The Bigger Picture

    From time to time we face dilemmas and we have to make decisions that aren't easy to make. Right now, in History, we are going through one of those times. We, who live in America, are getting ready for a big election in the fall. There are two men who are running for the office of president, and only one of them will win. These two men represent two different ways of thinking. One is called 'Conservative' and the other is 'Liberal'.
   But if it were just a matter of either voting conservative or liberal, there wouldn't be any problem, because all the people who are conservative will vote for the conservative guy, and the liberals will vote for the liberal guy. But there is a problem that goes deeper than that. You see, the conservative guy has a lot of strikes against him. First, he is a Mormon. In Biblical Christianity, we learn how to defend the faith. We learn what the Bible says about such issues and salvation and the deity of Christ. And we know that Mormons do not see the Bible the way we do. They have a different religion altogether. Our conservative candidate may be weak in some areas, as far as the presidency is concerned. Also, a strike against him is that, although he is pro-life, he will allow for a woman who has been raped to have the option of abortion. The bottom line is, our conservative candidate has some flaws in him.
  I don't have to go into much detail about the liberal candidate who is rerunning for the office of President. This man has continually been trying to bring our country down, so it is no longer a #1 nation. He is trying to weaken the power of our country by making our defense reduce its weapons. He wants to tax the rich people in America in order for them to pay for the damages done by colonization. That is one reason why he will not open the oil available to us, but will go down to South America and use its oil. We owe money to all these other countries because we have stolen through them through colonization. One of the biggest goals our current president has is to cause our economy to collapse. He wants America to be in slavery of other nations. We can see his socialistic heart as he carries out his plans throughout the past four years in office. Anyone with any kind of intelligence and foresight will be able to see that this man is trouble for our country.
  Now we have to pick which man we want for president the next four years. We don't have the option of filling someone's name in the blank and expecting that person to win over the opposing candidate. So, the questions are; Is it right to vote for a person who has flaws, some of them sinful? Does voting for such a person mean that I am condoning or endorsing sin? Is there such a thing as a candidate who is morally flawless? What will happen if I don't vote? What does the Bible say about voting?
   I will try to answer the last question first. Does the Bible talk about voting? Let's look at that and see. In the days of the Bible, the government was set up in such a way that people did not vote for their leader. Kings and Emperors inherited the throne and no one had a say about who they wanted (or didn't want) in. But there were fights and murders over the throne. So, people in the Bible days didn't elect people into office. But the Bible talks about those in authority. We are to respect and honor those in authority, and to pay taxes to them. They are responsible to protect their people. The Bible doesn't say anything about whether they had to be Christians or people who believed in God, or not. But we do have to pray for them.
   So my question is this; What kind of expectations should we have for a president or vice president? Keep in mind that the role of a president (or any country leader) is not the same role as a pastor. Here is where I think the Conservatives are missing it. It looks like we, probably without thinking about it, are putting the same standard out for president, that we would for a pastor. The Bible has high moral standards for a pastor. The pastor has a special role in the church. The president doesn't have a role in the church. His role is presiding over the United States of America, which means basically, providing protection for, and governing the people, believers and non-believers, Christian, Atheist, Catholic, Mormon, Jewish, Muslim, Agnostic, you name it, he is one who promises to protect and govern this group of people.
