APN Remembers Billy Graham

/0 Comments/in , /by

The American Pastors Network’s radio ministry, “Stand in the Gap Today” remembered the life of Billy Graham on the day of his death at the age of 99.

“Dr. Billy Graham made an eternal impact on our world by proclaiming the simple truth of the Gospel,” said APN President Sam Rohrer, who is also one of the co-hosts of “Stand in the Gap Today.” “He will always be remembered for the way God touched people’s hearts and minds through his preaching, which motivated many to give their hearts to Christ.”

Rohrer added that Graham will be remembered for the following:

  • For his preaching: Preaching the Gospel clearly and simply around the world.
  • For his family: His wife, Ruth, and his five children, including ministry leaders in their own right, Franklin and Anne, and how the family has remained true to the faith.
  • For his associated ministries: Organizations that care for the poor around the world and demonstrate the love of Christ.
  • For his message: He called sin as sin and Jesus Christ as the only way to heaven, reminding that no one was ever so sinful that Christ’s power to save and heal couldn’t transform.
  • For preservation of his testimony: He wished to be minimized and Christ to be glorified. He put cautions into place to preserve his testimony and the relationship to his wife. For example, Rohrer said, Graham never went into a hotel room until it was checked first. He also put cautions into place regarding his finances and instituted a separate board to handle all the finances so he could not be accused of wrongdoing.
  • For his balanced role: He was not a troublemaker or a bomb thrower. He was a uniting force and a balm in troubled times.

Rohrer and the other “Stand in the Gap” co-hosts talked further about Graham’s life and how pastors in all pulpits can emulate at least one aspect of his service and ministry. Listen to a clip from yesterday’s show here.

American Pastors Network Keeps Christian Persecution at Forefront Through Radio Show, New Coalition

/0 Comments/in , /by

The American Pastors Network is addressing Christian persecution head-on, both through its radio ministry “Stand in the Gap Today” and as a member of a newly formed coalition called Save the Persecuted Christians.

In recent shows, host and APN President Sam Rohrer has welcomed multiple guests to the show to help raise awareness about numerous worldwide incidents of Christians suffering for their beliefs.

“Christian persecution has reached terrible and alarming heights, yet so little is being done about it, so we were honored and moved to join a large coalition made up of concerned individuals and action-oriented organizations who are working together to ‘Save the Persecuted Christians’ around the world,” Rohrer said. “It will take an all-hands-on deck approach—and now—to address the horrendous persecution worldwide. Specifically, we have discussed the attacks on Christians in Muslim countries, and namely, that the worst persecution happens when the power and the sword of government joins forces with the ‘moral’ imprimatur of a religious ideology.”

APN is a member of the new Save the Persecuted Christians coalition, which has the mission to protect Christians worldwide who are suffering discrimination, torture, rape, slavery, banishment and murder—simply because they believe in Jesus Christ.

The goal of the STPC coalition is to greatly reduce—and to deter—the further, global persecution of Christians. Beyond calling attention to the oppression of Christians worldwide, the immediate task is to disseminate actionable information about ways in which the American people can help those being persecuted.

The initiative was announced Ash Wednesday, Feb. 14, by asking faith leaders and houses of worship across America to post banners outside for two reasons: 1) build awareness and 2) encourage engagement by visiting www.SaveThePersecutedChristians.org, where resource kits can be ordered and downloaded. The banners feature the “nun” letter, which has become an international symbol for the oppression of Christians ever since the Islamic State used this first letter of the Arabic word for “Nazarene” to designate homes of followers of Christ targeted for persecution.

A model for the coalition was the Save the Soviet Jewry campaign of the 1970s, which started out with banners and signage outside synagogues and churches across America and turned into a powerful political movement and catalyst for policy changes that ultimately helped free the USSR’s oppressed Jews.

