Is Islam Luring the American Church into Denying Jesus?

Mark Your Calendars!
Webinar/Conference Call for Pastors
with Special Guest Dr. Mark Christian 
Friday, March 24 from 10:00-11:30 a.m. ET
The American Pastors Network welcomes all pastors to join this lively discussion where Dr. Mark Christian, a former Imam with family ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, will discuss the dangers of Islam.  He has been a guest on APN’s “Stand in the Gap Today” radio program to share his insights on this crucial topic of interest (click here to listen to the Mar. 1 program).  Dr. Christian will present his points, followed by a Q&A session.Date and Time of Pastors Call/Webinar: Friday, March 24 from 10:00-11:30 a.m. ET
Guest Speaker: Dr. Mark Christian
Method: This discussion is offered as a conference call and as a webinar (visual materials included for those who want to see the information displayed on a computer).
Topic: “Is Islam Luring the American Church Into Denying Jesus?”
To Register for This Free Call/Webinar: Click here to sign up. Once you’ve completed the online registration form, you will receive more contact information for this call/webinar event.

Janet Mefferd Today Show with APN Pres. Sam Rohrer

On March 16, 2017, APN President Sam Rohrer appeared as guest on the Janet Mefferd Today Show. Here’s a description of the program:

“Despite what the media has told you, there are plenty of evangelical pastors and leaders who support President Trump’s temporary travel ban from Muslim countries – and have written their own letter saying so. We’ll get their biblical perspective from Sam Rohrer with Faith Leaders for America. “

An Open Letter on Immigration to President Trump

The letter below, from Faith Leaders for America, is a joint effort of clerics in support of President Trump’s efforts to protect American through wise and judicious legislation.

To read the accompanying article on the FLFA website, please click HERE.

_________________________________________________________________________

Dear President Trump and Vice President Pence:

We write on behalf of the millions of Americans – clergy and lay citizens, alike – who deeply appreciate your leadership in working to make our country safe again.  In particular, as faith leaders, we want to thank you for: following a discerning and Biblical approach to the “wise welcome” of foreigners, including refugees; your commitment to border security; and your determination to end the magnet for illegal immigration represented by so-called “sanctuary” cities.  All of these initiatives have firm foundations in Biblical instruction.

Unfortunately, there are some who cite the Bible selectively to suggest that such policies are contrary to America’s faith traditions.  (Among those, it must be noted, are groups that receive very sizeable federal funding to relocate refugees into this country.) We believe that a more accurate understanding requires the “whole counsel of Scripture” approach.

That approach reveals a divine call not to open borders, but to the sensible differentiation between strangers who seek to assimilate – that is, who want to adopt the faith and values of the land to which they are coming – and those who come to do harm and subvert.

For example, we find in Scripture the warm welcome of a foreigner like Ruth, a Moabite woman in distress, who came lawfully as a blessing.  In Ruth 1:6, she declared, “Your people will be my people and your God, my God.”

Likewise in Scripture, we see the example of offering temporary welcome to well-meaning foreigners passing through.

However, in the Bible, we also find instruction for excluding “strangers” who come with sinister motives and no desire to assimilate.  Indeed, we often see the Lord’s stern rebuke for unwise leadership, notably in Isaiah 1: 7: “Your country is desolate, your cities burned with fire; your fields are being stripped by foreigners right before you, laid waste as when overthrown by strangers.”

To protect against such dangers, we have the example of Nehemiah who, with patience and determination, led his nation in rebuilding its walls, as well as its faith and culture. He protected the people of Israel against foreign dangers and made possible a time of renewal and flourishing.  And, once Nehemiah finished providing physical protection for the nation, he turned to Ezra, a spiritual leader, to provide moral and spiritual guidance to renew the nation.

In much the same way as most Americans protect those they love by securing the doors and windows of their homes, so we must preclude those who may wish us harm from entering our country.  That is the clear and necessary purpose of your executive order pausing certain immigrants and refugees from coming here until we can determine whether they are strangers who come in love, or with conquest in their hearts.

