Obama: Christian or Muslim?

Obama: Muslim or Christian




When Obama first took office nearly 12% of the population thought him to be a Muslim. Now nearly 33% of Americans think Obama is a closet Muslim. There are pictures floating the internet of Obama removing his shoes as he is about to pray with certain Muslims. But, there are others pictures of Obama at the wailing wall with what looks like a Jewish kippah, or skullcap on his head. We don’t know where he was born, we don’t know who his father was, we don’t know why there are no records of his college life. No one really seems to know who Barack Obama is.

That kind of mystery feeds the frenzy surrounding his religious claims. He claims to be a Christian. I suppose only God knows but if he is a Christian he is certainly a mediocre Christian at best if there even is such a person. We could count on one hand the number of times he’s taken his family to church in the last 18 months. He says he receives a daily devotional from Josh DuBois, the director of the Faith-Based Initiatives Office, on his blackberry. The Bible would be a better source of inspiration than a Blackberry. By his own admission he said he didn’t attend Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s church often enough to realize that the pastor who married he and his wife and mentored him for 21 years had a deep seated hatred for America and all she stands for.

If Obama is Christian then he is mediocre at best. The Bible has some pretty harsh words for those who would choose mediocrity. “Because you are lukewarm and neither hot nor cold, I will spit you out of my mouth.” (Rev. 3:16)

So, let’s assume Barack is a closet Muslim. Would the Muslims want to claim him. If we measured Obama by the five pillars of Muslim he comes up very short.

1. A Muslim believer will make this profession: “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is his messenger.” I’ve never heard Obama utter those words.

2. A Muslim believer is directed to give 2.5% of his income to the needy. Tax records reveal that the Obamas gave less than 1% of their income to charity in the five years leading up to his run for the presidency.

3. A Muslim believer must pray toward Mecca five times a day. If Obama does this he is a match for the late Houdini.

4. A Muslim believer fasts during the month of Ramadan. There is no evidence that Obama has ever conducted a fast during that month.

5. A Muslim believer is expected to make at least one pilgrimage to Mecca in his lifetime. There is no record that Obama has done that.

If he is a Muslim, he is not very devout. He is mediocre at best.

I suspect that Obama is neither a devout Christian nor is he a devout Muslim. I believe strongly that he is a devout humanist. I teach humanism as a religion in my Apologetics class. According to the Humanist Manifesto, humanism is a “philosophical, religious and moral point of view.” Most humanists would deny their beliefs are a religion because they don’t want to be expelled from public schools.

Humanists believe in an ethical relativism or the belief that no absolute morals exist. Man adjusts his ethical standards according to the situation (situational ethics) in which he finds himself. What’s right for you may not be right for me. Man, not God, makes up the rules. We don’t really discover any existing truth, we sort of develop truth as we go.

Past presidents who were most aware of the existence and presence of God were the most humble of presidents. Arrogance and pride replace humility when we center our beliefs on humanity instead of the Divine. I remember frequent references to God by Ronald Reagan and George “W”. I even remember Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter referring often to the Almighty One. I would be interested if someone did a search to discover the number of references Obama has made to God compared to previous presidents.

Christian…questionable. Muslim….they wouldn’t have him. Humanist seems to fit him well.

I felt like weeping...

I felt like weeping…

Did you wake up the Monday morning after Obamacare was passed with an empty feeling in your gut. Did you feel like your country may never be quite the same? I remembered the crying Indian picture from years ago. A tear trickled down his cheek as he looked out over the destruction of his land. That’s how I felt on Monday morning, maybe its how you felt too.

My ancestors approached Philadelphia on a ship in 1732 with their hearts bursting with hope. It seems surreal to me that my country is now very much like the country they were fleeing. We call ourselves a Representative Democracy. 70% of Americans disprove of healthcare. In what way are our Congressmen representing the will of the people? They are no longer responsive the people. They have no qualms about trampling the Constitution. Individualism is despised. The will of the majority is trampled by a government too eager to respond to the sniffles of a whiney minority.

