dallas. He was born in Dallas and grew up mostly in east Texas. Elsie is from Detroit, Michigan. They have three grown children, Amy, Randy, and Danny. Mr. Hooser graduated in 1963 from Southern Methodist University with a degree in mechanical engineering, and graduated in 1966 from Ambassador College, Big Sandy. Don and Elsie married two days after Don’s graduation.
Tom Robinson

Tom is an elder in the United Church of God who works from his home near St. Louis, Missouri, as a senior writer and editor for the Beyond Today magazine and church booklets. He is also the editor of the UCG Bible Commentary. He also served as a copy editor for Vertical Thought and managing editor for World News and Prophecy .

Thursday, August 4, 2016

Current Events & Trends Zika virus—the latest health scare

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about Zika. This follows this post about Australia’s neighbors. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Current Events & Trends

Zika virus—the latest health scare

by Tom Robinson Listen Estimated reading time: 3 minutes

MP3 Audio (5.79 MB)

A mosquito — What prompted the Zika virus outbreak this past year is unknown.

“As many as four million people could be infected by the end of the year” (Donald McNeil Jr., Catherine Saint Louis and Nicholas St. Fleur, “Short Answers to Hard Questions About Zika Virus,” The New York Times, Feb. 3, 2016).
Meanwhile, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention announced that its Emergency Operations Center had been activated to Level 1, meaning its staff will be working around the clock in emergency conditions.
Discovered in the Zika forest of Uganda in 1947, the virus is common in Africa and Asia. It didn’t begin spreading in the Western Hemisphere until May 2015, with an outbreak occurring in Brazil. It’s had a notable impact throughout Latin America and the Caribbean. As of this writing, only a few cases have been reported in the United States and now Europe.
For most, the infection causes no symptoms and does no lasting harm. However, “concern is focused on women who become infected while pregnant and those who develop a temporary form of paralysis after exposure to the Zika virus” (ibid.).
In October 2015, doctors in northern Brazil noted a surge in babies with microcephaly—a birth defect of abnormally small heads and underdeveloped brains. There can be various causes for this problem, including other infections such as German measles (or rubella) and cytomegalovirus. A causal link to the Zika virus in the recent cases is not certain, but there is significant evidence of a direct connection (Katie Worth, “New Link Between Zika Virus and Microcephaly Is Found in Brazil,” PBS.org, Feb. 4, 2016). Many nations in South America are advising citizens to hold off on pregnancy until as late as 2018.
There’s a recent case in Dallas, Texas, of the virus being transmitted sexually from someone who’d recently returned from Venezuela, but this is considered to be a very rare occurrence—with only two documented cases linking the virus to sex before this, in 2008 and 2013.
What prompted the outbreak this past year is unknown. One speculation is that it may have been a traveler from Africa or Asia to the 2014 World Cup in Brazil. But it could have been anyone—wrong place, wrong time.
It’s assumed that the United States might have outbreaks in the southeastern part of the country, but that the chance of it being major is low—“because most people in the US hang out indoors in the air conditioning, install window screens, use bug repellent, and keep their yards free of standing water” (Beth Skwarecki, “Your Non-Alarmist Guide to the Zika Virus,” Lifehacker.com, Feb. 2, 2016).
Certainly this virus is a serious problem. But it may prove no worse than many other health issues the world is dealing with. Yet it should be remembered that Jesus warned of increasing disease epidemics before His return (Matthew 24:3-8). Any major outbreaks should serve as a wakeup call to that reality.
In any case, for this and any other health crisis, we should be seeking the true Healer. In Him alone is true security and well-being. (Sources: The New York Times, Yahoo News, PBS.org, Lifehacker.com.)

Disease

You might also be interested in...

Tuesday, May 31, 2016

Editorial: Memorial Day and Desecration

Editorial

As you likely heard, many, many cemeteries and other monuments dedicated to honoring the war dead of the U.S. have been recently desecrated.

Of course, having a Commander in Chief who has had his picture taken with memorials to Che Guevara and Ho Chi Minh over the past two months, as well as going to a battle site which ended up shortening World War II, and saving countless American, Chinese, Korean, as well as Japanese lives, shows where his priorities are.

Thursday, May 19, 2016

Corruption and Despotism Cry Out

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/ about corrupt governments. This follows this post about American greatness. This follows this post about Facebook and Transgendered people. For a free magazine subscription or to get the books recommended for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886- 8632.

