Obama Chooses Lincoln's Bible for Inauguration

DonKeesee »

Thu Jan 01, 2009 10:05 am Agree: 2   Disagree: 0

Quote from a post below: "SAD SAD a liberal A-Rab Muslim Democrate and NON citizen by birth to boot! Taking the oath of the highest office in this GOD Given Land on the 1st's Republican's Bible!
I'll bet Honest Abe is turning over in his grave!!"

My granfather voted for Richard Nixon over John F. Kennedy in the 1960 election. As I remember, almost immediately after Nixon lost, my grandfather said something like this: "I didn't vote for him, but now he is my President." My grandfather supported Kennedy in areas he could and prayed for him. Oh what a great deal of good that attitude would do today.

Atheists Sue to Take 'God' Out of Obama Inauguration

DonKeesee »

Thu Jan 01, 2009 9:50 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

He who sits in the heavens laughs. Well, kind of chuckles. This silliness is not worth a full laugh. Well, I hate to see the chain emails that will come of this. No one will believe this story because of all the false ones. I'm sure I will get related morphed emails concerning this for the next ten years. They will start out something like, "Today the athiest Madeline Murray O'Hare filed suit in Federal Court . . . ."

Farrakhan's Praise Heightens Obama's Messianic Image

DonKeesee »

Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:44 am Agree: 1   Disagree: 0

One more thing:
Someone said this: "Nothing personal, but I would never trust anything Louis Farrakhan promotes, I saw some of his literature many years ago and it was all a message of hate."

Let's hope then he never promotes you or me. For then we wouldn't trust ourselves.

Farrakhan's Praise Heightens Obama's Messianic Image

DonKeesee »

Thu Mar 13, 2008 12:37 am Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

I don't get all this antichrist talk. The Obama phenomenon has to do with hope for something better. Could it be that hope is the thing that is glowing? The problem is that Christians are always cowering in fear that someone will lead them astray. But fear will not work as a descerner. Only real discernment from God does that. Fear will lead to deception. We need faith that leads to truth, not fear. We need to pray more before we write articles like the one above. I realize that the writer does not say Obama is the antichrist, yet, there is some real concern there about the messianic image, etc. But others are saying it. Barack Obama is about as much the antichrist as Mr. Bean.

Churches Wary of NFL Policy Sack Super Bowl Parties

DonKeesee »

Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:40 pm Agree: 2   Disagree: 2

I certainly do not tend to be a holier than thou person, but as for me and my house, I think it's best for my twelve-year-old son to see the Super Bowl with me at T.G.I. Fridays or at Grandpa's. At least in those venues I can divert his attention when the lude and tasteless commercials are aired or if the latest star seeking attention has some sort of malfuction or whatever. I don't like to "holyize" brick and stone (the people being the church!), but it makes me a little uncomfortable for such things to be promoted by churches. See you at Buffalo Wild Wings!

Christians to Protest Outside ESPN HQ Over Anti-Jesus Remarks

DonKeesee »

Fri Jan 25, 2008 10:09 pm Agree: 0   Disagree: 0

Well . . . err . . . What was said was crude and unreasonable, and it is true that if such things were said about certain other religions or groups, much more would be made of it. But don't the protests and the demanding of harsher treatment sort of mitigate against all that Jesus stood for? So much of the time Christianity seems like a political party rather than the family of God Himself.

Grassley Asks Televangelists Again for Cooperation

DonKeesee »

Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:39 pm Agree: 3   Disagree: 2

Whatever each of us may think of the theology involved here, surely we can agree that this is a theological issue. It is a dangerous thing when the government starts to decide what is good theology and what is not. Please take a look at some of the good senator's statements, and you may decide that he is attempting to judge the theology of the ministries involved. Example: He says that Jesus came into Jerusalem on a donkey and that ministers should not drive a certain car (basically the idea of his statement). This is a U.S. Senator judging theology. Yes, we are dealing with income tax deductions for givers to particular ministries. But if the government begins to quibble about money spent on this and that by these ministries, where will it all stop? I suspect that this may be the stand of Sekulow, who may be concerned about the constitutional dangers of such actions by congressmen and their committees. Let me ask this: Where is the line one can draw between an acceptible car for a minister to drive and an unaccetible one. I assure you that my own family cars would be acceptible to the senator or most anyone else in this nation, but I do not believe we should let the government determine these issues. Here is the theological stand of the Constitution in our country: We will let people believe what they wish to believe, so we the people can believe what we choose to believe. How about letting the contributors to ministries deal with these issues. If they do not like the way money appears to be spent in a ministry, let them give elsewhere. Certainly, one can envision circumstances in which ministries can lose their tax-exempt status. But if ministries are, indeed, following IRS rules, then leave them alone. Change rules if you wish, but be very careful doing so to protect freedom of religion. I know some of you very much dislike the so-called "prosperity gospel," but be careful in supporting government attempts to control the Church, or you may be unwittingly find your own views getting government scrutiny in the future.