As religious leaders, we also wish to encourage and commend you as our nation’s president for upholding your primary, divinely directed duty as a “minister of God” in civil government to: pursue justice against the lawbreaker; protect our citizens from those who would bring them harm; and defend the freedoms of individuals, families, and the faith community to fulfill their God-given duties. We thank you for taking seriously your oath to the American people to protect “against all enemies foreign and domestic.” When you do these things, you are on the firmest of moral ground, will see God’s blessings and will heighten the support of the majority of the American people.

We applaud and bless your efforts to heed the whole counsel of Scripture and to protect our people with both compassion and common sense against the dangers of our time.

Sincerely,

* Ministry affiliation and organizational titles for identification purposes only.

Dr. Rick Scarborough

Founder, Vision America,
Keller, TX

Dr. Jerry A. Johnson

President, National Religious Broadcasters,
Washington, D.C.

Bishop Earl Walker “E. W.” Jackson Sr.

Founder, President, S.T.A.N.D. America,
Chesapeake, VA

Rabbi Jonathan Hausman

Hon., Pastor Sam Rohrer

President, American Pastors Network,
Elverson, PA

LTG, Rev. William “Jerry” Boykin

Family Research Council,
Washington, D.C.

Bishop Aubrey Shines

Senior Pastor of Glory to Glory Ministries,
Temple Terrace, FL 

Dr. Jim Garlow

Senior Pastor at Skyline Church,
San Diego, CA

Rev. David Barton

Founder of Wallbuilders,
Aledo, TX

Rev. Phil Cohn

Dr. Rick Joyner

Founder, MorningStar Ministries,
Fort Mill, SC

Dr. James Dobson

Family Talk,
Colorado Springs, CO

Mr. Rich Bott

President & CEO Bott Radio Network,
Overland Park, KS

Dr. Robert Jeffress

Pastor of First Baptist Church,
Dallas, TX

Dr. Paige Patterson

President, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary,
Fort Worth, TX

Pastor Roger Burks

Church of the Harvest,
Grimsley, TN

Dr. Greg Linnebach

MorningStar Ministries,
Peoria, AZ

Elder George Rasley

Presbyterian Church,
Naples, FL

Pastor Roy L. Roden

Founder, Destiny Eastgate Ministries,
Camden, ME

Pastor Isaac Crockett

Hamburg Bible Church,
Hamburg, PA

Minister Bart Peacher

MorningStar Ministries, It is Time Israel,
Fort Mill, SC

Rev. James McLaughlin

MorningStar Ministries,
Moravian Fals, NC

Dr. John D. Mallonee

Blessed Hope Bible Church,
Liverpool, PA 

Rev. Lloyd C. Phillips

MorningStar Ministries,
Missoula, MT

Minister Thomas Walz

Market Place Ministry,
Lansing, MI

Deacon James R. Bacon

Belmont, NC

Pastor David McClellan

Strong Tower Ministries,
Boise, ID

Pastor Daniel El Kouri

World Alive Church,
Lawton, OK

Pastor Dale Walker

President, Tennessee Pastors Network,
Nashville, TN

Bishop Harry R. Jackson, Jr.

Senior Pastor, Hope Christian Church,
Beltsville, MD

Rev. Sandy Durham

Celebration Ministries International,
Arkansas City, KS

Minister Steven Strzepek

Grace and Truth Ministries,
Westbrook, CT

Pastor Ronnie W. Rogers

Senior Pastor, Trinity Baptist Church,
Norman, OK

Dr. Calvin Wittman

Applewood Baptist Church,
Wheatridge, CO

Senior Pastor Gus Booth

Senior Pastor, Warroad Community Church,
Warroad, MN

Pastor Ronnie Yarber

Gross Road Baptist Church,
Mesquite, TX

Dr. Kirby M. Hill

Southside Baptist Church,
Carthage, TX

Dr. John H Killian

Pastor Maytown Baptist Church,
Mulga, AL  

Pastor Kenneth M. Fryer

Past President, Louisiana Baptist Pastors Conference,
Baton Rouge, LA

Pastor Dwayne Carson

Epic Life Church,
Columbus, OH

Rev. John Senin

Missionary, Ordained in United States and Africa

Dr. Gary Dull

Senior Pastor, Faith Baptist Church
Altoona, PA

Evangelist Dave Kistler

President, Hope Ministries International
Houston, TX

The Biblical Approach To Immigration

Sam Rohrer, APN President, recently joined WallBuilders Live Radio program to discuss the biblical approach to immigration, jurisdictions and the role of the church and government on this issue.

