Occupations In Heaven by John Thiel
Ever wondered what it will be like in heaven? Some think its all about sitting on a white fluffy cloud playing a harp... No... It will be much more exciting and engaging than that. Have a listen! And remember, our preparation for heaven starts here...
101002 - Order and Dependability of Heaven
Read more at thesearethey.blogspot.com
David Gates - Latest Sermons: Are You Ready?
Loma Linda Filipino Church - Vespers: November 19, 2010 Pastor David Gates
Preparing For the CRISIS special:
Loma Linda Filipino Church - Sabbath Sermon: Nov. 20, 2010 - David Gates
Afternoon Service 11/20/2010 2PM at the Loma Linda Filipino church - Pastor David GatesRead more at thesearethey.blogspot.com
Christian Earthkeeping – Social Justice Over Climate Change
At George Fox Evangelical Seminary, this semester marks the first for the Christian Earthkeeping concentration and growth in the way evangelicals are viewing environmentalism through the lenses of stewardship and poverty.
Since an announcement in May, the evangelical seminary located in Portland, Ore., has welcomed its first 15 students into the program and started them on their first course in Christian Earthkeeping. The course is part of a concentration in sustainability.
Admissions officer Sheila Bartlett says the concentration is about more than the three R’s (recycle, reuse and reduce).
“This is not about recycling … this is about good stewardship,” explained Bartlett.
On the website, the seminary notes that the evangelical church has long been silent about environmental issues. However, it cites the Bible as the anchor for Godly concern. The site quotes Genesis 2 :15, which states, “The Lord God took the man and put him in the Garden of Eden to work it and take care of it.”
Evangelical leadership has historically challenged environmentalism because of theories such as global warming and climate change.
In March 2007, Focus on the Family’s James Dobson and Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins expressed opposition to evangelical activism on global warming.
This year, Dr. R. Albert Mohler, Jr., a leading evangelical theologian, posed arguments that liken ecology to a secular religion on his blog.
“[T]he intellectual elites are not so secular as they believe themselves to be. As it happens, their religion may not be theistic, but it is a religion all the same. That fact is confirmed in a recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education. Stephen T. Asma, a professor of philosophy at Columbia College Chicago, argues that the new religion of many secular folk is ecology,” he wrote in a January blog post.
But according to a 2009 report from the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, sustainability studies – the study of environmental, economic and social dimensions – is catching on at many Christian institutions of higher learning.
Last year, the institution created a grant for the development of creation care courses and 24 CCCU campus applied. Six of those campuses received mini grants of $5,000 along with training and with the intent of offering courses this year.
“Something is happening that makes [the work of creation care] less adversarial and much more attractive. We have seen a sense of value and technology come together, so that it has become a sense of best practices to do what is right,” said Dr. Randy Lowry, president of Lipscomb University.
What’s happening, says James Tomowich, a senior fellow of the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, is religious leaders are taking an ecology stance that is focused on people as the answer to earth’s problems rather than the initiator.
The type of environmentalism that focuses on climate change and global warming says that humans and humans’ consumption are the source of earth’s problems, Tomowich points out.
By contrast, he defines stewardship as “an acknowledgment that God created all things and that, as in the first two chapters of Genesis, God gave human beings one, dominion over creation, and two, called them to be stewards to tend the earth.”
The difference is the role of the human being. “Humans from a biblical, Christian point of view are producers and stewards of creation. From an environmentalist point of view, humans are users and polluters,” Tomowich explained.
The focus of Christian earth care then is to uplift people spiritually and economically.
The goal of Christian stewardship on the mission field is not “running in[to an impoverished community], sharing Christ with people and then running away,” Tomowich shared, but to develop communities so as to lift people from the biological and environmental problems that stem from poverty.
This is also the goal at George Fox Evangelical Seminary.
Seminary students who elect the Christian Earthkeeping concentration balance theology courses with a half credit earthkeeping courses such as “Theology and Stewardship,” “Theology and Ethic of Land” and “Poverty and Restoring Earth-keeping” throughout the fall and spring.
In the summer, students will participate in five-day retreats to learn about the environment but also, how issues like racism, sexism and global systems lead to poverty.
