DISCUSSION FORUMS
MAIN MENU
Home
Help
Advanced Search
Recent Posts
Site Statistics
Who's Online
Forum Rules
Bible Resources
• Bible Study Aids
• Bible Devotionals
• Audio Sermons
Community
• ChristiansUnite Blogs
• Christian Forums
• Facebook Apps
Web Search
• Christian Family Sites
• Top Christian Sites
• Christian RSS Feeds
Family Life
• Christian Finance
• ChristiansUnite KIDS
Shop
• Christian Magazines
• Christian Book Store
Read
• Christian News
• Christian Columns
• Christian Song Lyrics
• Christian Mailing Lists
Connect
• Christian Singles
• Christian Classifieds
Graphics
• Free Christian Clipart
• Christian Wallpaper
Fun Stuff
• Clean Christian Jokes
• Bible Trivia Quiz
• Online Video Games
• Bible Crosswords
Webmasters
• Christian Guestbooks
• Banner Exchange
• Dynamic Content

Subscribe to our Free Newsletter.
Enter your email address:

ChristiansUnite
Forums
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
February 21, 2018, 04:19:49 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Our Lord Jesus Christ loves you.
278363 Posts in 26611 Topics by 3790 Members
Latest Member: Goodwin
* Home Help Search Login Register
Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10

 81 
 on: February 06, 2018, 06:39:47 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 2-6-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________


The Patriot Post® · Mid-Day Digest
Feb. 6, 2018 · https://patriotpost.us/digests/53962-mid-day-digest

IN TODAY’S EDITION

Two more Demo memos muddy the waters over the FBI.
Trump was kidding, but he shouldn’t have said “treasonous.”
The new Nuclear Posture Review is a welcome change from the Obama years.
Objection: Marines shouldn’t have been used as “door-pullers” for NFL celebrity athletes.
California’s “free” health care and universal basic income in one city are too expensive.
Is #MeToo becoming a lame anti-men campaign?
Plus our Daily Features: Top Headlines, Memes, Cartoons, Columnists and Short Cuts.

THE FOUNDATION

“It is of great importance to set a resolution, not to be shaken, never to tell an untruth. There is no vice so mean, so pitiful, so contemptible; and he who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and a third time, till at length it becomes habitual; he tells lies without attending to it, and truths without the world’s believing him. This falsehood of the tongue leads to that of the heart, and in time depraves all its good disposition.” —Thomas Jefferson (1785)

IN BRIEF

Demo Memo(s)1


By Thomas Gallatin

The House Intelligence Committee voted unanimously Monday to release the Democrat rebuttal to the Republicans’ FISA memo2. President Donald Trump will now have five days to decide if he will release it to the public, which he has previously stated he would do. Rep. Adam Schiff (D-CA), the author of this rebuttal memo, accused Republicans of seeking to distort the facts with the FISA memo produced by House Intelligence Committee Chairman Devin Nunes (R-CA). Democrats claim that Nunes coordinated with the White House in creating the FISA memo, a charge Nunes has strongly denied.

Meanwhile, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) “leaked” a six-page response to the FISA memo, in which he argues that the FBI’s acquiring of a FISA warrant based on the dubious and unverified Christopher Steele dossier was perfectly fine because of Steele’s solid reputation with the FBI and because the allegations made within the dossier have not been disproven.

Andrew McCarthy of National Review astutely notes3 that the court is interested in the credibility of eyewitnesses, not the reputation of the agent who collected the information. If the FBI, as the FISA memo alleges, relied heavily on the unverified information from the Steele dossier, then the FBI did not meet the standard necessary to justify receiving a surveillance warrant. McCarthy writes, “So far, the FBI and Justice Department have provided only cause for grave concern that they gave a federal court unverified, highly unreliable information that was essential to the court’s probable-cause finding, and that they did so without being candid with the court about the biases of the information’s purveyor. That being so, the burden is on the FBI and the Justice Department to prove that they did not act improperly in seeking the FISA warrant — especially since they, rather than the rest of us, are in possession of the information that they insist would vindicate them.”

McCarthy also points out that the burden is on the DOJ and the FBI to prove they had credible witnesses for seeking a FISA warrant. He writes, “Before you ever get to the point of having an expert explain factual transactions that are beyond the ken of the layman, the occurrence of these factual transactions has to be established by competent, reliable witnesses. Steele and the FBI point us to none.” He continues, “Warrants are issued based on the quality of the information proffered to the court, not the duration of the information-gathering process.”

Democrats are clearly scrambling to regain control of the narrative surrounding Russiagate, with spurious accusations of a Republican Congress going out of its way in seeking to protect Trump. However, the stench of deep-state corruption is all wafting from the Democrat side of the aisle, and no amount of political spin perfume will cover the stink of this growing scandal.

Trump, Treason and Democrats4

By Nate Jackson

President Donald Trump has a habit of giving powerful speeches5 only to follow them up by saying something stupid (usually on Twitter) that gives fodder to the Leftmedia and derails his momentum. That was partially the case yet again yesterday in a speech that was supposed to be about the economy but ended up devolving into partisan sniping. He told an Ohio crowd, “[Democrats] would rather see Trump do badly, ok, than our country do well — it’s very selfish — even on positive news, really positive news … they were like death and un-American. Un-American. Somebody [in the crowd] said ‘treasonous.’ I mean, yeah, I guess, why not? Can we call that treason? Why not? I mean, [Democrats] certainly didn’t seem to love our country very much. But you look at that and it’s really very, very sad.”

The crowd laughed at multiple points, and Trump was clearly playing for it, but that didn’t stop leftists from caterwauling about it as proof of his Hitlerian bent.

