Thursday, October 25, 2012

Putin's Evolving Strategy in Europe

A very interesting post from www.Stratfor.com about U.S. embassies. This follows this post about YouTube being fined by Brazil.  This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran . For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read a very interesting book HERE.


Putin's Evolving Strategy in Europe




Stratfor

By George Friedman



This week, Vladimir Putin was sworn in for a third term as Russian president. Putin's return to the presidency was not unexpected; he was never really unseated as Russia's leader, even during Dmitri Medvedev's presidency. But it comes as an anti-incumbent trend is developing in Europe, most recently demonstrated when socialist challenger Francois Hollande defeated Nicolas Sarkozy in France's presidential elections this week. In response to these changes, Putin will have to adjust Russia's approach in Europe.



Putin's Plans for Russia and Beyond

Russia has been on the path to resurgence since Putin won the presidency in 1999. He inherited a broken, weak and chaotic Russia. As Stratfor has noted over the years, Putin did not seek to re-create the Soviet Union. He is a student of geopolitics, and he understands Russia's constraints and the overreaching that led to the fall of the Soviet Union. Putin's mission was to return Russia to stability and security -- a massive undertaking for the leader of a country that not only is the world's largest but also is internally diverse and surrounded by potentially hostile powers.



During his first presidential term, Putin launched a comprehensive series of reforms that recentralized power over the Russian regions, cracked down on militancy in the Russian Caucasus, purged the oligarch class and centralized the economy and political system. Putin implemented an autocratic regime and used the military and Russia's security apparatus (including the Federal Security Service), following the example of previous leaders, from the czars to the Soviet rulers. Putin's maneuvers were the natural evolution of how a successful leader rules Russia.



With Russia strong and steady, Putin was able to focus on his country's near abroad. However, the countries surrounding Russia were hostile to the Kremlin's view, with NATO and the European Union pushing ever closer to Russia's borders and forming partnerships with numerous former Soviet states. The czars and Soviet rulers used two primary tactics to counter such a situation.



The first tactic was to mobilize Russia's military to push out foreign influence, whether directly (as Moscow has done with Georgia) or indirectly (by forging military alliances with former Soviet states such as Belarus and Kazakhstan). Although Putin's Russia could do this for one or two countries, it could not use this tactic everywhere in its periphery.



The second tactic was to create alliances of convenience in Europe to help Moscow divide pan-European and NATO expansion and sentiment against Russia while bolstering Russia economically, financially and technologically. Czarist Russia made such arrangements with the United Kingdom during the Napoleonic Wars and with France ahead of World War I, and Soviet leaders formed an alliance of convenience with Germany ahead of World War II. It is not that Russia ever trusted any of these countries (or vice versa), but the Russian and European leaderships shared an inherent understanding that certain alliances are necessary to shape the dynamics on the Continent.



During Putin's era, Russia set its sights on what it considered three of the four premier European powers: Germany, France and Italy. The Kremlin considers the United Kingdom the fourth main power, but London's firm and traditional alliance with the United States has made it resistant to Russia's overtures. The Kremlin saw Germany, France and Italy as the countries holding the economic, political and military heft that, if unified within Western alliance structures, could oppose Russia in Europe. In order to forge partnerships with these countries, Putin built relationships with their rulers.



Putin's Personal Approach

Germany was Russia's natural first choice for a partnership; not only is it the core of Europe, but it is also the European state that the Kremlin fears most. Moreover, Putin has an affinity for Germany that dates back to his days with the KGB, when he was stationed in Dresden, Germany. In the early 2000s, Putin was able to use his fluency in German to develop a strong friendship with then-German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. Schroeder saw the relationship first as an economic opportunity, since Russia is the world's largest energy producer and exporter and also a place for potential heavy investment.



During Schroeder's chancellorship, trade between Germany and Russia boomed, and Russia gave Germany special benefits as an energy partner. Germany -- in accordance with Putin's plan -- began supporting Russia's position in Europe on specific strategic issues. Schroeder's Germany was alone among Western governments in not vociferously supporting Ukraine's Orange Revolution in 2004-2005. Schroeder also led European opposition to U.S. efforts to begin the NATO accession process for Ukraine and Georgia.



As his friendship with Putin grew, Schroeder purchased an estate outside Moscow near Putin's home and even sought Putin's assistance in adopting two Russian children. Schroeder's ejection from office in 2005 did not end their friendship -- or Schroeder's usefulness to Putin. Despite widespread German criticism, even from Schroeder's own party, the former chancellor accepted a position with Russian state natural gas firm Gazprom to lead the Nord Stream project, a pipeline designed specifically to maximize Russia's energy leverage over Belarus, Ukraine and Poland.



Having created a strong relationship with Berlin, Putin established a similar relationship with France's then-President Jacques Chirac. France's position is different from Germany's in that France is not connected economically or politically with Russia. However, Paris understands the history of strong Berlin-Moscow ties and what those mean for all of Europe. France thus has an interest in making sure it is not left out when Russia and Germany meet. The relationship between Chirac and Putin took this a step further.



At the beginning of their relationship, Putin and Chirac allied politically against the U.S.-led war in Iraq. This was important to Moscow because it undermined NATO's unity on a critical issue. More important for Russia's interests, Chirac lobbied against NATO's expansion to include the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The Baltics were admitted despite Chirac's objections, and when the next NATO summit occurred -- in Latvia -- Chirac invited Putin to the meeting as his guest.



Putin was close friends with the French and German leaders, but he was like a brother to Italy's then-Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. This relationship was more personal, because Italy was not as strategic (or threatening) as the other two European powers. Putin and Berlusconi vacationed together, spent birthdays together and bought each other expensive gifts. In 2011, when Berlusconi was on trial for sexual improprieties, Putin publically defended his friend, saying the allegations were "made out of envy." The Putin-Berlusconi friendship led to relationships between Russian and Italian energy companies, banks and military industrial projects. Most notable, Putin was able to use his relationship with Berlusconi to get Gazprom access to Italian state-linked energy giant ENI's assets throughout North Africa, particularly in Libya.



Putin's personal connections with Germany, France and Italy did not change with the leadership shifts in each country from 2005 to 2007, nor did they change when Putin left the presidential spotlight to become prime minister in 2008. Putin used the momentum built under the previous governments to forge relationships -- even if not as personal -- with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Nicolas Sarkozy and (for a time) Italy's then-Prime Minister Romano Prodi. Putin's circle of friends and associates helped him shape some of Russia's most important strategies in Europe: complicating NATO expansion, pushing Moscow's agenda with NATO, expanding military relationships and becoming capable of invading Georgia without European or NATO intervention. It is not that all of this was possible because of Putin's personal relationships with the leaders of Italy, France and Germany, but those connections facilitated many of the deals that made Russia's progress possible.