“For far too long, and particularly under the Obama presidency, the plight of persecuted Christians and Jews at the hands of not only Islamic ideology-driven but also the atheistic ideologies of North Korea or China was given little attention,” Rohrer concluded. “This has, in part, contributed to the nearly unrestrained increase in Christian persecution worldwide. It has reached a point where no civil person, certainly no God-fearing or liberty-loving person can any longer sit to the side. We have an obligation biblically to assist where we can those who are persecuted for their faith.”

Listen to the two recent programs on Christian persecution here and here.

“Stand in the Gap Today,” which airs on 425 stations nationwide, can be heard live online from noon to 1 p.m. EST at American Pastors Network.com at the orange “Listen Live” button on the right-hand side of the webpage; find a station here.

A Historic Example Of Judicial Activism: The Cantwell Case

/0 Comments/in /by

by David W. New, Esq.

(Originally published in 2005. Updated in 2018.)

     The problem of judicial activism is on the radar scope more today than ever before. Many people who were not sure if judicial activism was a problem changed their mind when the Supreme Court ruled that homosexuals have a right to marry. The American Bar Association released a poll which indicated that more than half of all Americans believe judicial activism is a serious problem. Note 1.

Many people think judicial activism is something new. However, the history books suggest that it has been with us since the 1940’s if not earlier. In my opinion, one of the most important examples of judicial activism in American history occurred on May 20, 1940. On this date, the Supreme Court decided the Cantwell v. Connecticut case. Note 2.

Surprisingly, very few Americans know anything about this case. However, the Cantwell case has affected your life in a very big way. If religious freedom is important to you then you should learn as much as possible about this case. Cantwell could be the most important religion case in American history. In fact, it could be argued that it is more important than the First Amendment.

In this article, I will explain why the Cantwell case is important. I will provide the basic facts of the case and how it affected religion law in the United States.

In a nutshell, the Supreme Court through the Cantwell case illegally seized control of religious freedom in the United States. As a result of this case, the Supreme Court began a new career as the final referee for issues involving the separation of church and state in America. Thus, Cantwell was a turning point for religious freedom in American history.

The Basic Facts of the Cantwell Case

The Cantwell family were very devout Jehovah’s Witnesses. Newton Cantwell and his two sons Jesse and Russell wanted to share their faith with other people. One day in 1938, they went door to door in New Haven, Connecticut to spread the Good News of the Kingdom to come. Apparently, a problem began when they went to Cassius Street, which was a neighborhood thickly populated with Roman Catholics. The Cantwells would play a phonograph record titled “Enemies” which attacked the Catholic Church. At one point, a dispute arose between young Jesse Cantwell and two other individuals over the recording. The police had to intervene and Newton Cantwell and his sons were charged with inciting a breach of the peace and soliciting money for a religious organization without a license. This began a legal fight that would change America forever.

Today the hot button issues involving religion are the display of the Ten Commandments and the so called ‘rights’ of homosexuals. In the 1920’s and 30’s, it was about Jehovah’s Witnesses. Many Americans felt this group had made a nuisance of themselves by constantly going door to door. State and local governments responded by requiring anyone who went door to door to ask for money to first obtain a permit. The Jehovah’s Witnesses refused to comply with these laws.

Religious Freedom Before Cantwell

Prior to the Cantwell case, disputes involving the separation of church and state were left to the states. The state constitution and laws drew the line between church and state. Consequently, the separation between church and state varied from one state to another. The people in each state through their elected representatives decided how religion and government would interact. This of course was the intent of the First Amendment. It is an undisputed fact that the Framers of our Constitution intended religion issues to be left to the states. Unless the Federal Government was directly involved somehow, federal courts would not intervene.

The Cantwell case reversed this. The Supreme Court reversed the Framers of our Constitution.

Religious Freedom After Cantwell

As a result of the Cantwell case, a new institution would have the power to decide church state issues. This institution was the Supreme Court. Many Americans might be surprised to learn that prior to 1940, the Supreme Court rarely decided religion cases. From the time the Supreme Court came into existence in 1790 until 1940 there were approximately 12 to 15 cases which could be classified as religion cases. This is true because the Framers of our Constitution gave the Supreme Court a very limited role in this area. Unless the Federal Government was involved, the Supreme Court stayed out of the case.

