News-Record.com

Of course they do!!!! The godless, Marxist, humanist Hollywood/media , , juggarnaut has finally placed their little figurehead radical in office, and now they want the Christ-bashing payoff they've been longing for for several dacades now - precisely why they have gone absolutely freako over the Warren prayer thing.

They want total victory over the Chruch and all its influences in society. In the short term they want isolation and irrelevance - in the long term total extinction. It's not that they fear the little holy-roller church on the corner or the frauds that pass for ministry on TV; but the large effective church ministries and the fecund sharp young Christian apologists emerging on college campuses and shoiwng up in book stores. They care nothing about the "rotting corpse" of tired, effete religionism, but urgently need to move on the virile Biblical Faith that transforms, renews and offers biblical solutions. They want to nail the lid on the coffin/tomb, but seem to have forgotten about Resurrection!

On the other hand, Nikos, maybe they want a secular equivalent of theocracy (ha ha). You preach that Jesus is in control, but you seem to have little trust that he knows what he's doing, or is able to keep the "godless, Marxist, humanist hollywoodmedia" (you left out "satanic", by the way) in line without your help. All they are doing is exactly what you want to do, namely, silence every religious opinion but one. The only difference is which religion gets shoved down the throat of the unwilling. I say a plague on both your houses.
Are you aware that not every humanist is a Marxist? That some people in Hollywood actually believe in God (especially when pandering to the religious audience lines their pockets)? Ever heard of the line of religious films put out by Fox Faith? All is not bleak in the vast wasteland you see as America. Lighten up. The country survived Roosevelt, the other "little figurehead radical" pinko socialist, and it will survive Obama (who is a Christian, by the way, not a godless humanist...or had you forgotten?).

Jesus warned us that false teachers (prophets) would claim to be of God. The apple tree example is quite precise in this regard. A cursory examination of the president-elect's record show some characteristically un-Christian fruit.
God raises whom He will, and there is a reason Obama won. We need to pray for the perfect guidance of our new president.

Does anyone understand what will happen to our civil rights if the secular humanists are able to erase God from our laws? We would no longer be "endowed by our Creator", but subject to the whims of a soulless government. We are almost there already.

I would submit, Kuranes, that every serious, ideological humanist is at least a crypto-Marxist/socialist. The two manifestos are like two peas in a pod!

It depends on what "Christian" really means. By my orthodox, biblical standards Obama is closer to a radical liberationist (superficially "Christian" because they major on social justice themes from a primarily Maxist point of view) - than to a true biblical Christian. His church in Chicago was exactly the former: he can't be far off after 20 years sittin' under the Rev.

God does not call followers of Yahweh, OT or NT, to kick back and let Him do it all. We have certain definite responsibilities: living the life, preaching the Gospel of Grace and building a Messianic culture/state (by passionately living it out and voting).

My concern is not so much for the secularists, but for the Church, which is in such DIRE straights. There is such woeful ignorance of sound biblical truth and a tawdry addiction to emotionalism and "religionism" that its voice is only a mere whisper of what it should be. The religious voices that ARE heard are very far from the biblical model. The victory of humanism in the last election was not because it is right or effective (has answers), but because the Church seriously dropped the ball - over a century or more.

My optimism is based ONLY on the powerful truth of God's infallible Word and the Messianic rule of Jesus Christ, which can't be seen by unbelieving and unregenerate eyes. But no doubt, someday "every knee shall bow and every tongue confess . . . that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."

Sometimes things just have to play out. Jesus compared it to yeast working through a batch of doe. Time is not scarce in God's economy, and Divine Truth WILL ultimately prevail. All else will fall under its own eroneous weight - including religionism and churchianity.

IThe oath as written in the Constitution does not have any reference to God, but does say he must either "solemnly swear (or affirm)". This clearly indicates that the President-Elect has a choice. Swearing is usually taken to mean swearing an oath to a deity or other supernatural source. Affirming means simply making a clear commitment of one's own conscience.