Changes Across Europe

As Putin returns to the presidency, he faces a very different Europe -- one in which nearly all of his close friends are out of power. As prime minister, Putin focused on Russia's internal issues while Europe became embroiled in a political and financial crisis that has affected the Continent as a whole. Europe is not as concerned as it once was with the wider world (including Russia). Instead, each state is focused on keeping itself -- and some form of the European alliance -- intact.



Voters have ejected two of the three Russian-friendly European governments during these crises. Berlusconi and his political machine were forced from power in favor of technocrat and now Prime Minister Mario Monti. Monti lacks the political mandate or the will to become involved in geopolitical alignments like a close relationship with Russia. France's Chirac has retired from politics, and Sarkozy was voted out of office the day before Putin was inaugurated. France's Hollande surrounds himself with politicians who have not been in government at any point when Putin was in charge in Russia. This leaves Merkel, whose ties with Putin are the weakest in the Russian leader's European circle. Furthermore, Merkel is concerned with holding Europe together, leaving little time or interest for Russia's plans for Europe.



Thus, Putin's tactic of using personal relationships to help strengthen Russia's position in Europe seems to be outdated. The French and Italian governments are still young, so Putin could try to build relationships with Hollande and Monti. But, like Germany, France and Italy are more interested in what is happening in Europe than in Russia.



This new attitude toward Russia already has surfaced in Rome. In the first talks between the new Italian government and the Russian government, Italian President Giorgio Napolitano made it clear that the Moscow-Rome relationship would undergo a "depersonalization." The first evidence of this was Italy's embrace of U.S. ballistic missile defense plans for Europe. Italy -- like France -- long supported Russia's position on missile defense in Europe. Although this did not prevent Washington from moving forward with its plans, it did create disagreements within NATO. Italy's shift toward unity with NATO and the United States comes just before what was to be a NATO-Russia summit in Chicago, but Russia has been disinvited.



The changes in Europe's leadership and focus come amid Russia's adjustments to other new dynamics in Europe. Before the Continent's financial and political crises, Russia had forged a new strategy for foreign policy regarding Europe in which strategic European partners -- especially Germany, France and Italy -- would invest heavily in Russia's economy and financial sector. With Europe nearly broke, however, this strategy has been cut back and could be abandoned altogether. Russia is proceeding with European partners on some projects, but Moscow must financially step up more than it anticipated for these projects to succeed. It is an expensive foreign policy choice.



Russia's main goal regarding Europe is to keep European powers divided while extracting what Moscow wants financially and technologically. The days have passed when Putin could call a friend in Europe to help with NATO or with technological deficiencies. Russia has to design a new strategy to deal with a very different Europe and adhere to its deeper imperatives rather than rely on personal and political relationships, which are fleeting compared to the forces of geopolitics.





--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Print

1383 249 2048 216 Reprinting or republication of this report on websites is authorized by prominently displaying the following sentence, including the hyperlink to Stratfor, at the beginning or end of the report.

"Putin's Evolving Strategy in Europe is republished with permission of Stratfor." .



Read more: Putin's Evolving Strategy in Europe
Stratfor

Mali: Islamic supremacists "getting more and more barbaric" as they impose Sharia

A very interesting post from www.jihadwatch.org   about terrorists in Mali. This follows this post about gas stations. This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran . For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read a very interesting book HERE.

Mali: Islamic supremacists "getting more and more barbaric" as they impose Sharia


Barbaric? You mean Sharia supremacists in Mali are savages? This "student named Oumar" must be a racist, greasy Islamophobe, right?



"Mali Islamists ‘getting more barbaric,’" by Serge Daniel in IOL News, October 18 (thanks to Twostellas):



The Islamists who have seized control of Mali's desert north are growing increasingly brutal as they impose sharia on the region, even as they violate the strict Muslim law themselves, say fleeing residents.

“They are really getting more and more barbaric. They kill, they rape, and no one does anything to stop them,” a student named Oumar told AFP after arriving in the capital Bamako on Wednesday on a bus from the north-eastern town of Gao.



“They forced my sister into marriage, then a month later her husband divorced her. These barbarians get married to have a good time and when they're done, they throw the woman away,” he added.



“How can a man of God have six wives?” he asked - two wives more than the number allowed by the Qur’an. According to Oumar, women who have fled forced marriages with Islamist fighters have said the men do not wear condoms, which he said worried him because they were likely to spread Aids through the region....





Six wives? Ah, clearly these are Misunderstanders of Islam! Unless, of course, two of them are "captives of the right hand" (cf. Qur'an 4:3) -- that is, Qur'an-sanctioned sex slaves.

Posted by Robert

Wednesday, October 24, 2012

Same-Sex Marriage: Does It Meet With God's Approval?

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/  about same sex marriage. This follows this post about commercialized holidays such as Halloween.This follows this post about a "ghost" scene in the Bible. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Same-Sex Marriage: Does It Meet With God's Approval?






article by Melvin Rhodes





The gay agenda is steadily gaining ground in Western nations, with same-sex marriage finding acceptance. But what does the Bible say—and why? And what's at the root of same-sex attraction?



The U.S. Supreme Court's June decision striking down state laws banning homosexual acts between consenting adults was the latest victory in the cultural war between those advocating full acceptance of homosexuality in public life and those opposed on various grounds.



It followed decisions announced earlier in the month from Britain that a law banning the promotion of homosexuality in schools would be repealed and a stunning announcement from Canada that an Ontario appeals court had ruled that refusing same-sex couples the rights of marriage was discriminatory.



A similar decision is now pending in the Massachusetts Supreme Court, with major implications for the other 49 American states —which are constitutionally obligated to recognize the actions of all other states. With two European countries already allowing it, and several others allowing civil unions, same-sex marriage is a major and growing issue.



Nor is this only a secular issue. In August the U.S.-based Episcopalian Church shocked many of its members by approving its first openly homosexual bishop and giving local dioceses the option of deciding whether to perform same-sex marriages.



How did marriage begin?

Marriage is a constant theme throughout the Bible, as we might expect it to be. After all, the Bible is largely about human relationships, and none is so fundamental as marriage.