How did the Supreme Court get the power to control religion law in the states? By expanding the jurisdiction of the First Amendment to include the states. When the Supreme Court ruled that the state governments must obey the First Amendment, this effectively transferred power from the states to the Supreme Court for religion cases. This is what Cantwell did. Cantwell said the states must obey the religion clauses in the First Amendment. Before Cantwell, the states were not bound by it. The Cantwell case said the states must obey the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clause which says: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . .”

By limiting the First Amendment to the Federal Government, no one should think the Framers wanted the states to abuse the freedom of religion. Surely this cannot be true. The Framers limited the jurisdiction of the First Amendment because they believed the people in each state through their own constitution were better able to protect the freedom of religion.

The most important effect of the Cantwell case was to transfer power. Power over religion was transferred from the states to the Supreme Court. Essentially, religion law in the United States became federalized in 1940. In addition, the separation of powers for religion law within the Federal Government does not exists. The Supreme Court alone has almost all the power. The President and Congress can affect religion law only at the margins. The federal takeover of religion law has been so complete that if you deleted the religion clauses in the state constitutions very little would change. The state religion clauses are largely worthless. Only the First Amendment counts or to be more precise, only the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the First Amendment counts. Groups like the ACLU and Americans United for Separation of Church and State strongly support the transfer of power for religion law to the Supreme Court. These groups oppose what the Framers of our Constitution wanted for America.

Why the Cantwell Case is More Important Than the First Amendment

In a sense, the Cantwell case is more important than the First Amendment because it gave the Supreme Court the power to control religion in the states. The Framers of the First Amendment did not do it. They wanted the states to be free to govern themselves. This is why the First Amendment begins with the word “Congress.” By beginning the First Amendment with the word “Congress” this excluded state and local governments from its jurisdiction. Cantwell reversed this. In effect, Cantwell amended the First Amendment! Very few Americans are aware that the First Amendment was amended in 1940. But in a sense it was. The First Amendment has 45 words in it. It begins with “Congress shall make no law . . . ” In 1940, the Supreme Court amended it to add three words. It now has 48 words “Congress and no State shall make no law . . . ”

The Supreme Court violated the Constitution when they de facto amended the First Amendment. They enlarged its jurisdiction to include the states.

How Cantwell Affected the Public Schools

The authority to remove prayer and Bible reading from the public schools in America was based on the Cantwell case. In 1962 and ‘63, the Supreme Court removed vocal prayer and Bible reading from the classroom. What authority did the Supreme Court cite to do this? The Cantwell case. Note 3. Prior to Cantwell, there were about 30 cases which involved prayer and Bible reading in the public schools. This covered a period from the1850’s to the 1930’s. In every case, the state constitution and laws decided the case. The First Amendment was never used. However, after Cantwell this would no longer be possible. The First Amendment must now decide the case. The first time the First Amendment was used in a school prayer/Bible reading case was in 1950. Why is the Cantwell case more important than the First Amendment? Because the First Amendment originally did not give the Supreme Court the power to decide these cases. Activist judges on the Supreme Court made a bogus claim that the Fourteenth Amendment required them to apply the First Amendment to the states. The fact that it took more than 70 years after the Fourteenth Amendment was ratified (1868) to make this claim has never been explained by the Supreme Court. It remains a mystery to this day.

Interestingly, in the 30 cases discussed above, as long as student participation was voluntary, state courts overwhelmingly ruled in favor of prayer and Bible reading. If student participation was not voluntary, the courts made it voluntary. They did not ban prayer and the Bible. If the Supreme Court had never decided the Cantwell case, it’s likely these activities would continue in many schools today. Each state would be free to decide the issue for itself. No doubt this explains why the ACLU strongly supports the transfer of power for religion law to the Supreme Court.

