Friday, December 11, 2009
Most of us were shocked recently, if that's still possible, with Harry Reid's comments comparing those opposed to a government run health plan which would pay for abortion on demand to those who opposed slavery and civil rights for African-Americans. This misspeak was aimed specifically at the Republican Party. Really! I wonder if Harry received an "F" in U.S. History. It was Harry's party that resisted these rights for over 100 years! (Don't believe me, Click here:) I'm not surprised that politicians are getting by with comments like this since we no longer teach true History in our public school system. The following from Wallbuilder's reveals what really happened in recent years regarding the two parties:
"When Democrat John F. Kennedy was elected President in 1960, he had been less willing than Eisenhower to utilize executive orders to promote civil rights. He even delayed for more than two years the signing of an executive order to integrate public housing. However, following the violent racial discord in Birmingham in 1963, Kennedy sent a major civil rights bill to Congress – a bill based on the findings of Eisenhower’s 1957 Civil Rights Commission. Kennedy worked aggressively for the passage of that civil rights bill but was tragically assassinated before he could see its success. Democratic presidential successor Lyndon Johnson picked up the civil rights measure, but like his predecessors, he faced stiff opposition from his own party. In fact, Democratic Senators Robert Byrd of West Virginia and Richard Russell of Georgia led the opposition against the 1964 Civil Rights Act, including lengthy and extended filibuster speeches. Republican Senator Everett Dirksen resurrected language proposed by Eisenhower’s Attorney General in 1960, thus breaking the filibuster of the civil rights bill and allowing Johnson to sign into law the Civil Rights Act of 1964, followed by the Voting Rights Act of 1965. These two important civil rights acts were signed into law under a Democratic President, but it was the Republicans in Congress who made possible the passage of both acts, for Democratic President Johnson had been unable to garner sufficient Democratic support to pass either bill. At that time, Democrats had 315 members in Congress, holding almost two-thirds of the House and two-thirds of the Senate. President Johnson needed only a majority – only 269 votes – to get those bills passed; but out of the 315 Democrats, only 198 voted for passage. Democrats had it completely within their power to pass those bills and did not do so. The bills passed because Republicans overwhelmingly came to the aid of Democrat President Johnson: in fact, 83 percent of Republicans voted for those bills, a percentage of support almost twenty points higher than that of the Democrats. If not for the strong support of Republicans, the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965 would never have become law – not to mention the fact that the heart of both bills came from the work of Republican President Dwight D. Eisenhower. The 1964 Civil Rights Act had banned discrimination in voting, public accommodations, education, federal programs, or employment. The 1965 Voting Rights Act had banned literacy tests and authorized the federal government to oversee voter registration and elections in counties that had used such tests. Those two Acts – along with the 24th Amendment to the Constitution – were the final culmination of a century of civil rights legislation, and of even a longer period of attempts to secure equal rights and racial justice for African Americans. What was the effect of these three measures? The positive impact of these changes was immediate. For example, within a year, 450,000 new southern blacks were successfully registered to vote and voter registration of black Americans in Mississippi also rose sharply – from only 5 percent in 1960 to 60 percent by 1968. The number of blacks serving in federal and state legislatures rose from only 2 in 1965 to 160 by 1990. The disenfranchisement laws and policies long enforced by southern Democratic legislatures had finally come to an end."
And now, as the Late Paul Harvey would say,"You know the rest of the story."
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
"The grand reason why the
miraclous gifts were so soon withdrawn was not only that faith and
holiness were well-nigh lost, but that dry, formal, orthodox men began
then to ridicule whatever gifts they had not themselves and to cry them
all [down] as evil madness or imposture."-John Wesley
Sunday, October 25, 2009
We celebrated Pastor Appreciation Month today at Boonville Wesleyan Church. Pastor and Mrs Ames have been with us since the early nineties. How time flies. In that time we have seen such ministries as Indiana Wesleyan Academy. It has not been that long since we moved into our new sanctuary. Currently we minister on Wednesday evenings at Woodmont. I appreciate the different Pastors who have ministered to me personally over the years. Especially those who visited me when I underwent surgery back on February 2007. When Pastors are mentioned I always think of John Wesley who rode horseback enough miles to circle the globe several times. He gave up a life of comfort to bring the Gospel to many who would never be able to enter the great social churches of 18th century England.He often met great and violent resistance from those who didn't want to hear his message. Many churches of today probably couldn't handle some of the truths of which he spoke. As the Rev'd Dr. Jack Van Impe says,"Sermonettes usually produce Christianettes." Preaching the Word isn't always easy in today's world. When your Pastor does, be sure to give him or her a pat on the back and tell them how much you appreciate them...God Bless...keith..1 Cor 13.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Wednesday, September 30, 2009
By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar, Associated Press
The 13-10 vote by the Senate Finance Committee could threaten support for the health care bill from some Catholics who otherwise back its broad goal of expanding coverage. But women's groups are likely to see the committee's action as a reasonable compromise on a divisive issue that is always fraught with difficulties.
Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, argued that provisions already in the bill to restrict federal funding for abortions needed to be tightened to guarantee they would be ironclad.
But his amendment failed to carry the day. One Republican - Olympia Snowe of Maine - voted with the majority. One Democrat - Kent Conrad of North Dakota - supported Hatch.
Separately, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said that the full Senate could start voting on health care legislation the week of Oct. 12, after the Columbus Day holiday. Reid has to meld the Finance bill with legislation that the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee approved this summer.
Conservatives also are determined to strengthen prohibitions against illegal immigrants getting federal funding to buy insurance.
Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa offered an amendment that would have helped cut fraud in health care programs for low-income people. It would have required applicants to present a government-issued ID when applying for Medicaid or the children's health care program.
But Democrats said unscrupulous medical providers - not beneficiaries - are usually the ones responsible for fraud. They said current ID requirements for beneficiaries are strong enough. The vote was 13-10, against the amendment.
Emotions ran high over the health care issue in Congress.
In the House, a Democratic lawmaker angered Republicans when he summed up their health care alternative as the GOP wanting Americans to "die quickly" if they get sick. Rep. Alan Grayson of Florida has refused to apologize for his remarks on the House floor Tuesday night in which he called GOP health care proposals a "blank piece of paper."
