really white

October 22, 2016

Image result for a pictures of a snow covered fields

“Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean: wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow.” Psalm 51:7

I heard of a missionary whose wife was very fastidious. They moved into a small hut, and soon she noticed that the floor was filthy. The first thing the wife wanted to do was to scrub that floor, so she scrubbed and scrubbed but to no avail. She began to wonder if she would ever get the floor clean. Finally, somebody told her the problem. It was a dirt floor! The more she scrubbed the more dirt she scrubbed up.

In the same way, we can never scrub off our sinful nature. All we do is reveal more of what is there.

I hate to tell you this, but we’re rotten to the core.

Jesus said, “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God” (John 3:3).

How dirty are you this morning? How clean must you be before you can talk with your heavenly Father? Claim the blood of Jesus and commune freely with your Father who loves you.

I was talking to my publisher today and he is always trying to get me to publish my biography. I usually always say no, but today he said it would be a great read to those that feel they are to bad to get saved. It rang a real bell, and for the first time I agreed to send him three chapters and see what kind of feedback he gets.

Today’s devotional really fits the theme of my life and all believers, dirty filthy sinners, purged, white, forgiven saints; thank God, literally thank God.

Blessings from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

All comments, prayer requests, questions to the above email. I do not respond to posts on twitter or Instagram only here, blessings.

the fox in the hen house

October 20, 2016

Image result for picture of a fox in the hen house

Nehemiah on a Wednesday, I know it’s not Thursday, but I’ve been on the road all week and using my ipad which I hate, and the devotions tend to be a little skimpy because of my lack or expertise with an ipad. So here’s something to sink your teeth into.

Satan will try to use Infiltration through False Teaching. It’s been a long time since I’ve slammed all the religious talking heads out there that are full of hooey. Whether it’s Joel Osteen or Benny Hinn, or the local pastor, false teaching seems to prevail. When we do our annual district pastor sermons review, I’m amazed at the chaff in the sermons, more smoke than fire. The biggest problem is laziness on the part of the pastor, the second problem is lack of mentoring and accountability.

So let’s look at Nehemiah;

One day I went to the house of Shemaiah son of Delaiah, the son of Mehetabel, who was shut in at his home. He said, “Let us meet in the house of God, inside the temple, and let us close the temple doors, because men are coming to kill you—by night they are coming to kill you.” But I said, “Should a man like me run away? Or should one like me go into the temple to save his life? I will not go!” I realized that God had not sent him, but that he had prophesied against me because Tobiah and Sanballat had hired him. He had been hired to intimidate me so that I would commit a sin by doing this, and then they would give me a bad name to discredit me. Remember Tobiah and Sanballat, O my God, because of what they have done; remember also the prophetess Noadiah and the rest of the prophets who have been trying to intimidate me.

Nehemiah 6:10-14

The next tactic of the enemy was to intimidate Nehemiah through false teaching. In this scenario, Tobiah and Sanballat hired a prophet named Shemaiah to deceive Nehemiah. His intent was to get Nehemiah to protect himself from the enemy by hiding in the temple (v. 10).

It seems that Shemaiah was trying to give the illusion of a “prophet utterance.” When we see the prophet “shut in at his home,” he probably was acting out the prophecy. This was common for prophets in the Old Testament. For example, we see Isaiah prophesy naked against Egypt and Cush to demonstrate how Assyria would conquer them, take them captive, and lead them naked in order to shame them (Isaiah 20). We also see that Hosea was called to marry a prostitute to represent how Israel was adulterous in her relationship with God (Hosea 1).

Shemaiah said, “let us close the temple doors, because men are coming to kill you, by night they are coming to kill you” (v. 10). This utterance seemed to be written in the form of a poetic couplet in order to trick Nehemiah into sin.1 However, Nehemiah realized that this prophet had been sent by Sanballat to make him commit sin and to give him a bad name.

This is important because one of the common tactics Satan uses to try to lure people away from God and their callings is through false teaching and false prophets. Listen to what Christ said:

Watch out for false prophets. They come to you in sheep’s clothing, but inwardly they are ferocious wolves. By their fruit you will recognize them. Do people pick grapes from thorn bushes, or figs from thistles?

Matthew 7:15-16

Jesus said to beware of false prophets. They are deceptive; they come to us in sheep’s clothing. However, they are really wolves trying to destroy. We will be able to recognize them by their fruits.

The enemy has led many astray through his false teachers. In fact, Paul said this:

For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, masquerading as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness. Their end will be what their actions deserve.

2 Corinthians 11:13-15

Paul said that these people are in the church masquerading as servants of righteousness. This is still happening today, and we must be aware of it. Consider what Paul taught Timothy about the last days:

The Spirit clearly says that in later times some will abandon the faith and follow deceiving spirits and things taught by demons. Such teachings come through hypocritical liars, whose consciences have been seared as with a hot iron.