Air Date: 2/20/17

Hosts: Sam Rohrer, David Barton, Tim Barton, and Rick Green

To access the full transcript of this program, please click HERE.

Breitbart: American Pastors’ Prez: Calling Islam Non-Violent Is ‘Purposeful Denial of Facts’

NOTE: This article was originally published on the Breitbart News website HERE. To read a similar article published on the Christian Post website, please click HERE.

The president of the American Pastors Network said that many U.S. citizens are in denial over the true nature of Islam by refusing to acknowledge its inherent ties to violent jihad.

Responding to a recent CBS poll that found that the majority of Democrats believe that Islam is no more violent than Christianity, Sam Rohrer said that many Americans are confused about the Muslim faith and the teachings of the Qur’an.

“The view for a long time has been that jihadists, wherever they are, are not at all reflective of Islam, and these are only a small number, who don’t speak for Islam,” Rohrer said in an interview with the Christian Post.

“The unfortunate thing about that is that those involved in jihad are the only ones who are really practicing what the Qur’an says,” he said.

Last week’s CBS poll found that only 33 percent of respondents believe that the Muslim religion encourages violence more so than other religions, a view that Rohrer described as a “purposeful denial of facts.”

Those who do not recognize that Islam is more prone to terrorism and violence either haven’t “done their homework,” or are ignoring the truth, he said.

Rohrer argued that public opinion on Islam is tied to a religious relativism that assumes that “all people worship the same God, or there is no God, or all gods are equal.”

It is a “great mistake” to believe that Islam is first and foremost a religion, like Christianity or Judaism, he suggested.

“That is totally wrong, because Islam is primarily a political, legal system. It has religious tenets, but it is a political system accompanied by Sharia law,” he said.

“By its very commandments,” he said, Sharia prohibits Islam from peacefully coexisting with others.

Rohrer’s remarks echoed statements from the Islamic State terror group itself, which has publicly rejected claims that its war on the Judeo-Christian West is not religiously motivated.

In an issue of its online propaganda magazine, Dabiq, ISIS criticized Pope Francis last summer for his naïveté in clinging to the conviction that Muslims want peace and that acts of Islamic terror are economically rather than religiously motivated.

“This is a divinely-warranted war between the Muslim nation and the nations of disbelief,” the authors stated in an article titled “By the Sword.”

The Islamic State attacked Francis for claiming that “authentic Islam and the proper reading of the Quran are opposed to every form of violence.”

Pope Francis “has struggled against reality” in his efforts to portray Islam as a religion of peace, the article insists, before going on to urge all Muslims to take up the sword of jihad, the “greatest obligation” of a true Muslim.

Last spring, noted Georgetown University scholar Father James V. Schall SJ published an essay arguing that Islam has consistently advocated violence “from its seventh century beginning,” and that the purpose of violent jihad is “ultimately, religious and pious.”

In his article, Schall contended that Islam has been “violent throughout its entire history,” and that the motivation for its violence “is obedience to the Law of Allah.”

“What we see now is little different from what has been seen throughout the centuries wherever Islam is found,” he wrote.

Many Westerners mistakenly assume that Islam is not violent, because all religions should be peaceful by their nature, Schall stated. Yet just because Islam is a “religion,” he argued, does not mean that it is therefore not “violent.”

Schall said that “while it may be politically incorrect to state these things, they need to be stated and are in fact the truth.”

“The designated and determined goal of the conquest of the world for Allah has been reinvigorated again and again in world history from the time of Mohammed in the seventh century,” he wrote.

“These revivals and expansions, which have only been temporarily halted by superior counterforce, have roots in the Qur’an itself and in its commentaries,” he said.

Christian Humanitarian Organization Gets it Dead Wrong!!!

World Vision, the humanitarian relief organization, has crafted and sent to President Trump and Vice President Pence a stinging criticism of the President’s immigration policies. (To read the letter from World Vision, please click HERE.)

Calling for Christian compassion and the unmitigated acceptance of refugees, World Vision has missed a KEY biblical point, thus placing themselves in opposition to God and His word.