Republicans are likening the remarks to Rep. Joe Wilson's widely criticized shout of "You lie!" during Obama's address to Congress earlier this month. They say Democrats should insist that Grayson apologize just as they insisted Wilson, R-S.C., should.
The abortion debate in the Senate Finance Committee is certain to be waged again - with higher stakes and greater intensity - on the Senate floor.
Finance chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., argued that his bill already incorporates federal law that bars abortion funding, except in cases of rape, incest or to save the life of the mother. It would require health plans to keep federal subsidies separate from any funds used to pay for abortions in all other cases.
A major concern for abortion opponents - including Catholic bishops - is that those underlying restrictions have to be renewed every year. If Congress fails to renew the ban one year, plans funded through the health care overhaul would be allowed to cover the procedure, abortion opponents contend.
Abortion rights supporters respond that adding a permanent restriction on abortion funding to the health bill would actually go beyond current federal law - in which such curbs have to be renewed every year.
"This is a health care bill," said Baucus. "This is not an abortion bill. And we are not changing current law."
Hatch said his language, "would codify it, so we don't have to go through it every year."
Abortion rights supporters said the Hatch language could deny coverage for abortion to working women signing up for coverage through private plans.
Its approval would be a "poison pill ... if it is hung on this legislation," said Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.
The committee also rejected 13-10 a second Hatch amendment that would have strengthened current legal protections for health care professionals who refuse to perform abortions or other procedures on grounds of moral or religious objections.
Abortion and immigration are also pending controversies in the House, where Democratic leaders hope to finalize legislation this week that would merge the work of three separate committees into one. House Democrats are struggling over how to pare the bill down to $900 billion over 10 years - Obama's preferred price tag and about how much the Senate Finance version costs.
AP writer Erica Werner contributed to this report.
(Copyright 2008 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Sunday, October 4, 2009
I had a busy day today, but it was one filled with many blessings. The Churchman Gospel Bluegrass group were at Boonville Wesleyan Church for the morning service. Several residents from Woodmont were there also.I then visited an afternoon Homecoming service with Vicky and her 90 y/o aunt at Flint Street Church (Pentecostal) in Boonville Indiana.
Pictured on left is Rev. Basil Embry and wife, my wife Vicky, and her Aunt Leona Sharp. The meal was followed by a singing and testimony service pictured below.
This evening I decided to walk a couple of blocks to Tennyson General Baptist Church for a kickoff to a four day revival service. Rev. Charles Greene shared his testimony how God has miraculously saved him from cancer three times! I am thankful there will be no denominations in Heaven. I have had the privilege of serving within different denominations over the past 25 years ranging from Interdenominational and Nazarene in South Florida to General Baptist and Wesleyan in Southern Indiana. I have learned we are more alike than different. God still works today despite some of the limitations we try to place on Him because of conceptions we have of Him based on what we have been taught. As has often been said, "God is good...all the time!" God bless, keith 1 Cor 13.
Friday, October 2, 2009
A Heart Problem
By Warren Wiersbe
Read Psalm 5:1-12
It's imperative for us to meet God in the morning if we want to have a good day. Jesus got up early in the morning to pray, according to Mark 1:35. Here we find the psalmist saying, "My voice You shall hear in the morning, O Lord; in the morning I will direct it to You, and I will look up" (v. 3).
When I used to work the night shift, I would sleep in the morning. So when I got up in the afternoon, I would meet with the Lord. Meeting with God is not an appointment on a clock but an appointment in your heart. Does God hear your voice in the morning? When He looks on you at the beginning of your day, does He look on you as a priest who has come to offer Him sacrifices of praise? That's what direct means (v. 3)--"to order my prayer." It means to arrange the sacrifice on the altar.
When you wake up in the morning, remind yourself that you are one of God's priests. How did you become a priest? Through faith in Jesus Christ. "To Him who loved us and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and has made us kings and priests to His God and Father" (Rev. 1:5,6). You're one of God's priests. That means wherever you are is God's temple, because your body is His temple.
The first thing we do in the morning is the first thing the high priest used to do every morning. He laid the burnt offering on the altar. The burnt offering is a picture of total dedication to God. If you want to have a good day, start by giving yourself to the Lord as a burnt offering, a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God (Rom. 12:1). A good day begins in the morning, and it begins at the altar.
Does your day begin with God? If not, decide to start each morning by dedicating yourself to Him as a living sacrifice and ask His guidance for the day's decisions and actions. He wants to direct your life. So view each day as a gift from God and determine to be a good steward of the day's resources. Make your time with Him a daily appointment.
Back to Warren Wiersbe index of articles.
Saturday, September 12, 2009
It was one of those crisp, sunny, nearly perfect September mornings. I was working at Sears in Evansville that day. Sometimes I would listen to the morning news as I prepared myself for work, both mentally and physically. Those of you you have worked in sales know what I'm talking about. Then those images flashed across the television screen. I still remember them as the planes hit the twin towers and then the Pentagon.
They say you always remember what you were doing when events like these happen. Believe it or not, I remember what I was doing when John Kennedy was assassinated. I was at recess in third grade at Oakdale Elementary. The teacher called us inside and gave us the news. I remember the live black and white images on our television. I remember watching the funeral procession with my parents as most people were not working the day of the President's funeral.
Flashing back to September 11, 2001, I remember some other things also in the weeks after that day.. I remember that the late night comedians weren't hurling the usual crude humor at us. I remember American flags everywhere as people showed their support for our country. Words like God and prayer were even mentioned by the nightly newscasters. Party politics were set aside for a while as senators and congressmen and women came together as one voice. The new President that so many of the comedians had been making fun of amazed many with his leadership. It didn't matter whether or not his grammer was as polished as some. The nation listened to the message he gave the world as terrorists around the world realized there was a new sheriff in town. Those in the military were heroes once again.