1 Timothy 4:1-2

Paul said that false teachers and false teachings will be common in the last days. Essentially a new cult of Christianity pops up every day, and many people from the church are often led into them. If this will continue to increase in these last days, how much do Christians need discernment more than previous generations?

Interpretation Question: How did Nehemiah know this was a false prophecy? How can we know?

  1. He tested it by Scripture.

Nehemiah knew this was a false prophesy because he knew it would be sin for him to enter into the temple and close the doors. The fact that the prophet talked about closing the door indicates that the prophet was calling him to enter the Holy Place, which was only for priests (Num 18:7).2 For him to enter would have been sin and possibly led to his death.

He, no doubt, tested this prophecy by knowing Scripture. God would never tell him to enter a forbidden area of the temple. A king in the Old Testament actually entered the Holy place to offer a sacrifice and God struck him with leprosy (cf. 2 Chr 26:19).

The best protection from false teachers and false doctrine is through diligent study of the Word of God. Listen to the story of the Bereans:

Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true.

Acts 17:11

We need Christians who are diligent in the study of the Bible and test everything that comes out of the teacher’s mouth. God is calling all of us to be “noble” Christians.

  1. He knew his identity.

Nehemiah said, “Should a man like me hide?” Nehemiah knew his identity as governor, but more than that, as a servant of God and the people of Israel. In serving God and man, he could not sin against them.

In the New Testament, this reality is also true of us. Part of the reason many of us fall to the deceptions of Satan is because we really don’t know who we are in Christ. When people don’t know their identity, then they will run around trying to find it in everything.

You will find your identity in wealth, education, relationships, or even sin, if you don’t know who you are in Christ.

For example, Christ taught his disciples about their identity as children of God in order that they would not struggle with fear and worry about future provisions. Listen to what he says:

So do not worry, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the pagans run after all these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things will be given to you as well.

Matthew 6:31-33

Jesus essentially said, “The world runs after what they will eat, drink or wear, but you have a Father who takes care of you. Stop living for food, drink and clothing. The world does that, but you don’t have to because your Father will provide.” Knowing your identity will help free us from the lies of the enemy.

One of the ways we will be kept from the myriads of false teachings that will continue to increase as we get closer to the end times is by knowing the Word of God. Nehemiah knew it would be sin to enter the holy place in the temple. It was only for priests. But Nehemiah also knew his identity as a leader of Israel and servant of God. Knowing who we are will protect us from much of Satan’s tactics.

God bless and praise and thankfulness to the Lord, one area I often fall short of is counting my blessings and looking at the good.

scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

so much trouble

October 11, 2016

The most trouble

“In the multitude of words there wanteth not sin: but he that refraineth his lips is wise.” Proverbs 10:19

Your tongue can get you into a lot of trouble. There is nothing that can do more damage to your relationships than your words.

Proverbs 17:27 says, “He that hath knowledge spareth his words.” That is, if you’re smart, you won’t talk so much. When you do talk, keep your words warm and sweet because you may have to eat them later.

There’s an old saying I heard a Rabbi use once that reminds us:

 “The ears are open and out. They’re unguarded, but the tongue is behind ivory bars.”

  • When you’re talking, you’re not learning.

  • When you’re not learning, you’re not communicating.

  • When you’re not communicating, there will be no intimacy in your relationships.

In what ways has your mouth gotten you into trouble this week? Confess those times before the Lord and ask for strength and wisdom to be a better communicator.

God bless from scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com

Pray for Jackie and her first chemo treatment tomorrow, she’s 19

Roberta, her German shepherd passed today at 16

Tim and his temper this would also include Ray, Jack, Jack Jr. Steve and Raymond, these were all prayer requests by wives that live in fear of their husbands coming home from work.

A LINE IN THE SAND

June 17, 2016

last_nail

My first political rant

Omar Abdel Rahman, infamously known as the Blind Sheikh. Is a globally renowned scholar—a doctor of Islamic jurisprudence who graduated from al-Azhar University in Cairo, the seat of Sunni Islamic learning for over a millennium. His area of academic expertise was sharia—Islamic law.

I have pored over the Blind Sheikh’s many writings. And what I found was alarming: whenever he quoted the Koran or other sources of Islamic scripture, he quoted them accurately.

Now, you might be able to argue that he took scripture out of context or gave an incomplete account of it. In my subsequent years of studying Islam, I’ve learned that this is not a particularly persuasive argument. But even if one concedes for the purposes of discussion that it’s a colorable claim, the inconvenient fact remains: Abdel Rahman was not lying about Islam.

When he said the scriptures command that Muslims strike terror into the hearts of Islam’s enemies, the scriptures backed him up.

You could counter that there are other ways of construing the scriptures. You could contend that these exhortations to violence and hatred should be “contextualized”—i.e., that they were only meant for their time and place in the seventh century.  Again, I would caution that there are compelling arguments against this manner of interpreting Islamic scripture. The point, however, is that what you’d be arguing is an interpretation.