   But you might ask, what if his views on abortion are weak? That is a good question. People have different levels of understanding when life begins. I was thinking about the Roe vs. Wade decision that was made. The woman who was the one who started this whole process came to Christ. After she repented of her sins, she still did not see abortion as totally wrong. The Bible says that we see through a glass darkly. She was a brand new Christian, and her views may have developed to the point where she does see all abortion as wrong.
    We have a candidate who is 'pro-life'. But he thinks abortion can be allowed if a woman is raped. Compare that view with a man who is in full belief of abortion being fine, because it is a woman's choice. Look at the two different hearts. One only believes abortion is ok if it is done as a result of rape. The other believes a woman has the right to choose to abort her baby if she wants to. These two men are not even close on the spectrum, yet, people want to penalize the one who says its ok if a woman is raped. Let's look at the reality of this. It is very rare that a woman has an abortion because she got raped. The heart of the Conservative is not aggressively seeking to make provisions for a woman to be able to make her choice. But, if you can see what the liberal is doing, most things are done aggressively to accomplish an agenda, which is to diminish America.
   Even if a president believes in abortion as a woman's right, he cannot create abortion laws. All he can do is influence his thinking that abortion is right. So, when we vote for a man who only believes abortion is ok when a woman is raped, we don't need to fear that he will aggressively make abortion legal. That is just nonsense.
   If our forefathers and early presidents were alive today, I doubt many of us would vote for them. For example, Thomas Jefferson was a Deist, and his Bible had holes throughout it, where he cut out the verses that had to do with hell. Yet, Thomas Jefferson did much good for our country. He really did have some fear of God in his life. One of our best presidents, Ronald Reagan, showed a lot of wisdom in the decisions he made, yet he did some questionable things. While he was taking the Presidential oath, he was facing the obelisk. While he was governor, he introduced 'no fault divorce'.
   The bottom line is this. Every presidential candidate is going to have things in his life that are wrong. If we take those things that are wrong, and line them up with Scripture, and believe that the candidate is disqualified for running because of the things that he believes in, or practices, is wrong, we won't be voting for anybody. No candidate will meet our criteria for being president. The result will be that we won't vote. Guess what happens when people don't vote? The country falls apart.
   When we vote for an imperfect person (and every candidate is imperfect), we are not supporting his wrong beliefs. If his wrong belief system however, violates the Constitution, or is a danger to our country potentially, then we don't vote for him or her. The Bible describes the rulers as those who promote peace and protect the country. If a man has those qualifications that indicate he will protect the nation and if he shows that he truly loves our country, then we should vote for him/her.
   Here is one more question for you; Could it be that a trick of the devil would be to have the Conservatives divide over this issue, so that, the Conservative vote would become weak? If the Conservative vote is divided, then Obama wins. Satan always works to try to divide and bring down. Let's be aware of the devil's tactics.
   This is the bigger picture. It's not about Republicans vs. Democrats, or Conservatives vs. Liberals. It is about promoting peace and protecting the country vs. destroying the country and bringing the defenses down.
   And that is the end of the story, my friend. Thank you for reading and considering.