I feel a pain similar to the Indian’s when I see the hurt in the eyes of our friends and loyal allies. Britain and Israel are despised while Castro and Hugo Chavez are embraced. I wonder why we refuse to harvest the natural resources God has blessed us with? I remember Ronald Reagan’s warning about the enlargement of government and wonder how our representatives have let our government reach behemoth size?

I tell my students that they are witnessing the demise of western civilization. That the greatest country on earth is rambling toward bankruptcy and unless we make some drastic changes we will no longer be king of the hill. I tell them that it is unlikely they will experience the same standard of living that their parents experienced and they look at me with blank stares.

It’s troubling when I ask them if their families are discussing the healthcare bill and many say there is no talk of it at home. Somer hardly see their parents. Everyone is so busy or so preoccupied watching American Idol or Dancing with the Stars. The masses are bound by a cord of ignorance or they are so busy seeking entertainment that they have no idea what is happening to their country.

I feel like weeping when I see the backroom, cigar smoking thugs wheeling and dealing for the soul of America. They don’t do this secretly, they do this out in the open. It is “in your face” politics; raw, blatant, immoral and unethical.

We will remember being the wealthiest nation in the history of the world. Then we put the lower class back on the plantation with a entitlement mentality spawned by Johnson’s war on poverty. We will now add the middle class to the plantation population by offering them the entitlement drug. Why are a people so easily deceived. Do they think the liberals are providing healthcare for them because they love them? Do they not realize this is all about power? It’s about controlling the masses. They have taken over the banks, then the automotive industry, then the health care industry. What happened to free enterprise? If we could see under their sleeves we would see the word ‘socialism’ tattooed on their forearms.

Repeal the law? Not likely. Find me an entitlement program that the Republicans have ever been able to repeal. It’s like giving candy to a baby and snatching it away. They will never allow it. The states will overturn it? Not likely. The states are lackeys to the federal government, utterly dependent on federal money for roads, schools, etc. Resisting the federal government would require a cold turkey withdrawal from the drug they are so dependent on. The Supreme Court will overturn it? Not likely. If it ever does reach the Supreme Court it will likely be majority liberal by that time.

Does it make you feel like weeping? It makes me feel like it.

Did They Do Their Homework?

Did They Do Their Homework?

Anytime I make a big decision, especially if it concerns large amounts of money, I try to do exhaustive research to make sure I get the best deal. It might take twelve months to buy a house. Buying a car requires several months. I can’t think of a more important decision an American can make than voting for the man who would lead them for a four year block. I’m wondering, those who voted for Barack Obama, did they do their homework? Did they do any research at all before making such a momentous decision?

Sex education in public schools has become a major issue in our culture. President Bush designated a significant sum of federal money toward abstinence based educational programs. If you voted for Obama you voted against abstinence based sex educating. The Obama administration eliminated $150 million in funding for abstinence based education. Instead, they have committed $183 million to a new program called Pregnancy Prevention Initiative. The idea is to fund only programs that are proven to be effective through scientific research.

Is there any scientific evidence that abstinence sex education works? A study published in the Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine (Vol. 164 No. 2, February, 2010) shows that 33% of Middle School students chosen for abstinence education became sexually active within two years. Nearly 52% of those attending safe sex programs became sexually active. The conclusion of the study: Abstinence only interventions are effective in preventing adolescent sexual involvement. Obama promised over and over during his campaign that his policies would be based on scientific research and facts. Abstinence program had the highest success rate among all sex education programs for youth. Why is Obama’s administration eliminating a program that is scientifically proven? Why is he willing to put our children at risk?

Dr. Eckman, President of Grace University, “As our dysfunctional culture ignores God’s boundaries for sexual activity, there will be tragic consequences. For that reason there will be sexually transmitted diseases, there are teen pregnancies. It is the children that are born to such pregnancies that will suffer the most.” The only hope for behavioral change is not the Congress, it’s not passing new laws, it is the unmerited grace of God that can change the deprived heart of men.

If you voted for Barack Obama you voted against vouchers for public education. Students enrolled in the Washington D.C. vouchers program advanced significantly beyond their public school peers. Over 70% of D.C. residents approved of the program. You would think that Obama would enthusiastically support such a program because he benefited from similar programs as he advanced up the ladder. Why would Obama not support such a program that presents itself as an alternative to public education. Does he not send his daughters to one of the most prestigious private schools in the country?

