College Denies Religious Court Credit

I am steamed about this one. I read this story (found at http://www.sfgate.com/) today on KLove.com. Below is a snippet of the article...

SAN FRANCISCO -- A federal judge says the University of California can deny course credit to applicants from Christian high schools whose textbooks declare the Bible infallible and reject evolution.

Rejecting claims of religious discrimination and stifling of free expression, U.S. District Judge James Otero of Los Angeles said UC's review committees cited legitimate reasons for rejecting the texts - not because they contained religious viewpoints, but because they omitted important topics in science and history and failed to teach critical thinking.

Otero's ruling Friday, which focused on specific courses and texts, followed his decision in March that found no anti-religious bias in the university's system of reviewing high school classes. Now that the lawsuit has been dismissed, a group of Christian schools has appealed Otero's rulings to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.

"It appears the UC is attempting to secularize private religious schools," attorney Jennifer Monk of Advocates for Faith and Freedom said Tuesday. Her clients include the Association of Christian Schools International, two Southern California high schools and several students.

Click Here to read the rest of the story...

I have a huge issue with this. The college claims that students should not receive credit for their classes because "they omitted important topics in science and history". What about classes that fail to teach the Bible or creation. I think that those classes omit "important topics in science and history". I am so sick of people misconstruing the intent of the First Amendment. It does not saying anything about separation of church and state - it has two clauses: (1) the Free Exercise Clause that prevents the government from passing any law that would interfere with one's right to worship or exercise their religion and (2) the Establishment Clause that prohibits the government from taking stances on issues as to put one religion higher than another or to establish a national religion.

In this case I think the judges ruling violates the constitution. He has established that classes that leave out important aspects of science such as evolution are not OK, but classes that leave out important aspects of science and history such as creation are OK (violation of the Constitution in my opinion). Had this been a class that taught on a Hindu principle such as reincarnation I don't think we would have an issue.

This makes me so mad. Let's at least be fair. I say we teach it all or don't teach anything. Either teach creation with evolution or don't teach evolution at all. Its only fair!

BAD CHRISTIAN!!!

SHAME ON ME!
"BAD CHRISTIAN! BAD CHRISTIAN!
HOW DARE YOU STATE WHAT YOU BELIEVE IN?!"

We should just all come to the realization that everyone in the world is angry at everyone else for some reason or another. In this photo, you see me... as the Hulk because I am angry about something or another everyday that I live and wake up... but why are we wasting our time and energy being angry all the time?

An anonymous poster commented on my last post [which I deleted the comment for the sake of posting it here.] saying something to this affect: "How dare she not sing Christian music? Perhaps she should be stoned! It is because of Christians like you that people stray away from your religion."

Well, Well Angry Beaver! My Oh My! Perhaps you have been a victim of condemnation yourself. For that I am sorry, and I would like to take this opportunity apologize to you and any other person who has been in that position. Condemnation is when a person or person[s] place blame onto a person, judge them and almost literally sentence them to Hell. I'll be doing a more in-depth post on Condemnation later, maybe next post. But condemnation also comes from the teachings of modern man's idea of "Religion". When one is condemned it is usually by beliefs of a specific church or group's traditions.

In which case, I first must add I do not believe in a sure "Religion" I believe in the Word of God and a personal relationship with Jesus Christ. Religion is just a set of traditions and beliefs set out by man in addition to those of God, or in remission of those of God or the one true God. If you are reading this Angry Beaver, I hope that you can understand the differences. Please understand that I am not "fighting with you" debating, or promoting an online quarrel. I would just like you to understand more thoroughly what I believe and my statements in my previous blog.

