24/7 Prayer

About a year and a half ago, we targeted several available phone numbers which we believed would work for a prayer line. Our goal is twofold: To intercede for Homestead in prayer and to build bridges to the lost by praying for them. For a year and a half, we diligently worked and prayed that we would successfully obtain one and for a year and a half we were told that it is simply not possible. God, however, is bigger than all of the telecommunications companies combined and today, we have a prayer line for Homestead.

We originally got this number because 247 is the most common prefix in Homestead. Someone later pointed out to me (after we had the number) that 247 can mean "24/7" as in "God answers prayer 24/7." This just confirms to me that God gave us what He wanted us to have in His time. So, now it's time to build the prayer line ministry and prepare the 247-PRAY campaign. Until then, I've got the phone and if it happens to ring before the ministry is launched, I'll be happy to pray for them!

Are You Contemporvant?

We often hear many churches criticizing the traditional, established "legacy" church. A chief criticism is that traditional churches are in a rut. Worship is painstakingly predictable and its order never changes. All too often, this is true. On the other hand, newer and "edgier" are a fresh response, full of spontanaeity and life.

The following video demonstrates that those who cast the first stone are often guilty of the same sin. You can be contermporary and stuck. The absolute honesty and (I would argue accuracy) of this video is a hoot. Enjoy.

Impact1 Men's Conference

One of my favorite preachers, James Merritt, will be up the road at Wayside Baptist Church next Friday, April 30 and Saturday, May 1. The registration fee is a ridiculously low $30, which includes dinner Friday, breakfast and lunch Saturday and conference materials. Check it out. If you want to go with FBCH, just send me an email.

The Fight We Mustn't Stop Waging

The Florida legislature is examining a compact between Governor Charlie Crist and the Seminole Tribe that would vastly expand predatory gambling in the state of Florida. I wrote Governor Crist as well as Senator Bullard and Representative Saunders urging them to oppose this expansion.

There are numerous reasons for opposing gambling in all of its forms. Gambling exploits the poor. It takes a disproportionate amount of money from those who can least spare it and reallocates it to those who often least need it. One study shows (page 270) that as a percentage of income, the poor spend eight times as much on the lottery as do those who make over $70,000 per year.

Gambling decreases the quality of life in those places where it flourishes. For example, one study from the University if Illinois stated, "The raw data suggests... that 12.4 percent of the crime observed in casino counties would not be there if casinos were absent." Who wouldn't like to see crime decrease y 12.4 %? Owners of Casino's wouldn't, that's who.

Gambling involves the taking of something for nothing. It violates the spirit of "Thou shalt not steal." It invites internal corruption which is why we hear so much about kickbacks for politicians willing to support it. Gambling is addictive in nature. It destroys families. Innocent people are caught up in the crossfire.

For the Christian, there is another issue. Gambling flies in the face of everything the Bible teaches about stewardship. As stewards, we own nothing and God owns everything. He wants us to manage what He has entrusted to us, not leave it up to chance. Gambling, on the other hand, requires a distinct lack of faith on the part of the participant. For example, if you play a multi-state lottery, one of the big ones, you have a one in 120,000,000 chance of winning. The moment you buy that ticket, you are saying that the the odds of God providing for you are less than that. You are more likely to win the lottery than for God to provide for His own.

I've often wondered why those who promote a "social justice" gospel are not on the front lines of the gambling issue. All believers should actively encourage our representatives to oppose gambling in all its forms.

Florida residents can get involved regarding today's legislation HERE.

The Bible and Bribery

In light of my previous comments on the eleven congressmen who switched their votes on the health care reform bill a day prior to being approved for $3.5 billion in earmarks, I thought it might be good to follow up with a few words from Scripture on the topic of bribery. Some will claim that a pastor should not name names in the political arena or address issues like earmarks. Look at the Biblical data, however, and ask yourself how anyone claiming to be a preacher of God's Word could be silent?

"Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds those who see and twists the words of the righteous." Exodus 23:8

"For the LORD your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who shows no partiality and accepts no bribes." Deuteronomy 10:17

"Do not pervert justice or show partiality. Do not accept a bribe, for a bribe blinds the eyes of the wise and twists the words of the righteous." Deuteronomy 16:19

"Cursed is the man who accepts a bribe to kill an innocent person." Then all the people shall say, "Amen!" Deuteronomy 27:25

"But his sons did not walk in his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice." 1 Samuel 8:3

"Now let the fear of the LORD be upon you. Judge carefully, for with the LORD our God there is no injustice or partiality or bribery." 2 Chronicles 19:7

"For the company of the godless will be barren, and fire will consume the tents of those who love bribes." Job 15:34

"Be careful that no one entices you by riches; do not let a large bribe turn you aside." Job 36:18

"A greedy man brings trouble to his family, but he who hates bribes will live." Proverbs 15:27

"A wicked man accepts a bribe in secret to pervert the course of justice." Proverbs 17:23

"By justice a king gives a country stability, but one who is greedy for bribes tears it down." Proverbs 29:4

"Extortion turns a wise man into a fool, and a bribe corrupts the heart." Ecclesiastes 7:7

"Your rulers are rebels, companions of thieves; they all love bribes and chase after gifts. They do not defend the cause of the fatherless; the widow's case does not come before them." Isaiah 1:23

He who walks righteously and speaks what is right, who rejects gain from extortion and keeps his hand from accepting bribes, who stops his ears against plots of murder and shuts his eyes against contemplating evil-this is the man who will dwell on the heights, whose refuge will be the mountain fortress. His bread will be supplied, and water will not fail him." Isaiah 33:15-16

"In you men accept bribes to shed blood; you take usury and excessive interest and make unjust gain from your neighbors by extortion. And you have forgotten me, declares the Sovereign LORD." Ezekiel 22:12

"For I know how many are your offenses and how great your sins. You oppress the righteous and take bribes and you deprive the poor of justice in the courts." Amos 5:12

"Her leaders judge for a bribe, her priests teach for a price, and her prophets tell fortunes for money. Yet they lean upon the LORD and say, "Is not the LORD among us? No disaster will come upon us." Micah 3:11

If the prophets of old were not silent about bribery, should those who proclaim God's word today be?

Now It All Makes Sense

Turns out that the eleven "pro-life" democrats who switched their health care vote hours before it was passed received $3.5 billion dollars in earmarks. They claimed that they were voting for health care because of Obama's promised executive order banning federal funds from paying for abortions. (This, of course, was a ruse...see article below.) These earmarks were approved on Monday, March 22, the day after their controversial vote. The timing seems suspect, right?

"The congressman's vote for health care has no connection to annual appropriations requests," spokeswoman Michelle Benoche said. "Appropriations requests were submitted on Monday, March 22, because that is the deadline of the Appropriations Committee."

Are we to believe that it is merely a coincidence that the day after abandoning their pro-life convictions, their districts are rewarded with billions of dollars? Without their eleven votes, the health care bill would have certainly failed. Are we to believe that these funds were never mentioned in the process?

You can call yourself a pro-life democrat, but if you're willing to sell your conviction for a price, you don't deserve the pro-life title. Some republicans are referred to as RINO's (Republicans In Name Only). Perhaps we should refer to these congressmen as PLINO's (Pro-Life In Name Only)?

Disappointment

I'll admit, I'm disappointed. The passage of the landmark health care bill by the House of Representatives is a setback for the sanctity of life in this country. I haven't spoken much about the issue of health care itself because I believe that much of the issue is political rather than biblical. As for whether or not the founding fathers would have wanted the federal government to have such authority over our lives is not a topic addressed in any book, chapter or verse of the Bible. When it comes to the issue of the sanctity of life, however, that is another matter.