Daniel Brunner, a professor at the seminary, says the program is focused on the social justice aspect of sustainability rather than climate theory.
“This is the single most important social justice issue facing humankind today,” Brunner told The Oregonian. “Therefore, it needs to be the single most important social justice issue the church engages in.”
Read more at www.christianpost.com
Creditors and Feds Object to Crystal Cathedral Salaries
The U.S. Trustee Program and creditors are objecting to salaries given out by the Crystal Cathedral to several of its employees as the Garden Grove, Calif., megachurch undergoes bankruptcy proceedings.
The latest filing by creditors on Thursday questioned the church's request to continue employing William Gaultiere, part-time pastor of Spiritual Formation Ministries and son-in-law of Chief Financial Officer Fred Southard, as the bankruptcy case is under review. Gaultiere receives a salary of $61,955 plus benefits, with over 95 percent of the total amount coming in the form of a housing allowance, the Los Angeles Times reported.
Earlier this week, a federal authority overseeing Crystal Cathedral's bankruptcy case and creditors filed objections to the salaries of three of the church's employees for what appeared to be redundant duties. Two of the names listed are related to the church's founding pastor, Robert H. Schuller.
Names of several other family members who work at the church were also listed in the filings.
The trustee questioned the $132,019 housing allowance for Southard, who takes only a $12,000 salary, the $70,000 compensation for Schuller's youngest daughter, Gretchen Penner, who produces the church's "Hour of Power" telecast, and the $55,000 salary of her daughter, Neva Klaassen, who books musical guests for the TV show, according to the Orange County Register.
"There is no justification whatsoever for a housing allowance of this amount," court documents state. "Mr. Southard has failed to explain why such a housing allowance is necessary or appropriate, given this Debtor is in Chapter 11 and suffering financial difficulties."
Jim Penner, Schuller's son-in-law and wife of Gretchen, defended their compensations this week, noting that Southard's tax-exempt housing allowance was a "benefit of working in a church," reported the Orange County Register.
Penner also told the paper the decision by the church to employ family members was more about hiring employees that can carry out the church's cause.
"If anyone looks at these people's resumes, and qualifications, there will be no questions asked," he said.
The Crystal Cathedral, formerly known as Garden Grove Community Church, was founded by Schuller in 1955. The church filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection Oct. 18, citing debts of more than $43 million.
Before that, the church's founder tried to cut expenses by taking a 50 percent pay cut. He announced in August that he and his family would take half their regular salary for a couple of months while other employees would take a 5 to 10 percent pay cut as they try to compensate the vendors whose services they employed during the 2009 "Glory of Christmas" production. While the bulk of the debt is their mortgage to the campus, what triggered the Chapter 11 was the $7 million debt to the vendors. Creditors filed lawsuits after the grace period for paying the vendors expired.
Read more at www.christianpost.com
Question of Religious Intolerance in Bhutan
After four months of detainment and trial, a court in Bhutan sentenced Prem Singh Gurung, an ethnic-Nepali Bhutanese citizen, to three years in prison. Gurung was accused of ‘creating civil unrest' by showing films about Jesus Christ to his neighbors.
The Kingdom of Bhutan has remained largely isolated from the outside world for centuries, but this tiny Himalayan nation has garnered international attention recently for modernizing to the beat of its own drum. In an attempt to preserve national heritage, the government banned television and the internet until 1999, making Bhutan one of the last countries to introduce the TV. Long a nation run by Buddhist monks and monarchical families, it wasn’t until March 2008 that the ruling King Jigme Singye Wangchuck abruptly stepped down to make way for democracy.
Now officially plugged into the internet and under a functioning democracy, Bhutan is posed to integrate itself with the rest of the world. Even the newly revised constitution is modern in tone, guaranteeing many of the same rights that are found in democracies across the globe. But this predominantly Buddhist country is having trouble acting according to its own constitution when it comes to religious freedom, and Bhutanese Christians are suffering as a result.
