Joseph Kony.... What do you think? I want to know...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4MnpzG5Sqc

Really I want to know what you think....

(a) What is your personal philosophy of ministry? My personal philosophy of
ministry is two fold.

1. To
be an example to the world of a sinner saved and sanctified by the power and
love of God and through my words and actions reflect Christ and lead others to
Him.
2. To
be a leader that discovers, develops and released David’s mighty men of Valour.


(b)Do you have a personal mission statement?

1. To
live my life with the theme from Ecc. 9:10 Whatever your hand finds to do,
do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is
neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom.

(c) What is it in ministry that produces the greatest sense of joy and/or
fulfillment?

Mentoring, mentoring, mentoring. I believe that the ones that God gives men
are the men that will change the world.

(d) What is it in ministry that you have found to be most challenging?

The internal struggles and disagreements that undermine the truth of the
Gospel with those who we are around and those who are watching from afar.

Gal 5:13 You,
my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the
sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love.

(e) What would be some key advice that you would pass on to a graduate about
to enter into vocational ministry?

Sheep stink. Not because they intend to stink in order to get under your
skin but rather because they are sheep. Get used to leading the smelly church
and don’t ever assume that the stench that you are experiencing is anything
other than life. Live your ministry with your grip on held lightly. Don’t ever
believe the reports that you hear on Sunday whether good or bad. They are all
lying. Believe the one you hear on Tuesday morning at Tim Horton’s.

(f) What do you see as a major weakness in the North American Church right
now?

The acceptance of Jesus as our saviour without accepting him as our Lord.
Flowing out of that, the lack of Holiness, purity, integrity, honesty, and
personal accountability. Today it’s always someone else’s fault for your issue.

WOW! FINALLY SOMEONE GETS IT!

A refuge from moral relativism

Ian Hunter, Special to the National Post · Tuesday, Feb. 15, 2011

In a Feb. 11 letter to the National Post, responding to recent criticism of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, CAUT executive director James Turk defended his organization's witch-hunt against faithbased universities. He argued that CAUT's investigation of religious schools was necessary to ensure that parents know what kinds of institutions their sons and daughters are attending-- and, as Mr. Turk puts it, "to ensure that neither universities nor outside groups impose ideological requirements on academic staff." In other words, we are asked to believe that CAUT commissioned studies of Trinity Western University in Langley, B.C., Redeemer University in Ancaster, Ont., and others, in an effort to glean information readily available to anyone who took the time to glance at the universities' respective calendars.

I found the CAUT report on Trinity Western University particularly risible: Two academics (Professors William Bruneau and Thomas Friedman) burrow away through 22 turgid pages -- plus four Appendices and 24 footnotes -- to discover what the university's mission statement says on the first page of the calendar; namely, that TWU is a Christian institution intended "to develop godly Christian leaders, goal-oriented University graduates ... who [will] serve God and people in various marketplaces of life."

Likewise Redeemer, and the other institutions under scrutiny, do not exactly hide their light under a bushel.

And that is precisely the problem. These institutions, you see, are committed to something other than secular relativism; and that sticks in the craw of the CAUT and however many of its 65,000 members actually support these ludicrous investigations.

As it happens, I have lectured at both Trinity Western and at Redeemer College, as well as many secular Canadian universities, and, for that matter, at Oxford and Cambridge in England. So I am in a position to offer a bit of direct evidence, evidence overlooked by the prolix twosome of Bruneau and Friedman: Yes, faith-based universities are different. Allow me to explain.

At Redeemer and Trinity Western, the buildings are clean, the walls undefaced by graffiti. The knuckles of their students do not drag the ground. I noticed immediately that informal and animated discussions were going on everywhere on campus between students and faculty -- and the faculty seemed to know each student's name.

The Staley Lectures, which I was at Redeemer and Trinity Western to deliver, continued over several days: public addresses, seminars and discussions, an evening panel, etc. I experienced culture shock.

I discovered that these faculty and students were unafraid of concepts such as "truth," or "good" and "evil" -- words not only foreign to, but suspect in, the secular university. The students, mirabile dictu, were not intimidated by intellectual debate; ideas were not threatening to them, nor was free-ranging inquiry immediately challenged as "offensive." In fact, I never once heard the word "offensive." Controversy was not something to be avoided. I quickly realized how long it had been since I had spoken at a school without speech codes and "equity officers."

It was the experience of lecturing at such institutions that reminded me of what universities once were.

