News-Record.com

We are MOST fortunate that God is still "a part" of the innauguration, because we are already SO OBVIOUSLY under divine judgement for our unbelief and sin as a nation. The fact that an apostate sodomite "bishop" will be "praying" is illustrative of the moral pit we are wallowing in at this point.

The further shame is that one true God of the Bible is just "a part." In fact, He should be the central focus of all public ceremony, governance and policy. And until He is, we will continue our downward slide into ruin and decay, as a culture, an economy, and as a political entity.

I'm an atheist who doesn't particularly care if the president chooses to say "so help me God" or make some other acknowledgment of his personal faith.

I'd be against that being REQUIRED...

That's fine, Joe. There seem to be two types of atheistic response to public affirmations such as this. One chooses to be consistent with his postion of freedom and personal choice for all.

The other is on a vitriolic warpath to eradicate all forms of religion (esp. Christianity) from the public arena.

You seem to be the former type. The latter sort fall into the "gall of bitterness" category, of those whose soul is in rebellion against the evident truth of God and his Law, mixed with inevitable guilt. Sin exudes bitterness and agressiveness. This is the dynamic of the latter category of atheists. No benign tolerance for them: gain control and throw the religious zealots to the "lions."

I can see how it would be galling to these sorts that Obama is playing the religion game. Because that's all it is to him: a political expediency. The real humanist agenda of Obama and company will only be revealed down the road a bit. We shall see.

Just when you think things have gotten better; some posts prove that thinking as error!

Sadly, far too many less than open-minded people of faith fail to realize that the founding fathers of the US sought to keep religious preference/reference neutral. There were reasons for this. If people chose to read accurate history, they might learn this. Until then, the rest of the populous will have to endure as has been done until now.

Shalom

I do want to correct one of my more virulent statements. I had read ( I think on this blog) that Obama had asked the gay Episcopal Bp. Robinson to pray. Perhaps it was at a venue other than the inaunguration, but he apparently was not in fact slated to pray there. My apologies.

The ones who did pray did a pretty decent job, although they were both very preachy and not consistently prayers: Warren's from some sort of evangelical point of view and the older gentleman's from a more religious left perspective.

As Peter and John said before the Jewish authorities who adjured them to speak no more concerning Yeshua, "We must obey God rather than men." For one who believes the Bible is indeed the inspired and authoritatvie Word of God, there is only ONE goal of human endeavor, political, spiritual or social: the willing bowng of every knee to the Savior of their soul, and Messianic King.

The Scripture tells, OT and NT, that God is patient and allows the unbeliever and sinner to gain the ascendancy for periods of time to show the failure and death of sinful ideas and policies in human affairs - and ultimately to vindicate God and His Word, and perchance to turn their wicked hearts to repentance and righteousness. If they willingly rebel and dishonor the Creator, they will be judged accordingly. This is the map of history and it will NOT change now that neo-Marxist humanists are in power. Their rule will be transient and their policies will fail and do much harm in the areas where they transgress God's Law/Word.

The Bible allows no "sharing of power" with those who hate and disobey God: only a civil waiting for man to fail so that God will have the supremacy. Not that I wish Obama et al. to "fail;" but that godless practices, by nature, ALWAYS fail - without exception. All the religious veneer of the inauguration etc. cannot long hide the unbiblical and anti-Christian policies already in the pipeline of the leftist Democrats. We can only hope that Obama has the reason and intestinal fortitude to resist the more radical demands of his leftwing handlers.

You can expect true biblical Christians to loudly and forcefully oppose the socialist and immoral policies of Obama and company (aobrtion, gay marriage, etc). No peaceful coexsitence here. After all, it is the culture WAR!

Just in case you didn't guess, I wrote the above.

Nikos says that sin "exudes bitterness and aggression." Want to know my vote as to which frequent poster on this blog consistently sopunds most bitter and aggressive?
Speaking of Nikos, he wants only his God to be the center and focus of everything, which leaves all the other peoples' gods with nothing. Nikos complains that his God (the "True" one, of course) gets only a measly "part" of the recognition, but he would leave the gods of others without even that. How's that for treating others the way you want to be treated?

Kuranes, do you realize that if there is the one and only living God of the Bible, and still there were other gods, then the God of the Bible would really not be God. The Scriptures teach that He is the divine creator of all life and the entire universe, and He sustains it as well. So if other gods, then this God would not really be God at all. He shares His throne with no one.

Yes, Joshua, if the God of the Bible were the only God, no other gods would exist. The same is true if the God of the Koran is the only God, or the God(s) of the Zend-Avesta, or Hesiod's Theogony, and so on. That's what "only" implies. The question is *whether* the God of the Bible is in fact God. You believe he is; many believe he is not. Does God reach down from heaven and forcibly change their minds? Obviously not. Does he prevent them from speaking of their gods, or worshipping and praising them, or urging others to do the same? No (not any more, at least; the prophets of Baal were not so lucky in Elijah's day). Since your God leaves people to believe and worship according to their conscience, shouldn't you do the same?