Then a few weeks passed...The comedians gradually started telling their jokes again. We didn't hear so much about God, prayer, and love of country from those in mainstream media. The American flags started coming down one by one in our towns and across America. Shades of Viet Nam come to mind when the media discussed those returning from war and offered their "expert" advice. Experts came out of the woodwork as it seemed that anyone who had ever been a miltary commander was now on the payroll of big media. ...How soon we forget. We forget that God still loves us and is still in control, even when the world is falling apart all around .We as a nation forget about the One who made the ultimate sacrifice that we might live...forever...God bless-keith 1 Cor 13
Sunday, September 6, 2009
Washington, DC (LifeNews.com) -- President Barack Obama supports abortion and has done everything possible to expand the number of abortions during his brief tenure as president. While Obama may not have racist motivations for backing abortion, black pro-life advocates are saying that is the outcome.
Two African-American pro-life leaders are saying that, because abortions disproportionately target the blackcommunity, expanding abortions brings a racial result.
Day Gardner, the president of the National Black Pro-Life Union, tells LifeNews.com that Obama's abortion promotion is evident.
"In less than nine months he has overturned the Mexico City policy -- which means American tax dollars will be used to pay for foreign abortions. Most of those killed will be the children of my beautiful brothers and sisters in Africa," she explained.
'President Obama's most recent effort is to push a health care bill that will mandate taxpayer funding of abortions. He has gone on record to deny this fact, which leaves many Americans wondering if he has bothered to read the 1000 plus-page monster circulating Congress," she says.
Gardner points out that, since the 1973 Supreme Court decision allowing the destruction of more than 50 million unborn children, 17 million of them were black. That represents a larger percentage of the abortions than black Americans as a portion of the American population.
"Today, for every black baby born, another black baby is killed by abortion," Gardner says.
'I find Mr. Obama's abortion push especially strange because the abortion industry purposefully targets black people," Gardner continued. "The Alan Guttmacher Institute and the Center for Disease Control, (CDC), show that Planned Parenthood, the nation's largest abortion chain, has planted its clinics -- more than 75 percent --strategically in our urban and minority dense neighborhoods."
"Every day Planned Parenthood manages to convince pregnant black girls, especially in urban areas to abort by making them believe their pitiful lives will be better if their unwanted, unloved, worthless black ghetto child dies," she said.
"They are wrong! We come from a strong stock of people who survived slavery and Jim Crow. We don't have to kill our children to have better lives," Gardner told LifeNews.com.
"So, how can President Obama support an industry that goes to such great lengths to kill black children?" she asks.
The black pro-life advocate believes Obama is beholden to pro-abortion groups that strongly supported his presidential bid.
Meanwhile, Fox News host Glenn Beck had Dallas-area pastor Stephen Broden, who made some of the same points.
Broden argued that the health reform bill being debated in Congress will lead to a campaign to exterminate black people in America.
Broden plugged a documentary, Maafa 21, that points out how the founders of Planned Parenthood, such as Margaret Sanger, had racial motivations for promotion abortion.
“What’s going on in that documentary is what’s going to happen in the health care package,” Broden told Glenn Beck.
“I believe what we're seeing is an orchestrated attempt to radically change this country from what the founders had in mind,” Broden said. “There is a deliberate attempt on the part of Marxist, socialist and … Darwin atheists who are changing this country.”
Ultimately Gardner says abortion must be strongly opposed in the same manner as genocide in African nations.
"If we are truly the America that holds life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so dear -- then we must obliterate the scourge of abortion from our midst otherwise we are no better than the those who perpetrate the conflict in Darfur, Rwanda, or any other country where human beings are enslaved, butchered or denied their rights just because they are meeker or weaker," she says.
Related web sites: National Black Pro-Life Union - http://www.NationalBlackProLifeUnion.com
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Two pro-life pharmacy owners have won the right, for now, to refuse to stock and dispense the morning-after pill.
The Circuit Court in Springfield, Il. has issued a preliminary injunction in the case, stating that the two pharmacists "are suffering irreparable harm in the form of an ongoing chill of their free exercise rights."
For the last four years, Glen Kosirog and Luke Vanderbleek have been facing off against the state of Illinois over their conscience rights. Both men oppose the morning-after pill because it can prevent implantation of a fertilized egg.
Illinois boasts one of the strongest conscience protection laws in the country, but then-Gov. Rod Blagojevich overturned it in 2005.
CBN News spoke with Vanderbleek earlier this year about the issue.
"If the government says that Luke Vanderbleek can't enter his pharmacy without a moral conscience and do what my heart and the Spirit tells me to do with good conscience I won't be a pharmacist anymore in this state," he said.
Monday, August 24, 2009
On Friday, the nation's largest Lutheran church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), voted to allow sexually active gays and lesbians in committed relationships to serve as clergy. Individual congregations now have the ability to select pastors or lay leaders in monogamous and lifelong same-sex relationships. Last month, the Episcopal Church lifted a similar ban on non-celibate gay bishops.
Hmmm...I wonder how they interpret Romans Chapter One. Must not be the same Bible I read...,"Refusing to know God, they soon didn't know how to be human either-women who didn't know how to be women, men who didn't know how to be men. Sexually confused, they abused and defiled one another, women with women, men with men-all lust, no love. And then they paid for it, oh, how they paid for it-emptied of God's love, godless and loveless wretches." Romans 1:26,27 The Message
Tuesday, August 18, 2009
In a USA Today opinion piece titled “We Believe in Evolution—and God,” two "Christian evolutionists" send a broadside our way. But do they bring up anything new?
The authors of the piece are Eastern Nazarene College professor Karl Giberson (whom we wrote about last November) and Point Loma Nazarene University professor Darrel Falk. Both are co-presidents of the new BioLogos Foundation established by Christian evolutionist Francis Collins (see the May 16 edition of News to Note).
The two begin with an unsurprising assertion: “We find no contradiction between the scientific understanding of the world, and the belief that God created that world. And that includes Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution.” They add that molecules-to-man evolution “unifies the entire science of biology,” and that “evolution is as well-established within biology as heliocentricity is established within astronomy.” Then they bring out their biggest guns:
The “science” undergirding this “young earth creationism” comes from a narrow, literalistic and relatively recent interpretation of Genesis, the first book in the Bible. This “science” is on display in the Creation Museum in Kentucky, where friendly dinosaurs—one with a saddle!—cavort with humans in the Garden of Eden. . . . Science faculty at schools such as Bryan College in Tennessee and Liberty University in Virginia work on “models” to shoehorn the 15 billion year history of the universe into the past 10,000 years.