First, it should go without saying such language is not the way American presidents should speak. Every Trump fan would lose their mind if Barack Obama had said the same thing, even in jest. Obama did make lesser but similar charges against opponents, and every conservative objected. But Trump does often speak like an authoritarian and thus it makes such labels far easier to apply to him. It’s also one reason why he had such vociferous opposition in the GOP primaries. Treason has a specific definition (Article III, Section 3 of the U.S. Constitution6), and it’s not a word that should be thrown about flippantly. Chief of Staff John Kelly, call your office.

On the other hand, Trump has never made the first move to carry through with anything remotely like the language he uses on the stump — language that he intends as New Yorker bluster, not policy or law enforcement prescription. Obama, on the other hand, actually weaponized federal agencies to punish political opponents.

Leftist hypocrisy goes even deeper. They wail every day about Trump, his family and his campaign committing treason. What else is the whole “collusion with Russia” nonsense about? And for eight years, those of us who steadfastly opposed Obama’s statist policies meant to “fundamentally transform” America were labeled7 not just racist but treasonous. All the time8. The difference is Democrats weren’t kidding. So please, Demo and media talkingheads, spare us your phony outrage now.

Finally, aside from agreeing to a word suggested to him by a member of the audience, Trump was right — Democrats certainly do seem to hate him more than they love America9.

Top Headlines10

Congress returns with just days to avoid shutdown (The Hill11)

McCain’s DACA fix is likely dead on arrival (The Daily Signal12)

Suspect in Colts’ Edwin Jackson, Uber driver deaths was twice-deported illegal alien who was previously convicted for drunk driving in California (Indianapolis Star13)

U.S. economy fundamentally strong despite stock market plunge (Associated Press14)

Clinton donor and Hollywood mogul Haim Saban gives $1,000 bonuses to staff thanks to tax reform (The Daily Wire15)

Supreme Court won’t block Pennsylvania ruling that state redraw congressional boundaries immediately, in decision that could help Democrats (The Washington Post16)

Here are the Philadelphia Eagles who plan to skip the White House Super Bowl visit (Fox News17)

Super Bowl airs call for “equal pay” after NFL rejects #PleaseStand ad as too political (The Washington Times18.)

Canadian PM Trudeau mansplains to woman questioner: “Peoplekind” is “more inclusive” than “mankind” (The Washington Free Beacon19)

Berkeley spent almost $4 million to keep campus safe from people angry about opinions (Washington Examiner20)

Policy: 2018 solutions for federal spending and debt (The Heritage Foundation21)

Policy: CFPB case threatens the power of a president to shape his administration’s policies (National Review22)

For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report23.

FEATURED ANALYSIS
The Nuclear Posture Review Brings Military Readiness24


By Todd Johnson

The release of a new nuclear posture25 is the latest initiative by President Donald Trump and Defense Secretary James Mattis to revive a Department of Defense capability that, in the words of one senior official, needs to be updated to meet a “challenging and dynamic security environment26.”

The 74-page nuclear posture document27, the first since 2010, reflects the administration’s attempt to deal with “a more diverse and advanced nuclear-threat environment than ever before, with considerable dynamism in potential adversaries’ development and deployment programs for nuclear weapons and delivery systems.”

 82 
 on: February 06, 2018, 08:35:25 AM 
Started by Soldier4Christ - Last post by Soldier4Christ
Tithes and Offerings

“Bring ye all the tithes into the storehouse, that there may be meat in mine house, and prove me now herewith, saith the LORD of hosts, if I will not open you the windows of heaven, and pour you out a blessing, that there shall not be room enough to receive it.” (Malachi 3:10)
 
Today there is much talk of financial security. The biblical formula in today’s verse, given to Israel but applied to all, begins with a scathing indictment. “Will a man rob God? Yet ye have robbed me. But ye say, Wherein have we robbed thee? In tithes and offerings” (v. 8). What a terrible thing, to rob God. The result of their thievery, in God’s eyes: “Ye are cursed with a curse” (v. 9) such that their financial state was much worse than it would have been had they been obedient. This teaching and promise has not been rescinded (Luke 6:38; 1 Corinthians 16:2; etc.).
 
God’s charge to us as given in today’s verse is in three steps. First, we are told to obey; i.e., “bring ye.” This cannot be considered an option. Secondly, God proposes a test. “Prove me,” He says, give and see if He lives up to His promises. Thirdly, trust His promise to meet our needs.
 
Note that His promise is also threefold. It abundantly covers present needs, for He promises to “pour you out a blessing” unmeasurable in quality or quantity. Likewise, it covers the threat of future loss. “And I will rebuke the devourer for your sakes, and he shall not destroy the fruits of your ground; neither shall your vine cast her fruit before the time in the field” (v. 11). Most precious is His promise to reward obedience and trust with a special relationship: “All nations shall call you blessed: for ye shall be a delightsome land” (v. 12).
 
Thus, we see that with less than 100 percent of our income at our disposal, we will have greater financial security than if we had kept it all to ourselves, thereby robbing God. JDM

 83 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:10:30 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
_______________________________________________
More Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society

Free Email Subscription


For Questions Or Comments:  berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________


Access Your Grace and Joy!
by Pastor Ricky Kurth

How different things are under Grace! What a blessing it has been over the years for this Grace pastor to be able to visit God’s people in the hospital and not have to suggest that perhaps they were hospitalized because of some secret sin! If the reader of this page is currently going through some tribulation in life, you needn’t be ashamed in such circumstances as people were under the Law.