At the beginning, when God created Adam, the first man, He said: "It is not good that man should be alone" (Genesis 2:18And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.



See All...). God created for him a female companion, Eve, meaning "life" or "living," for "she was the mother of all living" (Genesis 3:20And Adam called his wife's name Eve; because she was the mother of all living.



See All...).



God's plan for the male and female sexes is then clearly instituted: "Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and they shall become one flesh" (Genesis 2:24Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.



See All...). In joining them as man and wife, the Creator of mankind instituted marriage. In the next verse Adam and Eve are clearly described as a married couple: "And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed" (verse 25).



Thousands of years later we see the covenant relationship between God and the nation of Israel, whom He had chosen, likened to the marital relationship (Isaiah 54:5For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called.



See All...; Jeremiah 3:14Turn, O backsliding children, saith the LORD; for I am married unto you: and I will take you one of a city, and two of a family, and I will bring you to Zion:



See All...).



In the New Testament, Jesus Christ reinforces the special relationship between a husband and wife: "Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning ‘made them male and female,' and said, ‘For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh'? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate" (Matthew 19:4-6 [4] And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female,

[5] And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh?

[6] Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.





See All...).



He stated further: "Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so" (verse 8). Clearly, marriage between a husband and wife was intended to be for life.



Following the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, the apostle Paul wrote extensively on marriage. In his epistle to the Ephesians, chapter 5, he compares the marital union of a husband and wife to the relationship between Christ and the Church.



He writes: "For the husband is head of the wife, as also Christ is head of the church ... Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself for her ... that He might present her to Himself a glorious church ... So husbands ought to love their own wives ..." (verses 23-28).



Later we see, at the very close of the Bible, a time still ahead when Jesus Christ returns and marries His Bride, the Church (Revelation 19:7Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready.



See All...). In these scriptural references we see a totally committed relationship between Jesus Christ and His true followers, the Church.



The Western crisis in marriage

Today we live in an age in which commitment within marriage has become rare, especially in the richer Western world. For centuries the laws of Western nations relating to marriage were very strict. Divorce was not usually permitted.



In the last century, however, we have seen dramatic changes in laws relating to marriage. Among the most significant were the no-fault divorce laws passed in most of the Western democracies a little over 30 years ago. These laws contributed greatly to the trivialization of marriage, making it easier for a husband or wife to walk away from that commitment.



At the same time, the availability of the birth control pill made it quite acceptable for unmarried couples to live together, as supposedly there were now no negative consequences to sex outside of marriage. These major societal shifts further diminished the marital relationship even as they encouraged a vast rise in premarital sex and adultery.



In turn, these were—and still are—promoted as "alternative lifestyles," with mass media constantly depicting temporary relationships without commitment as fun and faithful marriage as tedious. The tragic result was an explosion of terrible consequences—broken homes, abandoned children, depression, crime, substance abuse and sexually transmitted diseases that remain with us today.



Another major shift in sexual attitudes

In the "anything goes" atmosphere of the 1960s and 70s, it was only a matter of time before other lifestyles would become accepted.



Before 1973 American psychiatrists considered same-sex attraction (homosexuality) as abnormal behavior and offered treatment accordingly. But a decision that year reversed this long-held stand. No longer was same-sex attraction classified as abnormal.



Similar decisions had already been made in other Western nations. In a span of 30 years, people practicing homosexual acts would go from being considered criminals by society to being accepted, if not fully embraced, by much of the heterosexual community.



In recent years same-sex couples have increasingly pressed for the legal option of entering a full marital union. Two European countries, Belgium and the Netherlands, already have laws permitting such marriages. Several other European countries allow civil unions, which give same-sex couples the same rights as heterosexual couples without a legal marriage. The American state of Vermont also permits same-sex civil unions.



Following the June Ontario appeals court decision that ruled in favor of same-sex unions being equal to heterosexual unions, the Canadian government announced that it would legislate same-sex marriages into law in the near future. In the United States, Massachusetts appears likely to make a similar decision in favor of same-sex marriages. It seems only a matter of time before the whole country follows suit.



It should be noted that, in the United States at least, it is the courts that have made these changes possible rather than the voters, as polls consistently show that a majority of Americans do not support same-sex marriage. Federal and state lawmakers wouldn't risk the ire of voters on this issue, and even Canada is simply following a decision of the court.



As with so many of the liberal social reforms of the last four decades, the courts have played a leading role in changing society, with activist judges sometimes arbitrarily creating new rights and law where none were previously spelled out.



While many on both sides of the argument will claim that this is a worldwide issue, the fact remains that this is essentially a Western phenomenon, thereby further widening the gap between the rich Western democracies and the poorer nations.



The fault lines are also spreading throughout the Western religious world, with major international church denominations facing increasing division over this issue and that of the ordination of homosexual clergy.



Does the Bible offer guidance?

Why doesn't the Bible mention same-sex marriages? The answer is simple—no such institution existed when it was written! No matter how bad some of the societies described in the Bible were, they never went so far as to have same-sex marriages.



Make no mistake, the Word of God approves only one sexual relationship: that between a husband and wife within marriage. You can search the Scriptures from Genesis to Revelation looking for the existence or approval of such alternative relationships as living together and same-sex marriage, but there is none. Certainly there are accounts of fornication, adultery and same-sex relationships, but they are always in the context of sin, which is the breaking of God's law (1 John 3:4Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.



See All...).



And yes, some of God's most faithful servants committed sins in the sexual area—and the Bible duly records the painful consequences their actions had on them and others. These servants of God allowed themselves to be unduly influenced by the society around them, just as Christians can be today.



So why does our Creator forbid all sexual relationships outside of marriage? Does He not want us to have what some consider to be fun? Does God not want those who are attracted to the same sex to have the same happiness, commitment and sense of fulfillment that is achievable within a committed, lifelong, heterosexual marriage?



In John 10:10The thief cometh not, but for to steal, and to kill, and to destroy: I am come that they might have life, and that they might have it more abundantly.



See All... Jesus Christ states, "I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly." God wants us to be happy, to live fulfilled and joyful lives.



That is precisely why He gave us the Ten Commandments, some of which deal with the family relationship. It is also part of the reason He instituted marriage. Within the framework of a stable, committed marriage, people can find a sense of loving security. Children especially need this when they are brought into the world.