I am particularly disappointed by Bart Stupak, the congressman from Michigan who initially led the pro-life democratic opposition. Stupak cited specific sections of the senate bill that did, in fact, provide federal funding for abortions, contrary to what the president and others said. Yet, after carefully and effectively articulating his point, he then walked away from it, voting for the bill anyway. He claims that he is accepting the president's promise that he will issue an executive order barring federal funds for abortion. It sounds good, but the problem is that the law passed by congress supersedes an executive order. The president does not have the constitutional authority to wish away a bill that was passed and signed into law. Furthermore, even if the president could do such a thing, all it would take is a swipe of his pen, or another president's pen later, to undo it.

Some will point out that the amount of money provided by the government to cover abortions is small. That is true. Others will point out that under the new law, an individual must pay for their own rider to receive coverage for abortions. This also is true. The threshold, however, has now been crossed. The principle that government funds do not pay for the destruction of preborn human life has ended. And once you cross that line, it is easy to adjust the numbers. The hard part is getting the first dollar.

We now have all the more reason to pray for revival in America and to fear the judgment that God may bring upon us.

Pray for the Brethren in India

It is reported that there have been 1,000 attacks on Christians or churches in the last 500 days in India. We need to keep our brothers and sisters over there bathed in prayer.

Already Taken

Imagine that I invented a new sport. This sport involves throwing darts at balloons. I'm very excited about this sport. I want to market it and make it a mainstream hobby in America. I hope that one day it will even become an Olympic sport. But first, I need to give my dart-throwing sport a name. Would I call it "Bowling?" Of course not. Why not? There is already a sport called bowling and it is nothing like the one I have invented. "Bowling" involves rolling a ball down a lane to knock down pins. Whatever I call my new sport, it can't be bowling. Bowling is already taken.

Likewise, there is an institution called marriage. The defining quality of marriage is fidelity. However, this is not so with so called "gay marriage." There's an editorial in today's Baptist Press about the nature of "gay marriage" that does a marvelous job of demonstrating just how different the traditional understanding of marriage is from what is being advocated by those who attack it. You can read the article HERE.

Here's Proof

My favorite movie is Casablanca. In it, there is a scene where Captain Renault says he is "shocked" to discover that there is gambling in Rick's saloon...just as someone hands him his winnings. Likewise, I am "shocked" by a quote today from a member of the Supreme Court, Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Ginsburg argued that the second amendment's right to bear arms is really not a fundamental right that should be honored and protected. To support her conclusion she said, "If the notion is that these are principles that any free society would adopt, well, a lot of free societies have rejected the right to keep and bear arms."

There you have it. Two things I bet you didn't know. First, because other societies oppress this right, it's not really oppression if we do as well. Secondly, international precedent can trump the constitution. Isn't that nice to know?

I'm shocked, but should I be? Here's what doesn't shock me...Ginsburg's quote is proof that you don't have to be a genius to serve on the Supreme Court.

My Two Cents

The arrest and detainment of ten Baptist missionaries in Haiti for attempting to transport thirty-three Haitian children to an orphanage in the Dominican Republic is generating a lot of waves in the media this week. I want to make a few observations...

* Their actions were rash and somewhat careless. There are disputing reports regarding whether or not they had paperwork which authorized, at least in their minds, the transfer of these children. Nevertheless, you cannot leave any stone left unturned when the guardianship of children is at stake. They were caught with children and did not have their legal "ducks in order." I read where the family members of one detainee are claiming that they did have paperwork, simply not enough. Since the earthquake, the Prime Minister's signature is now required for international adoptions, so they may have been unaware that the paperwork they possessed was obsolete.

* These are Southern Baptists who were attempting to save lives. Even the fiercest critics of these missionaries, those wanting them locked away for years, dare not deny that some of these thirty-three children would have starved had it not been for the intervention of this group. I can't help but wonder, if these very children had died of starvation, would the critics have been just as angry? Of course not.

* I wonder how many of those criticizing the missionaries have donated one red cent to help Haiti? Many are asking why they did not help orphans here instead of travelling to Haiti? While there is poverty in the United States and many children do without, to insinuate that the misery here can be compared with that of post-earthquake Haiti is completely disingenuous. We should be concerned with international needs, not just domestic ones. We should pity those who have so small a moral compass that they would even make such a criticism.

