One of my Digg friends sent me an email with a prophecy from a pastor in Berlin, Germany.  I’m sharing it with you, but I want to give you my take on it first.  I’m a bit skeptical of modern day “prophecies” because so many of them are private opinion presented as from the Lord.  (I guess that this is so that others dare not argue with them.)  What I look for when presented with a message that purports to be a prophecy is consistency with Scripture.  This prophecy passes that test.

Read the rest of this entry »

The people of California, through a direct vote made a law.  Judges of the California Supreme Court decided that the law violated the rights of a small minority.  (It is supposed that the California Constitution spells out what rights the people have, but I don’t know which of those rights were violated.)  The people of California were emphatic, embedding into the Constitution itself what their will is.

And those same “justices” are now going to determine whether the vote that declared their declaration of the law to be unconstitutional is now in the Constitution are going to decide whether or not the Constitution is constitutional.  Arg-g-gh!  Oh, what a tangled web we weave…

Read the rest of this entry »

There has been the suggestion that it may become necessary for Constitutional Americans to form a new government.  (See Joseph Farah’s column and my earlier post.)

With this in mind, I have updated the preamble to the Declaration of Independence.  I have brought the language up to date from 18th century English and have modified it for present circumstances.  I am asking readers to help me complete the document.  This may be done in two ways:

Read the rest of this entry »

I’m reading a lot of columns that tell us how badly things would go for a lover of American style freedom under an Obama administration.

It is a good thing to try to frighten people about what an Obama administration would bring. The fact is that the possibility of a Socialist States of America is a very real possibility. Socialism lite is already a part of our governmental policy, even though it is unconstitutional.

The question is, “What are you going to do about it?” Bellyache? Cry? Some (including me) are talking about setting up a new national government — secession. I’ve seen a lot of naysayers who claim that it can’t be done. If you believe that something can’t be done, then you won’t try to do it or support those who are trying. So you are back to bellyaching.

Submit yourselves to God. Seek His will in every detail of your life. Then live your life in faith, not in fear. The Bible says that the fearful are among those who will not inherit the kingdom of God. Then claim the freedom that God gives.

Kwitchurbellyachin!!

I have prayed many prayers in my sixty plus years’ walk with my Lord Jesus.  Some of them stand out in my memory because the answers to them have been more important than I realized at the time that I first prayed them.  Additionally, I have had greater understanding of the wisdom in them.  Maybe praying them will be of help to you.
Read the rest of this entry »

I went public, very public, with a speculation that didn’t turn out as I thought that it might. Now, I’m asking myself (and you) whether I should have published a speculation where I was not sure of the outcome? In my publication, I said that I was not sure. The reason that I published my thoughts on the matter was that the stakes are high. Here’s a summary of the issue.

Read the rest of this entry »

Suomeksi

My wife and I believe in the soon return of Christ for His church.  We believe that His return might be this week.  We have prepared an explanation for our family and friends here in Finland, so that, if it does happen this soon, they will understand what has happened and not be subject to the deception of the antichrist.

I am putting this text here in this post, just in case any of my readers want to take it, modify it and give this message to your friends and relatives who are not committed to Jesus Christ as their Lord.

Read the rest of this entry »

Michael Farris wrote in a column on World Net Daily:

There are only two meaningful ways to interpret the Constitution. The originalist theory is that the words mean the same thing today as they meant when they were written and ratified. This is an approach that is necessary if we believe in both self-government and the rule of law. Self-government requires us to accept the meaning from the elected officials who made the law. The rule of law requires us to accept the rules established by the law as fixed principles until such time as another law of equal rank formally amends the first law.

The other theory of constitutional interpretation is the “living Constitution,” which asserts that the meaning of the Constitution changes over time. Words no longer have a fixed meaning. They now mean whatever the judges of today think they should mean. This is the rule of men, not law.

Obama’s theological wanderings may be interesting, but we have all that we need to know for voting purposes by the revelation that he is unwilling to address or follow the original meaning of the Constitution.

If he is unwilling to following the original meaning of the Constitution on life and death, why would we think he will follow it on anything less important?

Mr Farris makes a valid point, but what he points out about Obama is also true of Mr. McCain. McCain may be more “constitutional” in some of his views, but that is only because the Constitution agrees with McCain, not because McCain agrees with the Constitution.  Where McCain disagrees with the Constitution, his voting record shows that he is willing to ignore the Document.

America is defined by the words of the Constitution.  Because the Constitution is being ignored in all three branches of our federal government, the America that our founding creationists gave us is dead.  The idea is still alive in the hearts of some people.

http://www.selfgovernment.us/aip

A while ago I wrote a blog post that posited that it was sinful for a Christian couple to decline to deliberately include God and His will into the fabric of their marriage.

In the responses to an article in World Net Daily, California bans ‘brides,’ ‘grooms’, about the fallout of a California Supreme Court decision wherein the Court made a law(!) that overturned the will of the people by legalizing sodomite marriage.

The story is about a couple being denied a marriage license under the new law because they wanted to be Bride and Groom instead of Party A and Party B.  Among the Digg comments about the story are two links that give information I wish that I had known many years ago.  They point out that the government has no legitimate role in a God ordained marriage; only in one that excludes God.  Here are the two links:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yiTGhQOYZv4

http://www.mercyseat.net/BROCHURES/marriagelicense …

In January, 2006, I moved from America, my home for over six decades, to Finland.  The reason was to marry the woman I love.  I link to that story here, but this story is to describe my impression of Finland’s economic system.  I think of it as “socialist”, but a Finnish friend took umbrage to my description of it as such.

Regardless of what it might be called, the economic policies of Finland’s government results in a different life experience for those who live under it.  Whether that’s good or bad depends upon one’s point of view.  America’s politics has moved her economic policies far from those established by our founding creationists in the Constitution.  This move is in the same direction as that in which Finland has gone.  An American friend has asked me what it’s like.  Here’s my answer.

Read the rest of this entry »