How Cantwell Affected the Ten Commandments

In 1980, the Supreme Court ruled against the display of the Ten Commandments in the Kentucky public schools. What authority did the Supreme Court cite to do this? The Cantwell case. Specifically, the Supreme Court cited Abington v. Schempp which in turn cited Cantwell. You may recall the Supreme Court banned the Bible for moral instruction in the public schools in 1963 in the Abington case.  Note 4.

In 2005, the Supreme Court decided two cases involving the display of the Ten Commandments in Kentucky and Texas. What authority did the Supreme Court cite to do this? Again, the Cantwell Case.

Special Note: If prayer, Bible reading or the Ten Commandments were displayed on federal property such as in a school on a military base, then the Supreme Court would have the authority to hear the case.

Judicial Activism in Cantwell

Judicial activism is a serious threat to our freedom. It subverts the authority of the Constitution and threatens the independence of the judiciary. The Cantwell case resulted in an unconstitutional transfer of power from the states and a massive loss of freedom for the American people. Sadly, when the Supreme Court removed prayer from the public schools, they set an example of intolerance for religion. The message they sent was that prayer is offensive speech. Today, many people are ‘offended’ if they can hear someone pray in public. The Supreme Court is responsible for this new attitude toward religion.

Incredibly, in the legal briefs filed in the Cantwell case with the Supreme Court, neither party asked the First Amendment to be applied to the states. The Supreme Court did this on their own initiative. This is another reason Cantwell is an important example of judicial activism.

Is there any doubt that Cantwell was a major turning point in American history? Just think how free Americans would be if the Supreme Court had not reversed the Framers of our Constitution? Right now only nine unelected judges have power over religion law– a power never given to them by the Constitution.

I support what the Framers of our Constitution intended for America. I support their view that power for religious freedom should be shared with all the American people. It’s time to end the discrimination against religious speech in the United States begun by the Supreme Court.

A note from the author:  Watch for my latest book due out in 2018, The Separation of Church and State for Beginners available at Amazon.com

Note 1. Half of U.S. Sees ‘Judicial Activism Crisis’ by Martha

Neil. To read the ABA poll visit:

http://www.abanet.org/journal/ereport/s30survey.html

Note 2. Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296 (1940).

Note 3. Abington v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 at 215 (1963).

Note 4. Stone v. Graham, 449 U.S. 39 (1980).

David W. New is an attorney in Washington, D.C. He graduated

from the Georgetown University Law Center in 1989.

 

 

 

 

Christian Persecution—A Slow-Motion Holocaust

/0 Comments/in , /by

A crucial global problem is that millions of Christians are being persecuted around the world, yet the news rarely makes headlines.

That issue was somewhat alleviated, at least temporarily, with the coverage of the recent World Watch List from Open Doors USA, which annually ranks the top 50 countries where Christians are persecuted. The top five, with “extreme persecution,” include North Korea, Afghanistan, Somalia, Sudan and Pakistan.

The American Pastors Network  recently discussed this important topic on its daily, live, one-hour radio program, “Stand in the Gap Today,” heard on more than 425 stations nationwide—namely, what Christians can do about these attacks on their brothers and sisters in Christ.

“Some Christians may have been ridiculed by a classmate, maligned by a co-worker or embarrassed by a teacher for their beliefs,” said APN president Sam Rohrer. “But few of us in America have been beaten, thrown into jail or publicly humiliated at the hands of government officials because of our faith in Jesus Christ. Today, around the world, there is more persecution of people because of their faith in Jesus than in the entire history of the world. Yet, sadly, few people know about it. It’s time for Christians who enjoy their religious freedom to stand for those who are persecuted to both create awareness and take action.”