Prem Singh Gurung's sentence was announced on October 6, four months after he hauled a generator and projector up to two villages, both of which are without electricity and located more than a day's walk from the nearest road. According to Kuensel, the government-run newspaper of Bhutan, Gurung showed Nepali movies between each of which was a short clip about Jesus Christ.
Several villagers complained about the incident, and government prosecutors charged Gurung with promoting civil unrest. Unable to prove the allegations beyond a reasonable doubt, the government instead charged him with an “attempt to promote civil unrest.”
The 2008 constitution states that "Buddhism is the spiritual heritage of Bhutan, which promotes the principles and values of peace, non-violence, compassion and tolerance.”
As its official heritage, the government has prioritized the preservation of Buddhism over tolerance and compassion towards other religions. The result has been official opposition to the spread of Christianity, and it is now illegal to attempt to convert someone from the country’s two predominant religions, Buddhism and Hinduism. But it is not only in cases of proselyting that Christians are being persecuted.
In the second week of April 2008, two families were physically attacked and kicked out of their village after they were discovered to have converted to Christianity. The families had been introduced to the faith by missionaries from Gospel for Asia, a missions organization based in the US and India. On April 12, their fellow villagers attacked the new believers and forced them to leave their homes. The government did not have a hand in the incident, but it did opt to remain a mute spectator even though the constitution expressly says that the King is the protector of all religions in Bhutan.
More than 75% of Bhutan's 700,000 people are Buddhist, mostly living in northern and western regions. The country's rich Buddhist heritage reaches back to the AD 700's, and the present day state was established by a Tibetan Lama in the 17th century. At the same time, Bhutan is undoubtedly multi-ethnic and multi-religious, with an estimated 200,000 Hindus living in southern regions and roughly 6,000 Christians scattered across the country.
The fledging Christian population is not publicly acknowledged by the government, making communal worship difficult, human rights groups and mission organizations report. In 2007, according to Gospel for Asia, "the government had begun clamping down on Christians by barring some congregations from meeting for worship. This has caused at least two Gospel for Asia-affiliated churches to temporarily close their doors."
A February 2009 report by Open Doors, a Christian Rights group, ranked Bhutan 11 on a list of top 50 countries persecuting Christians.
Despite the difficult circumstances on the ground for Christians, the government of Bhutan has retained a friendly relationship with international Christian organizations when it has proven beneficial. In the early 1960s, a Canadian Jesuit, Father William Mackey, was invited into Bhutan to help establish a secular school system. Father Mackey continued his work in the education sector until his death in 1995.
Even Bhutan's own history with international Christianity goes back to the 17th century, when missionaries met with the same Tibetan Lama who unified present day Bhutan. According to a 17th century report by a Portuguese Jesuit missionary, Father Estevao Cacella, Bhutan’s first contact with the Christian faith took place in 1627. His report, available on the Centre for Bhutan Studies website, says that he and his companion met several times with the man who not only united Bhutan but also institutionalized Buddhism as the state religion, Zhabdrung Ngawang Namgyel.
Bhutanese Christians continue to face daily hardships while attempting to practice their faith peacefully. As the government increases interaction with the global community and further embraces democracy, Christians there can only hope that it will also embrace a higher level of religious freedom. A good first step would be for the government of democratic Bhutan to withdraw the allegations clamped on Gurung and grant him unconditional release.
Read more at www.christianpost.com
The Road Ahead: Tax and Spend or Cut and Save?
As Congress' lame duck session gets underway, the nation is watching to see if the Democrats will attempt to capitalize on their last few weeks of hegemony before a huge shift in power occurs. Foremost on the agenda are the soon-to-expire Bush tax cuts. Happily for the middle class, there appears to be universal agreement that those cuts should be extended. The real contention lies with the question of whether or not to extend tax cuts to those Americans earning over $250,000 a year.
Aside from the obvious political implications of using the lame duck session to ram through a tax increase that would undoubtedly fail if put forward under the new Congress, there are two key issues at the heart of this debate. They represent different sides of the same coin: Taxing and Spending. When it comes to taxation, the real issue is how the federal government views the earnings of the American people. With regard to those earnings, does the government have an entitlement mentality? The second involves the American people's view of government programs. Concerning such programs, do the American people have an entitlement mentality?