And hence the misinformation begins, which we will answer in turn. Here, we wonder if Giberson and Falk dismiss plain readings of other Bible passages as “narrow” and “literalistic” even if those passages, like Genesis 1 show the hallmarks of being plainly worded historical accounts. And the early church fathers’ supposed doubt concerning a literal Genesis has also been dramatically exaggerated (see The Early Church on Creation). Also, as we have explained before, the saddled dinosaur in the Creation Museum is not an exhibit, but rather a fun photo opportunity for young children; it is in the basement, far from the Garden of Eden display. And the authors merely beg the question when they write that our friends at Bryan College, Liberty University, and elsewhere must “shoehorn” old-earth ideas into a young-earth framework.
Challenging accepted ideas is how America churns out Nobel Prize-winning science and patents that will drive tomorrow’s technology. But challenging authority can also undermine this country’s leadership in science, when citizens reject it. . . . [We aim] to counter the voices coming from places such as the website Answers in Genesis, which touts creation scientists, and the Discovery Institute, a think tank in Seattle, that calls on Christians to essentially choose between science and faith.
First of all, the professors have conflated operational science with origins science—a common problem we point out. Also we have made clear many times that we certainly do not reject science; we just do not believe that everything labeled “science” or that everything believed by scientists actually is good, objective science. Likewise, we regularly emphasize that the supposed dichotomy between religion (or faith) and science is false. The issue is not that we fight the encroachment of science; rather, we believe that one’s starting point is an inherently religious belief that determines how one interprets the results of the scientific method.
Darwin proposed the theory of evolution in 1859 in On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. This controversial text presented evidence that present-day life forms have descended from common ancestors via natural selection. Organisms better adapted to their environments had more offspring, and these fitness adaptations accumulated across the millennia. And this is how new species arose.
Natural selection is a readily observed, experimentally verified scientific fact that requires no historical speculation, and as such, our Creation Museum has an exhibit that explains it. We agree that natural selection can lead to new species within a kind as it reduces the genetic information in a population, resulting in sexual incompatibility where there previously was none. But Darwin and those who follow him extrapolate backward from these observations all the way to a single ancestor of all life. That assertion can never be proved right or wrong from fossils or any other present-day scientific study.
We are trained scientists who believe in God, but we also believe that science provides reliable information about nature. We don’t view evolution as sinister and atheistic. We think it is simply God’s way of creating. . . . Evolution is not a chaotic and wasteful process, as the critics charge.
We agree that the scientific method can show certain hypotheses to be more reliable than others through the process of attempted falsification. However, “science” does not provide anything—saying as much is to commit the fallacy of reification. We also would ask if the authors believe in the true, bodily resurrection of Jesus, given that such is as “scientifically” unverifiable as creation. Next, by using the word “sinister,” the authors imply that young-earth creationists are afraid of evolution. Rather, we understand the idea of evolution; it is simply that we don’t believe it is true for biblical and logical reasons. And the authors seem to be deluding themselves by writing that evolution is not “chaotic and wasteful,” given that young-earth creationists believe God created a world of life in one week without any death. The fossil record, however, is a record of death and includes evidence of violence and disease, such as cancer. Why would God call that “very good” if death is an enemy (1 Corinthians 15:26) introduced by sin, which could not have occurred before man (Romans 5:12–14)?
We understand science as a gift from God to explore the creation, a companion revelation enriching the understanding of God we get from other sources, such as the Bible. Many do not realize that making the Bible into a textbook of modern science is a recent development. What we learn from science cannot threaten our belief in God as the creator. If God created the universe in a [b]ig [b]ang 15 billion years ago, guided its development with elegant mathematical laws so that eventually there would be big-brained mammals exploring things such as beauty, morality and truth, then let us celebrate that idea, not reject it.
Again, we agree that science can help us explore creation. But the authors’ description of it as a “companion revelation” forces a question: is everything reported in a scientific journal automatically as valid as Scripture? What about when the two come into conflict—such as if an archaeologist alleges that the Bible’s history is inaccurate? Again, the church fathers overwhelmingly believed in a recent creation as the Bible taught. And of course we do not make the Bible a “textbook of modern science,” since it is a book of history. And again, the authors fallaciously reify “science.” What Richard Dawkins believes the scientific method shows certainly does threaten one’s belief in God. Finally, there is the word if: “If God created the universe in a [b]ig [b]ang 15 billion years ago . . . .” The authors seem to misunderstand our perspective entirely, again, falsely implying that our position is due to fear or unwillingness to consider what it would mean to celebrate the big bang, etc.
Sadly, the visibility of Giberson and Falk’s piece will surely misinform many who don’t actually know what we and other young-earth creationists believe. Even while lobbying tired old defenses of theistic evolution, the authors did not answer a single of our substantive problems with compromise (which are documented in the articles linked below). Still, we are thankful for the continued attention on the Creation Museum, which continues to be the best chance many have for beginning to understand the creationist’s perspective—and for meeting the Creator.
I'm sure these guys don't represent the views of most Nazarenes. Not the ones I know anyway. This just shows what happens when some within the church try to compromise with the worldviews espoused in institutions of "higher" learning. Evolution is a religion, not a science.Science has natural laws and reasonable explanations to back it up. Its a matter of which religion we choose.Personally I believe in the literal six day creation.Some believe in longer periods of time. When we use the Bible first to interpret events, things tend to make more sense than when trying to make science "fit" the Bible. 2 Peter 2:1 gives us some surprising insights about our day,"But false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you...What do you think?"keith 1 Cor 13
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Monday, March 30, 2009
The culture of death advances
By Patrick J. Buchanan
© 2009 Creators Syndicate, Inc
On Good Friday, as Terri Schiavo lay dying of thirst in Woodside Hospice, Gabriel Keys took her a cup of water. Gabriel was arrested, handcuffed and taken away.
Apparently, no one taught Gabriel that you do not disobey a judge's order, even to bring water to someone dying of thirst. As he is 10 years old, he is probably not yet conversant with the new morality, where a corporal work of mercy can be a crime. Perhaps his parents filled his mind with such subversive texts as, "Whoever shall give to drink to one of these little ones, a cup of cold water" shall not lose eternal life.