While it is the ministry of the church to act with compassion with respect to legitimate refugees, that is NOT the purpose of civil government! According to Romans 13, government exists for the purpose of enacting justice–the punishment of those who do evil and the praise of those who do good.

By extension, if justice is the role of government, then keeping the citizens of the nation safe is definitely a part of that God-ordained mandate. Thus keeping out of our nation those who are determined to harm us would be a given.

I Timothy 2:2, states that we are to pray for our leaders with this end in view–“that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life.” In other words, we pray for our leaders that they will fulfill their God-ordained duty to keep us safe, so that a “quiet and peaceable” life may become a reality.

When a President takes his God-ordained duty seriously, as well as his oath (“to protect against ALL enemies, foreign and domestic), we in the church community should NOT be criticizing him and calling on him to
take on/adopt the church’s responsibility. This is a matter of jurisdiction. The church operates in one arena of jurisdiction. Civil government operates in another. To superimpose the church’s jurisdictional responsibility on civil government, or vice versa, is to pervert, corrupt, disobey God’s clearly stated word.

Tragically, World Vision has done precisely that. In all candor, they should know better. Even more tragic are the 5000 plus pastors, ministry leaders, lay leaders, who’ve signed on to the letter to the President.

The appearance of the letter is designed to make it look as if they (World Vision) speak for ALL evangelicals/evangelical leaders in America. Let me assure you that they DO NOT! They definitely don’t speak
for me! The implication that they speak for all evangelicals is problematic to say the least. Their confusion about the church’s role versus the government’s role is unbiblical.

Dave Kistler
President, HOPE Ministries International/HOPE To The Hill
President, North Carolina Pastors Network (NCPN)
Co-host, Stand In The Gap Radio

How America Pays for Abortion

And why Neil Gorsuch must be confirmed as the next justice of the Supreme Court

Almost every day, we hear numbers reflecting the national debt now at nearly $20 trillion. Much of the debt was added during the eight years of the Obama administration — which, strangely enough, was a proponent of abortion at all stages of pregnancy.

The untold truth is how much better off the United States would be if abortion rights had never been supposedly “found” in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution in 1973 by the Supreme Court.

Let’s start with the chilling numbers.

1.) The Human and Financial Toll
If we start our analysis at 1950, near the beginning of the baby boom, with the cumulative number of abortions each year controlled for the respective annual birth rates, infant mortality rates, and general mortality rates as of 2014, America has sustained a population loss of at least 125 million persons due to abortion.

This is roughly a third of today’s population.

Macroeconomics would tell us that a shortage of 125 million persons would cause significant economic problems. The negative economic impact in real dollars is derived by taking each annual population loss total due to abortion and applying the “per capita” individual federal income and social insurance taxes paid for each respective year — so when totaled, as of 2014, the federal government has sustained a loss of about $20 trillion in revenue due to abortion. Over time, in fact, the abortion rate and the federal debt rate follow the same growth curve.

While it’s true the abortion rate has fallen during the past few years, now — in 2017 — according to the U.S. abortion clock, 3,000 babies per day are killed by abortion. If they were allowed to live, our country would have had more children and increased the birth rate from 2.0 children per household to 2.1, which is the number needed just to replace the dying adult population.

Instead, as baby boomers retire, we now have an increasing number of seniors using Social Security and Medicare and fewer young people paying into the system. What’s worse, the boomers probably paid into Social Security for 50 or more years — and the government has already spent every dollar paid “borrowing” from the Social Security “lockbox” as it blows through $4 billion per day in what amounts to nothing more than a failing Ponzi scheme.

2.) The Loss of Potential
For those who have participated in the process of creating new life and rearing children with all its joys and sorrows, just the thought of killing the unborn for whatever reason is simply unconscionable.

For parents who have lost a child through disease, accident, or murder, one of the most painful things to deal with is the lost potential of that child if he or she had lived to adulthood. Perhaps this child would have grown up to be the person who discovered a cure for AIDS or the Ebola virus. Perhaps this child would have been successful in business or grown up to become America’s next president. Or perhaps this person would have brought peace to a war-torn country.

All of that potential has been lost because these innocent babies were murdered before their lives ever began.

3.) The Moral Morass
The Bible is quite clear that murder is blatantly wrong. Some people, however, have talked themselves into the humanistic untruth that an unborn baby is not really a child. Job 3:16 refers to the unborn as infants.