So why can't gay couples have it too? Some argue that they also deserve the happiness of a stable and committed marriage. And in this age of AIDS and many other terrible diseases, shouldn't we encourage same-sex partners to remain faithful to one another, just as we do heterosexual couples through the institution of marriage?



Sex and the Bible

In the Bible, marriage is always between a husband and wife. There are no scriptural accounts of same-sex marriages, even though homosexual relationships were common and sometimes encouraged in the Greco-Roman world of early New Testament times (although an exclusively homosexual orientation was considered an aberration even in that society, which understood the necessity of heterosexual marriage for the production and raising of children).



Pagan gentile society notwithstanding, both the Old and New Testaments of the Bible clearly condemn sexual acts between members of the same sex. "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination," says Leviticus 18:22Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination.



See All....



Why does the Bible forbid such behavior? God created the first two human beings male and female, bound them as husband and wife in a sexual union and instructed them to have children (Genesis 2:24-25 [24] Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.

[25] And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.





See All...; 1:28). The biblical account of our first human parents makes it clear that God ordained the marriage of Adam and Eve, creating the family union of a man and a woman.



God designed this union to stabilize and protect male-female and parent-child relationships with love and security. It was also designed to serve as a pattern or model of the relationship God wants to have with His people (Ephesians 5:23-33 [23] For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.

[24] Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.

[25] Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;

[26] That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

[27] That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish.

[28] So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.

[29] For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church:

[30] For we are members of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones.

[31] For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they two shall be one flesh.

[32] This is a great mystery: but I speak concerning Christ and the church.

[33] Nevertheless let every one of you in particular so love his wife even as himself; and the wife see that she reverence her husband.





See All...).



There is no question that male-female attraction is God's intended design. Homosexuality, on the other hand, is a developmental disorder that leads to actions and lifestyles diametrically opposite to the male-female design.



When Adam and Eve rejected God's instructions and determined to do things their own way, they set humanity on a course that every human being since has chosen to follow. Consequently, as a result of man's rejection of God, men and women are experiencing an array of confused or conflicted interpersonal relationships—including homosexuality. Although homosexuality may feel "natural" to people who have same-sex attraction, it in fact reflects a yearning that God intended to be met within the natural male-female family context, with parents providing the proper natural affection and approval their children need.



Man and woman: A perfect creation

When God created Adam and Eve, "they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed" (Genesis 2:25And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.



See All...). Additionally, we read that "God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good" (Genesis 1:31And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.



See All...).



This tells us that God's creation was "very good," including His creation of the first man and the first woman, Adam and Eve. Even their naked bodies were physically perfect, created differently, but also perfectly, to complement each other and to bring additional human beings into the world, in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-28 [26] And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

[27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

[28] And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.





See All...). Adam was pleased with his new companion, to whom he remained married for a very long time, until death. He was clearly attracted to her—they gave birth to many children.



What we learn from these passages is that a man should naturally be attracted to the female body. As Adam and Eve were the only two people living at this time, they could walk around unclothed without any sense of shame or embarrassment.



God intended men to be attracted to women, and vice versa. When a man is not attracted to women, something has gone wrong in the natural development of his mind, as this is not the way God intended things to be.



Causes of same-sex attraction

It is common today for men who consider themselves gay to say that they were born that way, but there is no convincing evidence for this. Homosexuality is not caused by a "gay gene," or identical twins would always both be gay—and they usually aren't.



What is the truth? As most homosexual males and some lesbians can only remember same-sex attractions, even when very young, we can conclude that their early development was affected in some way that led to a different sexual orientation.



Research has shown that the basic common cause of homosexuality, whether male or female, is an emotional detachment from the parent of the same sex (see interview with Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, page 20). This causes insecurity about the child's own masculinity (or femininity) and makes the forming of friendship bonds with those of the same sex much more difficult, frequently leading to painful rejection. Often added to this in the case of boys is a mother who overly compensates, giving the son too much female affection and fawning over in the early stages of his life.



Deprived of normal male love and affection, the boy starts out in life with a desperate longing for what is a legitimate unmet need. The inevitable attraction to the same sex in itself is not a sin. Later on, however, that need often becomes sexualized—leading to sinful homosexual acts with other boys and men. At the same time, the smothering love and affection he received from his mother often will have contributed to a rejection of women as a source of love.



This developmental tragedy often takes place within the first two or three years of childhood. Typically, in the first year, a baby bonds with the mother as she gives birth to the child and then breastfeeds and generally nurtures him. After the child is weaned, the father must play a more prominent role.



This is the time when sexual identity is formed. If the father is absent, or unwilling or unable to fulfill his role, then the child will feel rejection—and the basis on which homosexual feelings can develop will have been laid.



Note the importance of perception—either of the lack of loving affection or of rejection. In some cases a father truly may be affectionate and loving to his son, but the boy may not perceive it and instead develops feelings of rejection.



Or, in a family of several boys where the father is so busy with work or other things that he fails to spend any time with them, all are neglected, but only one may turn out to have homosexual tendencies. This is the one who perceived rejection, perhaps because he was more sensitive than the others.



Struggle for those dealing with same-sex attraction

Sadly, these tendencies and unmet needs remain. Because this lack becomes a part of one's mental and emotional makeup at such an early age, it should be understood that exclusively same-sex attraction is seldom a voluntary, conscious choice.



Homosexual acts, however, just like heterosexual acts, are a voluntary choice. While the attraction may be there in a way that is not a matter of choice, it is one's choice to dwell on or entertain thoughts that can lead to sin. Jesus Christ pointed out that mentally entertaining thoughts of illicit sexual acts is itself a sin (Matthew 5:27-28 [27] Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery:

[28] But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.





See All...).



Paul urged Christians to be aware of the spiritual struggles in which all of us are engaged, emphasizing our need to discipline our thoughts and bring "every thought into captivity" (2 Corinthians 10:4-5 [4] (For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;)

[5] Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ;





See All...). James, Jesus' half-brother, wrote that mentally dwelling on temptations typically leads us into lust and sin, so we must short-circuit the process before sin results (James 1:14-15 [14] But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.

[15] Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.





See All...; compare 4:8).



Some give in to their same-sex attraction later on in life and enter the gay lifestyle. Others, often due to religious beliefs, try to fight their desires and overcome them. These people are often called strugglers, reflecting the reality that it is a lifetime struggle. Another term increasingly used is healers, recognizing that they are seeking emotional healing for their condition. A combination of both terms (struggler-healer) is appropriate.