Corruption and Despotism Cry Out for the Coming Kingdom of God

by Melvin Rhodes

As someone not born and raised in the United States, I've sometimes been asked who I think was the greatest American president.
My answer has always been George Washington.
The answer often surprises people since Washington led the Continental Army during the Revolutionary War against the British—and I was born and grew up in Great Britain.
But Washington was great for a different reason. The man who became the country's first president set an incredible example for his successors.
At a time when the world was governed mostly by monarchs who ruled for life, Washington retired after two four-year terms in office, thereby setting a precedent for other presidents. Only Franklin Roosevelt broke tradition by standing for election (and winning) four times. After that, the U.S. Constitution was amended to prevent anyone from being elected president more than twice (or once if the person finished out another president's term for two years), limiting the number of years anyone can hold that office.
With America's preeminence in the world during most of the last century, many countries have tried to copy the American system of government. While the United States was the first country to have a presidential form of government, today most countries have a president as head of state. But few have successfully adopted the U.S. system, and none has been able to copy it successfully for very long. The reason for this goes right back to George Washington.
Whereas Washington retired to his farm after eight years, few presidents around the world seem capable of letting go of the reins of power. Inevitably this leads to dictatorship, frequently accompanied by the title “president for life.” Even if there is no such official title, it is at least understood that the man at the top is there until he dies.
These “presidents for life” surround themselves with sycophants and grow increasingly out of touch with reality. With those close to them constantly praising them, the presidents come to think the people love them—so when opposition arises, they mistakenly assume it's only a minority and use massive force to crush all dissent.
All of this could be avoided if only they would follow Washington's example and retire after eight years!

Arab revolts and dynastic leaders

We've seen a number of these dictator-presidents in the news recently. Demonstrations precipitated by food inflation, high unemployment and corruption have spread across North Africa and the Middle East as people have demanded that their leaders go. Whether these uprisings, dubbed the “Arab Spring,” will result in greater democracy is still a question. Too often, culture limits the potential for a truly democratic system, which requires tolerance and respect for the rule of law.
The first leader to fall in the Arab Spring was Tunisia's President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali, who held his position for 23 years, followed by President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt, overthrown after 30 years in power.
It remains to be seen what will happen to leaders of other countries confronted by revolutionary fervor. One conclusion drawn from the overthrow of Ben Ali and Mubarak is that they reacted to demonstrations with weakness—so the others are doing everything possible to suppress all dissent.
The others include three more beleaguered Arab leaders: Libya's Colonel Gaddafi (42 years), Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh (33 years) and Syria's Bashar al-Assad (11 years). Assad succeeded his father, the two of them having ruled the country for 40 years. Although a republic like all other nations with a president, the country has a de facto dynasty. Mubarak and Gaddafi were also grooming their sons for succession.
Many expressed confidence in Syria's president after he succeeded his father in 2000. The son had spent many years in England studying optometry and then working as an optometrist. He even married an English woman of Syrian descent. Many hoped that those years in a liberal democracy like England would have changed him, turning him into a typical, tolerant Englishman. However, once back in his native culture, he reverted to type and has turned out to be every bit as ruthless as his father.
Dynastic successions are not confined to Middle Eastern leaders. North Korea (a self-proclaimed “Peoples' Republic”) is expected to soon get its third hereditary leader. The only other country still espousing traditional communism is Cuba, where founder Fidel Castro's brother Raul has recently been put in charge. These countries should more accurately be called “communist monarchies,” with their very own hereditary family dynasties.
Romania was another communist country set on establishing a ruling dynasty—until the people overthrew and executed their communist monarch, President Nicolae Ceausescu, in 1989.