One more thing about experience. As we all know, experience is a great teacher, and our experience with tribulation teaches us that we are not under Law (Rom. 6:14,15). When we sin, we sometimes experience tribulation afterward—and sometimes not. Sometimes when we experience tribulation, we can think back to a particular sin that we have committed—and sometimes we can’t. In other words, our experience with tribulation teaches us that our tribulations have nothing to do with our conduct! For the believer today, tribulations are just a result of living with the results of Adam’s fall. We do experience trouble as a result of reaping what we sow (Gal. 6:7), but that is quite different than tribulation sent from God under the Law as a result of disobedience.

    “And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us” (Rom. 5:5).

At the risk of sounding irreverent, I would suggest to you that without the blessed hope of the Rapture, you should be ashamed of God! In the dispensation of grace, are you guaranteed prosperity, as was the experience of Abraham and Lot (Gen. 13:2,5,6), Job (1:3) and others? Should you be pursued by men intent on doing you harm, and you find yourself cornered at a large body of water, will God part the waters to facilitate your escape? When you are hungry, does He provide manna for you as He did for Israel?

These things and more might cause us to be ashamed and embarrassed to name such a God as our own. Ah, but “hope maketh not ashamed”! The blessed hope of living eternally with God in heaven takes away all “shame” of worshipping a God who does not defy nature to meet our needs and deliver us from tribulation in life. Paul was right when he said that “if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable” (I Cor. 15:19). Thank God, we have hope in Christ in the next life as well!

God’s love may not be shed abroad in our health or our wealth, but “the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts“ (Rom. 5:5). The word “shed” in Scripture is almost always used in conjunction with the shedding of blood, and so the Apostle uses this word here to remind us that “God commendeth His love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8.). Of course, while the Lord’s blood was shed at Calvary, the love of God that was manifest in the Cross is only shed abroad “in our hearts” when we believe.

We must always remember to measure the love of God by the love expressed at Calvary. We have ways of measuring just about everything, including the amount of electricity and natural gas that comes into our homes. But in order to get a correct measure of things, we must use the proper measuring device. Every cook knows that if the recipe calls for a dry measure and you employ a liquid measuring cup, you are going to come up with a faulty measure! Every electrician knows that you can’t measure amps with an ohmmeter, or ohms with a voltmeter. And every Christian should know that we cannot measure the love of God in our lives by the amount of tribulation in our lives. The only accurate standard by which to measure the love of God is the Cross of Christ.

The story is told of a young man in ancient times who was convicted of adultery, a crime punishable in those days by the putting out of the two eyes of the perpetrator. But after he levied the sentence, the judge revealed that he was the young man’s father. He then announced that he would execute the sentence by putting out just one of his son’s eyes, and one of his own. In this way the justice of the law was satisfied, but the judge’s son would be spared total blindness.

While this story is a touching one indeed, it cannot begin to illustrate the love that God showed to us at the Cross. For there the Lord Jesus did not just volunteer to “go halves” with us in satisfying the just demands of the Law. He rather bore all the punishment that was justly due to us, as He “bare our sins in His own body on the tree” (I Pet. 2:24). When the trials of life seem almost too great too bear, what joy can be ours as we access by faith this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God!

 84 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:09:32 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
_______________________________________________
More Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society

Free Email Subscription


For Questions Or Comments:  berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________


Access Your Grace and Joy!
by Pastor Ricky Kurth

But of what grace does the apostle speak when he uses the phrase “this grace”? When he writes of “this grace” in II Corinthians 8:7, the context tells us that he speaks of the grace of giving. But here the context determines that the phrase “this grace” speaks of the grace of our justification and our peace with God.

But if we “stand” before God justified and at peace with Him, why do we need to “access” this grace? The answer lies in the difference between our standing as believers and our state. Sometimes expressed in other terms, such as the difference between our position and our practice, this Bible study principle points out the difference between the perfect standing that believers have before God in Christ, and the outworking of that position in our daily lives (Phil. 2:12). Ideally the two should be the same, but even the best of us falls short of the absolute perfection we have in Christ.

Likewise our text tells us that we stand fully justified and at peace with God. However, when we sin, it is natural to fear that we have provoked God. Likewise when we get sick, or suffer an accident or experience some other adversity, we are prone to think that God is angry with us. When these things happen, we must access the grace that tells us we stand before Him justified and at peace.

How do we access this grace? Paul says that we do so “by faith,” and faith comes by hearing the Word (Rom. 10:17). Thus when your conscience whispers that God is angry with you, or when some preacher on TV suggests that God is judging you for your sin, you must by faith access His Word, and remind yourself that God says you have irrevocable peace with Him. Our joy is based in our peace with God, but we must access this grace by faith if we are to have the joy that God wants us to enjoy.

Next, Paul says that we “rejoice in hope of the glory of God.” Here we know that Paul is speaking of the Rapture, because the words “hope” and “glory” remind us of how Paul describes the Rapture as “that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing” of the Lord Jesus (Titus 2:13).

But has the reader ever wondered what the glory of God is, specifically? We needn’t speculate. When Moses asked God to show him His “glory,” the Lord replied that He would do so by showing him His “goodness” (Ex. 33:18,19). God’s glory is His goodness. Romans 3:23 says, “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God.” The glory of God is that He is so good that He has never sinned, and we have all fallen short of this. This is why the natural reaction of men to the glory of God is fear (Luke 2:9). It is natural for unholy men to fear the absolute holiness of God.

How then can Paul say that we “rejoice” in hope of the glory of God? Ah, it is because at the Rapture, God’s glory will not just be revealed to us, as it was revealed to the frightened shepherds at our Lord’s birth, it will be revealed “in” us (Rom. 8:18.). And so we needn’t fear God’s glory, we can rather rejoice in it, because in that day we will share it!