Many people with same-sex attraction experience social isolation and emotional pain as they struggle to cope with their lives. Some endure a struggle between coping with their homosexuality and remaining faithful to their religious beliefs. For many, it is a lonely, secret struggle that can sometimes involve excruciating pain.



Some give in to their same-sex attraction and enter the gay lifestyle. Others, in spite of their pain, continue to struggle, often in isolation, to remain faithful to their religious beliefs. In recent years, a number of social and religious organizations have recognized the need to help and support these individuals who struggle to be faithful to their religious convictions, although the work of these organizations has often been viewed as controversial.



This is where churches and individual Christians can help. Those who struggle with same-sex attraction not only battle with their unnatural sexual desires every day of their lives, they also have to do so in secret. Sometimes they seek help from others. Typically, they will either go to their church pastor or priest, seek psychological help or talk to a close friend. All three choices are problematic. Seeking help from the wrong person can lead to even greater withdrawal and a deepening fear of sharing with anyone.



Some church pastors may overreact when the problem of same-sex attraction is brought to them. This can push the person seeking and needing help into further isolation, even to the point of feeling rejected by God. Some people have made things worse by betraying the confidence of the individual out of misguided concern for others in the congregation.



Seeking professional psychiatric help can also be a problem for struggler-healers. Since the American Psychiatric Association's change of policy on homosexuality 30 years ago, most of those seeking help today will not be encouraged to change, but rather to reaffirm their same-sex feelings and embrace the gay lifestyle.



Sharing the problem with a friend can often end a friendship, as most men cannot handle a confession of homosexual feelings. Another obvious complication is the possibility of physical feelings developing toward the friend. While this is a problem that will need to be resolved, it should not rule out helping someone struggling with same-sex attraction.



Since the root cause of such attraction is rejection causing emotional detachment, someone struggling with this problem will find further rejection devastating. Not having had a close, loving relationship with the father in early childhood, there is a great need for such a relationship with another male. This need should be met in a nonsexual relationship with a heterosexual male who wants to help.



The apostle James wrote: "Confess your trespasses to one another, and pray for one another, that you may be healed. The effective, fervent prayer of a righteous man avails much" (James 5:16Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed. The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.



See All...). It should be possible for Christians to share their problems with other Christians, expecting help and encouragement in return, even when their problem is one of unresolved homosexual desires and feelings.



Sadly, most people who struggle with this problem will say that the response to sharing is usually negative. They soon learn to shut up and keep their problem a secret. Many, through discouragement, have even given up on trying to live God's way and have sought solace and acceptance in the gay community.



However, this is never the answer for a Christian. Christians realize that God gave us His laws because He cares for us. Certain sexual relationships are forbidden because they can never satisfy and lead to great emotional pain from which God wants to spare us.



The apostle Paul wrote: "Flee sexual immorality. Every sin that a man does is outside the body, but he who commits sexual immorality sins against his own body" (1 Corinthians 6:18Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body.



See All...). This is not just a warning against sexually transmitted diseases. It is also a warning against all the emotional damage that results from unfulfilling relationships based on sex, whether heterosexual or homosexual. Sadly, this lack of fulfillment for homosexuals often leads them into more and more sin, in a desperate and futile attempt to find the love they never thought or felt they received as a child.



Encouraging lessons from ancient Corinth

We learn from the apostle Paul's letters, preserved in the New Testament, that some people in the Corinthian church had come out of this homosexual lifestyle to become truly converted Christians.



Corinth was a port city in which all kinds of sexual and other vices were all too common, and notice that Paul warns the Church members there against slipping into such sins. "Do not be deceived," he wrote. "Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites ... will inherit the kingdom of God" (1 Corinthians 6:9-10 [9] Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind,

[10] Nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God.





See All...). The separate references to "homosexuals" and "sodomites" in Greek refers to different roles taken in homosexual couples.



We should note that in Paul's writings here, he condemns not only homosexual acts, but fornication and adultery as well. Too many Christians are quick to turn a blind eye to their own heterosexual sins while quickly condemning homosexual acts on the part of others.



It cannot be emphasized enough: All sexual acts outside of a biblically sanctioned marriage are a sin. The apostle James put it well when he wrote, "For whoever shall keep the whole law, and yet stumble in one point, he is guilty of all" (James 2:10For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.



See All...). So gay-bashing—attacking gays or singling out homosexual behavior as the worst sin—is unjustified.



In the following verse of 1 Corinthians 6, those struggling with same-sex attraction can read some very encouraging words from Paul: "And such were some of you," he notes. "But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (verse 11).



"And such were some of you" is in the past tense. The implication of this is clear: There were people in this Greek-speaking congregation, in a part of the world where homosexual acts were typically considered normal, who came out of their homosexual practices upon repentance and were able to overcome their desires.



What happens when society rejects God?

Although homosexuality is common to all cultures, it is in the Western democracies that the gay movement is most vocal. This was not the case even 50 years ago. This could mean that there are more people with homosexual leanings today than there were then, although militant gays would argue that it simply reflects progress made by them in gaining societal acceptance.



The truth, however, is that the greater numbers can easily be explained by the fact that the traditional family has progressively broken down in the last four decades with easier divorce and greater promiscuity. Absent or distant fathers are more common now than ever before, creating conditions in which the factors that may lead to homosexuality can flourish.



Writing to the church in Rome, Paul wrote a passage of Scripture that is quite applicable today. He showed a certain progression that takes place in human thinking that flows from man's rejection of God.



"... Although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened. Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things. Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves ...



"For this reason God gave them up to vile passions. For even their women exchanged the natural use for what is against nature. Likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust for one another, men with men committing what is shameful, and receiving in themselves the penalty of their error which was due. And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind, to do those things which are not fitting" (Romans 1:21-28 [21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

[21] Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.

[22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

[22] Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

[23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

[23] And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.

[24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

[24] Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves:

[25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

[25] Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.

[26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

[26] For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature:

[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

[27] And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet.

[28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

[28] And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;





See All...).



What this passage shows is that man progressively moves farther and farther away from God's way of thinking when he rejects the Bible. Our societies testify to this fact. Since the theory of evolution gained popularity a century and a half ago, Western nations have progressively distanced themselves from God. Now the thinking of most people is warped, not based on and often not even taking into consideration godly values or biblical teaching.



The theory of evolution—and its attendant arguments that there is no such thing as a Creator and that the Bible is merely a collection of myths—has affected man's thinking to the point of acceptance of gay marriage. It has taken a long time, yes, but the link is there. When people believe that human beings are nothing more than highly evolved animals, there is no basis for saying "no" to same-sex marriage—and many other things as well.



