Since we cannot get the poll section to work, we need to know what you think of baby names. CHOOSE WISELY !
-Lily Grace
-Amelia Grace
-Riley Marie
Tell us what you think. Remember, CHOOSE WISELY!
Monday, January 28, 2008
COME, LORD JESUS!
What a statement. The last three words of the Bible, and said with such enthusiasm! We know why John said these words (at least I hope we do), but I think maybe some have hijacked his passion. "Whatever do you mean, Skeeter?" Oh, I think you know what I mean. I am talking about the Rapture: that wonderful little idea where Jesus comes riding down on a cloud to take away believers. While that sounds fluffy and divine, is it true? My concern with this idea (notice I did not "truth") is that I do not believe for one second that it is Biblical. If my dad, Wayne, were able to read this he would have just had a stroke.
"No Rapture! Skeeter, how could you say such things? You better get right before you get left!" Well, do not worry about me. I will be fine. And if you cannot read with an open mind, stop now, but if you wish to read for the sole purpose of arguing later on, well then I am certainly up for that. I hope, though, we can engage, rather, in a healthy debate and not an arguement. Anyway, One of the reasons I disagree with the Rapture is based on the "interpretation" some have of Matthew 24:1-31. That is where Jesus talks about "Signs of the End of the Age". "Wars and rumors of wars...birth pains." They are here! Wars and rumors of wars! Hallelujah, Jesus is coming! Tim LaHaye certainly thinks so, and so does John Hagee. But are they right? No, I do not think so. Here is one of the reasons why: one of Jesus' favorite words in this section is "you". In thirty-one verses he used that word 14 times. One specific word appears in almost half of a very important section. Why is that important? Well, it is important because it is a personal pronoun. Jesus ALWAYS chose His words carefully. If anyone honestly assesses those verses he will clearly see that He is speaking to a specific group of people. He is talking to the disciples, not Tim LaHaye.
The Bible was written FOR us not TO us. WOW! What a bold statement. That is because it is true. Take Paul for instance: his letter to the Corinthians is adressed to the Corinthians not South Carolinians. The issues he writes about are specific to that city. While the lessons taught from that book can be very applicable to us today, Paul did not write with the intention of making sure that people 2,000 years from his time knew what to do in similar situations. If he did, he would have said so! Paul was always specific in his letters, never vague. The point is that it is completely wrong and unfair to assume that Jesus was saying those things in Matthew to us. What in the world did Peter or John care about people 2,000 years from their time? If LaHaye and Hagee insist on taking every word of the Bible literally maybe they ought to actually begin by doing just that. Not doing so is the height of hypocrisy. It is such a shame that men like LaHaye will call dissenters crazy. I think he does that because he knows that if a dissenting voice gains ground then his Left Behind empire could be brought down. That may sound harsh, but insulting people who disagree with you is no worse than the political mudslinging that we see in the secular society.
I do have more thoughts using the scriptures to add so we can continue this debate later on. I would LOVE to hear your thoughts.
"No Rapture! Skeeter, how could you say such things? You better get right before you get left!" Well, do not worry about me. I will be fine. And if you cannot read with an open mind, stop now, but if you wish to read for the sole purpose of arguing later on, well then I am certainly up for that. I hope, though, we can engage, rather, in a healthy debate and not an arguement. Anyway, One of the reasons I disagree with the Rapture is based on the "interpretation" some have of Matthew 24:1-31. That is where Jesus talks about "Signs of the End of the Age". "Wars and rumors of wars...birth pains." They are here! Wars and rumors of wars! Hallelujah, Jesus is coming! Tim LaHaye certainly thinks so, and so does John Hagee. But are they right? No, I do not think so. Here is one of the reasons why: one of Jesus' favorite words in this section is "you". In thirty-one verses he used that word 14 times. One specific word appears in almost half of a very important section. Why is that important? Well, it is important because it is a personal pronoun. Jesus ALWAYS chose His words carefully. If anyone honestly assesses those verses he will clearly see that He is speaking to a specific group of people. He is talking to the disciples, not Tim LaHaye.