One manifestation of the contemporary university's moral and intellectual vacuity is the transposition of the labels "liberal" and "conservative." In the multiversity, it is generally those called "conservative" who are disturbed by what these institutions have become and who propose drastic change. It is those termed "liberal" who are content with abandonment of core curricula, with rampant grade inflation, with declining standards of scholarship wrought by affirmative-action hiring and with the emergence of courses and departments based on ideology. In times past, a university "liberal" was identified with free speech; today, a university liberal is likely to be leading the charge to suppress free speech on the ground that someone, somewhere, might take offence.

A university's real mission is the pursuit of truth, however unpopular or politically incorrect that truth may be. In his classic essay, On Liberty, John Stuart Mill wrote: "Ages

are no more infallible than individuals; every age having held many opinions which subsequent ages have deemed not only false but absurd; and it is certain that many opinions, now general, will be rejected by future ages, as it is that many, once general, are rejected by the present."

Today, university dissenters from politically correct orthodoxy are encouraged to keep quiet, to fit their conclusions to premises they believe to be false. Instead of providing intellectual leadership, our universities are full mostly of CAUT-types, those whom J.S. Mill aptly called "conformers to the commonplace."

Serious students, looking for the kind of liberal education that was once available in many Canadian universities, will be fortunate indeed if they secure a place at a faith-based institution. Condemnation by the CAUT, in our topsy-turvy world, should be considered the academic equivalent of the Good Housekeeping Seal of Approval.

-Ian Hunter is Professor Emeritus in the Faculty of Law at the University of Western Ontario.

The Delusion of Deception

How does one know when they are deceived? How does one know when they have been convinced by people, situations and circumstances that simply are not being honest with them or honest at all.
It is in this situation that I find most people who are secular humanists within our Polite Canadian Culture. I find an intelligencia that proposes to all who will listen their exalted position of keeper of the real truth, as opposed to those lowly pions who live a faith based, God centred existence.
It is these wise individuals who carry the torch of wisdom for those of us who "just don't get it" or simply are too immature to understand their man centred philosophy. So what is a faith based person to do? What should be our response?

To answer these questions I had not choice but to go to the bible and see what God has to say about it. 1 Cor. 4:1-4 Says...Since God has so generously let us in on what he is doing, we're not about to throw up our hands and walk off the job just because we run into occasional hard times. We refuse to wear masks and play games. We don't maneuver and manipulate behind the scenes. And we don't twist God's Word to suit ourselves. Rather, we keep everything we do and say out in the open, the whole truth on display, so that those who want to can see and judge for themselves in the presence of God.
If our Message is obscure to anyone, it's not because we're holding back in any way. No, it's because these other people are looking or going the wrong way and refuse to give it serious attention. All they have eyes for is the fashionable god of darkness. They think he can give them what they want, and that they won't have to bother believing a Truth they can't see. They're stone-blind to the dayspring brightness of the Message that shines with Christ, who gives us the best picture of God we'll ever get.

So what do you think? Do you think that the god of darkness has blinded your eyes so that you cannot see the truth that is right in front of you?

What do you think?

So the National Media are at it again... here is the quote.
A national coalition of women's groups called on CBS on Monday to scrap its plan to broadcast an ad during the Super Bowl featuring college football star Tim Tebow and his mother, which critics say is likely to convey an anti-abortion message. "An ad that uses sports to divide rather than to unite has no place in the biggest national sports event of the year - an event designed to bring Americans together," said Jehmu Greene, president of the New York-based Women's Media Center.
The ad - paid for by the conservative Christian group Focus on the Family - is expected to recount the story of Pam Tebow's pregnancy in 1987 with a theme of "Celebrate Family, Celebrate Life." After getting sick during a mission trip to the Philippines, she ignored a recommendation by doctors to abort her fifth child and gave birth to Tim, who went on to win the 2007 Heisman Trophy while helping his Florida team to two BCS championships.

Do the Womans groups mentioned in the article comment on the sexual demeaning ads running throughout the Super Bowl? No!
Do they mention the use of woman as props rather that intelligent human beings ready to compete on equal footing with men? No!
No! Instead they continue to ridicule the promoters of the advertizing, Focus on the Family as being unworthy to even be considered to purchase airtime during the superbowl because they have done the unthinkable... they promoted the worst kind of social engineering... and corruption of real social liberal ideologies... they promoted, the family! Wow and I thought Amercia was free. I know Canada isn't but I thought they were.
Here is their contention...

The protest letter from the Women's Media Center suggested that CBS should have turned down the ad in part because it was conceived by Focus on the Family. "By offering one of the most coveted advertising spots of the year to an anti-equality, anti-choice, homophobic organization, CBS is aligning itself with a political stance that will damage its reputation, alienate viewers, and discourage consumers from supporting its shows and advertisers," the letter said.