When God's Word has been rejected by government and banished from schools and public life, anything is acceptable. After gay marriage, can we expect to see pressure to legalize group marriage, incest and pedophilia? After all, the same rationale the U.S. Supreme Court used in striking down state laws against sodomy also applies to these sins.



Collectively, Western society is heading down the same road as ancient Sodom and Gomorrah, two cities that God destroyed for their varied sins—one of which was homosexuality, Sodom giving its name to sodomy. Yet individually, everyone has the opportunity to repent and come out of this society's sliding standards and morals, to embrace God's way and fight, with His help, against any tendencies that do not conform to His law. This is the only way to true happiness and fulfillment.

.

The Battle Plan To Defeat Amnesty and Illegal Immigrants in the 2012 Elections

A very interesting post from www.Alipac.US about fighting for immigration enforcement during this election cycle. This follows this post about the Border Patrol being cut.  This follows this post about how to Report Illegal Immigrants! For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and HERE and you can read a very interesting book HERE.

Our Battle Plan To Defeat Amnesty and Illegal Immigrants in the 2012 Elections


by

ALIPAC

 Friends of ALIPAC,



We are in emergency mode and will stay in this mode through the elections or until we crash, it is up to you. Please read every detail of our battle plan below divided into the sections of  CAMPAIGNS, VOLUNTEERS, and CIVIL UNREST THREATS.



We are not going down without a fight, and we are still in position where we can defeat Amnesty for illegal aliens which will be decided on Election Day 2012, about 18 days from now.



If you are receiving our messages, we need you on board with our political battle plans.



CAMPAIGNS

We must work together to bring the attention level to the Congressional races. While we are in little position to affect the Presidential race more than we already have through our public education campaigns about Amnesty Gate, Fast and Furious, and other Obama scandals, we can make the difference in Congressional battles.



Getting our activists focused on the Congressional races is vital to defeating Amnesty for illegals in the elections.



If you have not already volunteered for or donated to the nearest endorsed ALIPAC candidate, please review the list and deploy soon.



ALIPAC Candidates

http://www.alipac.us/campaign/



If you are in Montana or Maryland, critical battles that will affect what happens with the illegal immigration invasion in your state and many others need to be a high priority. Please follow our instructions at this link and join the small army of volunteers fighting for our cause intensely. We need to win in Montana and Maryland in 18 days and right now that is unlikely to happen unless more people focus and get involved.



Montana and Maryland

http://www.alipac.us/f8/important-il...on-day-265156/



VOLUNTEERS

If you are already volunteering on one of our endorsed campaigns, please consider sending occasional email reports to WilliamG@alipac.us



Hearing from our national network of volunteers helps us to help others. How is your campaign going? What do they have you working on? How do you feel about your candidate's chances of winning? Is the district redrawn in a way to harm our candidate's chances? Are you experiencing security threats such as sign damage, property damage, online threats, or menacing behavior from illegal alien or Obama supporters?



ALIPAC activists will be ready to assist you by phone, email, or in our online forums 24/7 for the next 18 days. Please call on us for help and guidance, and please send us reports of your operational status during the 2012 campaign volunteer deployment.



CIVIL UNREST THREATS

By now many of you have read the reports of threats by Obama supporters to riot if Obama loses, of the damaged campaign offices, and of the destroyed and desecrated campaign signs. We plan to use our ALIPAC network and resources to be the first to detect any civil unrest involving the elections. We will send you more details and activist instructions soon detailing how you can be the first to know and receive accurate information during numerous security scenarios.



ALIPAC has been the first to deliver important news to you many times. We can work together with our national network to make sure you receive any information you need to protect your families and campaigns from potential problems.



Let's all pull together and get our candidates and ALIPAC the support we need to win against illegal immigration in the 2012 elections!





William Gheen and The ALIPAC Team





PS: We have currently raised $7,000 of the $30,000 we need to continue operations. Please take a few moments to chip in now via...

http://www.alipac.us/donations/



Saudi-inspired Muslim writer blames Jews for the violence in Islamic theology

A very interesting post from www.jihadwatch.org  about Muslim hate speech against Jews. This follows this post about the second class status of non-Muslims in Saudi Arabia (affirmative action for non-Muslims there anyone?).  This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran . For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read a very interesting book HERE.

Muslim writer blames Jews for the violence in Islamic theology


Who else? Murad Ali Baig knows that the Jews are, according to the Qur'an, the worst enemies of the Muslims (cf. 5:82). Of course, the Jews might have put that passage in as well. You never know what those Zionist black arts can accomplish!



"The burden of history," by Murad Ali Baig in the Hindustan Times, October 21 (thanks to all who sent this in):



On October 9, Malala Yusufzai, 14, was shot by the Taliban for promoting education among girls. On September 9, the US ambassador to Libya was killed by extremists protesting against a film that allegedly insulted the Prophet. Such acts of crime are not allowed in the Koran or Hadis, the most-sacred sources of Islamic law. Both say little on blasphemy, heresy or sacrilege, issues that seem to upset Muslims today. Naturally, very few dare to question the scriptural authority when Muslim clerics themselves pronounce the death sentences. But such actions are against the wishes of the Prophet who said: "… anyone who sets another… even an ant… on fire commits the greatest sin and is destined to the fires of Hell".

The Koran does not contain a legal code and most of the legal injunctions were to regularise pre-Islamic tribal customs. After the death of Muhammad in 632 CE, the Islamic polity changed fundamentally: the civil and religious order expanded beyond Arabia to create a huge Arab-Islamic imperial caliphate.



As Islam became an urban movement, it became difficult for the caliphs to administer their complex, multi-cultural realms without mosques, centres of learning, bureaucracies and other institutions essential for governance. Islamic law had to evolve continuously with changing social and economic pressures during the period of the Ummayids, Abbasids, the Caliphs of Cordoba, the Seljuks and Turks and finally during the years of decline after the rise of the European nations.



The main source of Islamic authority was the Koran and Hadis but many new laws were derived from the Jewish Torah, which was later included in the 104 holy books of Islam. One of its five books is the Book of Leviticus that covers Jewish law.



This book, belonging to an era when small bands of Jews were oppressed, lists all 'The Lord's' laws that are harsh and has many prohibitions concerning circumcision, food, suppression of women and lists draconian punishments like death by stoning, burning, strangulation and beheading for a long list of offences, including adultery, worshipping other gods, blasphemy, witchcraft, homosexuality, bestiality, etc.