In no way have I intended on condemning Katy Perry or anyone of the sort. I have not sentenced her to eternal damnation in Hell and it is not my job to judge her, her works, or lack thereof. I could make a long list of "Judases" in our midst today. There are also many "Prodigal's Sons", Katy Perry seeming to be one of those as well. Am I chastising or blaming them? No. I have merely pointed out a few facts that other people may not be aware of. I am expressing concern for her seemingly fading relationship with God. I want other Christians to be aware of her past and present so that we can pray that she is not being led astray and that God will bless her in a way that she realizes she truly needs him in her life. I'm not making a "big deal" out of her change in music. I'm wanting to share that she was once a Christian artist, and now she is singing about kissing girls and making bookoo[sp?] bucks for it, after which she has admitted that her Gospel career was on the rocks. The point is she has most likely done it for the cold, hard, cash. I want people to pray for her, not tear her down.

Perhaps our friend did not read the entire post, for it was a long post indeed. I apologize for I tend to be long-winded. [Or long-finger movemented?] I do see where my Angry friend is coming from, such as those who scream "You're going to Hell! Repent now!" I do not believe that way. I believe in stating the facts when prompted to do so, sharing my beliefs and showing Christ in my ways and actions, not by force or by scaring someone, such as threatenings of Hell. Although I do believe in Hell, I don't believe that Jesus would want me to scare anyone into serving him. In a way I would say... Jesus now, Hell later. But thank you Angry Beaver, for assuming I am a stereotypical, insane extremist because I have enough boldness to type my views on Katy Perry's globally advertised life in a Blog. I needed that for inspiration in this post.

Moving On...
Now, why am I the Hulk?
What makes me angry?
When we say "Let's keep prayer in schools, and if a student doesn't believe that way, they can do something elsewhere for that period of time." It's stupid, and unconstitutional.
When we start a petition saying "In God We Trust" should stay on our money... it is too.
And apparently, so is a Christian posting a blog, a video on youtube, or making a website... maybe not unconstitutional, but certainly bogus.
Anyone can post something online, but if it spreads a message of Jesus,
they are often harassed, and beaten down for it.

When Non-Believers mock us and our God, it's freedom of speech.
When Non-Believers say "No prayer in Schools!" It's freedom of speech.
Saying No to God, posting their Blogs and Videos...
All freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of blah blah blah.

WHERE'S MY FREEDOM?
Why can't I say "Jesus loves you" on someone's blogs and videos, [or even my own!] without being attacked?

Well, I want to know why it's so fair for every Non-Believer to post their views on a Blog and not be attacked for it. [I recognize there are many exceptions, but usually, even when there is a Christian who stands up for Jesus and their beliefs, there is seldom a blaming or hateful way of coming across about it. Maybe a loving gesture such as "Jesus loves you, even if you don't believe he is there" or a Bible verse.]

Why all the animosity?!

I found this study outline for those out there who love Jesus and study their word!
It's an amazing outline showing positive ways to deal with and express anger.
It also discusses the anger of GOD himself, instilled in you.
Here's the ANGER page

So, I'd like to know...
WHAT MAKES YOU ANGRY?

Thanks for reading!
-Crystal

So... Who is this Katy Perry Girl?

Well, it's really late and I'm very tired, so if some of this isn't grammatically perfect, please don't sue me! I think I have enough life in me to get this blog out... I just stumbled upon some interesting information I'd like to share about this Katy Perry.

The first time I heard the song "I kissed a Girl" was her performance on So You Think You Can Dance. The "watching/listening" that happened here lasted a total of about 30 seconds as my mother and I looked at each other and she then asked, "Uh, can we fast-forward through this?" Responding with no words, I x3'd it all the way through the commercial break and thought nothing more of it.

A few days later, I was doing some cleaning and a little rocking out and the song came on the XM Satellite radio. Although the song has an awesome catchy tune, I couldn't help but get a strange feeling about it. I felt to change the channel. I haven't listened to the song in it's entirety, but I get the point.

I read on some online news that gay activists are angry with the song pinning it as "homophobic" I'm not sure where it has been pinned "homophobic" I guess I haven't listened that far into the song, but "I kissed a girl, and I liked it, the taste of her cherry chapstic" personally sounds pro-gay to me.