Recently on “Stand in the Gap Today,” Rohrer, his co-hosts and guests have defined persecution, discussed where it’s happening, identified who is perpetrating it and considered what other believers can do in response. Officially, Rohrer said, persecution is defined as the “the infliction of pain, punishment or death upon others unjustly, particularly for adhering to a religious creed or mode of worship, either by way of penalty or for compelling them to renounce their principles.”

“The very sad fact is that persecution in general and Christian persecution in particular has risen its ugly head around the world,” Rohrer added. “Yet very little news of this ever reaches the people. Over the centuries since the days of Nero and the Christians in the Coliseum, to the era of Stalin and Hitler, to the current days of ISIS, Christians have been persecuted and martyred for their faith. We can compare this to a modern-day, slow-moving genocide, with 255 Christians killed worldwide every month, according to Open Doors.”

Additionally, Open Doors shares, 104 Christians are abducted; 180 Christian women are raped, sexually assaulted or forced into marriage; 160 Christians are detained or imprisoned without trial; and 66 churches are attacked—every month.

“Persecution, while it is observable, serious and growing, is sometimes difficult to ascertain the cause,” Rohrer said on the program. “In the study of Christian persecution, there are certain key drivers. Perhaps the very worst is government because it has the power to imprison and kill and could be the very worst type of driver because there is no one to help in such cases, other than another government stepping in.

“But, there are other drivers of persecution: ethnic group leaders, religious and non-religious leaders at various levels, extended family, organized crime cartels and a host of others that would fall in the broader category of ‘society,’” Rohrer continued. “Yet, I would submit that the worst of all persecutors are those who blend the religious and the governmental through Islam and sharia law.”

Ultimately, Christians who are free to worship as they please must be the ones to come to the aid of their fellow believers, Rohrer said, whether by prayer, raising awareness or urging U.S. government intervention.

Rohrer also shared these concepts on the show:

  • Christians shouldn’t hope for persecution, but should expect it.
  • Christians can be confident because no persecution can separate believers from the love of God.
  • Christians should have the attitude and pre-determined conviction of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego.
  • Persecution is a result of living as Christ commands, refusing to bow down to the god of government or culture, and refusing to renounce the name of Jesus Christ.
  • Christians must awaken to the reality of the times regarding persecution.

Listen to these audio clips on Christian persecution from “Stand in the Gap Today:”

To listen to the entire program, click HERE.

Photo by Simeon Muller on Unsplash

Separation of Church and State— A Grave Misunderstanding

/1 Comment/in , /by

For decades, society has squabbled over the true meaning of “separation of church and state.” Does it mean no prayer in schools? No nativity scenes at government buildings? No Ten Commandments in courtrooms?

The American Pastors Network recently discussed this long-debated topic on its daily, live, one-hour radio program, “Stand in the Gap Today,” heard on more than 425 stations nationwide.

“We’ve all heard it. You can’t do that. That’s a violation of separation of church and state,” said Dave Kistler, one of the co-hosts of “Stand in the Gap Today.” “From prayer at public school functions to references to the name Jesus in military chaplains’ prayers, if some had their way, they’d end every reference to God, and especially Jesus, claiming that ALL such references are an egregious violation of the ‘separation of church and state’ principle.”

On the program, Kistler, who serves as the president of the North Carolina Pastors Network (NCPN, www.ncpastors.net), a state chapter of APN, and co-host Gary Dull, executive director of the Pennsylvania Pastors Network (PPN, www.papastors.net), welcomed attorney David New, a legal and constitutional expert and Bible scholar. New is the author of “The Separation of Church and State for Beginners,” in which he explores the principle, where it came from and from it really means.

“Separation of church and state is one of the most misunderstood and misapplied concepts in the nation,” said APN president Sam Rohrer. “This idea has been the root cause of religion, faith and God’s presence being pushed out of our culture—and these actions have had detrimental effects on society.”