By contrast to Yahweh, the angry god of the Jews, the Allah of Muhammad was a merciful god. Some scholars believe that many Jews who had converted to the triumphant Islam were probably responsible for fusing Jewish laws into the evolving Islamic tradition after the 10th century.





If this were remotely true and not just churned out to throw sand in the eyes of the kuffar, then there would be a movement within Islam to jettison the death penalty for adultery, apostasy, etc. But there isn't.



This may explain why the laws of the Prophet and the laws of the later Islamic clerics are different. Muhammad had, for instance, prescribed 100 lashes for a woman who committed adultery, which was much milder than stoning her to death as was the later practice.

Actually, numerous hadiths depict Muhammad enjoining stoning. Here are a few. The caliph Umar, according to Islamic tradition one of Muhammad's closest companions, even maintained that it was originally in the Qur'an:



'Umar said, "I am afraid that after a long time has passed, people may say, "We do not find the Verses of the Rajam (stoning to death) in the Holy Book," and consequently they may go astray by leaving an obligation that Allah has revealed. Lo! I confirm that the penalty of Rajam be inflicted on him who commits illegal sexual intercourse, if he is already married and the crime is proved by witnesses or pregnancy or confession." Sufyan added, "I have memorized this narration in this way." 'Umar added, "Surely Allah's Apostle carried out the penalty of Rajam, and so did we after him." (Bukhari, vol. 8, bk. 82, no. 816)

"Allah's Apostle" is, of course, Muhammad, who did indeed carry out stonings. Here is the hadith in which he challenges the rabbis about stoning, and in which there is amidst the barbarism and brutality a final act of love and compassion:



The Jews came to Allah's Apostle and told him that a man and a woman from amongst them had committed illegal sexual intercourse. Allah's Apostle said to them, "What do you find in the Torah (old Testament) about the legal punishment of Ar-Rajm (stoning)?" They replied, (But) we announce their crime and lash them." Abdullah bin Salam said, "You are telling a lie; Torah contains the order of Rajm." They brought and opened the Torah and one of them solaced his hand on the Verse of Rajm and read the verses preceding and following it. Abdullah bin Salam said to him, "Lift your hand." When he lifted his hand, the Verse of Rajm was written there. They said, "Muhammad has told the truth; the Torah has the Verse of Rajm. The Prophet then gave the order that both of them should be stoned to death. ('Abdullah bin 'Umar said, "I saw the man leaning over the woman to shelter her from the stones." (Bukhari, vol. 4, bk. 56, no. 829)

Even the monkeys practiced stoning, according to another hadith:



During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them. (Bukhari, vol. 5, bk. 58, no. 188)

Muhammad's example is, of course, normative for Islamic behavior, since "verily in the messenger of Allah ye have a good example for him who looketh unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembereth Allah much" (Qur'an 33:21).



The article goes on:



Similarly, the Jewish laws of that time regarding blasphemy, heresy and apostasy, not found in the Koran, are now pronounced even by small town clerics. The bigoted mullahs do not also seem to understand that these ancient laws can be misused by the enemies of Islam to cause death and disturbance.

These are not Jewish laws. They are Islamic laws rooted in hadiths that Muslim scholars consider authentic.



It is now necessary to educate the Muslims, who memorise the Koran in Arabic (a language they do not understand) making them vulnerable to bigots who give their own distorted interpretations. For peace, leading Islamic scholars must use the media to explain the words of the Prophet and not the draconian injunctions of a repressive outdated law. Posted by Robert

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Commercialized Holidays, Is There an Alternative?

An interesting article from http://www.ucg.org/  about commercialized holidays such as Halloween. This follows this post about Libya.   This follows this post about a "ghost" scene in the Bible. For a free magazine subscription or to get this book for free click HERE! or call 1-888-886-8632.

Commercialized Holidays, Is There an Alternative?


A commentary by Don Hooser




We sincerely hope that in the very near future you and your children will learn more about God's Holy Days and begin observing them rather than Halloween and other days of pagan origin that are of no value for teaching spiritual truths.



The claim is now circulating that money spent on observing Halloween is second only to that spent on celebrating Christmas.



Actually, all popular holidays are now commercialized. Money is driving this artificial popularity . Without holiday advertising, retail profits would plummet.



But as it is, lots of people spend lots of money on holidays.



For Halloween, mega-bucks are spent on candy, costumes, carnivals, decorations, booze and extravagant high-tech haunted houses.



MSN Money reports (9/15/09), "Halloween is now, behind Christmas, the second biggest retail holiday in America. Americans are expected to spend over $7 billion this year on costumes, candy, attending parties and much more. Over the past three years, the popularity of Halloween has tripled …"



Of all the holidays in the Western world, Halloween —a holiday that celebrates nothing positive or noble—is having the greatest increase in popularity!



Surge in adult partying and masquerading!

Adult partying on Halloween has been rapidly increasing since the 1980's.



Halloween is now the third biggest adult party day of the year—behind only New Year's Eve and Super Bowl Sunday. Money spent on adult costumes may now be surpassing money spent on children's costumes!



For decades, adult partying on Halloween has been popular among those who actively subscribe to in the gay lifestyle. One participant, in an online article titled "Halloween: The Great Gay Holiday" says "Halloween's appeal to the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered communities … has a lot to do with … our propensity for cross-dressing and gender-bending… and our special capacity to have fun. [We] cherish it…" (posted October 27, 2008, The Bilerico Project).



The origin of Halloween

The ancient Celts regarded November 1 as the start of a new year, also as an annual holiday called Samhain.



October 31 was New Year's Eve! That night was considered the night of the dead, when spirits of the wicked dead were believed to haunt the living. People would leave offerings of food and drink at their front doors to appease the unfriendly ghosts and demons. So the origin of "trick or treat" is the pagan belief that evil spirits had the equivalent of a modern protection racket—"you give food or we break your leg!"



Church leaders adopt pagan practices

To Christianize the pagans Roman Christianity took the easy approach of relabeling pagan days and practices! They reasoned that the converts could continue observing their old ways if they used them to honor the God of the Bible. That is how many pagan days and practices acquired Christian labels!



And it is how the pagan festival Samhain came be relabeled as All Saints Day or All Hallows Day. Thus, the night before became All Hallows Even , later contracted to Hallowe'en —and is now just Halloween. Its purpose was to placate the not-so-hallowed spirits—the demonic or evil spirits. That is why a witch's costume is so popular for Halloween evening.



