Wednesday, July 18, 2007
Near Death Experiences
I found an interesting article by a rabbi in the Newsweek section of msnbc.com. He basically describes the role of faith within the context of science and empirical evidence. You might find it of interest. Go to http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19811291/site/newsweek/.
Public Schools Grapple with Muslim Prayer
There is an interesting article in the Christian Science Monitor that ties in with my recent series on the First Amendment. This case involves Muslim children, and their request that they be allowed to pray in the school at certain times in accordance with Islamic practice.
Please see this article at
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0712/p01s03-ussc.html?page=1.
Please see this article at
http://www.csmonitor.com/2007/0712/p01s03-ussc.html?page=1.
Tuesday, July 17, 2007
Take Out the Garbage
I read something recently in a daily devotional that made me think, and reminded me of the garbage in yours and my life. I always look forward to garbage pickup day, which may seem a little strange. But I like getting all that garbage out of the house each week and starting afresh.
Life is like that too. We accumulate a lot of garbage that we need to get rid of. If we don’t get rid of it, it starts to smell and eventually ruin our life. In the Christian faith, we are encouraged to turn our garbage over to Jesus. We do that by confessing, or telling Jesus what the garbage is. We acknowledge we can’t do it alone, and ask for Jesus’ help. We then have to surrender our will to his, meaning we will let God’s Holy Spirit work in us to keep us from going back to the same old ways.
To do this we must practice the various spiritual disciplines, such as attending weekly worship services, praying often throughout the day, have a daily meditation (such as using a daily devotional), and participating in a Bible study. That may seem like a lot of work, but it isn’t. These eventually become part of your life, and pretty soon you can’t imagine a day without them. Think of all the time we waste watching TV or listening to the radio. Spend some of that time with Jesus, and pretty soon the amount of garbage in your life will diminish.
Life is like that too. We accumulate a lot of garbage that we need to get rid of. If we don’t get rid of it, it starts to smell and eventually ruin our life. In the Christian faith, we are encouraged to turn our garbage over to Jesus. We do that by confessing, or telling Jesus what the garbage is. We acknowledge we can’t do it alone, and ask for Jesus’ help. We then have to surrender our will to his, meaning we will let God’s Holy Spirit work in us to keep us from going back to the same old ways.
To do this we must practice the various spiritual disciplines, such as attending weekly worship services, praying often throughout the day, have a daily meditation (such as using a daily devotional), and participating in a Bible study. That may seem like a lot of work, but it isn’t. These eventually become part of your life, and pretty soon you can’t imagine a day without them. Think of all the time we waste watching TV or listening to the radio. Spend some of that time with Jesus, and pretty soon the amount of garbage in your life will diminish.
Monday, July 16, 2007
The First Amendment – Follow Up
Here are some current cases regarding the First Amendment (see earlier postings discussing the First Amendment). This is a list from a fund-raising email from the American Center for Law and Justice, P.O. Box 90555, Washington, D.C. 20090-0555. Phone: (800) 296-4529. Their website is www.aclj.org.
Summum v. Pleasant Grove - The latest attack on the public display of the Ten Commandments. A group is suing to display their own guidelines (the Seven ‘‘Aphorisms’’), and we’re already preparing to go to the Supreme Court of the United States if necessary.
Trunk v. City of San Diego - Opponents of the Mt. Soledad war memorial cross refuse to give up. They’re relentlessly fighting public expressions of the Christian faith, even after our court victories. We’ll file an amicus brief in federal court soon.
McLean Bible Church v. McLane, et al. - We’re in federal court because Fairfax County, Va., says a Bible church must become an official college or university in order to hold Bible studies or religious ministry classes in its facilities! It’s an obvious, outrageous attempt to squelch churches’ proclamation of the Gospel - and an attack on freedom of religion and speech.
We’re preparing a federal case in defense of Teen Challenge, one of the world’s most successful drug rehab programs. A local Tennessee planning commission has discriminated against this Christian organization by refusing them the use of property already zoned for rehab services!
In addition to these cases, below are two other recent cases that you’ll rarely read about or see in the mainstream media. You can see that religious expression is under relentless attack:
The Rev. Greg Davis, who was arrested in 2006 for sharing the Gospel on a public New York college campus, was acquitted of criminal trespassing charges recently, reports citizenlink.org.
“Christians have the same First Amendment rights as other citizens,” Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum said in a statement. “Thankfully the judge in this case restored the rule of law and cleared Mr. Davis of the charges, reaffirming that campus officials were not authorized to eject Mr. Davis from campus for simply exercising his First Amendment rights by preaching in public.”