The Bible was written FOR us not TO us. WOW! What a bold statement. That is because it is true. Take Paul for instance: his letter to the Corinthians is adressed to the Corinthians not South Carolinians. The issues he writes about are specific to that city. While the lessons taught from that book can be very applicable to us today, Paul did not write with the intention of making sure that people 2,000 years from his time knew what to do in similar situations. If he did, he would have said so! Paul was always specific in his letters, never vague. The point is that it is completely wrong and unfair to assume that Jesus was saying those things in Matthew to us. What in the world did Peter or John care about people 2,000 years from their time? If LaHaye and Hagee insist on taking every word of the Bible literally maybe they ought to actually begin by doing just that. Not doing so is the height of hypocrisy. It is such a shame that men like LaHaye will call dissenters crazy. I think he does that because he knows that if a dissenting voice gains ground then his Left Behind empire could be brought down. That may sound harsh, but insulting people who disagree with you is no worse than the political mudslinging that we see in the secular society.
I do have more thoughts using the scriptures to add so we can continue this debate later on. I would LOVE to hear your thoughts.
Friday, January 25, 2008
WE NEED A "NEWT" CANDIDATE
I was thinking, what if a new candidate stepped into the fray? I read an article by Michael Reagan today, and he brought up some points I would like to share for those who are looking for a TRUE Conservative to run for President. While none of the potential GOP candidates resemble Ronald Reagan in every way, they all represent some of his ideas. Romney: a fiscal Reaganite. McCain: national security issues (except the border!). Rudy: hard-liner when it comes to crime. And Huckabee: embodies Reagan's views on faith and religion.
Some of you may be asking why does Reagan even matter. Well, I will tell you: we NEED a Reagan conservative. We do not need anymore RINO's (Republican In Name Only) getting power, especially the most powerful position in the world. Reagan resurrected a country that was short of being crippled by a RINO (Ford) and a liberal who could not find his butt with a map and a compass (Carter). To me, someone who chooses the RINO stance is selling out for moderate votes. Well, Reagan did not want moderate votes. He wanted the votes belonging to the Republican base. He wanted to give the average, God-fearing American hope again, and he did! Too bad we have let a semi-RINO (Bush I), a liberal who would rather follow polls than listen to the people who elected him (Bubba Clinton), and a RINO who has loved big government like it's going out of style (Bush II) take us back to the Ford-Carter days.
"Skeeter, why all the frustration?" Because I don't want to have to choose between the lesser of two evils! I want a man who stands on principle, a man who is more than willing to re-light the lamp on that hill Reagan so eloquently spoke of so that we can once again shine for all the world to see. As a country, we have lost hope, and we need someone who embodies hope, someone who is realistic, yet at the same time idealistic. A man who BELIEVES in America and her sovereignty. A man who looks to the future, who prefers to look towards the sunlight rather than waller in the mud being slung around by today's candidates (mostly the liberals).
"Skeeter, who is this man?! Hurry up and tell us!." Well, you should know who I mean by looking at the title of this post. Newt Gingrich is the man I want, and he is the man we need. "But Skeeter, did he not cheat on his wife? Has he not done some less than pure things?" As a matter of fact, yes he has...and we should forgive him and move on. "But so did Clinton, right? Why should we not have done the same for him?" That is a darn good question, and here is the answer: because Newt has confessed his sins. He does not hide behind charisma, he does not tell lie after lie about it, and he certainly doesn't pull a Bubba Clinton and blame the other Party for his behavior (i.e., Clinton and his gang of left-wing nuts!). I respect a man who is honest. It takes character and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and Newt has got those qualities.
The other thing I love about the guy is that he looks forward. He is aware of the past, and he knows we need to learn from it. The key, though, is he believes we should apply the lessons and move forward. His website http://www.americansolutions.com/ and his book "Winning the Future" are terrific. Check them both out. I firmly believe you will buy into what the man is saying. If so, contact and SCREAM at the man to run for President! If not, we may just have to settle for the lesser of the two evils.
Some of you may be asking why does Reagan even matter. Well, I will tell you: we NEED a Reagan conservative. We do not need anymore RINO's (Republican In Name Only) getting power, especially the most powerful position in the world. Reagan resurrected a country that was short of being crippled by a RINO (Ford) and a liberal who could not find his butt with a map and a compass (Carter). To me, someone who chooses the RINO stance is selling out for moderate votes. Well, Reagan did not want moderate votes. He wanted the votes belonging to the Republican base. He wanted to give the average, God-fearing American hope again, and he did! Too bad we have let a semi-RINO (Bush I), a liberal who would rather follow polls than listen to the people who elected him (Bubba Clinton), and a RINO who has loved big government like it's going out of style (Bush II) take us back to the Ford-Carter days.