Since when does forcing women to work equals equality? My mother was equal to my Dad even though she never worked as much as he did. No inequality there...they called it a team, a duet, a family. Equal... different but still equal.
So just because the advertizment was conceived by Focus on the Family they have no right to communicate their support of the traditional family? This is freedom? Like I have said before, the liberal media and the social engineering leadership believe that real tolerance is achieved by stamping out intolerant people. (sigh) How Orwellian is that? Everyone is equal, just some are more equal than others.
I do appreciate CBS and their position, as Schneeberger from Focus on the Family has said, "CBS officials carefully examined Focus on the Family's track record and found no basis for rejecting the ad." Way to go CBS!
Finally the hypocrasy of the complainants reached new heights of comunication when they used the very language of excusivity that the church has been criticized of for years to defend their rejection of their family friendy ad. Here it is...

A national columnist for CBSSports.com, Gregg Doyel, also objected to the CBS decision to show the ad, specifically because it would air on Super Sunday. "If you're a sports fan, and I am, that's the holiest day of the year," he wrote. "It's not a day to discuss abortion. For it, against it, I don't care what you are. On Super Sunday, I don't care what I am. Feb. 7 is simply not the day to have that discussion."

The Holiest Day of the Year? And they call us fundamentalists!

here is the full article...
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/01/26/national/main6143105.shtml?tag=strip

Surely Someone has the courage to comment....

Helen Keller was asked once, "What could be worse than being born blind?"To which she relied, "Having sight without a vision."



What a time in which we live!



The foundations of belief that have been the basis of thought both Secular and Sacred have been eroded and or removed completely. The basic understanding of right and wrong are gone and in it's place stands the highest commandment within the Satanic Church. "Do what thou wilt!"

The idea that the highest authority for a persons behavour is determined exclusively by that person. And that that individuals upper reason has now become the whims and will of the individual and not higher authority from any outside source. While the foundations of belief found in the bible have been thrown away it is now that we hear it repeated in the house of commons as readily as we hear it on the streets of West Vancouver.



In it's place we find, not just the quiet removal of belief but now the open assault on the beliefs of the church sighting them as hate literature rather than foundational truths. Today we hear about the confusion from the youth concerning their identity and purpose while the bringer of life is not contacted or even discussed.



Mom is used to saying that anyone who will not stand for something will fall for anything.

Leadership is not a learned behaviour... and the business of leadership development is just that...business, nothing more.

Recently I was reading an excellent book entitled "Leadership Reconsidered". The basic premise of the book was how we define a leaders. Was is by their power, influence and control or was it rather by the legacy that we leave upon leaving this planet.

Is a leader some one who has followers? Is is a gifted person who possesses a charismatic personality? I have found this book to be supremely challenging and thought provoking.

With Chapters like "Jefferson and Jefferson, walk like a man" and "Smile when I'm gone, the legacy of laughter" this book challenges the concepts of leadership within the 21 century mindset, both inside and outside the church.

So how about you? What is the legacy that you are trying to leave? What footprint will be followed after your walking is done?

It's an interesting time to be God.

Have you ever wondered at the thoughts that must go through God's mind as he watches the world?

He watches as mankind now worships creation rather than a creator.
He watches as mankind dismisses Him as just so much mythology.
He watches as mankind refuses to accept a gift that cost him everything, replacing it with something that was never designed to satisfy.

I have once again been deeply saddened by reading the blog of a good friend.

His self realization and self assurance is so confident and presumably so "right". His rejection of any voice that does not start it's reasoning with... "in the beginning me..." and his presumption that if something cannot be measured and confirmed by science then it holds no truth is nothing short of unsettling. The arrogance of any position that assumes the understanding of all there is, a position that he has been faithfully constructing over the decades, is inspiring in it's selfishness and closedmindedness.

"For the scientist that has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountain of ignorance. He is about to conquer the highest peak. As he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greated by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."~Robert Jastrow, God and the Astronomer

I simply see my friend, a picture of a small man...so small that in the picture he looks smaller than any ant, standing looking toward heaven declaring in his tiny ant voice. Show yourself God to that I can measure you! For if science can't measure you you simply don't exist." And all around him there is a slow constant wind making a sound that he simply can't hear. It's the lowest voice of all... the voice of God...and he is sighing.

So... I come back to my original thought. I wonder what thoughts are going through God's mind as He watches us?

I have discovered that only in the realization that there is a God and he is personally interested in every aspect of our lives can real contentment and purpose be found. But not as some buddy, friend or life insurance policy but rather only as He can be seen. His interest is simple... in it's truth. He is simply interested in being God. Our God. Our King. Our master. Our Lord. Our Guide. Our Ruler. And on His throne there is only room for one.

Oh yeah...and because He is who his billing says He is...He can't settle for anything less.