* The leader of this group, Laura Silsby, has no real legal representation. I say no "real" representation because her state appointed attorney has basically thrown her under the bus. What kind of chance do you have when your own lawyer is criticizing you in front of the international media? Every person deserves a defense. I believe that is a human right. It is time for Hillary Clinton to speak out on this point. She can do so without endorsing the actions of the missionaries.

* According to a friend of mine who just returned from Haiti last night, this has captured the attention of the Haitian people as well. The man on the street, according to my source, is very angry because they haven't even restored ambulance service yet and the government is devoting time and energy to prosecuting these missionaries. Meanwhile, Haitians are needlessly dying. The Haitian Prime Minister is more concerned about scoring political points (and probably a bribe from the United States government) than he is the welfare of his own people. This is the absolute height of corruption.

* It is clear that laws were broken and I would not suggest for one moment that any sovereign nation should suspend its laws just because the transgressors are Americans. But if the Haitian government even thinks about handing down the kind of sentences that are being proposed, they are going to regret it. For one, many will (unfortunately) use this as an excuse to withhold much needed support. (If you're think about that, please don't.) Second, God, the Righteous Judge, will ensure that everyone involved reaps what they have sown.

I Couldn't Have Said It Better

A report has been in the news this week indicating an increase in teen pregnancies for the first time in a decade. This, of course, is being used by many in the media to discredit the use of abstinence education programs funded previously under the Bush administration. Once again, the source of this research is the Guttmacher Institution, which was founded by a former president of Planned Parenthood, making its findings automatically suspect, at best. Is the slight increase the result of an overemphasis on abstinence education as we're being told?

I like what Richard Ross said. He is the cofounder of True Love Waits. "Should we expect the Guttmacher Institute, the research arm for Planned Parenthood, to support abstinence messages?...Here is a similar question: Should we expect General Motors to work hard convincing the public to abandon cars for mass transit? Abstinent teenagers don't get pregnant and thus they don't contribute millions of dollars to the abortion industry. If you want to understand new directions in Washington related to abstinence, follow the money."

Amen!

$20

John Sullivan has been negotiating a deal to ship rice to Haiti in the wake of the recent earthquake. So here's the result: $20 will purchase a 100 pound bag. That will feed a family of four for a good while. So now the question becomes: How many bags will we send? I can't wait to see how many pounds our church can send. Let's do this!

Not Good Enough

Today, pro-life democrats in the US Senate agreed to a health care bill that will allow federal dollars to subsidize abortion. I had hoped in particular that Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., would have the intestinal fortitude in the senate that Rep. Bart Stupak, D-Mich., had in the house. Stupak's amendment to the house version does not allow any federal funds to pay for elective abortions...period. The agreement that Nelson conceded to, however, allows states to decide whether or not federally funded health plans will pay for elective abortions. It also claims to "segregate" funds that are paid by the insured from funds provided by the federal government, only allowing the private funds to pay for abortion.

These differences may be intricate, but they are important. Let's say, for example, that my neighbor comes over and asks for me to pay for her abortion. I say that I'm opposed to abortion and decline to pay her anything. She replies, "That's fine. I have a car payment due which happens to be the same cost as the abortion. Why don't you make my car payment for me so that I can pay for my own abortion?" Needless to say, I'm still not going to give her a dime, because at the end of the day, it's an accounting gimmick. If I give her the money, I'm paying for her abortion.

Likewise, if federally subsidized health insurance pays for an abortion, it really doesn't matter where the money came from on paper. All the abortionist knows is that he got money from Uncle Sam to pay for an abortion. This will likely result in an increase in abortions across America.

There is another problem with the senate version. If you live in a liberal state that votes to approve federal funds for abortion, you no longer have any say in the matter. Dollars will be taken from you to pay for the destruction of innocent human life.

Stupak is maintaining his stand and says that the senate compromise is not enough. At least now we know where to go to find pro-life democrats who are true to their convictions and where to find those who merely give lip service to the rights of the preborn.