In discussing his opposition to an across-the-board extension of the Bush tax cuts, President Obama has repeatedly insisted that the government "can't afford to borrow and spend another $700 billion on permanent tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires." Nancy Pelosi echoed the President's position in an interview with NPR: "It's too costly. It's $700 billion. . . . That's a lot of money to give a tax cut at the high end. And I remind you that those tax cuts have been in effect for a very long time, they did not create jobs."
It's probably worth pointing out to the President that earning $250,000 a year doesn't make one a "millionaire" – or a "billionaire" for that matter – and Nancy Pelosi's implication that tax cuts are somehow responsible for the nation's current economic woes is just plain silly. More importantly however, in making their arguments against tax cuts for America's top earners the President and Ms. Pelosi reveal an attitude of entitlement that pervades the government at virtually every level. To say that the government "can't afford" a tax cut is to say that the government has already laid claim to the $700 billion in question. As far as the politicians are concerned, that money does not belong to those individuals who will get up and go to work every day for the next year in order to earn it; it belongs to the government. In other words, if a politician decides that you make more money than he thinks you need, that extra money isn't really yours, it's his – his to appropriate, his to redistribute, his to use to "stimulate" the economy.
How can we trust our representatives to lift us out of the economic chasm we are in when, deep down, they don't really believe that we are entitled to keep the money we earn and they are not good stewards of the money they take from us through taxation?
On the flip side of the coin, if the American people reject tax hikes, then they must be willing to embrace significant cuts in spending, which will translate to cuts in government benefits and services. History shows, however, that people do not respond well when their government "entitlements" are threatened. When we talk about cutting spending, it's inevitably the "other guy's" benefits and programs we want cut, never our own. We love our Social Security, our Medicare, our government pensions, our government-backed mortgages, and the like.
The time has come for discipline and decisiveness. Our government stands at fork in the road, and it will be the American people who ultimately decide which direction we will travel. If we are unwilling to make the sacrifices necessary to rein in government spending and regain fiscal solvency, then we better get used to high taxes, high unemployment, and greater government intrusion into our everyday lives.
We can have fiscal discipline backed by self-denial and self-reliance, or we can have fiscal decadence backed by insolvency and dependency. Which vision is truer to America's Founding vision? Which one can we afford? Which road will take us back to prosperity and independence? Do the politicians and the people have the will for what it will really take to get us back on track? Only time will tell.
Read more at www.christianpost.com
Papal Crusade?
Billy Graham and His Last Crusade?
I’ve had the privilege, for the last two days, to be with one of the most special people on the face of the earth. He is justly called America’s Pastor, a friend of presidents, a fearless preacher of the gospel.
Of course, I am speaking of Billy Graham.
Billy is 92 years old now, and his eyesight is failing him, and his hearing is not as good as it used to be. But he still has a fiery passion that drives him-in fact, it’s a burden on his heart:
Billy Graham wants to preach one last Sermon.
He said “I have one more message to give!” He wants to do it before a crowd of people. And he wants to do it soon.
Think about that. One last message from the world’s greatest evangelist. Have you ever thought about what you would say if you could give one last message? Even if you are not a preacher, per se, you still have a message to deliver. What if you could stand before family and friends, or even the world at large, and give one last talk about what really mattered to you? What would your topic be? What text from Scripture would you quote?
Billy Graham has prayed and thought deeply about this and has come up with an answer. I am sure if he does give this message that, quite literally, the world will sit up and take notice.
Lunch with Billy
I sat with him today at lunch and asked him, “Billy, I heard you want to give one last message. Is that true?”
Emphatically, he said “Yes!”
“Do you want to do that before a live audience or to a TV camera?”
“A live audience,” he said with certainty. “Maybe I could come do it at your church!” he said, with a twinkle in his eye.
“You have a standing invitation-trust me!” I told him. I then asked Billy what the text of his last message would be. He said it would be 2 Chronicles 7:14. “If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves, and pray and seek My face, and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin and heal their land.”