David said in Psalm 51:5: “Behold, I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me.”

He was conceived. He was not some blob of ambiguous tissue to be murdered and discarded like trash. Like all the unborn, David was a person. Proverbs 6:16-17 says God hates those who shed innocent blood. Who could be more innocent than an unborn child?

4.) Shame, Heartache and Regret
The preamble of the Declaration of Independence was once memorized by every school child. The first paragraph declares the bedrock principles upon which our country was built: “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

The origin of all life is the giver of life, God Almighty. But the most defenseless members of our society — unborn children — are discriminated against in an unspeakable way. They are murdered before being born. They are deprived not only of life, they will also never experience liberty or be allowed the pursuit of happiness. Why? Because many in our country have denied God, decided that they are their own god and able to call for the murder of their own children, knowing there will be no punishment under our nation’s law for this heinous sin before God.

The Declaration does not, however, declare that any “right” is unchangeable when it says, “That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”

Over the next several weeks, we will likely see and hear many lies directed toward the denial of the nomination of a new Supreme Court justice. It is our job to allow this change to be made, and it is totally in keeping with the writings of the Founders. We should call our senators’ offices daily and challenge them to vote for the approval of Neil Gorsuch as the new SCOTUS justice.

This is really a “life and death” battle. By confirming this new pro-life justice, we may see the birth of many new American citizens. We will also be helping our current fellow citizens. They are currently operating under a delusion about when life begins; in their desire for convenience, they’re being relieved of their responsibility for their sinful actions.

In the book “The Christian and Social Issues” by Tom Wallace, a reference is made to a full-page Washington Post advertisement, dated June 13, 1983. A woman who had undergone a saline abortion six months earlier described the mental torments that she suffered daily. She spoke of her “everyday hell of never hearing a baby cry without crying within myself; counting days to see how old the baby would have been; wondering what contributions my baby would have made to our desperate society; and wondering if there will ever be another chance for motherhood.”

Of the abortion itself, this woman recalls “sitting in a crowded waiting room studying each other’s fearful, anxious faces … signing death certificates for what is very much alive within you … seeing crying women given tranquilizers and sent home to recuperate and try to forget.”

Let us never forget the millions of silent, voiceless unborn citizens who have a right to life under God and our original founding documents, and work to give them the freedom their parents currently enjoy.

The Hon. Sam Rohrer is president of the American Pastors Network, a national network of pastors with constitutional and biblical teachings that discusses today’s pressing issues. He was a member of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives for 18 years and a candidate for governor in 2010, and is co-host of the daily “Stand in the Gap Today” national radio program on 425 stations.

Note: This article was originally published by Lifezette on Feb. 8, 2017.  To read the article on the Lifezette website, please click HERE.

Immigration Speech Delivered at the PA State Capitol by Sam Rohrer

Immigration Speech at the PA State Capitol

December 14, 2015

The Hon. Sam Rohrer

Today we gather here to express legitimate and studied concerns about the unjustifiable urgings from Barack Obama – even being joined by a few pastors and religious leaders – to continue lobbying the American public for in essence an unlimited open door for ‘embedded jihadists’  and refugees never intending to assimilate into our culture. Too many people in positions of leadership, refuse to acknowledge that we are at war! Or should I say, have had war declared against us, our way of life, our Constitution, and our historic relationship to the concept of a ‘holy experiment’ by a people embracing a totalitarian ideology. Denying the reality that our nation is already full of terrorists, these deniers of reality double down in bringing in hundreds of thousands more highly suspect people who embrace this ideology of totalitarianism from countries that harbor and train the very terrorists who destroy life, property, and commit the highest of crimes against humanity.