Obama cut federal funds for the D.C. voucher program. It just doesn’t seem to make any sense unless you look at the National Education Association (NEA), one of the most liberal and strongest supporting unions of Obama and his liberal policies. The funds were refused because the NEA sent orders to Obama. Obama put politics above the welfare of the children living in his own community. There is scientific evidence that voucher programs educate more efficiently than government run schools.

If you voted for Obama you probably feel less secure since he took office. Obama has sent a clear message to terrorists that if they launch an attack on U.S. citizens they will not be water-boarded. He has sent a message that some terrorist may qualify to be tried under U.S. law as if they were U.S. citizens rather than in a military tribunal. Those who have attacked the U.S. have committed an act of war. They are not criminals who have violated some federal law, they are war criminals who have no rights to the privileges of U.S. law. Obama allowed his Attorney General, Eric Holder, to treat terrorism as a law enforcement issue rather than a national security issue.

Obama’s group from Chicago are amateur, they are fumbling the ball on terrorism, on sex education, on vouchers, on healthcare, on foreign policy. They have demonstrated over and over a very poor judgment on issues that will have life and death consequences for many Americans.

Its obvious Americans didn't do their homework before the last election. There is still time to get it done before we vote again in 2012.

Love: Is It a Freedom or a Bondage?

Love: Is It a Freedom or a Bondage??

Freedom is so complex. I’ve observed so many who think they are free but they are actually bound. I’ve seen many who feel they are bound without realizing just how free they are. Our modern culture would define freedom as the ability to determine one’s own morality, to decide one’s own values. I witnessed first-hand as a young child the ‘freedom’ of the revolutionaries of the 1960’s. Their proclamation that ‘free love’ was liberating was a farce. They were bound tightly to their own sensuality and sexual exploits. They were imprisoned by their own ideas and beliefs.

So, can we so easily define freedom as the absence of restrictions and constraint? When I was a youth, about nine years old, my mother thought it would be good for me to learn to play the piano. I took several lessons but soon began to feel imprisoned by the hours of practice while my friends were out playing. I decided I’d rather run the woods than play the piano and learned to appreciate my ‘freedom’. But, had I been willing to sacrifice those hours of leisure I would certainly had learned to play the piano and today that same bondage would have given me freedom to display talents and enjoy certain achievements. At age nine I couldn’t understand the freedom that would result in my bondage.

Freedom is not really the absence of restrictions, it is finding the right restrictions, those that would benefit us most in our development. We had pet rabbits when I was young. We kept them in a hutch. We also had a dog, a German Shepherd named Bigi. We learned the hard way that sometimes restrictions can be a good thing. We felt sorry for the rabbit living in his cage, but when we set him free we exposed him to a danger he couldn’t cope with.

I hear so many who look at those of us who are Christians and they will say, “Why live in that bondage? Don’t you want to be free? You can’t decide your own morals, you are bound by such a narrow set of beliefs.” Ironically, it is the Christian’s limitations that actually make him free. Christian love may seem to be confining but it is very liberating.

When I fell in love with Shannon, my wife, I knew that loving her would require that I sacrifice some of my own independence. I knew marrying her meant sharing the decisions of the future. I knew that love limits freedom and it limits one’s options. But, there was a mysterious freedom in the limitations. The lost of independence was mutual. She also chose to live under the constraints of love. There is a mutual sacrifice and giving which may seem like a bondage but it is actually liberating. It is a joy to make offerings of sacrifice to one you love deeply.

C.S. Lewis explained it so eloquently, “Love anything, and your heart will certainly be wrung and possibly broken. If you want to make sure of keeping it intact, your must give your heart to no one, not even an animal….lock it up safe in the casket or coffin or your selfishness. But in that casket – safe, dark, motionless, airless – it will change. It will not be broken, it will become unbreakable, impenetrable, irredeemable. The alternative to tragedy, or at least to the risk of tragedy, is damnation.”