Billy wants to call our nation, and all who would hear, to turn back to God. Billy said, “I want to call the country to repentance.” Billy Graham listens to the news. He knows what is going on in our country. Throughout his ministry he always stayed in touch with his culture, and that has not changed.
In this great passage from 2 Chronicles, God tells His people what to do when they want to get right with Him again: humble ourselves, pray, seek His face, and turn from our wicked ways. What is fascinating is that this passage is not directed to the world at large, but to God’s people, to whom it was originally given. Billy wants to call the church and the country to turn back to God.
He wants to see spiritual revival in America.
That is a message that I, for one, would love to hear him give.
But there is another passage that burns on the famed evangelist’s heart. In fact, it is posted on his wall in large print so he can read it and commit it to memory. It is Galatians 6:14, where Paul writes, “But God forbid that I should boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.” That is what Billy has always preached over the years: the cross of Christ. He has never wavered from that, always emphasized it.
Once, some years ago, I asked him the question,”If an older Billy were to speak to a younger one, what would he say? What would he tell the younger man to remember?” Without missing a beat, Billy said, “I would preach more on the cross and the blood of Christ. That’s where the power is.”
I never forgot that.
I don’t know if Billy will ever deliver this last message, but if he does, he wants us to know that we need to turn from our sins to God…and this was made possible through the blood of Jesus Christ. We need to humble ourselves and pray and turn from our wicked ways. God promises if we do this, He will heal our land. That sounds like good news to me.
This was originally posted on November 19, 2010.Read more at www.christianpost.com
Disbelief Over Couple's Poll on Whether to Abort Baby
A Minnesota couple’s decision to let the public vote on whether or not they should keep their baby has dismayed pro-lifers.
Pete and Alisha Arnold, both 30, have set up the website www.birthornot.com to allow people to place their vote, as well as share their thoughts and see pictures of the fetus – nicknamed “Wiggles” by the pair.
Alisha is already 17 weeks pregnant, meaning that the unborn baby is entering the stage of growth where it is able to suck its thumb and hear voices.
The couple has given the public until December 7 to vote, just two days before the couple reach the legal limit for an abortion in their home state of Minnesota – 20 weeks, a stage at which it is believed babies can experience pain.
The Arnolds, who experienced two miscarriages, say on their website that the public’s vote “will not go unheard.”
“The whole point here is to let people have a real way to voice your opinion on the topic of abortion and have it actually make a difference in the real world,” they say.
The poll has horrified pro-lifers around the world.
Rebecca Ng, of the London-based Pro-Life Alliance, said the website was “horrifying and objectionable.”
“Whatever may or may not be real about this website, the ultrasound of the baby is of a real human being. To think for one minute that his or her experience is going to be determined by those who log on and vote is absolutely spine-chilling,” she said.
At one point, there were more votes for the pair to abort their baby but in the last few days, the site has seen a significant increase in the number of votes for the birth to go ahead after some pro-lifers began rallying people to vote against the abortion.
Out of more than 70,000 votes polled, 56,000 people want the couple to give birth – nearly 80 percent of the votes so far.
Multiple people have even offered to adopt if the vote result is to abort the baby, the couple wrote in their latest update.
Meanwhile, some pro-lifers are choosing to stay away from the poll altogether.
Anthony Ozimic, of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said they were advising people not to vote at all because the entire concept of the poll was “wrong.”
“We are not encouraging people to participate in this vote because the child’s right to life is unshakable regardless of what a poll says and it is simply wrong to subject it to vote. We should refuse to make that choice,” he said.
Read more at www.christianpost.com
U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Proposal Meets Firm Resistance
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, and Open Doors are just some of the people and groups that have publicly denounced the proposed U.N. anti-blasphemy resolution that is expected to be voted on next week.
The Organization of the Islamic Conference, which sponsored the draft resolution, recently changed the term from “defamation of religions” to “vilification of religions.” But USCIRF chair Leonard Leo said the change is minor and “a distinction without a difference.”
“Having lost support on this issue over the past few years, the OIC is now trying to fool delegations into believing that the resolution has improved when it has not,” said Leo in a statement Thursday. “It … still erroneously conflates blasphemy or criticism of religious ideas with incitement to acts of discrimination or violence against individuals.”