The fact that there are multiple ways of construing Islam hardly makes the Blind Sheikh’s literal construction wrong. The blunt fact of the matter is that, in this contest of competing interpretations, it is the jihadists who seem to be making sense because they have the words of scripture on their side—it is the others who seem to be dancing on the head of a pin. For our present purposes, however, the fact is that the Blind Sheikh’s summons to jihad was rooted in a coherent interpretation of Islamic doctrine. He was not perverting Islam—he was, if anything, shining a light on the need to reform it.

Another point, obvious but inconvenient, is that Islam is not a religion of peace. There are ways of interpreting Islam that could make it something other than a call to war. But even these benign constructions do not make it a call to peace. Verses such as “Fight those who believe not in Allah,” and “Fight and slay the pagans wherever ye find them, and seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem of war,” are not peaceful injunctions, no matter how one contextualizes.

Another disturbing aspect of the trial against the Blind Sheikh and his fellow jihadists was the character witnesses who testified for the defense. Most of these people were moderate, peaceful Muslim Americans who would no more commit terrorist acts than the rest of us. But when questions about Islamic doctrine would come up—“What does jihad mean?” “What is sharia?” “How might sharia apply to a certain situation?”—these moderate, peaceful Muslims explained that they were not competent to say. In other words, for the answers, you’d have to turn to Islamic scholars like the Blind Sheikh.

Now, understand: there was no doubt what the Blind Sheikh was on trial for. And there was no doubt that he was a terrorist—after all, he bragged about it. But that did not disqualify him, in the minds of these moderate, peaceful Muslims, from rendering authoritative opinions on the meaning of the core tenets of their religion. No one was saying that they would follow the Blind Sheikh into terrorism—but no one was discrediting his status either.

Although this came as a revelation to me, it should not have. After all, it is not as if Western civilization had no experience dealing with Islamic supremacism—what today we call “Islamist” ideology, the belief that sharia must govern society. Winston Churchill, for one, had encountered it as a young man serving in the British army, both in the border region between modern-day Afghanistan and Pakistan and in the Sudan—places that are still cauldrons of Islamist terror. Ever the perceptive observer, Churchill wrote:

    How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. . . . Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property—either as a child, a wife, or a concubine—must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

Three weeks before Christmas, a jihadist couple—an American citizen, the son of Pakistani immigrants, and his Pakistani wife who had been welcomed into our country on a fiancée visa—carried out a jihadist attack in San Bernardino, California, killing 14 people. Our government, as with the case in Fort Hood—where a jihadist who had infiltrated the Army killed 13 innocents, mostly fellow soldiers—resisted calling the atrocity a “terrorist attack.” Why? Our investigators are good at what they do, and our top officials may be ideological, but they are not stupid. Why is it that they can’t say two plus two equals four when Islam is involved?

The reason is simple: stubbornly unwilling to deal with the reality of Islam, our leaders have constructed an Islam of their very own. This triumph of willful blindness and political correctness over common sense was best illustrated by former British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith when she described terrorism as “anti-Islamic activity.” In other words, the savagery is not merely unrelated to Islam; it becomes, by dint of its being inconsistent with a “religion of peace,” contrary to Islam. This explains our government’s handwringing over “radicalization”: we are supposed to wonder why young Muslims spontaneously become violent radicals—as if there is no belief system involved.

This is political correctness on steroids, and it has dangerous policy implications. Consider the inability of government officials to call a mass-murder attack by Muslims a terrorist attack unless and until the police uncover evidence proving that the mass murderers have some tie to a designated terrorist group, such as ISIS or al Qaeda. It is rare for such evidence to be uncovered early in an investigation—and as a matter of fact, such evidence often does not exist. Terrorist recruits already share the same ideology as these groups: the goal of imposing sharia. All they need in order to execute terrorist attacks is paramilitary training, which is readily available in more places than just Syria.

The dangerous flipside to our government’s insistence on making up its own version of Islam is that anyone who is publicly associated with Islam must be deemed peaceful. This is how we fall into the trap of allowing the Muslim Brotherhood, the world’s most influential Islamic supremacist organization, to infiltrate policy-making organs of the U.S. government, not to mention our schools, our prisons, and other institutions. The federal government, particularly under the Obama administration, acknowledges the Brotherhood as an Islamic organization—notwithstanding the ham-handed attempt by the intelligence community a few years back to rebrand it as “largely secular”—thereby giving it a clean bill of health. This despite the fact that Hamas is the Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch, that the Brotherhood has a long history of terrorist violence, and that major Brotherhood figures have gone on to play leading roles in terrorist organizations such as al Qaeda.

To quote Churchill again:  “Facts are better than dreams.” In the real world, we must deal with the facts of Islamic supremacism, because its jihadist legions have every intention of dealing with us. But we can only defeat them if we resolve to see them for what they are.

Wake America, the enemy is within the gates. Obama is a liar and a deceiver, Hillary is a liar, just as Christians say the live by the bible so does the muslim live by the koran, we are their enemy, period.

Send hate mail, objectionable comments to scumlikeuschurch@gmail.com