Still another case:
Attorneys filed a motion Monday to a federal court on behalf of a Texas school district supporting a Bible class that officials say has been taught appropriately. The motion was in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and People for the American Way Foundation against the Ector County Independent School District in Odessa on behalf of eight parents in which the two groups asked school officials to stop offering the class.
The school board members feel the lawsuit is unnecessary, however, since the class is in no way violating any individual’s religious rights. The elective class uses a King James Version scripture as its text book and uses material from the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools. According to the Council, the curriculum is used by hundreds of schools, including more than 50 in Texas.
These last two cases were reported by the Pastor’s Weekly Briefing, 07/12/07, Copyright © 2007, Focus on the Family, All rights reserved.
Summum v. Pleasant Grove - The latest attack on the public display of the Ten Commandments. A group is suing to display their own guidelines (the Seven ‘‘Aphorisms’’), and we’re already preparing to go to the Supreme Court of the United States if necessary.
Trunk v. City of San Diego - Opponents of the Mt. Soledad war memorial cross refuse to give up. They’re relentlessly fighting public expressions of the Christian faith, even after our court victories. We’ll file an amicus brief in federal court soon.
McLean Bible Church v. McLane, et al. - We’re in federal court because Fairfax County, Va., says a Bible church must become an official college or university in order to hold Bible studies or religious ministry classes in its facilities! It’s an obvious, outrageous attempt to squelch churches’ proclamation of the Gospel - and an attack on freedom of religion and speech.
We’re preparing a federal case in defense of Teen Challenge, one of the world’s most successful drug rehab programs. A local Tennessee planning commission has discriminated against this Christian organization by refusing them the use of property already zoned for rehab services!
In addition to these cases, below are two other recent cases that you’ll rarely read about or see in the mainstream media. You can see that religious expression is under relentless attack:
The Rev. Greg Davis, who was arrested in 2006 for sharing the Gospel on a public New York college campus, was acquitted of criminal trespassing charges recently, reports citizenlink.org.
“Christians have the same First Amendment rights as other citizens,” Alliance Defense Fund Senior Legal Counsel Brian Raum said in a statement. “Thankfully the judge in this case restored the rule of law and cleared Mr. Davis of the charges, reaffirming that campus officials were not authorized to eject Mr. Davis from campus for simply exercising his First Amendment rights by preaching in public.”
Still another case:
Attorneys filed a motion Monday to a federal court on behalf of a Texas school district supporting a Bible class that officials say has been taught appropriately. The motion was in response to a lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union and People for the American Way Foundation against the Ector County Independent School District in Odessa on behalf of eight parents in which the two groups asked school officials to stop offering the class.
The school board members feel the lawsuit is unnecessary, however, since the class is in no way violating any individual’s religious rights. The elective class uses a King James Version scripture as its text book and uses material from the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools. According to the Council, the curriculum is used by hundreds of schools, including more than 50 in Texas.
These last two cases were reported by the Pastor’s Weekly Briefing, 07/12/07, Copyright © 2007, Focus on the Family, All rights reserved.
Friday, July 13, 2007
The First Amendment – Part VI
Conclusion
Frustrating as this situation is, what can we do? We don’t have any influence over the Supreme Court, which is responsible for much of this sad state of affairs. We can’t vote out the Supreme Court, but we can do something even more powerful. We can pray.
We as a nation can also turn away from the false idols we now worship and return to God, just as this Old Testament reading tells us (2 Chronicles 7:14-15):
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. NIV
Second, we can write Congress when there is a bill before them that supports the free exercise of religion. Fortunately, Congress has passed laws restoring rights to religious groups that the courts have been taking away. For example, the equal access law has guaranteed that religious groups have the same access as anybody else has to use schools and other public buildings.
Third, you can be open about your faith, knowing that you are protected by the First Amendment. Too often we are bullied by these wrong applications of the First Amendment, and so we fall silent in the face of these lies. Let us not hesitate to exercise our rights under the Constitution.
As we celebrate 231 years of freedom from British oppression, let’s commit to battle against another kind of oppression coming from a misguided Supreme Court. It’s really a spiritual battle, and we are well equipped with spiritual weapons. Let’s use them.
Frustrating as this situation is, what can we do? We don’t have any influence over the Supreme Court, which is responsible for much of this sad state of affairs. We can’t vote out the Supreme Court, but we can do something even more powerful. We can pray.