"Skeeter, why all the frustration?" Because I don't want to have to choose between the lesser of two evils! I want a man who stands on principle, a man who is more than willing to re-light the lamp on that hill Reagan so eloquently spoke of so that we can once again shine for all the world to see. As a country, we have lost hope, and we need someone who embodies hope, someone who is realistic, yet at the same time idealistic. A man who BELIEVES in America and her sovereignty. A man who looks to the future, who prefers to look towards the sunlight rather than waller in the mud being slung around by today's candidates (mostly the liberals).
"Skeeter, who is this man?! Hurry up and tell us!." Well, you should know who I mean by looking at the title of this post. Newt Gingrich is the man I want, and he is the man we need. "But Skeeter, did he not cheat on his wife? Has he not done some less than pure things?" As a matter of fact, yes he has...and we should forgive him and move on. "But so did Clinton, right? Why should we not have done the same for him?" That is a darn good question, and here is the answer: because Newt has confessed his sins. He does not hide behind charisma, he does not tell lie after lie about it, and he certainly doesn't pull a Bubba Clinton and blame the other Party for his behavior (i.e., Clinton and his gang of left-wing nuts!). I respect a man who is honest. It takes character and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and Newt has got those qualities.
The other thing I love about the guy is that he looks forward. He is aware of the past, and he knows we need to learn from it. The key, though, is he believes we should apply the lessons and move forward. His website http://www.americansolutions.com/ and his book "Winning the Future" are terrific. Check them both out. I firmly believe you will buy into what the man is saying. If so, contact and SCREAM at the man to run for President! If not, we may just have to settle for the lesser of the two evils.
Thursday, January 24, 2008
In reponse to DB's comment
DB...hell will freeze over before Hillary gets my vote. In fact, if she wins we are coming to Afghanistan to live with you and Jenni.
Where Have You Gone, Fred?
I'm mad. I'm a bit upset. I feel let-down. I feel snubbed. No, I have not failed to win the lottery. Well...in a way maybe I have. Last Saturday I happily went to my local polling place and cast my vote. I am not ashamed to say that I cast that vote for Senator Fred Thompson...and that is why I am mad. I was all about Fred. I got excited because he seemed to be the only true conservative running. Yet, he never seemed to be real excited about that fact. In fact, he never seemed to be excited about too much. I was a Fred-head, and now I sit here deflated. It feels like watching your favorite team start off slow, and continue to do so even though you are cheering relentlessly for them! Was there a method to his madness? Because whether he wants to acknowledge it or not madness is quite possibly what we are about to descend into.
What am I talking about? I am talking about John McCain. And to some extent, I am talking about Mike Huckabee. Take a look at this:
Vote to pass an amendment that would prohibit undocumented immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or crimes relating to the illegal purchase or sale of firearms, from gaining legal status.
McCain voted "no".
Did you read that right? McCain said, in essence, even though you may be ILLEGAl, and even though you have committed crimes, you need not worry about never becoming a U.S. citizen. In my house we call that permission; permission to committ crimes with no fear of real puishment other than prison. Prison is not enough. KICK THEM OUT AFTER THEY FINISH THEIR SENTANCE! McCain's vote in tantamount to betrayl.
S 3711: A bill to enhance the energy independence and security of the United States by providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.
Here's a bill that would have promoted energy independence. Guess how he voted? You got it: NO! I call that caving to the tree hugger lobby.
Here's more:
06/06/2007 Declaring English the National Language Vote to pass an amendment that declares English as the language of “sole legal authority” for the business of the federal government, and declares that no person has a right to require officials of the United States government to use a language other than English. He voted "yes" on this one. But on one right before that...
06/06/2007
English as the Common Language Vote to adopt an amendment that declares English to be the common language of the United States. He voted "no". Let me get this straight: members of the government HAVE to learn English, but the average citizen does not have to. This ammendment would have made the lives of school teachers a lot easier, and businesses would have had an easier time, but ole Johnny boy doesn't care. I guess the Hispanic vote is more important than any other ones. What a crock!
As for the Huckster, check out this that came from his own mouth: “Some have suggested [increasing the tax on tobacco at the retail level]. If that ends up being your preference, I will accept that. Others have suggested a surcharge on the income tax; that’s acceptable; I’m fine with that. Others have suggested, perhaps, a sales tax; that’s fine. Yet others have suggested a hybrid that will collect some monies from any one or a combination of these various ideas, and if that’s the plan that the House and Senate agree upon, then you will have nothing but my profound thanks.” http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/mike_huckabee120.html. I have seen the video of him saying this to the Arkansas Legislature. Sounds inspiring, doesn't it?