Critics of the resolution compare it to a global anti-blasphemy law. They point to countries like Pakistan, where a Christian woman was recently given the death sentence for alleged blasphemy against the Muslim Prophet Muhammad, as example of how such laws are regularly grossly abused to target religious minorities.
Since 1999, the Organization of the Islamic Conference has annually sponsored the resolution and the U.N. has adopted a non-binding anti-defamation of religion resolution every year since 2005.
On Wednesday, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly opposed the resolution during a press conference to announce the release of the annual State Department report on religious freedom around the world. She said the United States does not agree that protecting religious freedom means banning speech critical or offensive about religion.
“The United States joins in all nations coming together to condemn hateful speech, but we do not support the banning of that speech,” said Clinton. “Indeed, freedom of speech and freedom of religion emanate from the same fundamental belief that communities and individuals are enriched and strengthened by diversity of ideas, and attempts to stifle them or drive them underground, even when it is in the name and with the intention of protecting society, have the opposite effect.”
Open Doors, a ministry advocating on behalf of persecuted Christians worldwide, has been actively lobbying U.N. delegates to vote against the resolution. More than 200,000 Open Doors supporters worldwide have voiced opposition to the Defamation of Religions Resolution.
"It is incredibly sad and ironic that Pakistan has sentenced a Christian woman to death by hanging just days before a vote on the resolution at the United Nations that many countries are backing to purportedly protect religious freedom," remarked Open Doors USA President/CEO Carl Moeller. "This sentencing should alert countries and individuals to the serious consequences of passing this resolution."
The U.N. General Assembly’s Third Committee is expected to carry out a preliminary vote on Nov. 22 or 23. A final vote of the full General Assembly is expected in December.
On the Web: http://www.freetobelieve.info/
Read more at www.christianpost.com
Filmmakers Try to Break Negative Stereotype of 'Christian Films'
Hollywood doesn't like to hear you say "God," "Jesus" or "Christian film," said one producer.
Oftentimes, Hollywood places Christian films in "a box," said Todd Zeile, producer of the film "I Am." But Zeile wants to change that.
"We said, 'no, that box doesn't apply to us because we understand how to make films. We still make them cool and artistic but we have a message that we want to bring along and there's a lot more people out there that want that message than you guys are recognizing," he told The Christian Post in an interview.
A former professional baseball player, Zeile and director John Ward have created a film centered on the 10 commandments but in modern day.
"I Am," released last month and screened at over 2,500 churches, follows people living in Los Angeles, living out the commandments unknowingly, Ward explained. The film was made with the intent of making God's word relevant, starting conversations about faith, and breaking stereotypes of the true nature of God.
"People will say 'well God is angry and judgmental and if I do something wrong it affects His love for me," Ward said. "We wanted to create a portrait of a film that shows that nothing can be further from the truth. God's love is a constant thing."
Both Ward and Zeile acknowledged that in Hollywood and in the larger public square, faith-based films come with their own stereotype.
"A lot of times in Christian films, we've accepted that a Christian film can't be a quality film," Ward lamented. "We categorically and completely reject that."
Stressing the significance of the arts, Ward pointed to Jesus and how he spoke in parables.
But art and Christians have somehow become separated since Jesus' time and Ward considers it a real shame. He and Zeile and trying to resurrect the arts within the Christian community.
"We are professional artists and we felt a calling to take our art to the highest level and try to follow that parable example," Ward said.
While many are quick to differentiate a secular Hollywood film and a Christian one, Ward put it this way, using baseball analogy: "It's the same game, just a different uniform. We play just as hard and the difference is we're not playing for ourselves, we're playing for something bigger. We're playing for the name on the front (of the uniform), not the name on the back."
Notably, Ward said there are more professionals in Hollywood who are looking to venture into faith-based films. They are currently monitoring the success of such films.
"They're saying 'maybe we need to do what you're doing and put our faith in our work,'" he said. "If we're successful, a lot more are going to come from where we came from."
"I Am" is currently available on DVD.
On the Web: http://www.iamthemovie.com/