Today in History - August 26, 1957 - Russia tests an intercontinental ballistic missile

Russia Tests an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile - August 26, 1957

   Today in History, the Soviet Union made the announcement that it had successfully made an intercontinental ballistic missile, that was able to be fired 'into any part in the world'. Upon hearing this announcement, the United States became alarmed, and this led to a national debate over the 'missile gap' between America and Russia.

Source: History.com Russia Tests Intercontinental Ballistic Missile

Today, in this year of 2012, our president wants this country to reduce its arsenals. An agreement with Russia had been made, but he is not holding Russia to make the cuts. He wants us to cut back in order for us to become less than a first class nation. The link provides information on what our current president is trying to do with our country. If he is re-elected, he will implement many things such as this. Obama 2016

How Will You Vote?

I have a very serious concern today. I know all of us Conservatives are wanting to make sure that Obama does not get re-elected in this coming election. I am encouraged that his favor is dropping a little. However, I do have a major concern with this election.
     First of all, I am aware that our country is in need of revival. Any darkness from our national government is a reflection on the condition of the church. We see people who are in government making abominable decisions, and we can't do anything about them. We can also see tyranny in our government that is beginning to develop. We need help and we need it soon!
Here is what my concern is, but before I explain what my concern is, I will look at some different ways that Christians look at the elections. Many years ago, a man named Pat Robertson considered running for the presidency. A lot of people (Christians) would have voted for him, I'm sure. The reason they would have voted for him was because he was a Christian. And we need Christian people in our government. People would overlook any weakness he would have as a president because he was a Christian. Now I know I am not speaking from every Christian's perspective, but I know a lot of people think that way.
     Today, we have a president who can't seem to decide what religion he is, or, maybe he believes he can be more than one (oxymoron). He has stated that he is a Christian. He has stated that he is a Muslim. OK, all that is beside the point. We see what kind of track record he has as a president, and many have decided that 4 years is too long for him to be in office.
Now we have another man who is running for the presidency. He is a Mormon. Bible believing Christians don't like that. They want to vote for a Christian. But I don't think that is the main thing that people are against Romney for. Romney seems to be experiencing what every presidential candidate experiences. It is called 'slander'. For example, people say Romney wants to change the Constitution. Someone asked a person about this and the person who made this statement told the other person to do a google search on Romney second amendment. I did that. I read the articles on it and basically it talked about how Romney was trying to enforce strict gun control for the people in his state. He wanted to have a waiting period before people could actually take home their guns that they purchased. I am having a hard time seeing how someone who is making strict gun laws is trying to change the Constitution. Then I went to another 'recommended' web site on this. This blog page explained that Romney and Obama were similar in 40 ways (and it listed the ways). What was interesting, was that I looked at the information on the blogger. He put a newsletter out and he was an active 'Libertarian' . Now it made sense of why he was blasting Romney. I think the accusations on Romney are being way blown up.
    Now for the problem. We have an election in a couple of months. What is our goal? Do we want to have a man who will oppress us for four more years, and who will make decisions that will end up destroying our country, or do we want to look for that perfect man who will rule over us? We have a couple of choices. Conservatives are not going to vote for Obama, so that decision is made already. But what we have is a divided house. And I am not really sure why. The Bible says that 'a house divided against itself cannot stand'. The Conservatives are divided. Some will vote for Romney. Others will fill in a name and send it in. In the end, what good will that do? What good will it do if we look for a godly man to be our president and then put his name in when we cast our votes? Even a best case scenario, if a Godly man were elected by Conservatives, would that man still be able to receive more votes than Obama?
   The issue isn't looking for someone who has a high standard and voting him in. We are not voting for a pastor. A pastor and a president are two different things. If we are looking for a pastor, then he would have to have the qualifications met for being a pastor. But we cannot put those qualifications on a presidential candidate. The state is not the church, and the church is not the state.
  Do you see what is happening here? If we keep this attitude up, we can be sure that Obama will be in office for the next four years. The damage could be monumental. Whatever freedoms our forefathers died for, so we could have them, would be destroyed. Obama is not looking out for the welfare of Americans. It appears that he wants to bring our country down, and make us a weak nation. Could there be another agenda here? Could this be the seeds for Communism to germinate in?
   I am not going to tell you to vote for Romney, but I do want you to consider a couple of things. One of them is to ask yourself this question; 'Is it possible that Romney is being slandered?' (I personally don't know why he wouldn't be. That is the nature of politics today). Also, is it possible that Romney would be the only possible candidate that would be able to defeat Obama, and if so, should I vote for him, rather than vote for someone else and make the Conservative vote weaker? The Conservative vote is at stake today. If the Conservatives stay divided, it stands to reason that Obama will be re-elected. Please consider what I have written here. And most of all, if you are a Christian, please be praying for our country. Wouldn't it be great if Godly people would be elected into office? Let's work toward that goal. But for now, let's work with what we have.

Today in History - July 14, 1935 - FDR Signs Social Security Act

FDR Signs Social Security Act - August 14, 1935

  President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed, into law, the Social Security Act, today, in the year, 1935.
He was concerned for the young people in this country, because he felt they needed a type of support when they 'came to old age'. He also was working to help unemployment, as this was in the midst of the Great Depression, the worst economic crisis our nation had ever experienced.