Take the Survey

The Christian Anti-Defamation Commission has a poll on their site in which you can help compile the list of the year’s "top 10 most egregious acts of anti-Christian defamation, discrimination and persecution in America."

You'll be surprised when you see just how long and how legitimate the list is...all in 2009.

The link is HERE.

I Couldn't Help But Notice

I bought a new prayer journal this past January. It's my "black book." This past year, I have written down my petitions and checked off the evident answers to prayer. I noticed this morning that I have five adults whose names were entered with the petition "salvation" who have accepted Christ this year. I have baptized four of them and will soon baptize the fifth.

Sometimes, we fail to see God's answers to our prayers because we fail to write them down and keep track. Let me encourage you to keep a prayer journal and see, over time, how powerfully God works through prayer.

Senators, It's Your Turn

Pro-life democratic members of the House of Representatives made sure that the health care bill they sent to the senate eliminates federal funding of abortions. Now it's time for the pro-life democratic senators to follow suit. A senator like Casey from Pennsylvania or Nelson from Nebraska...one is all it would take to ensure that federal funding be removed prior to acceptance. Even Harry Reid claims to be pro-life, though his voting record is pretty much 50-50 on the sanctity of life. (National Right to Life gives him a 50% rating.) Now is the time to ask these men to stand up for what they already claim to believe...that every preborn child's life is worthy of protection and we should NOT force taxpayers to financially support abortion.

Thank You Pro-Life Democrats

While we do not know what the Senate will do to the health care bill passed by the House this past weekend, we do know that it appears that any bill coming out of Congress will, in fact, be abortion neutral. This is so, thanks to sixty-four pro-life democrats who stood up to the extreme left wing of their own party and to Speaker Pelosi and said, "John Q. Taxpayer will not be forced to pay for abortions." Consider that number for a moment. We rarely get to see any kind of up or down vote on the issue of abortion, so when we do, it is very significant. That number represents one fourth of all democrats in the House of Representatives!

Personally, I'm not a democrat, but I long to see a majority of democrats be pro-life. With this vote, I'm starting to think we're halfway there! Let's pray that the day will come when both parties contain respect for the sanctity of life as part of their platform.

The Power of a Picture

The direcor of a Planned Parenthood facility resigned after actually watching an abrtion for the first time. She even joined a pro-life group in praying for the facility.

Abby Johnson said that she first became disillusioned with the process when she received pressure from the organization to increase profits by performing more abortions.

"Every meeting that we had was, 'We don't have enough money, we don't have enough money — we've got to keep these abortions coming,'" Johnson told FoxNews.com. "It's a very lucrative business and that's why they want to increase numbers."

Actually seeing an abortion on the ultrasound sealed the deal. She called it an immediate "conversion."

Planned Parenthood's response? They are suing Johnson to keep her quiet about their practices!

Those who work in Crisis Pregnancy ministries attest that the best information to give an abortion-minded mother is a picture of the life God has created inside of her. Once they see their chid's heartbeat, they will not need a textbook to interpret it for them. Nor will they believe the abortionist who calls it "potential life" or a "blob of tissue." The pictures do not lie. Those who fight legislation requiring such information be shown to women prior to an abortion do not have the mother's best interests at heart.

Where Does It End?

A report out today states that in the UK, a premature baby was left to die after doctors refused to resuscitate a child born at 21 weeks. UK guidelines state that only after 22 weeks does a child's life warrant the expensive measures required to save him/her.

I have said for some time that if life is not sacred from beginning to end, then the question must then follow, "When does a human life become worthy of protection?" The groundwork has been laid in England that a life is worthy only if it will not pose too much of a burden upon the rest of society.

Eventually, this reasoning will be taken to its logical conclusion. If a child born at 21 weeks should not receive medical care because the costs (along with the possibility of disability) will be great, then what about the four year old child with cerebral palsy? Why should government spend money that could go to entitlements on someone who will never be able to "give back?" Next, we must ask, just how disabled do you have to be before we decide that you are not doing your part and should be eliminated at worst, or denied medical treatments at best?