For a love relationship to be happy there must be mutual sacrifice. Those who have not experienced the love of God will say, “Loving God is a one way street. If he is God, it’s his way or the highway.” But this is so not true. What makes the God of the Christians so peculiar from all other imposters is that he made the sacrifice of love. He gave his only begotten Son to die a horrible death in our stead. His Son took on the limitations of humanity so he could minister to us and make that ultimate sacrifice. Faith is so important in the Christian’s relationship with God. If you are willing to accept the limitations that come with loving him you will experience a freedom you’ve never know before.

If The Health Care Bill Passes

If the Health Care Bill passes:

Pelosi said she would do whatever it takes to pass the bill, she means it. This will be either a huge victory or a huge defeat for the Democrats. After so much investment, Obama can't afford a defeat. Be assured they'll pull every dirty trick out of their Chicago politics playbook to pass this bill. This bill will become an addictive entitlement to the American people. If the bill passes:

1. There will be a government committee to decide what treatments/benefits you get. (page 30 section 123)

2. Healthcare will be provided to all non-US citizens, illegal or otherwise. (page 50 Section 152

3. The government will have real-time acess to individual's bank accounts for elective funds transfer (page 59, lines 21-24)

4. The government will tell Doctors/American Medical Association what salary they can make. (page 127 lines 1-16)

5. Any individual who doesn't have acceptable health care according to the governkment will be taxed 2.5% of their income. (page 167 lines 18-23)

6. The tax imposed will be labeled as a fee rather than a tax. (page 203, line 14-15)

7. The government will determine if a hospital can expand or not. (page 317-318, lines 21-23, 1-3)

8. The government will mandate a program for orders on "end-of-life" (The government will demand a say in how your life ends!) (page 427, lines 15-24)

9. The government will restrict enrollment of 'special needs people!' (page 354 section 1177)

10. The government will cover marriage and family therapy. More meddling by the government in your family's affairs. (page 489, section 1308)

JonBenet Ramsey, Carrie Prejean and Adriana Lima.

JonBenet was a beautiful little girl born in the Atlanta suburb of Dunwoody in 1990. Six years later her battered and strangled body was found by her father in the basement of their Colorado home. The murder of JonBenet Ramsey was never solved. Her life and death was troubling in so many ways. Questions began to be raised about whether such a young child should be pushed into the modeling world and pressured to perform on the catwalk. Should a six year old child be taught that her worth is in her external beauty?

Our culture sends a strong message very early in life to its young females that gives them a wrong self-perception. Young girls hear the broken-record message over and over again that they are not pretty enough. They are told that they weigh too much or that their faces are not beautiful. Confusion reigns when they hear another message from their mothers and guidance counselors, a message assuring them that they are gorgeous and beautiful. The first message leads to self-hatred and the second sometimes leads to an exalted self-esteem. Either way, our daughters are taught to spend inordinate amounts of time searching inwardly for the beauty defined by their culture. This constant introspection can lead to an unhealthy obsession with themselves and eventually to depression. When our children embrace such cultural deception it can lead to eating disorders, early promiscuity and a sad emptiness.

The culture’s concept that beauty as defined by external traits is contrary to the word of God but reinforced by our daughter’s role models. Carrie Prejean, the beauty contestant from California, spawned a cultural tsunami by openly declaring that she believed marriage should be between a man and a woman. Some of the criticism coming from left leaning feminists might cause one to pause and reflect. One feminist wrote this: “I would suggest that if they expect people to take them (Carrie Prejean and Lauren Ashley, Miss Beverly Hills) seriously as Christians, they re-think the industry and lifestyle they've chosen. It's simply difficult to swallow moral and religious posturing from two women who, it seems to me, have opted to pick and choose for themselves when and where they act Biblically.”

Adriana Lima is a Roman Catholic Christian from Brazil. She is the 3rd highest paid model in the world doing much of her work for Victoria’s Secret. Even though she struggles with the desertion of her father at age six, Adriana declares, “I wouldn't change anything about my life. I am afraid that if I did, things might have turned out differently and I am currently living my dream”. Leslie Ludy, author of several books addressing the biblical definition of beauty, including Authentic Beauty and The Lost Art of True Beaut, reveals some statements Adriana made that seem to be contradictory . Adriana claims that every part of her beauty, from the top of her head to the bottom of her feet is fake. It is all artificially manufactured. “Even my heart is fake,” Adriana said. She has gone from relationship to relationship. From Derek Jeter of the New York Yankees to Prince Wenzeslaus of Liechtenstein. Her search for happiness has only brought her emptiness and heart break.