Imagine sharing the glory of God! People pay big bucks to buy JFK’s golf clubs, or a dress worn by Princess Diana, but these purchases can hardly enable the buyer to share the glory of these celebrities. Yet the God of all creation, who declared He would not give His glory to another (Isa. 42:8; 48:11), has given this glory to the Lord Jesus Christ (John 17:5), and will someday give it to us through Him. Surely this is grace to rejoice in!

    “And not only so, but we glory in tribulations also: knowing that tribulations worketh patience;

    “And patience, experience; and experience, hope” (Rom. 5:3,4).

The Greek word for “glory” in Verse 3 is the same as that translated “rejoice” in Verse 2. Coupled with the word “also” here, Paul is saying that we glory in tribulations as much as we rejoice in the Rapture! To which most of us would reply—“We do? How can Paul say such a thing!”

The key is in the word “knowing.” The key to glorying in tribulation is convincing ourselves that God is correct when He says tribulation works patience. As adults we endure going to the dentist, working out in the gym, etc., because we know that these things work physical good in us. Likewise as sons of God, we should be able to endure anything if we truly believe that it is working spiritual good in us.

If the reader wonders if tribulation really works patience, just imagine a Christian who was born wealthy and whose parents shielded him from all tribulation in life. Such a man is likely to be very impatient, and so we can prove by reverse reasoning that the Bible is as right about this as it is about all other things. But as tribulations begin to work patience in our shielded wealthy friend, his “experience” with tribulation will begin to work “hope” in him. A believer who experiences no tribulation in life is unlikely to be hoping for the Rapture.

But can we ever get to the point where we actually rejoice in tribulations? Perhaps the reader has heard of Ivan Pavlov, the Russian scientist who rang a bell when he fed his dog, then noticed that his pet would salivate even before being presented with food. In a lesser-known experiment, Pavlov administered an electric shock to the dog, who understandably growled at him. He then began to administer shocks to the dog followed by a treat, and soon his pet ceased growling after receiving a shock. Eventually the animal actually began to wag his tail upon receipt of the unpleasant jolt, joyfully realizing that a treat would follow.

In like manner, the believer in Christ can also learn to stop growling when we are on the receiving end of the many shocks and traumas of life, and actually learn to rejoice in tribulations. This is high spiritual ground indeed, but it is a level that Paul was able to attain in II Corinthians 7:4, where he said, “I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation.”

Of course in Scripture, “glory” is the opposite of “shame” (Psa. 4:2; Prov. 3:35; Isa. 22:18; Hos. 4:7; Hab. 2:16; Phil. 3:19). And so if as a believer you have not yet attained to the level of spirituality needed to actually rejoice in tribulations, you can at least know that tribulation in our lives is nothing of which to be ashamed.

This is different than under the Law. In Jeremiah 14:1-4, the farmers in Israel were “ashamed” when they experienced the tribulation of a drought. Why would a farmer be embarrassed about a lack of rain? In the dispensation of grace, such a dearth is in no way the farmer’s fault. But under the Law, the people of Israel brought drought upon themselves. The terms of their covenant with God stated that if they were disobedient, God would chasten them by withholding precipitation (Lev. 26:19). And so to experience a drought under the Law was a cause of shame and embarrassment, for it meant that they had been disobedient to God. Now it is possible that the farmers’ shame in Jeremiah 14 was also due to embarrassment caused by calling in vain upon false gods for rain (cf. Jer. 2:26,27), but the fact remains that tribulation under the Law was a cause for shame, not glory.

 85 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:08:32 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
_______________________________________________
More Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society

Free Email Subscription


For Questions Or Comments:  berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________


Access Your Grace and Joy!
by Pastor Ricky Kurth


(From a message given September 30, 2006, at Berean Grace Church in Genoa City, Wisconsin)

    “Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:

    “By whom also we have access by faith into this grace wherein we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God” (Rom. 5:1,2).

In 1888, a poem appeared in the San Francisco Examiner that soon swept the nation. It was a ballad about the then relatively young sport of baseball, and was entitled, “Casey at the Bat.” The last line of this epic poem reads: “But there is no joy in Mudville—mighty Casey has struck out.”

What a telling example of how the world about us views the subject of joy. When things are good, and their team has won, there is joy! But when things go bad, and their team has lost, their joy is lost. And so it must always be for the unbeliever, or even for the believer who knows no better than to find the basis for his joy in his circumstances. How much better is the joy that God offers to those who understand what His Word teaches on this important subject! Our text says that we can rejoice in hope of the glory of God. The word rejoice is the verb form of the word joy. If you are rejoicing, you have joy, and if you have joy, it means that you are rejoicing.

The Bible study principle known as The Law of 1st Mention says that the first mention of a word in Scripture often defines the word, or sets the tone for its use throughout Scripture. And while Romans 5:2 is not the first mention of joy in the Bible, it is the first mention of joy in Paul’s epistles. Since Paul is the apostle of the present dispensation, we can conclude that the basis for all of our joy as members of the Body of Christ is found here in these verses.

The primary source of the believer’s joy here is knowing that we have been “justified by faith.” What does it mean to be justified? It means to be made righteous. We have no English word righteous-fied, and so if you are justified, it means that you have been made righteous, and if you have been made righteous, it means that you are justified. But what does it mean to be made righteous?