So, the framers made it quite plain they were allowing for those who would choose not to swear. I doubt they expected an atheist, but it is possible a Deist or some stringent form of even Christian believer might find it anathema to swear an oath.

That said, I don't think God can be erased from our nation's federal laws, because they do not get their power from God. We are a nation set up by and accountable to the governed: We the People. No God required to set the Constitution as the final arbiter of laws.

The magical words, "so help me God", in my opinion, do not change the effects of Conscience. A man with weak enough ethics will contradict his oath to uphold laws whether he says them or not. Obama's understanding of Niebhur persuades me he is not weak ethically.
He shares this interest in the great mid-20th-century theologian with John McCain.

Finally, because such utterances, unless demanded by officials of those freely elected, or imposed by school systems upon children, or otherwise coerced from the general populace, are harmless, I do not think most atheists care if they are floating about in the parlance. They serve as little code words, often, to signify allegiance to (or feigned support for/pleading to) those who would be uncomfortable otherwise with whomever is saying them. They may also serve to assuage certain fears and insecurities for the speaker. Many studies show those with humble attitudes and reverence for nature's and life's gifts (and the ability to lessen the impact of life's vicissitudes) live longer, healthier lives. Sometimes I wish it were possible to believe in such incantations just to get the same edge against killer stress!

IThe oath as written in the Constitution does not have any reference to God, but does say he must either "solemnly swear (or affirm)". This clearly indicates that the President-Elect has a choice. Swearing is usually taken to mean swearing an oath to a deity or other supernatural source. Affirming means simply making a clear commitment of one's own conscience.

So, the framers made it quite plain they were allowing for those who would choose not to swear. I doubt they expected an atheist, but it is possible a Deist or some stringent form of even Christian believer might find it anathema to swear an oath.

That said, I don't think God can be erased from our nation's federal laws, because they do not get their power from God. We are a nation set up by and accountable to the governed: We the People. No God required to set the Constitution as the final arbiter of laws.

The magical words, "so help me God", in my opinion, do not change the effects of Conscience. A man with weak enough ethics will contradict his oath to uphold laws whether he says them or not. Obama's understanding of Niebhur persuades me he is not weak ethically.
He shares this interest in the great mid-20th-century theologian with John McCain.

Finally, because such utterances, unless demanded by officials of those freely elected, or imposed by school systems upon children, or otherwise coerced from the general populace, are harmless, I do not think most atheists care if they are floating about in the parlance. They serve as little code words, often, to signify allegiance to (or feigned support for/pleading to) those who would be uncomfortable otherwise with whomever is saying them. They may also serve to assuage certain fears and insecurities for the speaker. Many studies show those with humble attitudes and reverence for nature's and life's gifts (and the ability to lessen the impact of life's vicissitudes) live longer, healthier lives. Sometimes I wish it were possible for me to believe in such incantations just to get the same edge against killer stress!

To Kuranes: Anyone can "say" they believe in God, and the demons do also, and they shudder(James 2:19). It makes no difference what the President says, but what is in his heart. He "says" he is a christian, but also believes in evolution, which is ridiculous. Mr. O'Bama does not believe in a literal 7-day creation, and that is exactly what the Scriptures say. He is no christian, but just one who "professes" to be in order to receive votes. When he debated Alan Keys while running for governer of Illinois, he made him look silly. O'Bama really doesn't understand the Bible or God if you ask me, and it shows when he is asked about his faith. It does not match what the Bible teaches on the subject at all. Jesus is definitely in control, and He is using O'Bama for His sovereign purposes. In fact, God Himself is the one who put O'Bama there in the first place, and He can take him out as well(Daniel 2:21). And by the way, this is not about any "religious opinions", but about absolute truth. Jesus is the way, the truth, and the life, and no one comes to the Father except through Him. There is but one way, and no other. Opinions mean nothing.