We as a nation can also turn away from the false idols we now worship and return to God, just as this Old Testament reading tells us (2 Chronicles 7:14-15):
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land. Now my eyes will be open and my ears attentive to the prayers offered in this place. NIV
Second, we can write Congress when there is a bill before them that supports the free exercise of religion. Fortunately, Congress has passed laws restoring rights to religious groups that the courts have been taking away. For example, the equal access law has guaranteed that religious groups have the same access as anybody else has to use schools and other public buildings.
Third, you can be open about your faith, knowing that you are protected by the First Amendment. Too often we are bullied by these wrong applications of the First Amendment, and so we fall silent in the face of these lies. Let us not hesitate to exercise our rights under the Constitution.
As we celebrate 231 years of freedom from British oppression, let’s commit to battle against another kind of oppression coming from a misguided Supreme Court. It’s really a spiritual battle, and we are well equipped with spiritual weapons. Let’s use them.
Thursday, July 12, 2007
The First Amendment – Part V
Misunderstandings of the First Amendment
In the year 1947, two momentous things happened. First, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, which showed how faithfully the Bible had been copied and transmitted over the centuries.
The second event of 1947 was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court, which I mentioned in an earlier posting. In the case Everson v. Board of Education the court reversed over 150 years of Supreme Court precedent. In that and subsequent cases, the Court radically changed the intent of the First Amendment as it had been understood since it was ratified.
Since 1947, most Supreme Court decisions involving religion have now been based on Everson and succeeding cases, not on the original intent or the first 150 years of court precedent. Because of this, there has evolved tremendous misconceptions and misinformation concerning the First Amendment, so that’s why I’m providing this information. For example, today most people think the words “church,” “state” and “separation” are in the Constitution – they are not, as we read in an earlier posting. Today, most people believe the phrase “wall of separation” is in the Constitution – it is not.
Wall of Separation
Where, then, did that famous term “wall of separation” come from? While Thomas Jefferson was President of the United States, the Danbury Baptist Association wrote him a letter. They were concerned about how the First Amendment might affect churches and the free exercise of religion, especially small and relatively new denominations. In 1802, President Thomas Jefferson wrote the following response to the Danbury Baptists to assure them that the intent of the First Amendment was to protect them.
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence ... a wall of separation between church and state.” (emphasis mine)
Read in context, we see that Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” was a protective wall, preventing government from interfering with the free practice of religion. The Wall is to keep government out of religion, not to keep religion out of society.
Since 1947, two things have happened regarding the “Wall of Separation” between Church and state. First, Jefferson’s letter has been totally misinterpreted so that his Wall is now being used as a barrier to keep any mention of God out of our society. The ACLU and others are spending large amounts of money trying to make this country cleansed of God.
Second, this misinterpretation of Jefferson’s letter now has the force of law, since it is constantly invoked with more weight than even the Constitution itself. This is the only time in history that a private letter from a President has essentially become law, and it is a misinterpretation of the letter at that! Rather than using the papers written by the framers of the Constitution and early court decisions, the courts today use this letter, wrongly understood, as their guide.
In the year 1947, two momentous things happened. First, the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered, which showed how faithfully the Bible had been copied and transmitted over the centuries.
The second event of 1947 was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court, which I mentioned in an earlier posting. In the case Everson v. Board of Education the court reversed over 150 years of Supreme Court precedent. In that and subsequent cases, the Court radically changed the intent of the First Amendment as it had been understood since it was ratified.
Since 1947, most Supreme Court decisions involving religion have now been based on Everson and succeeding cases, not on the original intent or the first 150 years of court precedent. Because of this, there has evolved tremendous misconceptions and misinformation concerning the First Amendment, so that’s why I’m providing this information. For example, today most people think the words “church,” “state” and “separation” are in the Constitution – they are not, as we read in an earlier posting. Today, most people believe the phrase “wall of separation” is in the Constitution – it is not.
Wall of Separation
Where, then, did that famous term “wall of separation” come from? While Thomas Jefferson was President of the United States, the Danbury Baptist Association wrote him a letter. They were concerned about how the First Amendment might affect churches and the free exercise of religion, especially small and relatively new denominations. In 1802, President Thomas Jefferson wrote the following response to the Danbury Baptists to assure them that the intent of the First Amendment was to protect them.
“Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legislative powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence ... a wall of separation between church and state.” (emphasis mine)
Read in context, we see that Jefferson’s “Wall of Separation” was a protective wall, preventing government from interfering with the free practice of religion. The Wall is to keep government out of religion, not to keep religion out of society.