Many years ago, if a man in England shot and killed a man who was raping his wife, it was considered “justifiable homicide.” This means that not only was the husband not guilty of any wrong-doing in shooting the rapist, he was actually considered to have done the right thing. Similarly, when we get saved, God gives us so much more than just forgiveness. We are actually justified, “made the righteousness of God” in Christ (II Cor. 5:21). The very righteousness of God is imputed to us in Christ.

But how is God able to impute such righteousness to sinful men? The answer to this question is important, for it differs greatly from the justification offered by Greek mythology.

Has the reader ever wondered why the “gods” of the Greeks were frequently portrayed as lying, cheating, stealing, and lusting after human beings and other gods? Why would men fabricate gods who behaved so poorly? Ah, to justify their own behavior! After all, if their gods conducted themselves so sinfully, it was easy to rationalize and justify such iniquity amongst themselves.

How different is the justification offered by God in His Word. God justifies us not by lowering Himself to our level, but rather by raising us to His! He did not lower His standards of absolute righteousness so as to allow sinful men to be justified. He rather sent His Son to live a life that fully met His perfect standard, who then died a sacrificial death on our behalf. This explains how God could be “just, and the Justifier of him which believeth in Jesus” (Rom. 3:26). God then is able to impute His righteousness to us when we believe the gospel, and thus as our text says we are “justified by faith.” The word “faith” is the noun form of the word believe. If you believe, you have faith, and if you have faith, that means that you have believed.

But what is it that we must believe in order to be justified? Well, our text begins with the word “therefore.” Students of the Bible know that when we see a “therefore” in Scripture, we must look to see what it’s there for! In this instance, if we back up one verse, we learn what it is that we must believe in order to be justified. Speaking of the Lord Jesus Christ in Romans 4:24, Verse 25 says:

    “Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.”

The most important word in this verse is one of the smallest words, as is often the case in Scripture. It is the word “for.” Believing that Christ died and rose again is not enough to save anyone, for these are merely well-documented facts of history. It is only when we believe that Christ died for our sins and was raised for our justification that God can impute His righteousness to us. What a wonderful source of joy!

Additional grounds for the believer’s joy can be found in our text when Paul speaks of our “peace with God.” The peace that God makes with us is unlike the peace men make with one another, which is only temporary in nature. When we hear the announcement of a “cease-fire” in the Middle East, we know it will only last until the next shot is fired! Similarly, Hitler made “peace” with Stalin, but it wasn’t long before the German panzers were rolling eastward into Russia. Contrariwise, the peace that God offers is irrevocable! The believer in Christ will never again be the enemy of God that he was before salvation (Rom. 5:10).

If you stop and think about it, justification and peace with God are the only things we should rejoice in, for they are the only things we have that cannot be taken away! Many a man rejoices in his house, his car, his riches or his health, but all of these are things that can be lost. When husbands rejoice in their job, and wives rejoice in their children, these things are certainly more noble things in which to rejoice, but these too are things that can be taken away from us. When Christians rejoice in their church or in their pastor, this appears even more virtuous, and yet these too are things that can be lost. The only safe things in which to base our joy are immutable truths like our justification and our peace with the Almighty.

Further joy can be found in our text in the “access” we have “into this grace wherein we stand.” Our personal computers contain many files, and they are our files, but we must be able to access them for them to be of any use to us. Similarly, the believer in Christ has grace, but we must be able to access this grace for it to be of any functional value in our spiritual lives.

 86 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:07:04 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
_______________________________________________
Two Minutes With The Bible
From The Berean Bible Society

Free Email Subscription


For Questions Or Comments:  berean@execpc.com
_______________________________________________


This Is For Jesus
by Pastor Cornelius R. Stam


Visiting a young pastor and his family some time ago I observed a touching example of true Christian stewardship.

It was nearly time to go to church, when the pastor’s wife reached for a small box containing a few coins and handed it to her little boy. The coins represented the boy’s earnings received for jobs done, good behaviour, etc.

Seriously the boy contemplated the contents of the box and took from it two dimes — a substantial portion of the whole. Then looking up at me he said earnestly: “This is for Jesus”.

Several Scriptural lessons about Christian giving came to mind as we observed this simple incident.

This little lad had already been taught the responsibility of participating systematically in supporting the work of the Lord (I Cor. 16:2). He gave “as he purposed in his heart”; no one suggested how much he ought to give (II Cor. 9:7). After thinking it over carefully, he gave sacrificially (II Cor. 8:7,9). He “proved the sincerity of his love” (II Cor. 8:8.), for it was with sincere, childlike affection that he said: “This is for Jesus”.

Most of all, perhaps, his gift was a living demonstration of Paul’s exhortation in Romans 12:8: “He that giveth, let him do it with simplicity”. There was no fanfare, no boasting, no evidence of any feeling that he was doing a lot for the Lord; just an attitude of simple, humble satisfaction that he could join others in supporting the work of Christ.

How much we, who have too often been hardened through the years, can learn from children!

 87 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:05:24 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
__________________________________________
From Grace Gems:
Very Old - But Beautiful and Timeless Treasures.
Everything is FREE and Public Domain.
http://www.gracegems.org/19/literature.htm
___________________________________________

My coward heart!

(A.W. Tozer)

Father, I want to know You--but my coward heart fears to give up its toys. I cannot part with them without inward bleeding, and I do not try to hide from You the terror of the parting. I come trembling, but I do come. Please root from my heart all those things which I have cherished so long and which have become a very part of my self--so that You may reign there without a rival. Deliver me from the tyranny of things--and from the idols of my heart. In Jesus' name, Amen.

