"Preach the Word,

Hindu extremist groups are offering money, food and alcohol to anyone who murders Christians and destroys their homes.

The violence is nothing new in Orissa, India, where India's Communist Party estimates that more than 500 Christians have been killed by Hindu mobs in Orissa since late August, 12 times more than official government claims of only 40 homicides.

But now the stakes are even higher - and pastors have a bounty on their heads.

Faiz Rahman, chairman of Good News India, said Hindu militants are targeting Christian leaders, the Christian Post reported.

"The going price to kill a pastor is $250," he said.

Rahman, a head of several orphanages in Orissa State, said he's helped 25 pastors to leave refugee camps, but 250 Christian leaders are still in shelters.

"All of the pastors are high value targets," Rahman told the UK-based Release International. "We've got to get them out of the refugee camps."

An All-India Christian Council spokesman said, "People are being offered rewards to kill, and to destroy churches and Christian properties. They are being offered foreign liquor, chicken, mutton and weapons. They are given petrol and kerosene."

Read More Here

To be forewarned is to be forearmed

The basis of some people's Christianity is if a miracle takes place, it is sufficient evidence for them to believe it is from God. They never check it out or test it; something that God commands us to do. The Bible teaches us that Satan uses this method to deceive the naïve, the immature, and the ignorant to remove them from walking in the truth of the word. Someone who argues that miracles are from God 100 percent of the time is already open to deception. This becomes a major flaw from those who are willing to accept all miracles that happens is from God. To avoid testing is to neglect many of the Bibles commands for our safety. Jesus warns us about a movement in the last days that will be done by many coming in his name (Mt.24:5-6) and include miraculous signs taking place. Matthew 24:23-25: "Then if anyone says to you, 'Look, here is the Christ!' or 'There!' do not believe it. For false christ's and false prophets will rise and show great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect." If a Christian neglects this they will be deceived.

Read More Here

We are constantly reminded of Paul's admonition to "prove all things, hold fast that which is good" (1 Thessalonians 5:21).

[Note: Article adapted from The Berean Call, November 21, 2008]

This is a follow up to my other post and the comment I received regarding that article. Go here for the first post.

What was the temptation placed before man? The tree? Or the Woman? Or God's instructions? If we focus on the sin of eating the fruit as the first sin then maybe there is a point of God setting up man but the tree was just an object of a temptation or rather the 'question in a test'...it just shows if we can follow instructions.

Luke 6:1-2 tells us that "...Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan [note: where He was just baptized.], and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness. Being forty days tempted of the devil." [note: See also Matthew 3:13-4:11; Mark 1:9-13] Was Jesus being set up by the spirit to be tempted? YES! Was Jesus being set up to fail? NO! Did Jesus face the same kind of temptation set up as Adam did? Yes, He did. But He proved faithful and thus perfect to be the only one to remove the curse and debt of sin, right? So was Jesus set up to fail or succeed because of the temptation? Neither He passed the test because He followed the instructions, just like any student in school passes the test by learning and applying the information taught.

Is it a sin to be tempted or to yield to the temptation to the sin? Would it have been better if the garden was full of trees they were told not to eat and only one good true to eat from? Consider that wherever you are in the garden if you get hungry you can only eat from the one tree in the middle. The other ones that may be easier to get to and looked refreshing they would bring about sin's curse...does this scenario fill the same role as being set up for failure? I would think yes would be appropriate. The test objective is still the same and in fact the test is even harder. God told man just stay away from the one tree to protect it self and he failed at this simple thing. Why? Let's look at what I believe to be the true first sin.

I believe that the Bible shows that Adam added to God's instructions [note compare Gen 2:16-17 to 3:1-3]. Eve was not yet created in 2:17 so who told her about God's instructions? Did Adam add that "not to touch" stipulation? Did this give the room for Satan to raise doubts about what God said? We see Adam was "with her" (Gen 3:6). Why didn't he correct Eve or tell the serpent what God did say...Adam had heard it. When he didn't reinforce what God's instructions were...it raised opportunity for the serpent to cause Eve to question. But Adam couldn't have reinforced God's instructions because he had lied and added to them...albeit for a noble reason but still he lied when he implied what God's instructions to Eve were...don't eat..don't touch. This leads me to reason that the taking of the fruit was not the temptation or the sin, the mess was created by Adam adding to God's instructions and then lying or trying to at least conceal the truth. Adam should have revealed that he added something different to God's original instructions when the serpent asked "Yea, hath God said..." (Gen 3:1). But instead Adam kept this to himself and then once on this slippery slope he became a willing participant in the eating of the fruit offered to him.