Does it matter to God?

To those who don't consider what God thinks, the origins of Halloween would probably seem irrelevant. What would matter most to them is, "Is it fun?"



But for those who believe in God's Word it's a different story! The Bible says specifically that God detests pagan religious customs (Galatians 4:8-10 [8] Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.

[9] But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

[10] Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.





See All...).



According to the Bible our ultimate destiny depends on pleasing God. And the only real authority on what pleases God is the Bible.



God's Holy Days rather than unholy holidays

Four of God's festivals that God originally gave Old Testament Israel and were kept by Jesus Christ, Paul and the early Church occur in the fall.



These special festivals that have been observed by God's people down through the ages—including members of the United Church of God—are the Feast of Trumpets , the Day of Atonement , the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day .



God designated these deeply meaningful days to teach important truths about His great master plan as well as for worshipping and enjoying fellowship and wholesome activities with other likeminded believers.



The Day of Atonement pictures, among other things, the momentous time when Christ will remove the worldwide influence of the real evil spirits —Satan and the demons (Revelation 12:9And the great dragon was cast out, that old serpent, called the Devil, and Satan, which deceiveth the whole world: he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him.



See All...; 18:2; 20:1-3).



We sincerely hope that in the very near future you and your children will learn more about God's Holy Days and begin observing them rather than Halloween and other days of pagan origin that are of no value for teaching spiritual truths.



To get started in that learning process, simply request, download or read online our free, highly informative booklets: Holiday or Holy Days: Does It Matter Which Days We Observe? and Is There Really a Devil?

.

Is Your Gas Station Funding Hezbollah Via Tax Fraud? Convicted MI Station Owner Cousin of Hezbo Chief Nasrallah

A very interesting post from www.debbieschlussel.com about gas stations. This follows this post about a terrorist plot in New York against the Federal Reserve Bank.  This follows this article about American energy independence and preventing money from going to hostile countries such as Iran . For more that you can do to get involved click HERE and read a very interesting book HERE.

Is Your Gas Station Funding Hezbollah Via Tax Fraud? Convicted MI Station Owner Cousin of Hezbo Chief Nasrallah


By Debbie Schlussel



Several years ago, I told you about the Safiedine family (also spelled Safieddine). Shi’ite Muslims from Lebanon, they own gas stations throughout the Detroit area and are related to Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah. They are also related to Hachem Safieddine, who is Iran’s designated successor to Nasrallah and currently heads Hezbollah’s seven-member governing council, the Shurah Al-Karar. This is one of the many reasons I tell readers not to buy gas at Muslim-owned gas stations. You don’t know where the Safiedines are sending their money and you wouldn’t want to support proud relatives of Hezbollah’s leadership, would you? Yesterday, Elsayed Kazem “Tom” Safiedine, one of the owners of many of those gas stations, was sentenced to 21 months in prison for his second tax fraud incident. It’s a light sentence, given that the man did this before in the 1980s.



Hezbollah’s Girlieman Leader Hassan Nasrallah is Related to Michigan Gas Station Tax Defrauder



Nasrallah Girlie Man by (David Lunde/Lundesigns)



Safiedine defrauded the federal government of more than $1 million, by concealing $845,000 in income from Sunoco and $175,000 from a sale of a gas station. It appears, though, that the feds, failed to take into account, Safiedine’s prior similar tax fraud from the 1980s, when he spelled his first name “Kaszam” (Muslims spell their names in several ways to evade U.S. law enforcement authorities–and clearly it worked here).  In that case, in the mid-1980s, Safiedine was convicted of seven counts of tax fraud for under-reporting income at three of his gas stations. He was sentenced to five years probation (11 months of it in jail) at the time, but had the chutzpah to appeal it (and lost). The sentencing memorandum filed by the IRS in his latest conviction, requesting 33 months of imprisonment, failed to mention that. As I noted, Federal Judge Patrick Duggan, yesterday, sentenced Safiedine to just 21 months in the big house.



The amount of money Safiedine defrauded from the government is unknown. This is only what he was actually caught doing. How much money did he siphon off to his relatives in Hezbollah? Of course, Safiedine’s close connections to the top leadership in Hezbollah weren’t even mentioned by the feds. Also of note, Safiedine’s relative, Yousef Safiedine, was charged in 2006 with tax fraud for under-reporting tens of thousands of dollars of rental income, so it runs in the family. But Yousef Safiedine managed to get his indictment dropped by pleading mental illness, with government acquiescence. So mentally ill, yet so cunning. Hezbollah members and their relatives aren’t mentally ill at all. They know exactly what they are doing. How sad that not all of us succeed in figuring that out, especially those in authority. One other thing: another relative, Jim Safiedine, who owns Safiedine Oil and a number of other Michigan gas stations, is a major donor to Michigan Republican Congresswoman Candice Miller. Alhamdillullah [praise allah].



More:



U.S. District Judge Patrick J. Duggan sentenced Elsayed Kazem “Tom” Safiedine to 21 months in prison and Mary Fawaz to 12 months and one day in prison for tax fraud, the Justice Department and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) announced today. Safiedine and Fawaz were convicted by a Detroit jury of conspiring to defraud the United States by impeding and impairing the lawful functions of the IRS.


According to evidence at trial, Safiedine was an officer and member of multiple business entities that operated and leased gasoline stations in the Detroit area. Fawaz was an officer of JSC Corporation, a business operated by Safiendine, and also served as a bookkeeper and office manager for several of Safiedine’s businesses. The evidence established that from 1998 through 2001, Safiedine and Fawaz arranged for third parties to negotiate checks from Sunoco Incorporated made payable to JSC Corporation. The checks from Sunoco, which totaled $845,000, were not properly reported to the accountant for JSC Corporation and as a result, were not included as income on JSC’s corporate tax returns filed with the IRS.



Further evidence presented revealed that Safiedine and Fawaz participated in the sale of a gasoline station owned by one of Safiedine’s businesses, MTK & KLC Partnership, during which Safiedine and Fawaz advised the accountant for MTK & KLC that the gas station sold for $175,000 less than its actual sale price, thus resulting in an understatement of income on the MTK & KLC partnership income tax return.



Is your gas station funding Hezbollah? If you don’t know who owns the gas station, you don’t know where the profits from the pump are going. And odds are good it’s not going to a good place.



Know who owns the gas pump.