Before this column appears, Terri Schiavo may well be dead. If so, another milestone will have been passed in the long retreat of Western Civilization from a Christian-rooted culture of life to the pagan culture of death of pre-Christian Rome.
For Terri Schiavo will not have died a natural death. She will have been put to death by the state. The coroner's report should read: This was a state-sanctioned killing of a woman because she was brain-damaged, and the method of execution was by starvation and denial of water. These are methods most of us would protest if imposed on the Beltway snipers.
Why did Florida put Terri Schiavo to death? Because that was the demand of a husband who refused to divorce her and denied her medical care, while he lived with another woman. Michael Schiavo is the ACLU poster boy for family values.
In the Old Testament, King Solomon ruled that the mother who had been willing to give up her baby to the woman who had kidnapped the child rather than see the baby cut in half should have the child. Our Florida Solomon ruled that the husband who wanted Terri dead should have custody of her, not the parents who wanted her alive.
"Should Congress have intervened?" is an issue that has divided conservatives. But conservatives are constitutionalists. Under the Constitution, no person may be deprived of life without due process of law. This has traditionally meant a trial of one's peers, proof beyond a reasonable doubt of a heinous crime and no cruel or unusual punishment. Though she committed no crime, Terri was put to death in a manner most decent men and women would not use to put a suffering animal out of its misery.
Most conservatives believe in a God who is the Author of Life and has given us the laws by which we must live. Among the first of these is that we must not shed innocent blood. For that is forbidden by the teachings of Christianity, Judaism and Islam, and the laws of all the civilizations erected on these faiths. In all nations, killing of the innocent is the most despicable of crimes. Done on a vast scale, these are what were called at the Nuremberg trials, "crimes against humanity."
Americans must face a hard truth. The state of Florida put Terri Schiavo to death. Before Holy Week, she was neither dead nor dying. For 15 years, she had been cared for by nurses and visited by loving parents. She was not dying until the judge ordered her dead, by ordering her feeding tube removed. Then it has taken her nearly two weeks to die, as he blocked the reinsertion of the feeding tube and ordered police to prevent anyone from giving her water.
When the courts failed Terri, and Congress and the Florida Legislature failed Terri, the governor of Florida, who took an oath to defend the constitutional rights of Florida's citizens, should have taken custody of Terri, ordered the tube reinserted and let the federal courts proceed with the de novo hearing of the evidence, while Terri was still alive.
When Gov. John Peter Altgeld of Illinois came to believe that those convicted of murder in the infamous Haymarket Massacre of 1886 were innocent, that a judicial outrage had been committed, he pardoned them. "I am a dead man politically," he told Clarence Darrow.
Jeb Bush should have done the same thing, the right thing. He should have rescued Terri from the death sentence unjustly imposed upon her. If the court held him in contempt, so what? Who does not hold that Florida court in contempt?
From abortion on demand in 1973, to a right to die in Oregon, to a right to suicide in Holland, to involuntary euthanasia in the old folks homes on the old and dying continent of Europe, to America's death sentence for Terri Schiavo, the West advances steadily toward its own death.
As we find more and more justifications for ending life, we also find that not one Western nation has a native-born population that is growing. All are dying. Before century's end, the West ends, as T.S. Eliot wrote, "Not with a bang, but a whimper."Its interesting that this same week, four years (and now five) after Terri Schiavo's senseless death,Assisted Suicide is approved in several states, Harry Reid wants abortion covered under a National Socialized Healthcare plan, and Joe Biden is given an A-plus rating on his treatment of animals...("change" we can believe in?)...keith 1 Cor 13
*I first published this a little over a year ago... With all the attention recently on government "healthcare" I thought I would re-post this article. The way our courts treated Terri should be a warning of things to come under a government run plan.
What John Wesley so aptly said about slavery, still applies today"Where is the justice in inflicting the severist of evils on those who have done us no wrong?"
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
I Am the Lord That Healeth Thee
By Smith Wigglesworth
"Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven him" (James 5 :14, 15) .
We have in this precious word a real basis for the truth of healing. In this scripture God gives very definite instructions to the sick. If you are sick, your part is to call for the elders of the church; it is their part to anoint and pray for you in faith, and then the whole situation rests with the Lord. When you have been anointed and prayed for, you can rest assured that the Lord will raise you up. It is the word of God.
I believe that we all can see that the church cannot play with this business. If any turn away from these clear instructions they are in a place of tremendous danger. Those who refuse to obey, do so to their unspeakable loss.
James tells us in connection with this, "if any of you do err from the truth, and one convert him, let him know, that he which converteth the sinner from the error of his ways shall save a soul from death." Many turn away from the Lord, as did King Asa, who sought the physicians in his sickness and consequently died; and I take it that this passage means that if one induces another to turn back to the Lord, he will save such from death and God will forgive a multitude of sins that they have committed. This scripture can also have a large application on the line of salvation. If you turn away from any part of God's truth, the enemy will certainly get an advantage over you.
Does the Lord meet those who look to Him for healing and obey the instructions set forth in James? Most assuredly. Let me tell you a story to show how He will undertake for the most extreme case.
One day I had been visiting the sick, and was with a friend of mine, an architect, when I saw a young man f from his office coming down the road in a car, and holding in his hand a telegram. It contained a very urgent request that we go immediately to pray for a man who was dying. We went off in an auto as fast as possible and in about an hour and a half reached a large house in the country where the man who was dying resided. There were two staircases in that house, and it was extremely convenient, for the doctors could go up and down one, and my friend and I could go up and down the other, and so we had no occasion to meet.
I found on arrival that it was a case of this sort. The man's body had been broken, he was ruptured, and his bowels had been punctured in two places. The discharge from the bowels had formed abscesses, and blood poisoning had set in. The man's face had turned green. Two doctors were in attendance, but they saw that the case was beyond their power. They had telegraphed to London for a great specialist, and, when we arrived, they were at the railway station awaiting bis arrival.
The man was very near death and could not speak. I said to his wife, "If you desire, we will anoint and pray for him." She said, "That is why I sent for you." I anointed him in the name of the Lord and asked the Lord to raise him up. Apparently there was no change. (God often hides what He does. From day to day we find that God is doing wonderful things, and we receive reports of healings that have taken place that we heard nothing about at the time of our meetings. Only last night a woman came into the meeting suffering terribly. Her whole arm was filled with poison, and her blood was so poisoned that it was certain to bring her to her death. We rebuked the thing, and she was here this morning and told us that she was without pain and had slept all night, a thing she had not done for two months. To God be all the praise. You will find He will do this kind of thing all along.)