Here's a curious thought - when their eyes were opened what did they know? Did they know that Adam had lied and that he failed to really care for Eve and warn her? Do you think she understood what kind of selfish, self-centered, conniving man Adam was, especially when he blamed God for "the woman whom thou gavest me" (Gen 3:12)?

How was Jesus was successful in escaping temptation? By using the 'Words of God' (the Scripture) the exact area that Adam failed at. Adam twisted the Words of God to fit his desire to not be alone, for his need of companionship, or whatever his personal reasons were. But ultimately when it came time for the test of temptation he failed to use God's words. He was trapped by his sin of lying/adding to God's instructions and truly this is the failure of man.

Since I believe this to be the first and ultimate sin of mankind...guess what the tree really had less of an effect than we like to think on the sin in the garden. Man is constantly being tempted...being tested...only following God's exact instructions can make us successful. Just like at school, huh?

Please think on these things and let me know if I can be of any more help.

When Bible believers discuss the “Word of God” they assume everyone agrees they are referring to the Bible. But if you are talking to a Roman Catholic, he is probably thinking of more than that.

In October a Synod of Bishops was called to discuss “The Word of God in the Life and Mission of the Church.” Guidelines for discussion contain this statement: “Both [the Bible and Tradition] are channels of communication of the Word of God. Therefore, the Word of God finds its completeness of meaning and grace in experiencing both, ‘one inside the other.’ In this way, both can be called, and indeed are, the “Word of God.”

This may seem like so much doublespeak, but it essentially expands the definition of the “Word of God” to include the Roman Catholic Tradition. Therefore, when we speak of the “Word of God” to a Roman Catholic, he is not thinking just the Bible, but also the Tradition or “Magisterium.” It is this official Tradition that encrusts the Bible with all the ritual, superstition and priestcraft so contradictory to Scripture.

So, when you use the Bible to witness to a Roman Catholic, he does not see it as God’s complete word for him. In fact, he has been taught that he cannot even understand the Bible unless it is interpreted by Roman Catholic “Tradition.”

The guidelines for the Synod go on to confirm this: “…the faithful have the responsibility to listen to [the Bible] and meditate on it; but to explain it is the responsibility only of those who by right of sacred ordination have the task of teaching or those who have been entrusted with the exercise of this ministry.” While the layman may “listen to and meditate on [the Bible],” only the pope and his priests are allowed to “explain” it.

This is no different from the Jehovah’s Witness who is told he is not capable of understanding the Bible, but must rely on the Watchtower Society to interpret and “explain” it.

In Matthew 15, Jesus told the Pharisees, “…ye have made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition.” Can the pope avoid the same condemnation when the Bible says Jesus is the only mediator but Vatican “Tradition” says pray to the Virgin Mary goddess? Or the Bible says God is Spirit to be worshiped “in spirit and truth” but the pope says worship a wafer god, instead? Or, the Bible says the Holy Spirit will guide us to truth but the pope says the “church” and its “Tradition” must “explain” what is truth?

How this spiritual bondage plays out is graphically illustrated by a young lady who this writer attempted to witness to. When encouraged to study the Bible, she responded, “No, if I read the Bible it will raise questions that I do not understand. If I have a problem, I go to my priest and he solves it for me.”

With Jehovah’s Witnesses, soul winners have discovered that the best approach is to plant seeds of doubt about the Watchtower Society. A similar approach with Roman Catholics can be effective. Chick Publications has tracts and books that equip you to do this. Paperback books Understanding Roman Catholicism and Answers to my Catholic Friends point out the unbiblical teachings of the Traditions, or Magisterium. Babylon Religion and The Two Babylons detail the pagan origins of the unscriptural Traditions. Tracts include Why is Mary Crying?, Last Rites, The Death Cookie and Are Roman Catholics Christians?

The precious Roman Catholics are trusting this prostitute “church” to get them to heaven. They need to know that Jesus said to “come out of her…that ye be not partakers of her sins.” Rev. 18:4.

[Article from "Battle Cry" Novmeber/December 2008 Issue]

Recently, I was presented with this 'argument' about God, Adam, and Sin. Now the Bible says that God doesn't tempt us but is that right? James 1:13 - Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:

Here is the discussion...

Genesis 2:17 - But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Why would a loving God place temptation before the very first man created knowing what the outcome would be. Isn't that making sure that man would fall? Why would that same loving God then sentence people to hell for taking advantage of something that He created? Something is not right with this picture. All that was accomplished by God creating that tree was the first humans had their lives destroyed, they were cast out of the garden that God had created for them, the first man born on earth murdered his brother, and the second man born was murdered. Now somebody please tell me this is good. And of course down through the ages man has hated, killed, and went to hell because sin was passed down by God's first creation. What was God thinking?

