Kicking over Sacred Cows:The Cross or is it?

A lot has been said about the cross or the crucifix of the Messiah. In order for us to accept truth we must accept the truth of the Scriptures. While many will have us believe he was crucified on a cross, this runs contrary to what is true. He was murdered on an upright stake.

In order to know what something is we have to know what it is not. Church history is something that isn’t being taught. We have excluded true doctrine for the doctrine of itching ears. The issue of the cross is another in a long line of offenses that helps to delude or erode orthodoxy as useless and ineffective. The word cross is stauros “an upright pale or stake” on which executions took place. The verb form is stauroō “to fasten to a stake or pale.”

It’s important to note an argument that has arisen is the Jews were complicit in having the Messiah murdered. The Messiah was more likely murdered for political reasons. He resisted Jews from giving tribute or celebration to Caesar’s Jewish New Testament, Sacred Name Bible Authorized Version (Lk 23:2).

As much as it pains people to admit this, the Bible is a Jewish book. We have to look at the fact that translators have changed so much of the Bible to make it fit certain doctrines. Take Easter for example, why is it erroneously translated as Easter in the King James Version (KJV), while other Bibles translate it properly by using the word Passover? This is another in a long line of offences that must be corrected. The word cross isn’t figurative language either.

Our English word “cross” is the translation of crux. The word never implies or means two pieces of timber placed across one another at any angle but always of one piece alone (1Pet 2:24, Acts 5:30, 10:39, 13:29, Gal 3:13). The cross itself was presented by the Third Century A.D. The Ecclesia (church) was heavily influenced by pagan culture; it is one of the reasons why God says, “Do not follow in the way of the heathen (Jer 10:2-5). This very Scripture has to do with Christmas trees as well as Christians. So much of the church succumbed to strange practices and customs.

Scripture is specific and uses plain language. The word cross is erroneously translated when it should be upright stake. In the New Testament the word stauros (upright stake) is used 28 times. Many believe it isn’t necessary for this type of teaching. We are to contend for the faith (Jude 1:3); we are to preach the whole gospel, not in part. If we are confused about this one simple issue imagine all the other parts. The gospel has been perverted by pagan influence to this day. Why does the Apostle Paul sound so American, or Peter, or John?  Paul would be Shaul, Peter would be Kepha, and John would be Yochanon. The church also has been compromised by the very people that are supposed to uphold it and teach.

The execution stake is a place, the place, we are to die. It is metaphorically used in denunciation from the world and from self. It is to take on the life of the Messiah and to live for him (1Cor 1:17-18, Gal 5:11, Phil 3:17-20). We are to take our burden and follow the Messiah, we are to follow in fellowship with him (Matt 10:38).

Lastly, it is the traditions of men that make the word of no affect (Mk7:13). The reason to wear the cross is best explained in (Matt 10:38), and anyone who does not take up his execution-stake and follow me is not worthy of me.

Senate Bill 514

North Carolina's Senate Bill 514, The Defense of Marriage Act, has caused quite a bit of a stir as of late. Both sides are arguing and marching to the detriment of what, this bill ,for lack of a better word, is confusing. The main argument is to strengthen the law so activist judges won’t overturn it and to make it so arduous that when/if liberals come into office, it can’t be tampered with. I do believe I hit the proverbial nail on the head.

I’ve looked at both sides of the aisle and I’m still confused. The word redundancy describing the bill has come up, as well as it should. When you look at both sides what is the most compelling argument? I have four.

1. Religious groups are on the wrong side of the argument. If the bill passes, lawsuits will take it into the federal courts and eventually to the Supreme Court. It takes power from the voter/electorate.
2.  It takes power from companies that cover same-sex couples.
3. What will be the effects on same-sex couple who have adopted children?
4. The bill has too many add-ons that aren’t glaringly clear.

For example, what is the meaning of private party in Section 6? It's unclear language with too many question marks pertaining to it.

Ministers aren’t helping this issue at all especially the outspoken Raleigh Minister Patrick L. Wooden, the same person that involved himself with the Merry Xmas controversy. I’m still trying to wrap my head around what Christmas has to do with the Bible. He’s on the wrong side of two arguments and doesn’t know it yet. True, we are not the left coast but notice the vote is being taken out of the hands of the people. I don’t want the Supreme Court to have more over-reaching power to make a decision for me. With these people's continued action that is what's going to take place.