Corruption a major factor

All of these men have made a fortune out of governing their countries. Dictators of poverty-plagued Third World nations often rank among the wealthiest people in the world—not legally, of course, but through bribes and corruption. This is one reason why so many dictators cannot hand power over to somebody else—they are afraid that the next man in charge might prosecute them on charges of corruption.
This happened in Zambia in 2009 when former president Frederick Chiluba was tried on corruption charges. A common joke in Africa is that, whatever country you're in, you don't ask if the president is corrupt. Instead you ask: How corrupt is he? It's commonly believed that all presidents on the African continent are corrupt. The lesson that many of them will have learned from Zambia is to never surrender power!
Many such leaders will do anything to retain their office. In one African nation there are 2.5 million dead voters. These dead people naturally all “vote” for the president whenever there's an election, thereby giving the incumbent a built-in majority!
This prompts the question: Why bother with elections?
Some presidents like to keep up a level of respectability and acceptance if only to get foreign aid (which often goes straight into their pockets). Membership in multinational organizations like the (British) Commonwealth requires at least the appearance of a democratic system, even though some Commonwealth members have often had periods of military rule.
Ghana, where I once lived, set the pattern. When the British gave the country independence in 1957, it had a system of government modeled on Britain's. Two years after independence, the prime minister, Kwame Nkrumah, called for a change to a presidential system. It wasn't long after that he was proclaimed “president for life.” Then he abolished the parliament, making himself an absolute dictator.
Ghana's early post-colonial experience also showed that the only way to remove a president for life is to forcibly overthrow him, which the military did in 1966. In 1979, a later military government was overthrown by another branch of the military, and all former heads of state were sentenced to death for corruption—for effectively stealing the country blind.
Corruption is a way of life throughout Africa. A recent article in The Economist highlighted corruption in Africa, showing that so many people have a vested interest in corruption that it's doubtful any progress can be made in dealing with it.
Titled “Briefing: Nigeria's Prospects,” the article states: “To change the system, [Nigerian President Goodluck] Jonathan would have to break with his backers. That is difficult, perhaps even dangerous. For instance, a mafia that embezzles vast fuel subsidies is said to be a big contributor to his campaign. The government spends more than $4 billion a year to sell fuel at less than half the already low American price.
“The president's backers routinely falsify bills of lading, inflating the amount of fuel imported fivefold, then collect the government subsidy on all of it, and finally smuggle the fuel to a neighboring country to sell at double or triple the price. Mr. Jonathan, of course, did not personally take their money. But if he goes after them their cronies may stop cooperating” (May 28, 2011).
Even in India, the world's biggest democracy, corruption is endemic and threatens the stability of the country. One of the inevitable consequences of corruption is the growing gap between the rich (often corrupt) and the poor. And as the gap widens there is an increased likelihood of civil disturbance or even revolution. That's what's happened across the Arab world.
But, knowing this, leaders all over the world line their own pockets while the people go hungry!

The example of Equatorial Guinea

One of the worst examples of corruption in Africa is Equatorial Guinea, whose dictatorial president Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo seized power in 1979 from his uncle, Macias Nguema, who had murdered an estimated one third of his own people. His nephew has been less bloodthirsty but has pocketed much of the nation's oil wealth during his 32-year rule. The country has a population of only 650,000. With oil, every single citizen should have a high standard of living—but that is not the reality.
“Energy revenues have flowed into the pockets of the country's elite, but virtually none has trickled down to the poor majority; since the oil boom began, the country has rocketed to one of the world's highest per capita incomes—and one of its lowest standards of living. Nearly four-fifths of its people live in abject poverty; child mortality has increased to the point that today some 15 percent of Equatorial Guinea's children die before reaching age 5, making it one of the deadliest places on the planet to be young” (“Teodorin's World,” Foreign Policy, March/April 2011).
Ironically, many of the leaders mentioned in these articles claim to be religious men. It would appear that none has read what Jesus Christ had to say on governance.

Jesus Christ's example of governance

Jesus told His disciples that they must be different from the rulers of this world. At the time, the Jews in the land of Israel were living under Roman rule. Rome's leaders in Christ's time were despotic and cruel, lording it over the people, wielding their authority.
What did Christ tell His followers? “Jesus called them [His disciples] together and said, ‘You know that the rulers of the Gentiles lord it over them, and their high officials exercise authority over them. Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be your slave—just as the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many” (Matthew 20:25-28, New International Version).
Most people in the world live in difficult or even depressing circumstances, under governments that are dictatorial and exploitative. But the good news is that these worldly systems of government and dictatorial styles of leadership will come to an end when Jesus Christ returns to the earth to establish the Kingdom of God over all nations. He will then rule the world with righteousness.
As Isaiah's famous prophecy foretells: “For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there will be no end. He will reign on David's throne and over his kingdom, establishing and upholding it with justice and righteousness from that time on and forever. The zeal of the Lord Almighty will accomplish this” (Isaiah 9:6-7, NIV).
Another of Isaiah's prophecies reads: “He will delight in the fear of the Lord. He will not judge by what he sees with his eyes, or decide by what he hears with his ears; but with righteousness he will judge the needy, with justice he will give decisions for the poor of the earth” (Isaiah 11:3-4).
With the Kingdom of God, government will finally truly be for the people. With Jesus Christ as the chief public servant, Christlike service will prevail right on down through every level of administration. Righteousness will govern the land—all lands, all nations around the world!

nepotism kingdom of god Governments governance corruption Governments News and Prophecy Kingdom of God Doctrinal Beliefs

You might also be interested in...

Beyond Today -- What is the Time of the End?

brianlee

Wednesday, November 30, 2016