Paul speaks to Timothy about internal feminine beauty. He said women should “dress modestly…with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God.” More lasting and meaningful beauty is found, not in the external appearance, but in the inward display of Christlikeness. God is all about the heart. A woman’s real source of beauty is that which God puts within the heart. This beauty outlasts youth. It stretches into the middle and later years when external beauty tends to fade.

Can Christian women walk down a runway scantily clad and reflect the humble beauty of our Savior? Our daughters won’t learn the biblical model of modesty and dignity from the world. They will only learn it in the home and in the church. They need more than just being told, they need this type of beauty modeled for them by women of faith.

"Fear Not!"

"Fear Not!"

I snatched my four year old up on my knee the other day and asked him, "Kam, what are you afraid of." Without missing a beat he looked up at me and said, "I'm not afraid of anything, I'm a superhero." But, as his father, I am very much aware of what his fears are.

We all fear something. We aren't superheroes. Howard Hughes was constantly washing his hands because he feared germs. Ronald Reagan was afraid to fly. Adolph Hitler feared getting cancer. William Shakespeare, Mussolini, Napoleon Bonaparte, Julius Caesar, Alexander the Great and Dwight Eisenhower are all reported to have suffered from ailurophobia, the fear of cats. Everyone seems to fear something. What is your fear?

In March of 1933 America had elected a new president. The country was suffering through a Great Depression and fear seemed to permeate all of our society. The words of our new president on his inauguration day were etched in the annals of history, "This nation will endure as it has endured, will revive and will prosper. So, first of all let me assert my firm belief that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself...nameless, unreasoning, unjustified terror which paralyzes needed efforts to convert retreat into advance."

It seems our country is feeling such fear again. People fear a failing economy, they fear the indecisiveness in the White House, they fear the incompetence in the Congress. Some of the more common fears we suffer from are: fear of public speaking, fear of needles, fear of heights, fear of failure, fear of driving, fear of thunder and fear of crowds. Could we not list thousands of fears we struggle with?

The Apostle Paul was concerned about Timothy so he wrote him a letter. "Paul," he said, "God did not give us a spirit of fear, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline." Timothy had a problem. Obviously it was something he feared. It seems he feared failure. We often fear change. We fear taking a new direction. We fear when God asks us to follow his plan instead of our own. What happens if I step out into a new ministry and it doesn't go well? What happens if I fail?

Change is sometimes a fearful thing and if we are going to be a part of God's plan to transform lives we must be willing to embrace change. When God has a goal to accomplish he sometimes asks us to change assignments. The older we are the more difficult this is to do. But, when he asks us to change directions we don't have to walk that path alone. He promises to send a Comforter to walk with us. When our lives quake with unexpected change we can rest in the arms of One who is unchangeable, the same yesterday, today and forever.

Fear is a tool Satan uses to try to neuter our faith. How many diseases were never cured? How many enemies were never conquered? How many products were never invented? How many great things have we failed to accomplish for God because we were afraid to step out on a limb? We must cast off the spirit of fear and receive the spirit of power and love and self-discipline.

Three Blind Men and an Elephant

Three Blind Men and an Elephant

One of the most frequent criticisms I hear regarding Christianity is its claim to exclusivity. Is there really only one way? Is there really only one God? Does Christianity really exclude all who refuse to believe this? By definition, a Christian can't possibly claim Christianity if he is not a follower of Jesus Christ. There are stark differences between Jews, Muslims and Christians. Those major differences revolved tightly around the person of Jesus Christ.

C.S. Lewis pointed out the 'absurd' claims of Jesus. Jesus said he was the 'son of God.' He said that he was a mediator between God and man. He said that his death would make man's salvation possible and he would go to prepare a place for man in his eternal home. We can only conclude three things. Either Jesus knew what he was saying was false and he was a liar, or he had no idea that what he was saying was false, making him a lunatic or he told the truth, making him, indeed, the Son of God. Those who don't accept Christ as the Messiah will often claim he was a 'good teacher'. If he wasn't the son of God he was a liar. No liar can be a 'good teacher.' Lunatics don't make good teachers either.