Source: History.com-FDR Signs Social Security Act

Repost-What Wang Ming-Dao Preached Before His Arrest - August 7, 1954

This article is reposted from http://www.christianity.com/ChurchHistory/11630806/

August 7, 1954

What Wang Ming-Dao Preached before His Arrest

Many cultures believe that our names affect our character. That seemed true in Wang Ming-Dao's case. He was born in 1900, during the Boxer uprising in China. This uprising was a revolt against foreign influences that were destroying ancient Chinese culture. The Wangs were in deadly danger, because they had associated with Christian missionaries. Terrified, Wang's father killed himself shortly before his son was born. Mrs. Wang named her new boy "Iron" which, because of his strong personality, soon became Tie-zi, "Iron son."

Mrs. Wang hated to cook and was quarrelsome, so Wang grew up with many fights and little food. After a wicked childhood, he became a Christian at the age of fourteen. Deep spiritual struggles followed until he understood that Christ demanded complete obedience. Then he gave up his dream to become a politician. He changed his name to Ming-Dao which means "understanding the word." He even gave up a secure position at a Christian school when he insisted on being baptized again as an adult believer. He and five friends broke ice at a creek in January and plunged themselves in the frigid water in obedience to their consciences.

After years in which God trained him, Wang was asked to preach. His messages stressed holy living. He also wrote a newsletter called Spiritual Food Quarterly. So many people came to hear him that he needed a bigger place to speak. Chinese Christians raised funds. The tabernacle that they built in 1937 was simple, without even a cross. No one was baptized without first showing real fruits of salvation. "Better a few good things than many bad ones," said the Christians.

Ming-Dao lived up to his own high standards. Even his worst enemies could find no fault in him except in his utter lack of compromise. As an example of this, during the Japanese occupation, he and his fellow workers refused to join a church cooperative. The Japanese threatened Ming-Dao so many times that he ordered himself a coffin, thinking that he would be executed.

After World War II, the Communists gained power. They arrested Christian leaders who refused to go along with them. Many Christian leaders buckled and criticized Ming-Dao, making ugly charges against him. He replied, "The one who faithfully preaches the Word of God cannot but expect to meet opposition in the form of malicious slander and abuse from some leaders in the church and from 'Christians' who are spiritually dead."

In 1954 the Communists brought accusations against him. Ming-Dao sat calmly, eyes fixed on the ceiling, refusing to answer a word. Many in the court wept. The Communists could not get a verdict against him.

He went home, knowing he would be arrested. While he waited, he wrote articles showing that the "Imperialist poison" of missionaries was for the most part the truth of the Bible. "...we are ready to pay any price to preserve the Word of God...Don't give way, don't compromise!"

He preached his last sermon at the tabernacle on this day, August 7, 1954, taking as his scripture, "The Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners." Afterward, he handed out copies of his spiritual manifesto. Around midnight, the police came. Tied with ropes, Ming-Dao, his wife and eighteen young Christians were taken to prison.

Ming-Dao was sentenced to fifteen years in prison for what was called "resistance to the government." Under intense brainwashing, he cracked and signed a confession. He was released; but convinced that he had betrayed Christ, he repeated over and over, "I am Peter. I am Judas." When his mind returned, he and his wife agreed that he must tell the authorities that his statement had been made under duress and did not represent his true feelings. The pastor was immediately returned to prison for twenty years and his brave wife was sentenced, too.

Mrs. Wang was released in 1973 and Ming-Dao in 1980. By then he was old, toothless and deaf.

Bibliography:

1. Anonymous. "Book Review of Wang Mingdao's A Call to the Church." http://www.goldenmorning.com/call.htm
2. Hutten, Kurt. Iron Curtain Christians; the church in Communist countries today. Minneapolis, Minnesota: Augsburg Publishing House, 1967. [This books transcribes his name as Wang Ming-toa].
3. Lyall, Leslie. Three of China's Mighty Men. Hodder and Stoughton; Overseas Missionary Fellowship, 1973.
4. "Wang Mingdao." http://www.yutopian.com/religion/christian/Wangmd.html
5. Various internet articles.