 88 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:01:36 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 2-5-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________


MORE ANALYSIS FROM THE PATRIOT POST

Eagles Win, Capping Off Another Politically Plagued NFL Season52 — No anthem kneeling, but Philly fans celebrate a Super Bowl victory by tearing up their city.
Democrats Hate Trump More Than They Love America53 — Last Tuesday’s State of the Union response may have been a tipping point for the American Left.
Pros and Cons of Paid Family Leave54 — How do we balance taking care of workers with heavy regulation or spending future money?
President Trump Releases the House FISA Memo55 — Now begins the investigation into the DOJ and FBI and their handling of the infamous anti-Trump dossier.
Video: Leftist Students Busted Hating on Obama Speech56 — It’s John Jay College students’ turn to share in the embarrassing State of the Union spotlight.

BEST OF RIGHT OPINION

Hans von Spakovsky: GOP Memo Raises Serious Questions About FBI, DOJ57
Caleb Verbois: Memos, Trump, and Trust58
Marc A. Thiessen: Trump’s New Immigration Proposal Is Quintessentially Presidential59
Kathryn Jean Lopez: Moral Cowardice in the Senate60
Rebecca Hagelin: Rot, or Revival?61
For more of today’s columns, visit Right Opinion62.

OPINION IN BRIEF

Hans von Spakovsky: “One would think that senior law enforcement officials would have realized they had a professional duty to tell the court about the origins of the dossier and about Steele himself, since that information was relevant to the credibility of the information drawn from the dossier. Yet, according to the Republican memo, the senior FBI and Justice Department officials involved in the application and re-application process failed in that duty. The staff memo says nothing regarding what Page is alleged to have done. Thus, the reader is not able to assess whether or not a FISA warrant targeting him was a valid government objective. Nor do we know what information — from the dossier or elsewhere — led the government to reasonably believe that Page was ‘an agent of a foreign power.’ Clearly, the FISA memo released is but a portion of a much larger story. If Washington works the way it typically works, the fuller story will come out eventually. It should, because the public has a right to know what happened. But if the main elements of this staff memo prove to be true — that key government officials failed to disclose the tawdry facts about the unverified Steele dossier, its origin, and who paid for it, in the middle of a presidential election — there could and should be serious ramifications for all of those involved.”

SHORT CUTS

For the record: “It is important for the American public to know if the dossier was paid for by another candidate, used in court pleadings, vetted before it was used, vetted after it was used, and whether all relevant facts were shared with the tribunal approving of the FISA application.” —Rep. Trey Gowdy

Self-righteous indignation: “That’s it? Dishonest and misleading memo wrecked the House intel committee, destroyed trust with Intelligence Community, damaged relationship with FISA court, and inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an American citizen. For what? DOJ & FBI must keep doing their jobs.” —James Comey

Non Compos Mentis: “Trump has surrendered his constitutional responsibility as Commander-in-Chief by releasing highly classified and distorted intelligence. By not protecting intelligence sources and methods, he just sent his friend Putin a bouquet.” —Nancy Pelosi

Oh for crying out loud: “I think there is probably a credible case [of obstruction] involving [Devin] Nunes as well.” —Sen. Richard Blumenthal

“I’m with [fill in the blank]”: “There’s a definite yearning for ‘Who’s my next great love?’ And the problem is we’re not really loving anyone we see. So we’re looking for someone we’re not expecting.” —Democrat strategist Patti Solis Doyle

Dumb and dumber: “[Trump] makes it sound like the biggest issue in the United States … is MS-13, a gang nobody that doesn’t watch Fox News has ever heard of.” —MSNBC’s Joy Reid, who thinks a transnational crime syndicate is no big deal

Braying Jackass: “You should not come to my state, saying that you know what is best for my state when you would do everything you could to harm my state.” —Sen. Joe Manchin on Mike Pence’s recent visit

Alpha Jackass: “It just so happens that almost every talk show host is a liberal and that’s because it requires a level of intelligence.” —Jimmy Kimmel

And last… “We got hit with these corporations giving tremendous bonuses to everybody that Nancy Pelosi called crumbs. That was a bad — that could be like [Clinton’s use of the word] deplorable. Does that make sense? Deplorable and crumbs — those two words, they seem to have a resemblance.” —Donald Trump

Join us in daily prayer for our Patriots in uniform — Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen — standing in harm’s way in defense of Liberty, and for their families. We also humbly ask prayer for your Patriot team, that our mission would seed and encourage the spirit of Liberty in the hearts and minds of our countrymen.

Semper Vigilans Fortis Paratus et Fidelis

Nate Jackson, Managing Editor
Mark Alexander, Publisher

 89 
 on: February 05, 2018, 07:00:20 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 2-5-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________


Regarding the political motivations of Steele, who authored and brought the fake dossier to the FBI, and who was paid for his “services” before being terminated as an unreliable informant, the memo notes: “[Steele] maintained contact with DOJ via then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr. … Shortly after the election, the FBI began interviewing Ohr, documenting his communications with Steele. For example, in September 2016, Steele admitted to Ohr his feelings against then-candidate Trump when Steele said he ‘was desperate that Donald Trump not get elected and was passionate about him not being president.’ This clear evidence of Steele’s bias was recorded by Ohr at the time and subsequently in official FBI files, but not reflected in any of the Page FISA applications.”

(Recall that, like Steele, Ohr’s wife also worked for Fusion GPS25 doing opposition research against Trump for the Clinton campaign.)

After the FBI terminated Steele as an FBI source “for what the FBI defines as the most serious of violations,” for his “unauthorized disclosure to the media of his relationship with the FBI,” an internal FBI report concluded that his dossier was at best “only minimally corroborated.” Recall that in January of last year, then-FBI Director Comey declared that at least part of the dossier was “salacious and unverified.”