Many in our world today embrace the idea that religious differences are the source of friction that leads to culture disagreements and even war. Who would disagree? Radical Muslims hate Americans because they perceive deep and troubling differences in our laws of morality. The suggested solution is to eliminate all religions thereby paving the way to peace on earth. Millions in the last century lost their lives as the world's demagogues attempted this very thing. Killing off Christians is like trying to stomp out ants in an anthill. The more you stomp the more they appear. Christianity will never go away and it will never be eliminated by any form of government!!

It is interesting to observe how carefully politicians will tip-toe around the issue of religion in an attempt to pacify those who oppose exclusivity. They often discuss their Christianity only when it’s convenient and they 'hide it under a bush' when they are speaking to a crowd who would condemn exclusivity. When I hear some say that all religions are equally valid, they all worship the same god and basically teach the same thing I want to gag. Do they really want to claim that Jim Jones' group and other sects that lead their followers to child sacrifice and mass suicide are in no way inferior to any other faith?

The most common argument against exclusivity is the story of the blind men who 'see' an elephant. One man grabs the elephant’s trunk and says, "This creature is long and flexible like a snake." Another grabs the elephants leg and says, "This creature is round and firm like a tree." A third slides his hands along the side of the elephant and says, "This creature is large and flat." The claim is that no religion can be superior to any other because the religions of the world can only grasp partial truth, not whole truth. Anyone who declares to know truth is considered arrogant and ignorant..

How can anyone who makes such a claim know it to be true unless they see the whole truth, how can they say that no one else sees the whole truth? If the truth is that know one knows the truth, are they not contradicting themselves by claiming to know at least one truth: that know one can know the truth? Which group is being arrogant here? Are they not saying, "All claims about the truth are questionable accept the claim I am now making; that no one can really know the truth"?

At the risk of sounding arrogant and ignorant, I am a strong advocate of exclusivity. I believe this because the Christ I follow said, "I am the way, the truth and the life: No man cometh to the Father except by me." It sounds exclusive because it is. If we are followers of Christ we will be devoted to the exclusivity that he taught.

The Feminist Ideal of Woman is Unscriptural and Unappealing

The Feminist Ideal of Woman is Unscriptural and Unappealing








It has been traditional for the world’s cultures to prepare their men for war. Sports has been instrumental in teaching young boys character traits such as team work, courage, and determination that would be needed if they were called upon to defend their country. After World War II women began to take a greater role in the work force and the feminist movement began to push women to compete with men. The distinct differences between the sexes was put through the gender blender and women learned that to be successful competitors they would have to take on some of the more aggressive male characteristics.

The feminists declared that a woman could have both a career and a family. Today, 47% of women with professional degrees have no children but only 14% of them wanted no children. As women were trained to be more aggressive and assertive men began to feel confused about their own roles. The new feminist was unappealing to many men and some, in fact, began to hate such women. Men are troubled to look at a women and see a reflection of himself: aggressive, competitive, assertive, bold and driven. The feminist told women to become more like men but they didn’t tell them that they would lose male love in the process.

I was shocked recently when I saw Brittany Griner, a female basketball player for Baylor University round-house sucker-punch Jordan Bailey, an opponent from Texas Tech. It seemed to be a microcosm of an ailment that is infecting our society. A search of my Bible teaches me that the ideal, godly woman finds her beauty in her “inner self, the unfading beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit, which is of great worth in God's sight. For this is the way the holy women of the past who put their hope in God used to make themselves beautiful.” (1 Peter 3:4-5) I don’t have any daughters but I think I might have second thoughts about putting her in situations where she is taught to be overtly masculine and aggressive.

God made men to be lovingly accepted and affirmed by their wives. God made women to be possessed and cherished by their husbands. If both play their roles according to scripture the chances of marital success are very good. But if the woman, who has been taught to be aggressive and competitive decides to compete with her husband for control and authority the marriage is endangered. If a husband, who recognizes that his wife is stronger than he, becomes passive and submissive he presents to her exactly what she does not want or need.