Government should be challenged. Abraham Lincoln said it best in his famous speech “a government of the people, by the people, for the people.” Government should be continually challenged by the people who politicians do essentially work for: the folk that elect them.

Allow me to say this. I’m not for gay marriage within the Ekklesia(Church), I do however look at history as well as miscegenation laws still being upheld in Tennessee. Intermarrying within the colonies was banned. Why don’t Minister’s argue bigamy or miscegenation laws that are current within states. Marriage is a contract entered into by two consenting adults.

All of this is nothing but a wedge issue for votes and to keep religion in line with the conservatives. Politics and religion should be kept separate but that’s for another day. For a better understanding read my book, God, the Bible and Politics.

We have to remember we are not a theocracy and also we have a document called the Bill of Rights that certain people want to reinterpret to fit their myopic personal view points.

This is but another non-issue, NC doesn’t recognize common law marriage and also already on the books: marriage is between a man and a woman. Is this potential amendment a way to punish people who may differ with you? So come May 8th vote, NO, in order to save what is already on the books, so the Supreme Court doesn’t have to get involved and to save the preacher from their own demise.

Out Of The Mouth Of Santorum

Notice when a candidate becomes the front-runner, they become for a lack of a better word, cocky. They seem to ramp up the rhetoric and immediately play the blame game. Rick Santorum is that very person, saying the media is making him a target. Really Rick, isn't it simply that you are the front-runner? Ron Paul suffered, Herman Caine suffered, even Newt Gingrich suffered when they were the front-runners. Their personal lives were looked into and dark secrets were exposed.

You, the real conservative, you, the real Bible believer, you should understand (1Cor 4:5) what you do in dark will be revealed in light. You're crying now, wait till they start digging deeply into your past and find something hidden, wait till the second and third place finishers start with their super pacs. What bothers me most is that you compared the President's theology, not ideology, to that of an amoeba to say he was an Evolutionist. Santorum( frothy mixture man) is dishonest. He's trying to play up the Religious Right. Where is the mention of the Newsweek article by Ayan Hirsi Ali about Christians being mistreated and murdered and jailed at an alarming rate, where's the outcry for your fellow brethren? I don't want to go there but I have to, Catholicism in most Christian circles is considered a cult. The presidential field comes down to who favors or looks more like you and right now you barley edge out a Mormon whom you how know the Christian Right feels about.

This is how nominal Christians or Bible believers view Catholicism. I won't mention molestation or rape of your children at the hands of priests, Yet you mention the Bible, what Bible, the Sacred Tradition or the Sacred Scripture, what about  (2Tim 3:16)? Guess you forgot about that one. What about the other beliefs you hold on to such as:

•  Praying to Saints
•  The Confessional
• Penance

Be careful Rick, Conservatives will turn on you for the better candidate. There is already rumor of a third-party candidate to vie for the position. Don't think ministers aren't talking about the erroneous doctrines and don't think they aren't speaking about women  who should be held in high esteem. Remember, "He that finds a wife finds a good thing."

Properly framing the Gay Argument pt.1

The subject of one’s sexuality continues to come up. As the sun is scorching the United States so is the topic of homosexuality. The problem I have is how the argument is being framed. Should gays have equal rights? Are they born this way or is it a choice? As I mentioned before the framing of the issue has been wrong. The argument generally falls between two camps: for or against. Those for believe the Constitution answers the question. Those against believe the Bible is the answer. So, what is the answer? Well both, kind of.

Let’s deal with the Bible and the religious side first. I would like to add something first, people hold and have the right to agree as well as disagree. This is what adds to the framework of the argument. We all need to learn to disagree agreeably or agreeably disagree. No one opinion is absolute.

Let’s get back to the religious aspect. The Bible is written for all those that will hear. People have the right to follow its teachings or not. I want to deal with three very specific scriptures that people point to in opposition to homosexuality. The first is Romans 1. It’s important to read the entire book of Romans but for time constraints we will begin with verses 21-32.