This morning, we’ve heard many great speakers share their views about why our elected officials in the federal and state government should not permit into our country vast populations of people who embrace an opposing ideological and political system and who call for the death and destruction of our nation and way of life. I’d like to concentrate for the next few minutes on dispelling a few of the ‘compelling arguments’ repeatedly cited by Barack Obama and some religious leaders for bringing in massive quantities of so called ‘refugees’.  I will put these into two categories: 1) Constitutional or civil, and 2) Moral

False Civil Arguments:

First: The proponents of nearly unrestrained and unvetted Muslim immigration or opening our arms to any or all would-be immigrants cite the same reason – “we have an historic ‘American’ role to play with opening our arms to ‘refugees’.  But this ‘refugee’ description is bogus. To call these preferred predominantly selected Muslim adherents ‘refugees’ who ostensibly long for religious freedom is not accurate. While some of these ‘refugees’ may wish to flee their respective nations because of the destruction of life and the economy by zealots within their own religion and political system, or because they might be persecuted or killed if they chose to leave their faith, the overwhelming majority are not coming to the United States because they want to worship Jesus Christ and Jehovah God. They, by their own admission, are committed to forcing Americans and Europeans to bow to the god of Allah and their prophet Muhammed.

In addition, the facts support the claim that the predominant make up of these ‘refugees’ going into Europe and here in the US are primarily military age young men who embrace jihadism, world domination and sharia law. Their admittance would only enlarge the already massive numbers of already placed Muslim adherents who by overwhelming margins confirm their support of sharia and jihad and are therefore sworn enemies of our Constitutional republic and who repudiate our view of self-government under God.  Ironically, those in government bent on bringing in these so called refugees are also as adamant that they not help the truly persecuted Christian or non-Muslim being brutally attacked in the Middle East and Northern Africa because of their faith.

Second: These government and religious leaders have even gone as far as to say that to not bring in unlimited numbers of people- who admittedly can’t be confidently vetted – is so un-American it violates the very essence of the Statue of Liberty which says, “Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to be free…”   This claim is also bogus, untrue and a ruse. While that familiar phrase was an accurate description of a prevailing attitude toward those who were oppressed and downtrodden, that phrase had ensconced within it a very foundational assumption – and requirement.  That underlying premise was that those who would come here would come with the expectation and agreement that they would assimilate into our culture, obey and defend our Constitution and our laws, work hard and not become a liability to the taxpayer, learn to speak English, and would identify with historic Judeo-Christian principles underlying our nation. Those who would refused to do so were not welcomed into our nation. Yet the very discussion today not only denies this historical fact but also the very reality that these predominantly modern Muslim ‘poor and downtrodden’ are not coming with the intent to assimilate into our culture but to change our culture. The clear force of their politically based totalitarian ideology is to tear down our culture, destroy the Constitution and replace our system of law with sharia law, and replace the ‘holy experiment of self-government under God’ with totalitarianism and world domination. To compare today’s discussion around today’s ‘refugees’ with the historic American tradition and the Statue of Liberty’s ‘give me your poor’ is intellectually and historically dishonest.

Third:  These government and religious ‘leaders’ say that public policy must be driven by ‘compassion’, that is the proper compelling government action to bring in the Muslim adherent and ‘would be immigrant’  regardless of what they believe or from which nation they might hail. They imply if not outright say that to deny or restrict people holding to certain ideologies has no lawful or statutory precedent. Yet to hold this concept is to deny the most fundamental understanding of their duty and Constitutional obligation and facts of history.

First, they willingly refuse to acknowledge, that the primal duty and purpose of government is not worldwide humanitarianism or bringing in millions of people who will be dependent on the hard working taxpayers and citizens of this nation. The primary duty is to enact justice – praise those who uphold and obey our laws and to punish those who break our laws. Within this is the obligation to use the power of government to protect our citizens, our nation, our Constitution and our way of life, not to undermine it. It is this foremost obligation that proponents of unrestrained immigration have ignored and shall I say violated in an attempt to accomplish some political strategy or ulterior motive. Until the safety of the American people, the defense of their oath of office to uphold and defend the constitution of the United states and our various states is affirmed and clear, or just out pf respect to the American people if nothing else – a temporary moratorium should in fact be imposed on all people coming from Terrorist protecting and producing nations.

Secondly, they willfully deny history and the facts. In the early days of our nation, we were literally at war with the Middle eastern Muslim world for many years. The fight against Islamic ideology is not new. The distinction is that in our early years our civil and religious leaders recognized it for what it was and dealt with it as the threat that it was. In more recent years, former administrations and Congresses in times of conflict and engagement with enemies of this nation codified into law limiting and restricting immigration.