The godly woman is not characterized as a hunter or a killer. The godly woman finds her self-worth in her selflessness. The response of a man to a woman who gives of herself for her children and husband is to cherish and protect her. She is like a precious jewel that must be guarded and defended at all costs. Hollywood would like to portray women as being distant, elevated goddesses to be worshipped by men and men are all too willing to bow to these gods. But the woman described in the word of God is passionate and sexual, she needs commitment, love and direction from a man.

Scripture (Titus 2:3-5) teaches that the older women should teach the younger “ to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands, so that no one will malign the word of God.” Many women infected by modern feminism will resist, even hate these words. But, the feminist ideal of woman has turned her into a cold, calculating competitor. Her value is in her physical sensuality. Men have pulled her down from being the selfless and sacrificial woman of Proverbs 31 and relegated her to an instrument used only for sexual satisfaction.

The result has been devastating. Men have no real respect for a woman who has no substance to add to her sensuality and women hate the men who no longer are man enough to take on the responsibilities of loving a wife and providing for his children. The symptoms of this contagious disease that has been spread by radical feminists for almost a century is a 50% divorce rate, gender confusion evidenced in the increase in homosexuality, an increase in spousal abuse and millions of broken families. The cure is to return to God’s designated gender roles clearly revealed in his word.

Why search for something that doesn't exist?

Why search for something that does not exist?

Nothing in life has any value nor does life itself have value. If you know someone who believes this they are nihilists. A nihilist turns the idea of morality on its head. If there is no moral truth then there is no God because God is the author of all truth. People need care. Christians depend on God for care. He feeds the birds and clothes the lilies of the field, he will surely care for us. But a nihilist must substitute some other caring source for a God they refuse to believe in, so they often turn to the government to care for them. 'Forty acres and a mule' takes on real meaning. The government owes them something: healthcare, a job, a home and perhaps a cash-for-clunker car. What does God feel when he is substituted by a mostly incompetent government? Does he feel anger? Pity? Frustration? I can't imagine how I'd feel if an irresponsible hobo living on the tracks were to declare himself caretaker for my son.

While a nihilist may question the existence of truth, the relativist might admit truth exists but not absolute truth. Relativism is the great societal cancer of our age. It's alarming how many are infected by this devastating disease. 72% of Americans believe there is no such thing as absolute truth. Even more troubling, 64% of born-again Christians resist the idea of absolute truth. This is certainly an oxymoron. A Christian is defined by what he believes. If he/she believes that truth is relative or something that mirrors the opinions of the present age, then one's profession of Christianity must certainly be in question. How can one claim to be a follower (believer) in Christ if they don't believe in absolute truth?

If I hear one more 'New Ager' declare there are many ways to Christ and many ways to heaven my head is going to explode. Jesus didn't say, "I am a way, a truth and a life", he said, "I am THE way, THE truth and THE life." If truth is not absolute and eternal then there is no such thing as sin. Sin can only exist if there is a divine Being and a divine standard. Christ didn't die so we could have our own opinions, Christ died so we might be saved from sin. If there is no sin there is no reason for Christ to die.

When I was a child I contemplated the myth that there was gold at the end of the rainbow and if one could ever find the rainbow's end he would find his life's fortune. Any one who believes this fable spends much time searching for something that does not exist. A philosopher, by definition, is one who searches for truth. Little wonder I was very confused in my college philosophy class when my professor declared there was no truth. What then were we searching for?

If truth exists but it is relative to a social construct then how would one explain slavery? It was accepted in our country's birth years, but we fought a devastating war because we were finally convinced that it was wrong. What happens if 200 years from now it becomes acceptable again? Absolute truth doesn't evolve. The validity of truth is not dependent on the popular opinion of a majority. The Author of all truth declares that He is the same yesterday, today and forever!"

I teach apologetics to high school students. I'm optimistic about the younger generation. The students I teach are too bright to be fooled into wasting their time or their lives seeking to find something that does not exist. Our quest to find truth is what gives meaning to our lives.