Since 1947, two things have happened regarding the “Wall of Separation” between Church and state. First, Jefferson’s letter has been totally misinterpreted so that his Wall is now being used as a barrier to keep any mention of God out of our society. The ACLU and others are spending large amounts of money trying to make this country cleansed of God.
Second, this misinterpretation of Jefferson’s letter now has the force of law, since it is constantly invoked with more weight than even the Constitution itself. This is the only time in history that a private letter from a President has essentially become law, and it is a misinterpretation of the letter at that! Rather than using the papers written by the framers of the Constitution and early court decisions, the courts today use this letter, wrongly understood, as their guide.
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
The First Amendment – Part IV
Meaning of the Term “Religion”
To understand the background of the First Amendment, we also have to understand the meaning of the word “religion” in the 18th century. “Religion” in its 18th century usage generally referred to what we call today denominations or Churches within the Christian faith. For example, even today some Catholics refer to their church as the “Catholic Religion” even though it is a Church within the wider Christian faith.
Protestant churches today, such as the Church of England, Lutheran, Methodist, and others usually refer to themselves as denominations, not “religions.” The term “religion” today usually refers to Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other faiths in the world. At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, the United States was overwhelmingly Christian, so these other faiths weren’t considered, although they certainly would fall under its provisions given the wording of the First Amendment. The Founders were not thinking of other religions as we would today, since none of these other faiths were in the U.S. at that time. There was a relatively small number of Jewish people in the country, but everybody else had some sort of a Christian background.
Interestingly, most state constitutions required public officials to be practicing Christians, and those provisions within the state constitutions continued well after the U.S. Constitution was ratified. Despite revisionist history to the contrary, the vast majority of the Founders were devout and practicing Christians. Even Thomas Jefferson attended church regularly when he was president, and Benjamin Franklin attended various churches and supported public prayer. Although most of the Founders hadn’t lived in Europe, they were coming out of a European experience in which official state Christian “religions” oppressed minority Christian “religions.” Therefore, they wanted to allow all Christian “religions” freedom to exist without government interference, with no Christian “religion” being dominant.
As non-Christian faiths entered the country via immigrants, they were protected under the First Amendment. Its wording was broad enough that non-Christian faiths fell under its protection, so these immigrants could freely practice their religions in (at that time) a predominantly Protestant country. But we have to realize that “religion” in the First Amendment was understood to be Christian denominations. In no way were the Founders trying to eliminate Christianity or any mention of God from society, but rather to protect all religious expression from governmental interference.
To understand the background of the First Amendment, we also have to understand the meaning of the word “religion” in the 18th century. “Religion” in its 18th century usage generally referred to what we call today denominations or Churches within the Christian faith. For example, even today some Catholics refer to their church as the “Catholic Religion” even though it is a Church within the wider Christian faith.
Protestant churches today, such as the Church of England, Lutheran, Methodist, and others usually refer to themselves as denominations, not “religions.” The term “religion” today usually refers to Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Hinduism, Buddhism, and other faiths in the world. At the time of the drafting of the Constitution, the United States was overwhelmingly Christian, so these other faiths weren’t considered, although they certainly would fall under its provisions given the wording of the First Amendment. The Founders were not thinking of other religions as we would today, since none of these other faiths were in the U.S. at that time. There was a relatively small number of Jewish people in the country, but everybody else had some sort of a Christian background.
Interestingly, most state constitutions required public officials to be practicing Christians, and those provisions within the state constitutions continued well after the U.S. Constitution was ratified. Despite revisionist history to the contrary, the vast majority of the Founders were devout and practicing Christians. Even Thomas Jefferson attended church regularly when he was president, and Benjamin Franklin attended various churches and supported public prayer. Although most of the Founders hadn’t lived in Europe, they were coming out of a European experience in which official state Christian “religions” oppressed minority Christian “religions.” Therefore, they wanted to allow all Christian “religions” freedom to exist without government interference, with no Christian “religion” being dominant.
As non-Christian faiths entered the country via immigrants, they were protected under the First Amendment. Its wording was broad enough that non-Christian faiths fell under its protection, so these immigrants could freely practice their religions in (at that time) a predominantly Protestant country. But we have to realize that “religion” in the First Amendment was understood to be Christian denominations. In no way were the Founders trying to eliminate Christianity or any mention of God from society, but rather to protect all religious expression from governmental interference.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)