For his part, Comey, now an aspiring MSNBC hack, tweeted of the released memo, “That’s it? Dishonest and misleading memo wrecked the House intel committee, destroyed trust with Intelligence Community, damaged relationship with FISA court, and inexcusably exposed classified investigation of an American citizen.”

Of course as you recall, it was Comey who exonerated Hillary Clinton26 for her secret communications subterfuge26, and who signed the FISA court documents against Page on three occasions. He now falls squarely into the Democrat camp of those who doth protest too much.

And it was Comey who then leaked memos27 of his private conversations with Trump to Daniel Richman so he could provide them to the media — and by Comey’s admission, set up grounds for appointment of a special prosecutor.

Rep. Nunes responded: “Comey had [six months] to come clean on who paid for the dossier. He was asked about it in January, and he said very clearly that he knew that Republicans had started the dossier — which was a lie. And when asked who finished the dossier, he said he didn’t know. Maybe he was lying, maybe he didn’t know, but either way that’s a problem. … Comey is welcome to come back and tell us when exactly he learned the Democratic Party and the Clinton campaign paid for the dossier.”

Nunes added, “The American people understand that the FBI should not go to secret courts, using information that was paid for by the Democrats to open up investigations with warrants of people of the other political party. There is clear evidence of collusion with the Russians, it just happens to be with the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democrat National Committee9 [with a complicit mainstream media].”

The Democrats’ point man on the memo release appears to be Eric Swalwell (D-CA). Expect to hear his mantra repeatedly this week: “The rule of law has been run over.” (It’s always humorous to hear a liberal refer to “rule of law.”)

But they should be a little concerned when even CNN’s leftist s—thole promoter Jake Tapper28 asks Swalwell this question: “Is there anything inappropriate, do you think, about a partisan political document, the Steele dossier being used in an application to surveil an associate of a presidential candidate, in this case Carter Page — especially if that fact is not disclosed in the application? Is that inherently wrong do you think?”

To which Swalwell repLIED: “Jake, that fact was disclosed — it was disclosed to the FISA court, that part of the evidence was from a politically motivated source.”

And as of this date, that is where the FISA memo, and the Democrats’ deep-state operatives who solicited it, stand.

Here are a few additional observations at this juncture…

The memo release puts the remaining Obama operatives on notice that Congress is on their trail.

In the wake of Donald Trump’s well-received State of the Union Address29, which highlighted his administration’s very successful first year30, and the fact that he now has Democrats boxed in on their prized immigration platform31, expect them to go into full hysteria mode over the FISA memo this week.

Regarding Russian interference in U.S. elections, let me reiterate that Russia has and will always be interested in undermining American confidence in its political system and government.

However, Democrats made sure Vladimir Putin is still accomplishing that interference, ad nauseam, by using the fake Russian dossier to question the legitimacy of Trump’s election.

As for the collusion claims, former prosecutor Joe DiGenova concludes, “There is no Russia collusion story without the dossier and we now know and have confirmed six ways to Sunday there was nothing behind it so, therefore, why is there a special counsel investigation?”

Even so, we will exercise caution with the memo conclusions32. But I believe the reason Republicans waited so long to release it was to give Democrats and their Leftmedia advocates time to dig themselves ever deeper into a hole of lies.

A question that needs to be asked about Barack Obama’s operatives in the FBI and DoJ, those who colluded in an attempt to swing the 2016 election to Clinton: What did Obama know and when did he know it? (Let’s not forget that Obama has his own red-handed history of colluding with the Russians33.)

Robert Mueller should focus on the real obstruction conspiracy34, the extent of Demo deep-state malfeasance35 and the collusion25 of his rear-guard operatives in the DoJ and FBI.

Finally, I think the big winner in the FISA controversy is former President Richard M. Nixon. The 1972 Watergate DNC headquarters break-in by some Cuban burglars was amateur play compared to the creation and use of the fake Clinton/DNC funded Russia collusion dossier, to achieve surveillance access to the Trump campaign.

Footnote: When I say “Comey” in voice dictation, I have to correct the voice-to-text transcription, which interprets it as “commie.” Must be the Russians…


Top Headlines36

No players kneel during national anthem at Super Bowl (The Hill37)

Black Lives Matter protesters arrested after blocking light rail to Super Bowl (The Washington Times38.)

Mexican immigrant without license accused in DUI death of Indianapolis Colts linebacker Edwin Jackson (The Washington Times39)

“Dreamer” talks aim to end budget impasse (The Wall Street Journal40)

Pentagon unveils new nuclear weapons strategy, ending Obama-era push to reduce U.S. arsenal (The Washington Post41)

U.S. Episcopal diocese refuses to use God’s preferred gender pronoun (The Daily Wire42)

Ban on guns near parks violates the Second Amendment, Illinois Supreme Court says (Reason43)

Good Samaritan with a gun comes to the aid of Utah police officer under attack (Hot Air44)

The parents of this dead robber are really mad his victim had a gun (The Truth About Guns45)

Humor: Nation fondly remembers time when liberals advocated for government transparency (The Babylon Bee46)

Policy: What to expect from the Jerome Powell era at the Fed (Washington Examiner47)

Policy: Settled nutritional science just got blown up (Investor’s Business Daily48.)

For more of today’s news, visit Patriot Headline Report49.