One of the great tragedies of our time is that we no longer know (nor are most of our young people taught) the truth of the past.  Such is the case with all too soon forgotten legislation from our recent history.  Consider the “Immigration And Nationality Act of 1952.”  Passed on June 27 of that year, and for the purpose of preventing communists from entering the country, the actual text of the act is beyond applicable to today’s dangerous Islamic immigration and refugee situation!  The text of section 313 states:

(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 405(b) , no person shall hereafter be naturalized as a citizen of the United States-

— who advocates or teaches, or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization that advocates or teaches, opposition to all organized government; or 3) who, although not within any of the other provisions of this section, advocates … the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship, or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization that advocates the economic, international, and governmental doctrines of world communism or the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship, either through its own utterances or through any written or printed publications issued or published by or with the permission or consent of or under authority of such organizations or paid for by the funds of such organization; or

— who advocates or teaches or who is a member of or affiliated with any organization that advocates or teaches (A) the overthrow by force or violence or other unconstitutional means of the Government of the United States or of all forms of law; or (B) the duty, necessity, or propriety of the unlawful assaulting or of officers or killing of any officer or officers (either of specific individuals or of officers generally) of the Government of the United States or of any other organized government because of his or their official character; or (C) the unlawful damage, injury, or destruction of property; or (D) sabotage; or

— who writes or publishes or causes to be written or published, or who knowingly circulates, distributes, prints, or displays, or knowingly causes to be circulated, distributed, printed, published, or displayed or who knowingly has in his possession for the purpose of circulation, publication, distribution, or display, any written or printed matter, advocating or teaching opposition to all organized government, or advocating (A) the overthrow by force, violence, or other unconstitutional means of the Government of the United States or of all forms of law; or (B) the duty, necessity, or propriety of the unlawful assaulting or killing of any officer or officers (either of specific individuals or of officers generally) of the Government of the United States or of any other organized government, because of his or their official character; or (C) the unlawful damage, injury, or destruction of property; or (D) sabotage; or (E) the economic, international, and governmental doctrines of world communism or the establishment in the United States of a totalitarian dictatorship; or

— who is a member of or affiliated with any organization, that writes, circulates, distributes, prints, publishes, or displays, or causes to be written, circulated, distributed, printed, published, or displayed, or that has in its possession for the purpose of circulation, distribution, publication, issue, or display, any written or printed matter of the character described in subparagraph (5).

I’ve emphasized (in bold) the most appropriate portions!  In 1952, there was, obviously, no problem with excluding dangerous persons (and jihadists posing as refugees or immigrants definitely fits this description) from entrance into the United States!  Nor, was the “Christian” community – just a generation ago –  up in arms over the exclusion of said dangerous individuals from the United States!

 

False Moral and Biblical Arguments:

The moral component being cited by some religious leaders to justify a nearly unrestrained open door policy as promoted by Barack Obama is that of the biblical admonition to welcome the stranger and sojourner. They then couple this with the biblical command to care for the poor, the widow and orphan, to turn the other cheek, to love your enemies and some go as far as saying that we might even be able to ‘entertain angels unaware’! While in some ways this concept is admirable and true is falls entirely short in this situation. We as Americans are known for our compassion for the poor and we have perhaps set the highest standard in all history of civilizations in giving of our bounty for others. That is in fact what Christmas is all about.

However, some pastors and religious leaders are wrongly applying the command to the Church and to individuals to governmental public policy. That is not only unbiblical denying the clear teaching of Scripture but dangerous threatening the very foundation of our system of civil government that permits the Church and individuals to freely do fulfill what God has commanded. Should the Church be concerned about helping to meet the needs of the poor? The answer is unequivocally yes. But this command only applies to these two jurisdictions – Church and individuals – here in our own nation, our own communities, or our own neighbors.

Can we help overseas? That answer is a resounding yes as well. Such organizations like Samaritans Purse is right now in Greece and many places meeting the needs of the poor being displace by this enlarging war in the Middle East. This is exactly what should be done.

But, Jehovah God – the Author of moral Truth and Jesus Christ the Embodiment of Truth – never told any nation that they needed to open their arms unconditionally to the ‘stranger’. God never commanded any nation or His nation of Israel to invite in the sworn enemies of God or those committed to the destruction of their system of moral and civil law. There is simply no moral obligation for government to do what is currently being done or advocated. In fact it is not only a violation of our civil law it is a violation of moral law to bring in those who in time of war embrace the fundamental tenets of the very enemy who have sworn to kill us or to bring in people from countries who are training and harboring these enemies of freedom!