Why should all mankind be sentenced to having to choose between good and evil, because the first man and woman decided to eat something God forbade them to eat? We all have the power to choose and I understand that but the Bible says that sin was passed down from Adam as though we have no choice but to sin and that is exactly what the Bible says. [Romans 5:12 - Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; so death was passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:] Adam was born with no sin. Why don't we all have the same choice? Why should we all be sentenced to death because one man sinned? Even our justice is better than that. A man commits a crime , is sentenced but his family isn't convicted because is.

OK first off this is the kind circle logic that gets people focusing in the wrong direction. I don't criticize or blame people for this reasoning we see that John the Baptist, the forerunner of Jesus (who boldly proclaimed Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world. John 1:29) even had a time of doubts and questions (Matt. 11:2-15, Luke 7:18-35 - He asked of Jesus Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?). Jesus set a great example in dealing with John's doubts but proving his heavenly power. So the first answer I would have for one who brought of these questions is that God showed His love by sending Jesus and Jesus showed His love by willingly giving His life for us. One would think that if God was setting up anyone for heartache it would be himself or Jesus...He who knew no sin yet willingly gave all He had to become the appeasement of God's righteousness (see Phil. 2:5-8 & Rom. 5:6-21).

Secondly, this reasoning can simply be answered in the same circle reasoning of man's logic. To blame God for 'setting man up for failure' is like blaming the auto industry for making engines that go much faster than the speed limit. The driver has a choice to speed even though the capabilities and opportunity is in front of the driver to go 120 MPH that doesn't mean that man is 'being set up to get a speeding ticket'. Auto manufacturers know that people are going to speed and that mankind has the capability to speed, and is presented with opportunities to speed...ultimately though it is up to the driver to choose to speed. The same with Adam's sin in the garden. He chose to tell Eve something different than what God told him (compare Gen. 2:17 & 3:3). She chose to look at it, take it, eat it and then offer it to Adam that was there with her. And he chose to take it from her and eat it as well. They simply made a choice, albeit a seriously bad choice that has affected all of us. But a choice that God was prepared for by having a plan in place before the world was formed that was fulfilled by Jesus' death on the cross.

Thirdly, if the first man didn't choose and as the person making the question asked why not give each man a choice to sin or not...God in His wisdom knew that man would sin someday if not Adam then Cain, or any other of offspring of Adam and Eve. So let's apply some of this reverse logic and say that God didn't delay the inevitable and that He actually shows great mercy and wisdom knowing (or designing) the situation with the first man sinning so that the plan would be put into place immediately for man to have a way to escape the judgement of sin. Understand that I don't think that God said "oh well, it's going to happen anyways. I guess I might as well do it now" but if one wants to discuss a silly logic I can counter with another silly logic of my own.

Fourth, to compare God's justice system to ours is ridiculous. On one hand we have wrongly accused and condemned innocent people for crimes that they didn't commit. On the other hand, when a man is condemned for a crime while the court doesn't condemn the family, the situation in essence does condemn them and they suffer greatly for it. No one sins in a vacuum. There are always effects we know it, we see it, we experience it and God knew it from the very beginning and mankind has been paying for it ever since and compounding it with our own sins making it worse for each generation.

I hope that my points are considered and would love to have you leave comments or counter points to the original item or my counter-points. Thanks for reading and God bless!

Every phase of the Protestant Reformation in Europe was preceded by an immense tract effort that almost “turned the world upside down.”

Martin Luther wrote more than one tract, booklet, or book for every working week of his entire life.

Among the most precious items of cargo on the Mayflower on her first trip to America were Pastor John Robinson’s tracts.

William Penn, founder of the city of Philadelphia, wrote a single religious tract that freed 12,000 Quakers imprisoned for Christ’s sake.

Benjamin Franklin ghostwrote and printed the tracts for several early American evangelists, including those of George Whitefield.

Almost every foreign mission field in the world was opened by missionaries who first used tracts to win the heathen to Christ. A son of one of the chiefs of Burdwain, India, was converted through a single tract, and he was instrumental in winning 1,500 natives to Christ.

Dwight L. Moody began his fruitful evangelistic ministry in Chicago by
the simple act of distributing tracts to Great Lakes seaman.

John Wanamaker, while Postmaster General of the United States, carefully selected gospel tracts for distribution to those with whom he came in contact.

Whistler’s Mother was called a “preacher in skirts” because she distributed tracts to the workers on the railroad between Moscow and St. Petersburg, Russia.