Write it on your heart and lock it up!

 
 

”Termites”:

  1. Giving in to cultural pressures

  2. Basing your marriage on fantasy love and “feelings”

  3. Failing to expect the trials of life

  4. Failing to deal with sin properly

“It is not the feelings of love that keep marriage alive-

It is the commitment of marriage that keeps love alive.”

vvvvvvv

“Behold, I lay in Zion a stone for a foundation, a tried stone, a precious cornerstone, a sure foundation”.        isaiah 28:16






Next Pagesingly_perfect.html



“EACH MAN SHOULD GIVE WHAT HE HAS DECIDED IN HIS HEART TO GIVE, NOT RELUCTANTLY OR UNDER COMPULSION, FOR GOD LOVES A CHEERFUL GIVER”   

          2COR.9:7






“Unlike nineteenth-century reformers who sought to help the poor by teaching them the bourgeois virtues of hard work, thrift, and diligence, Rauschenbusch believed that the best way to uplift the downtrodden was to redistribute society’s wealth and forge an egalitarian society.

The leftist clerics ignore mounting evidence that much poverty in prosperous, opportunity-rich America results not from a failed economic system but from dysfunctional—dare one call it “sinful”?—behavior. Around two-thirds of poor families with children today are single-parent households, largely dependent on government subsidies. Single women with little education head most of these households. The kind of work for which these mothers are qualified—entry-level, low-wage—makes it hard to support large families; and the time that they must devote to raising their kids makes it hard, in turn, to climb the economic ladder. Poverty, in other words, is increasingly about the irresponsible decision—again, we might once have called it sinful—to have children out of wedlock. In a recent study on American poverty highlighted by the National Bureau of Economic Research, economists from the University of California at Davis found that “changes in family structure—notably a doubling of the percent of families headed by a single woman—can account for a 3.7 percentage point increase in poverty rates, more than the entire rise in the poverty rate from 10.7 percent to 12.8 percent since 1980.”

By contrast, observes Catholic neoconservative writer Michael Novak, research demonstrates that the way out of poverty for most Americans is to make a few simple life choices. “Some 97 percent of those who complete high school, stay married (even if not on the first try), and work full-time year-round (even at the minimum wage) are not poor,” Novak points out. “Nearly all poverty in the United States is associated with the absence of one or more of these three basic accomplishments”—not with insufficient social spending or a lack of economic opportunity.

Those numbers are a reminder that for four decades, as the leadership of America’s mainline Christian churches has moved steadily leftward, those churches’ memberships have declined as a percentage of the U.S. population, even as the number of Christian evangelicals exploded. Cultural issues drove most of the flight from old-line churches, which became as liberal socially as anticapitalist economically; believers moved to more conservative congregations, whose positions on issues such as abortion and the traditional family lined up more comfortably with their own. So the left-wing clerics may be buying greater political influence with their new alliance through organized labor, but in so doing they may wind up further alienating their shrinking flock.”            READ THE REST....

THE “RELIGIOUS” LEFT?

At it's very heart, Christianity is about the individual. The motivations of the individual's heart. The “Religious Left” err in that they say Christianity is socialistic. IT IS NOT. No where in Scripture is it advocated that the power of government be used to force people to give. Charity is only charity when the individual is moved in his heart to give, which is why God challenges the individual to give cheerfully (pretty difficult to do under coercion!) and he will be blessed. And God loves a cheerful giver, "Each man should give what he has decided IN HIS HEART to give, not reluctantly or UNDER COMPULSION, for God loves a cheerful giver" (2 cor. 9:7). I think this verse is pretty clear. The religious left are at heart socialists first. THEIR POLITICS INFORM THEIR RELIGION. For the right, their religion informs their politics. Anyone who spends time in Scripture, knows that God's revelation is addressed TO THE INDIVIDUAL. Just as we cannot be saved through our parent's faith, so we cannot be truly charitable, that is, have a charitable heart, through the government's effort.    -Deane.

"The significant thing is that rationalistic, humanistic man began by saying that Christianity was not rational enough. Now he has come around in a wide circle and ended as a mystic-though a mystic of a special kind. He is a mystic with nobody there. The old mystics always said that there was somebody there, but the new mystic says that that does not matter, because faith is the important thing. It is faith in faith, whether expressed in secular or religious terms. The leap is the thing and not the terms in which the leap is expressed. The verbalization, i.e., the symbol systems, can change; whether the systems are religious or nonreligious, whether they use one word or another is incidental. Modern man is committed to finding his answer upstairs, by a leap, away from rationality and away from reason."                 FRANCIS A. SCHAFFER


“COME NOW, LET US REASON TOGETHER”, SAYS THE LORD.                                            ISAIAH 1:13

“As our Catholic bishops have already made clear, a socialist state is contrary to the beliefs of Simón Bolívar, the South American liberation hero, and it is also contrary to human nature and the Christian view of society, because it grants the state absolute control over the people it governs...all Venezuelans, from every social stratum, are responsible for the institutional decay that we are witnessing. The elite never understood — and still fail to understand — the need to include, in every sense, the millions who have been kept at the margins of the decision-making process because of their poverty. At the same time, President Chávez led the poor to believe that they are finally being included in a governmental model that will reduce poverty and inequality. In reality, the very opposite is true.” MORE..