As soon as we anointed and prayed for this brother we went down the back staircase and the three doctors came up the front staircase. As we arrived downstairs, I said to my friend who had come with me, "Friend let me have hold of your hands." We held each other's hands, and I said to him, "Look into my face and let us agree together, according to Matthew 1$:19, that this man shall be brought out of this death." We laid the whole matter before God, and said, "Father, we believe."
Then the conflict began. The wife came down to us and said, "The doctors have got all their instruments out and they are about to operate." I cried, "What? Look here, he's your husband, and I tell you this, if those men operate on him, he will die. Go back and tell them you cannot allow it." She went back to the doctors and said, "Give me ten minutes." They said, "We can't afford to, the man is dying and it is your husband's only chance." She said, "I want ten minutes, and you don't touch his body until I have had them."
They went downstairs by one staircase and we went up by the other. I said to the woman, "This man is your husband, and he cannot speak for himself. It is now the time for you to put your whole trust in God and prove Him wholly true. You can save him from a thousand doctors. You must stand with God and for God in this critical hour." After that, we came down and the doctors went up. The wife faced those three doctors and said, "You shan't touch this man's body. He is my husband. I am sure that if you operate on him he will die, but he will live if you don't touch him."
Suddenly the man in the bed spoke. "God has done it," he said. They rolled back the bed clothes and the doctors examined him, and the abscesses were cut clear away. The nurse cleaned the place where they had been. The doctors could see the bowels still open and they said to the wife, "We know that you have great faith, and we can see that a miracle has taken place. But you must let us unite these broken parts and put in silver tubes, and we know that your husband will be all right after that, and it need not interfere with your faith at all." She said to them, "God has done the first thing and He can do the rest. No man shall touch him now." And God healed the whole thing. And that man is well and strong today. I can give his name and address to any who want it.
Do you ask by what power this was done? I would answer in the words of Peter, "His name, through faith in His name, made this man strong." The anointing was done i7. the name of the Lord. And it is written, "The LORD shall raise him up." And He provides the double cure; even if sin has been the cause of the sickness, His Word declares, "If he have committed sins, they shall be forgiven,"
You ask, "What is faith?" Faith is the principle of the Word of God. The Holy Spirit, who inspired the Word, is called the Spirit of Truth, and, as we receive with meekness the engrafted Word, faith springs in our heart-faith in the sacrifice of Calvary: faith in the shed blood of Jesus; faith in the fact that He took our weakness upon Himself, has borne our sicknesses and carried our pains, and that He is our life today.
God has chosen us to help one another. We dare not be independent. He brings us to a place where we submit ourselves to one another. If we refuse to do this, we get away from the Word of God and out of the place of faith. I have been in this place once and I trust I shall never be there again. I went one time to a meeting. I was very, very sick, and I got worse and worse. I knew the perfect will of God was for me to humble myself and ask the elders to pray for me. I put it off and the meeting finished. I went home without being anointed and prayed with, and everyone in the house caught the thing I was suffering with.
My boys did not know anything else but to trust the Lord as the family Physician, and my youngest boy, George, cried out from the attic, "Dadda, come." I cried, "I cannot come. The whole thing is from me. I shall have to repent and ask the Lord to forgive me." I made up my mind to humble myself before the whole church. Then I rushed to the attic and laid my hands on my boy in the name of Jesus. I placed my hands on his head and the pain left and went lower down; he cried again, "Put your hands still lower." At last the pain went right down to the feet and as I placed my hand on the feet be was completely delivered. Some evil power had evidently gotten hold and as I laid my hands on the different parts of the body it left. (We have to see the difference between anointing the sick and casting out demons.) God will always be gracious when we humble ourselves before Him and come to a place of brokenness of spirit.
I was at a place one time ministering to a sick woman, and she said, "I'm very sick. I become all right for an hour, and then I have another attack." I saw that it was an evil power that was attacking her, and I learned something in that hour that I had never learned before. As I moved my hand down her body in the name of the Lord that evil power seemed to move just ahead of my hands and as I moved them down further and further the evil power went right out of her body and never returned.
I was in Havre in France and the power of God was being mightily manifested. A Greek named Felix attended the meeting and became very zealous for God. He was very anxious to get all the Catholics he could to the meeting in order that they should see that God was graciously visiting France. He found a certain bed-ridden woman who was fixed in a certain position and could not move, and he told her about the Lord healing at the meetings and that he would get me to come if she wished. She said, "My husband is a Catholic and he would never allow anyone who was not a Catholic to see me."
She asked her husband to allow me to come and told him what Felix had told her about the power of God working in our midst. He said, "I will have no Protestant enter my house." She said, "You know the doctors cannot help me, and the priests cannot help, won't you let this man of God pray for me?" He finally consented and I went to the house. The simplicity of this woman and her child-like faith were beautiful to see.
I showed her my oil bottle and said to her, "Here is oil. It is a symbol of the Holy Ghost. When that comes upon you, the Holy Ghost will begin to work, and the Lord will raise you up." And God did something the moment the oil fell upon her. I looked toward the window and I saw Jesus. (I have seen Him often. There is no painting that is a bit like Him
no artist can ever depict the beauty of my lovely Lord.) The woman felt the power of God in her body and cried, "I'm free, my hands are free, my shoulders are free, and oh, I see Jesus! I'm free! I'm free!"
The vision vanished and the woman sat up in bed. Her legs were still bound, and I said to her, "I'll put my hands over your legs and you will be free entirely." And as I put my hands on those legs covered with bed clothes, I looked and saw the Lord again. She saw Him too and cried, "He's there again. I'm free! I'm free!" She rose from her bed and walked round the room praising God, and we were all in tears as we saw His wonderful works. The Lord shall raise them up when conditions are met.
When I was a young man I always loved the fellowship of old men, and was always careful to hear what they had to say. I had a friend, an old Baptist minister who was a wonderful preacher. I spent much of my time with him. One day he came to me and said, "My wife is dying." I said, "Brother Clark, why don't you believe God? God can raise her up if you will only believe Him." He asked me to come to his house, and I looked for some one to go with me.