That, essentially, is all I need to know. He also said he was a little wary of what he said was the NSA's policy of tapping the phones of average American citizens. That is a distortion of truth. Common citizens were not spied on! People suspected of terrorist ties were the only people that the NSA were allowed, LEGALLY, to "spy" on. They monitored their phone calls (those made or revieved by known terrorists) to see if they may have been concocting terrorist plots. That program was shut down by the dishonorable Senator from Nevada, Harry Reid and his fellow Lefties. By the way, guess who started the whole NSA wire-tapping program...the worst President in our history, Jimmy Carter. How ironic that he claimed to be an avowed Baptist who would lead in a Christian manner. Jim, support of abortion on demand is not a sweet Christian idea. Huckabee, another proud Baptist (no offense, Darrell), is saying the same stuff (except for abortion, thank God). To me, it may be a good idea to NOT vote for the man who is, to me, using his faith as a means to grab votes. Strong statement, I know, but I do believe it.
So, rather than being cynical, I am going to find me another candidate, and then I am going to do my best to get them elected. I hope you will do the same.
What am I talking about? I am talking about John McCain. And to some extent, I am talking about Mike Huckabee. Take a look at this:
Denying Legal Status for Immigrants Convicted of Certain Crimes
Bill Number: S Amdt 1184
Bill Number: S Amdt 1184
Vote to pass an amendment that would prohibit undocumented immigrants convicted of aggravated felonies, domestic violence, stalking, violation of protection orders, crimes against children, or crimes relating to the illegal purchase or sale of firearms, from gaining legal status.
McCain voted "no".
Did you read that right? McCain said, in essence, even though you may be ILLEGAl, and even though you have committed crimes, you need not worry about never becoming a U.S. citizen. In my house we call that permission; permission to committ crimes with no fear of real puishment other than prison. Prison is not enough. KICK THEM OUT AFTER THEY FINISH THEIR SENTANCE! McCain's vote in tantamount to betrayl.
Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006
S 3711: A bill to enhance the energy independence and security of the United States by providing for exploration, development, and production activities for mineral resources in the Gulf of Mexico, and for other purposes.
Here's a bill that would have promoted energy independence. Guess how he voted? You got it: NO! I call that caving to the tree hugger lobby.
Here's more:
06/06/2007 Declaring English the National Language Vote to pass an amendment that declares English as the language of “sole legal authority” for the business of the federal government, and declares that no person has a right to require officials of the United States government to use a language other than English. He voted "yes" on this one. But on one right before that...
06/06/2007
English as the Common Language Vote to adopt an amendment that declares English to be the common language of the United States. He voted "no". Let me get this straight: members of the government HAVE to learn English, but the average citizen does not have to. This ammendment would have made the lives of school teachers a lot easier, and businesses would have had an easier time, but ole Johnny boy doesn't care. I guess the Hispanic vote is more important than any other ones. What a crock!
As for the Huckster, check out this that came from his own mouth: “Some have suggested [increasing the tax on tobacco at the retail level]. If that ends up being your preference, I will accept that. Others have suggested a surcharge on the income tax; that’s acceptable; I’m fine with that. Others have suggested, perhaps, a sales tax; that’s fine. Yet others have suggested a hybrid that will collect some monies from any one or a combination of these various ideas, and if that’s the plan that the House and Senate agree upon, then you will have nothing but my profound thanks.” http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/mike_huckabee120.html. I have seen the video of him saying this to the Arkansas Legislature. Sounds inspiring, doesn't it?
That, essentially, is all I need to know. He also said he was a little wary of what he said was the NSA's policy of tapping the phones of average American citizens. That is a distortion of truth. Common citizens were not spied on! People suspected of terrorist ties were the only people that the NSA were allowed, LEGALLY, to "spy" on. They monitored their phone calls (those made or revieved by known terrorists) to see if they may have been concocting terrorist plots. That program was shut down by the dishonorable Senator from Nevada, Harry Reid and his fellow Lefties. By the way, guess who started the whole NSA wire-tapping program...the worst President in our history, Jimmy Carter. How ironic that he claimed to be an avowed Baptist who would lead in a Christian manner. Jim, support of abortion on demand is not a sweet Christian idea. Huckabee, another proud Baptist (no offense, Darrell), is saying the same stuff (except for abortion, thank God). To me, it may be a good idea to NOT vote for the man who is, to me, using his faith as a means to grab votes. Strong statement, I know, but I do believe it.
So, rather than being cynical, I am going to find me another candidate, and then I am going to do my best to get them elected. I hope you will do the same.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