 90 
 on: February 05, 2018, 06:59:14 PM 
Started by nChrist - Last post by nChrist
________________________________________
The Patriot Post Digest 2-5-2018
From The Federalist Patriot
Free Email Subscription
________________________________________


That notwithstanding, The Washington Post’s lead national security story over the weekend contained this: “In the 109 years of the FBI’s existence, it has repeatedly come under fire for abuses of power, privacy or civil rights. From Red Scares to recording and threatening to expose the private conduct of Martin Luther King Jr. to benefiting from bulk surveillance in the digital age, the FBI is accustomed to intense criticism. What is so unusual about the current moment … is the source of the attacks. The bureau is under fire not from those on the left but rather conservatives who have long been the agency’s biggest supporters, as well as the president…”

Again, no.

Ironically, while WaPo has railed against the release of the FISA memo, there is a big screen production currently in theaters, “The Post,” about some WaPo journalists who attempted to publish the Pentagon Papers. As you recall, that was a classified DoD study stolen by one of its authors, Daniel Ellsberg, regarding U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967.

Of course, it was actually The New York Times, which also railed against the FISA release, which broke the Pentagon Papers story in 1971, and began publishing excerpts. In a summary, The Times noted that the Kennedy and Johnson administrations has “systematically lied, not only to the public but also to Congress.”

So why would the Post and Times not want the FISA memo published? (Rhetorical question…)

In fact, the memo shines sunlight on the nefarious circumstances under which a FISA warrant was issued on evidence that was 10% substance and 90% fragrance, in order to spy on a Trump campaign volunteer, Carter Page, and by extension, everyone with whom Page had communication. In other words, the FBI could extend its powerful surveillance tentacles deep into the Trump campaign, and the information gleaned by that surveillance could then be used by Obama’s operatives to assist Clinton.

Page, a Distinguished Graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy (top 10% of his class) and a naval intelligence officer, also earned a master’s degree in National Security Studies from Georgetown University, an MBA from New York University, and a Ph.D. from the University of London. He was also a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations before starting his own business specializing in energy development. In 2013, because of his connections with Russian oil interests, he was advised by the FBI that Russian intelligence operatives were attempting to recruit him. This is why he was on the FBI’s radar as a person of interest — and this status would help justify, four years later, the FISA warrant against him.

After analyzing the FISA memo’s contents, it’s clear why Democrat Party13 leaders and some DoJ officials were adamantly opposed14 to its public release: It provided incontrovertible evidence that Obama operatives within DoJ and FBI used a phony Trump dossier15, which was created by a Trump-hating ex-British spy and paid for by the DNC and the Hillary Clinton campaign16, to spy on the Trump presidential campaign.

It references former FBI Director James Comey17, former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates18 and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who was the subject of Rep. Trey Gowdy’s epic House Oversight Committee inquiry19, which asked, “What the hell is going on with the Department of Justice and the FBI?”

Of course, it also referenced then-Associate Deputy Attorney General Bruce Ohr20, corrupt FBI agent Peter Strzok21 and former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe22.

The memo notes correctly that the investigation of former Trump campaign adviser George Papadopoulos’23 drunken remarks in a bar about Russians and Clinton’s insecure email server “triggered the opening of an FBI counterintelligence investigation in late July 2016 by FBI agent Peter Strzok.” That’s right, Strzok, Comey’s chief lieutenant, the dirty cop who held a top post on Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigative team until his conspiratorial anti-Trump communications with FBI lawyer Lisa Page, with whom he was having an illicit affair, were discovered.

According to now public information, the memo concludes, “The Strzok/Lisa Page texts also reflect extensive discussions about the investigation, orchestrating leaks to the media, and include a meeting with Deputy Director McCabe to discuss an ‘insurance’ policy against President Trump’s election.”

Once underway, that investigation would lead to the FISA court warrant request, using the fraudulent Clinton/DNC dossier on Trump. And that leads us to the memo’s reference to the critical testimony before the House Intelligence Committee by McCabe in December 2017, in which he told the committee that “no surveillance warrant would have been sought from the FISC without the [Christopher] Steele dossier information.”

The memo makes clear that the FBI knew the DNC and Clinton campaign were behind the fake dossier (having paid Steele $160,000 through the law firm of Perkins Coie and the opposition research firm Fusion GPS) but did not disclose that to the FISA court when seeking the warrant on Carter Page: “Neither the initial application in October 2016, nor any of the renewals, disclose or reference the role of the DNC, Clinton campaign, or any party/campaign in funding Steele’s efforts, even though the political origins of the Steele dossier were then known to senior and FBI officials. The initial FISA application notes Steele was working for a named US person, but does not name Fusion GPS and principal Glenn Simpson, who was paid by a US law firm (Perkins Coie) representing the DNC. The application does not mention Steele was ultimately working on behalf of — and paid by — the DNC and Clinton campaign, or that the FBI had separately authorized payment to Steele for the same information.”

Attempting to defuse the issue, Schiff and other Democrats are arguing that the FISA court did received some indication that the evidence being presented for the warrant against Page was politically motivated24. If true, that confirms what the FBI principles knew, and indicates that the court was open to the use of such evidence to issue a warrant — not good on either count.

Rep. Gowdy is countering that claim, however, saying, “Adam Schiff and others [should be] equally concerned about what’s not in the FISA application, which is a lot of really important information about the source, and its sub-sources, and the fact that he was hired by the DNC and the Clinton campaign, and the fact that he was biased against President Trump. That is all information that the finder of fact is entitled to.”

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10



More From ChristiansUnite...    About Us | Privacy Policy | | ChristiansUnite.com Site Map | Statement of Beliefs



Copyright © 1999-2016 ChristiansUnite.com. All rights reserved.
Please send your questions, comments, or bug reports to the

Powered by SMF 1.1 RC2 | SMF © 2001-2005, Lewis Media