I went to a certain rich man who was very zealous for God, and spent much money in opening up rescue. missions, and I asked him to go with me. He said, "Never you mind me. You go yourself, but I don't take to this kind of business." Then I thought of a man who could pray by the hour. When he was on his knees he could go round the world three times and come out at the same place. I asked him to go with me and said to him, "You'll have a real chance this time. Keep at it, and quit when you're through." (Some go on after they are through.)
Brother Nichols, for that was his name, went with me and started praying. He asked the Lord to comfort the husband in his great bereavement and prayed for the orphans and a lot more on this line. I cried, "O my God, stop this man." But there was no stopping him and he went on praying and there was not a particle of faith in anything he uttered. He did stop at last, and I said, "Brother Clark, it's now your turn to pray. He started, "Lord, answer the prayer of my brother and comfort me in this great bereavement and sorrow. Prepare me to face this great trial." I cried out, "My God, stop this man." The whole atmosphere was being charged with unbelief.
I had a glass bottle full of oil and I went up tea the woman and poured the whole lot on her in the name of Jesus. Suddenly Jesus appeared, standing at the foot of the bed. He smiled and vanished. The woman stood up, perfectly healed, and she is a strong woman today.
We have a big God. We have a wonderful Jesus. We have a glorious Comforter. God's canopy is over you and will cover you at all times, preserving you from evil. Under His wings shalt thou trust. The Word of God is living and powerful and in its treasures you will find eternal life. If you dare trust this wonderful Lord, this Lord of life, you will find in Him everything you need.
So many are tampering with drugs, quacks, pills and plasters. Clear them all out and believe God. It is sufficient to believe God. You will find that if you dare trust Him, He will never fail. "The prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the LORD shall raise him up." Do you trust Him? He is worthy to be trusted.
I was one time asked to go to Weston-super-mare, a seaside resort in the West of England. I learned from a telegram that a man had lost his reason and had become a raving maniac, and they wanted me to go to pray for him. I arrived at the place, and the wife said to me, "Will you sleep with my husband?" I agreed, and in the middle of the night an evil power laid hold of him. It was awful. I put my hand on his head and his hair was like a lot of sticks. God gave deliverance-a temporary deliverance. At 6 o'clock the next morning, I felt that it was necessary that I should get out of the house for a short time.
The man saw me going and cried out, "If you leave me, there is no hope." But I felt that I had to go. As I went out I saw a woman with a Salvation Army bonnet on and I knew that she was going to their 7 o'clock prayer meeting. I said to the Captain who was in charge of the meeting, when I saw he was about to give out a hymn, "Captain, don't sing. Let's get to prayer." He agreed, and I prayed my heart out, and then I grabbed my hat and rushed out of the hall. They all thought they had a madman in their prayer meeting that morning.
I saw the man I had spent the night with, rushing down toward the sea, without a particle of clothing on, about to drown himself. I cried, "In the name of Jesus, come out of him!" The man fell full length on the ground and that evil power went out of him never to return. His wife came rushing after him, and the husband was restored to her in a perfect mental condition.
There are evil powers, but Jesus is greater than all evil powers. There are tremendous diseases, but Jesus is healer. There is no case too hard for Him. The Lion of Judah shall break every chain. He came to relieve the oppressed and to set the captive free. He came to bring redemption, to make us as perfect as man was before the fall.
People want to know how to be kept by the power of God. Every position of grace into which you are led-forgiveness, healing, deliverance of any kindwill be contested by Satan. He will contend for your body. When you are saved, Satan will come round and say, "See, you are not saved." The devil is a liar. If he says you are not saved, it is a sure sign that you are.
You will remember the story of the man who was swept and garnished. The evil power had been swept out of him. But the man remained in a stationary position. If the Lord heals you, you dare not remain in a stationary position. The evil spirit came back to that man and found the house swept, and took seven others worse than himself, and the last state of that man was worse than the first. Be sure to get filled with God. Get the Occupier. Be filled with the Spirit.
God has a million ways of undertaking for those who go to Him for help. He has deliverance for every captive. He loves you so much that He even says, "Before they call, I will answer." Don't turn Him away.
"I slipped and fell on Broadway, San Diego, in February, 1921, and as was afterwards discovered, fractured the coccyx (the base of the spine), and so severely wrenched the hips and pelvic bones that I became a great sufferer. As the broken bone was not discovered and set until about two months after the accident, the constant pain and irritation caused a general inflammation of the nervous system, and the long delay in getting the bone set, made it impossible to heal, so that, my condition steadily grew worse, and I was taken to the hospital and the bone was removed about a month after it had been set. Though the wound healed rapidly, the nervous inflammation remained, and so for many months longer I was in constant pain and unable to get around without assistance. I was taken to the first service held by Mr. Wigglesworth on the 2nd of October, 1922. At the close of the service all those who were sick and in pain and had come for healing were requested to rise if possible. My husband assisted me to my feet, and as those were prayed for by the speaker I was instantly healed. How
I do not know. I only know the Great Physician touched my body and I was made whole, and freed from pain.
"After I got home I showed how I could sit down and rise with my hands above my head; when before it had taken both hands to push up my feeble body, and I had to have straps on my bed to pull up by. No more use for them now! I lay down and turned over for the first time without pain. I shall never cease to praise God for the healing of my body through the precious blood of Jesus and in His name. I walked to the street car alone the next day and attended the next service and have been "on the go" ever since. Can give names of friends who can substantiate all I have written. To Jesus be all the, praise and glory." -Mrs. Sanders, 4051 Bay View Court, San Diego, Calif.
Tuesday, August 4, 2009
State to spy on parents, make sure kids go to bed on time, attend school
Paul Joseph Watson
Monday, August 3, 2009
The UK government is about to spend $700 million dollars installing surveillance cameras inside the private homes of citizens to ensure that children go to bed on time, attend school and eat proper meals.
No you aren’t reading a passage from George Orwell’s 1984 or Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World, this is Britain in 2009, a country which already has more surveillance cameras watching its population than the whole of Europe put together.