In the end, this matter has a simple solution. Government and government officials– do your lawful and moral duty to enact justice and protect God honoring and law abiding citizens of this nation.  Church leaders and individuals – do your duty to extend compassion and kindness to all strangers, foreigners, the poor, the widow and the homeless whether they be next door or around the world. If these simple lines of jurisdiction are followed, this current controversy would be eliminated. I pray to God that all in positions of authority would heed and lead. Our very freedom depends on it!

 

Evaluating the President’s Immigration Policies: Are They Biblical? Are They Constitutional?

The policies President Donald Trump set forth on immigration last week certainly stirred debate across the nation, from riotous protests on college campuses to government leaders strongly stating their opposition or support.

Now, Christians are asking themselves some very important questions—safety or being a good Samaritan? How would Jesus approach the refugee situation the country is facing?

The American Pastors Network  is attempting to explore some of those answers on its nationally syndicated radio program, “Stand in the Gap Today,” heard on 425 stations around the country.

APN President and “Stand in the Gap Today” co-host Sam Rohrer welcomed noted historian and WallBuilders leader David Barton to the program last week, when they discussed the ongoing immigration debate and the biblical and constitutional perspectives therein.

“Immigration in this country is certainly a polarizing issue,” Rohrer said. “But the main questions to explore are these: Are President Trump’s immigration policies in agreement with or in opposition to the historical ideology set in motion by our Founding Fathers? What did our founding fathers envision for the immigrant and how did they perceive this issue? David Barton’s valuable insights and knowledge of the historical and biblical precedent for our laws on immigration helped shed great light on this dilemma. After all, this is an issue that touches every American, with many looking to their pastors and the church for guidance.”

These three questions, and others, were explored on a recent program, with David Barton’s answers following:

Question 1: What did George Washington and our founders think about immigration and controlling it and would they have agreed with the concept of extreme vetting-similar to what President Trump is putting in place?

Answer: “It’s not somebody that just shows up at your border and says, ‘I’m going to live here.’ No, you have to say, ‘I want to live according to your rules. I want to become one of you’ … our immigration (policy) was based on was the biblical concept of ‘come in and be part of us.’” Read more

Question 2: When did the view of immigrants change to bringing in people who don’t ever want to become Americans but actually want to change America?

Answer: “The seeds of that change began in education in the 1920s, as Progressives shifted the way we taught. Prior to that point in time, we taught about individuals. We did not look at groups, we looked at individuals. Every individual had God-given inalienable rights. Every item in the Bill of Rights is given to every individual, it’s not given to groups…” Read more

Question 3: What other characteristics of a nation did our Founders understand and build within the framework of our Constitution?

Answer: “If you look at the Declaration, it starts with 155 words that set forth the entire philosophy of American government in six principles. Of those six principles, four of the six are absolutely God-centered. If you don’t get that right, you don’t get the philosophy of the government right … In America, you’re an American because you adopt a certain philosophy. You can come from any country to be an American if you’ll become part of that philosophy.” Read more

APN Conference Call on President Trump’s Immigration Policies with John Guandolo

This recording was made during a conference call on Feb. 3rd.  Sam Rohrer, President of APN, hosted guest speaker John Guandolo with Understanding the Threat Organization.

The main points of the call were as follows:

TOPIC: President Trump’s Immigration Limitation Directive  

 KEY QUESTIONS:         

  1. Is it Constitutional?
  2. Is it Biblical
  3. Is it extreme?
  4. Is it unprecedented?
  5. Is it anti-Muslim?
  6. Is it appropriate?

TOPIC: Potential implications to Churches, citizens and Christians in the US

KEY QUESTIONS:   

  1. Is there a credible security threat to citizens, Christians, and churches in particular?  Why or why not?
  2. Is the threat level likely to increase in the near term? Why or why not?
  3. Is it appropriate for a pastor or church leaders to prepare and implement security measures? Why or why not?
  4. What should pastors/security teams etc do to best respond?
  5. What does UTT do to prepare and guide pastors and churches?

Q and A

Contact Information for John Guandolo and UTT