Anyway, Katy Perry is known as this new "provocative" break out artist with her catchy tunage on pop radio stations, but is this really her story? I was surprised to see my "weird feelings" become unveiled when I came upon an article about her previous recording history.

Katy Perry Is a sell out... and one of the most disheartening kind. Seven years ago, At age 16, she released a self-titled Album, under her real name which is Katy Hudson. (She has since changed her stage name to Perry because of the close similar name to Kate Hudson, the actress. Perry is her mother's maiden name.) This Album "Katy Hudson" was one her Pastor-father and Preacher-mother I'm sure were very proud of. The songs were originals, written at only 15 and 16 years old in praise to our Lord... but as for today's album, I'm not so sure about the parents loving this one.

In an interview I read online she says they are proud of her and support her in all she does as long as she "doesn't get naked in public or do drugs" and answers the next question with an F-Bomb. Parents will be proud of you in all your successes and support your decisions as an adult because they are your parents, but I must say, I'm sure the Hudsons are carrying a heavy burden for their daughter.

Now, say what you will about me or my views, "She sings a song you don't agree with, get over it." or Just because she's a pop singer now doesn't mean she doesn't still believe." The song itself or her "being a pop singer" is not the issue. Nor is even "Believing" I am a strong believer that you must accept Jesus into your life and continue to live a righteous life to be a true Christian and have true Salvation. I was a "believer" before I was actually saved, and I believe that I was mislead in a way and that if I had not actually accepted him and began to live my life for him I would have never actually been a Christian or gone to Heaven when I passed on. My point here is making comments about an urge to smooch Miley Cyrus, dropping F-Bombs, and performing in the Warped tour seems very different from Katy Hudson vs. Katy Perry.

She has also been referred to as: "Lez for pay" on a popular celebrity gossip page.

A review for her album on ChristianityToday [ChristianMUSICtoday] says:
"Katy Hudson's debut easily could have been just another teen songwriter mimicking mainstream music trends with Christian lyrics. Instead, I hear a remarkable young talent emerging, a gifted songwriter in her own right who will almost certainly go far in this business. That name again is Katy Hudson. Trust me, you'll be hearing it more and more in the next year."
[See the album review in its entirety here]

How ironic, is that the word I'm searching for?

It seems that Katy has lost sight of the importance of God in her life and decided to throw out a "struggling" Gospel career for some cold, hard, Cash.
Another person comes to mind right away for me here, and that's Judas. Judas was a sell-out.
Jesus, or 30 pieces of Silver?
It seems to me that Katy Perry has opted for the Silver.

I pray that Katy Hudson/Perry will find her roots and get back to a life that may not bring in as much dough, but she'll have tons of treasures in Heaven.

What do you think?
Katy Hudson vs. Katy Perry
... sold out for the 30 pieces of Silver
or not?

-Crystal

Todd Bentley - Florida Revival - Real or Fake?

I was recently at a friend's house and we visited Youtube to check out a guy named Todd Bentley. He is a preacher in Florida and revival has broke out through his ministry. According to his website his ministry has seen healings of many major illnesses and they have even seen people raised from the dead.

I have been curious about this since I have seen the videos. I have no doubt that God can perform these miracles, but in this day in time it would be really easy to fake something like this. I'm not saying that is what I believe, but I'm just not sure. I have been praying for the spiritual gift of discernment. It would come in real handy right now. I am a little uneasy about it, but I'm not sure if that is because he is just so different from everything I have ever seen.

His ministry is violent and he doesn't look the normal part of a preacher (which is fine with me). The violent part is the part that concerns me. He will often slap people across the face or kick them. It's not your typical healing ministry. I am totally ok with it if it is of God.

Watch this video..."WORST ASSAULT at Todd Bentley Raging Revival part 3"

I'm interested in hearing what you have to say. Let me know!