Now the government is embarking on a scheme called “Family Intervention Projects” which will literally create a nanny state on steroids, with social services goons and private security guards given the authority to make regular “home checks” to ensure parents are raising their children correctly.
Telescreens will also be installed so government spies can keep an eye on whether parents are mistreating kids and whether the kids are fulfilling their obligations under a pre-signed contract.
Around 2,000 families have been targeted by this program so far and the government wants to snare 20,000 more within the next two years. The tab will be picked up by the taxpayer, with the “interventions” being funded through local council authorities.
Another key aspect of the program will see parents deemed “responsible” by the government handed the power to denounce and report bad parents who allow their children to engage in bad behavior. Such families will then be targeted for “interventions”.
Both parents and children will also be forced to sign a “behavior contract” with the government known as Home School Agreements before the start of every year, in which the state will dictate obligations that it expects to be met.
The opposition Conservative Party, who are clear favorites to win the next British election, commented that the program does not go far enough and is “too little, too late.”
Respondents to a Daily Express article about the new program expressed their shock at the totalitarian implications of what is unfolding in the United Kingdom under the guise of social services initiatives.
(ARTICLE CONTINUES BELOW)
“Sorry, but what the hell? Why are people not up in arms about this?,” writes one, “This is a complete invasion of privacy, and it totally ignores the fact that the state does NOT own kids. It’s not up to them how parents choose to raise their children, as long as the parents do not actively harm them. Why on earth aren’t the public rioting? It’s completely anathema to basic British freedoms.”
“Excuse me!?! What an incredible intrusion into the privacy of a family! George Orwell must be spinning in his grave right now,” writes another.
“I have one comment to make: it completely violates Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights (Human Rights Act 1998). Has this minister and his lackies even done any basic homework on basic human rights and civil liberties? Or rather they’ve just decided to completely ignore them,” adds another.
The move to install surveillance cameras inside private homes is also on the agenda across the pond. In February 2006, Houston Chief of Police Harold Hurtt said cameras should be placed inside apartments and homes in order to “fight crime” due to there being a shortage of police officers.
“I know a lot of people are concerned about Big Brother, but my response to that is, if you are not doing anything wrong, why should you worry about it?” Chief Hurtt told reporters.
Andy Teas with the Houston Apartment Association supported the proposal, saying privacy concerns would take a back seat to many people who would, “appreciate the thought of extra eyes looking out for them.”
If such programs come to fruition and are implemented on a mass scale then the full scope of George Orwell’s depiction of a totalitarian society is his classic novel 1984 will have been realized.
The following passage is from Orwell’s 1984;
The telescreen received and transmitted simultaneously. Any sound that Winston made, above the level of a very low whisper, would be picked up by it, moreover, so long as he remained within the field of vision which the metal plaque commanded, he could be seen as well as heard. There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment. How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork. It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to. You had to live — did live, from habit that became instinct — in the assumption that every sound you made was overheard, and, except in darkness, every movement scrutinized.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Government Takeover of Healthcare
FOR THE UNBORN
Pro-ABORTION Congressional Leaders Plan
The Greatest Expansion of ABORTION since Roe v. Wade
A health care plan was approved by the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pension Committee (HELP) on July 15. The Senate plan is called the Kennedy Bill because it is sponsored by Pro-ABORTION Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts. The House of Representatives Health Care Plan is called H.R. 3200.
Wednesday, July 22, 2009
10 Tragic Consequences for a Public Figure’s Private Failure
The recent revelation of South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s marital infidelities is tragic and it reveals something about the character of our country. Each political party has its “who’s who” of moral and ethical failures. Each scandal is quickly seized upon for political gain yet the greater story is found in matters of the heart. To be a public success but a private failure is to place image above character. One often neglects to measure the ripple affects of moral and ethical trespasses. The following are 10 tragic consequences for a public figure’s private failure:
1. The shattered heart of a spouse.
2. The vulnerability of the children.
3. The sense of betrayal in a staff.
4. The loss of moral authority.
5. The jeopardizing of a future.
6. The message sent out to the next generation.
7. The damage done to a constituency.
8. The embarrassment to a political party.
9. The undermining of trust in one’s future decisions.
10. The inability to reconcile public convictions with private actions.
Where Governor Sanford is concerned, healing and hope will begin with repentance and reprioritization. Family values are not at the mercy of any public official. The lesson learned is that failure is not found in having values but in failing to honor the same. It can be said that the greatest failure can be found, not in those who hold values and fail, but in those who embrace no values and succeed.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
I was reading the Miami Herald online today, as I like to keep up with what's happening in South Florida. I used to live there and it seems to be that the coastal cities are an indicator of what eventually happens in the Heartland. The article I was reading focused on some Haitian immigrants that had arrived in Pompano Beach Florida, which is about 20 miles north of Miami. Most travel on makeshift rafts or stowed away in watercraft. Many times children drown or die along with their parents. Thanks be to God, these arrived safely. Illegal immigration and immigration in general has become a controversial topic in recent years. We hear much about it at election time, a lot of hot air from both parties, but no one really wants to confront the issue. In the meantime, emergency rooms are overcrowded , government funds are stretched to the limit leaving innocent children caught in the "crossfire." The problem is that the denominations which have their roots in the Wesley brothers have either become a denominational church which remembers the legalistic side of Wesley's teaching and forgets social activism, or a church of good works that has lost its moral compass.As Wesleyans we have a unique Christian Heritage. John Wesley believed there was a balance between personal heart holiness and a social Gospel of caring for the poor and disadvantaged. John Wesley believed the Christian could and should have it both ways. It is easy to look to a political party or leader to solve the social ills of our day. As Christians, we should give to Ceaser what is his and vote responsibly with Christian values in mind, hoping and praying the politicos don't turn on us as so many have done in the past. When Wesley started a "poor house for destitute widows and children," he had set it up so that he and the other Methodist preachers would also live with them, thereby maintaining solidarity. Here are Wesley's own words:
For I myself, as well as the other Preachers who are in town, diet with the poor, on the same food, at the same table; and we rejoice herein, as a comfortable earnest of our eating bread together in our father's kingdom. (A Plain Account of the People called Methodists, VIII:265)
In this day when many tele-evangelists are being investigated for misusing millions of dollars, it would be hard to imagine them living like this with the poor among us. What do you think?