New told the radio hosts that conservative Christians make three errors when it comes to the separation of church and state:

  1. That separation of church and state appears in the Constitution (that phrase does not).
  2. That only Thomas Jefferson believed in the separation of church and state. (Jefferson had obvious and overt respect, even affection, for religion, though he is often criticized for being irreligious.)
  3. To think that this separation concept is bad for religious liberty (Jefferson assured Baptists during his time that this “wall of separation” would be positive, not to keep God out of government, but rather to keep government out of the affairs of the church.)

Listen to these audio clips for more on the separation of church and state discussion from “Stand in the Gap Today:”

Photo by Sara Silva on Unsplash

Jesus Came to Save the World — Including Those in Silicon Valley

/0 Comments/in /by

Where’s the outrage over the lack of moral standards among those who drive so many technology developments in this country?

The recent revelation in the teaser chapter of Emily Chang’s forthcoming book in Vanity Fair about the drug-fueled secret sex parties in Silicon Valley should come as no surprise. It’s just another symptom of godlessness in a godless society.

What’s the outrage? Where’s the scandal? One supposes that, based on a duty to react based on feminist dogma amid claims of sexual abuse, some ink is required in the reporting. Besides, we can’t wait for the salacious details when Chang’s book, “Brotopia,” is finally released! Those publishers can really stoke the buzz, can’t they?

What is now called Silicon Valley was not always so. The godlier society in the form of early pioneers and settlers in the 18th, 19th and early 20th centuries would never have tolerated such events in a valley named after an entry on the Periodic Table. In fact, such thoughts would never have entered the minds of those early inhabitants, who settled San Jose and the surrounding area. Among them were many who helped douse the flames in 1906 San Francisco, and rebuilt the city after the earthquake and fire that year. These folks were far too busy starting over again and rebuilding a city to break down spiritually, mentally and morally.

Sober citizens like them are becoming more and more nervous about the implications of Big Data, the utter and irreversible elimination of individual privacy, and technology advances that range from CRISPR gene splicing to self-driving cars and much more. Who is behind all these advances? Just what kind of people are these? What are the true motives of those sponsoring these debauched, secret drug-fueled sex parties?

If the moral standards behind these extremely powerful technologies are reflected by these cultural behaviors, then where is the accountability? What is the basis of any justice related to these moral failures? Or, in a worst-case scenario, will Google-Facebook-Twitter simply redefine morality, screen out opposing views, and just get on with the party? They’ve already started, of course.

Most of us understand what the lusts of the eye and the flesh are. We fight those battles every day in this most over-communicated society, where children are prey, no limits are meaningful, and where “no fear” is an ancient brand of teen gear.

Where the Bible states that the fear of God is the beginning of both knowledge and wisdom, such a gut-check fear of a lost eternity is laughable among this crowd. Humanistic relativism assures them everything is just fine. After all, many of them believe, each person is his or her own god. All values are relative; there are no absolutes. It feels good, and they do it without remorse or accountability. Guilt and shame are dealt with at the therapist’s office, or sometimes just by ramping up the drug dosage, by far the preferred choice for some.

There are no standards, except that every once in a while, somebody gets hurt. Especially when a feminist standard is violated, and stories begin to spread, such as with Chang’s new book. But who in that valley of prosperity, prestige, status and money cares?

With relativism this extreme, what will be made by these folks of the claims of the Lord Jesus Christ? Imagine standing in a small clutch of people at a cocktail party in Silicon Valley. During small talk, you mention Jesus Christ by name. Here is what happens. Everyone in that small group will be gone within 30 seconds or so. Poof! Vanished!

The reason is that these people have been scandalized. It’s not the drugs, or sex or maniacal power motives that scandalize. It’s not talk of spiritual things featuring nameless, amorphous, ethereal and otherwise undefined higher powers of the unseen realm that bothers people. No, it is the mere mention of Jesus Christ, the specific God, that generates an internal shock, a quick piercing stab of conscience, shame and embarrassment within the chest or gut.

That pang is the Scandal of the Specific God. In this crowd, any other god will do as long as it is not Him.

It is ironic to think those easily scandalized by the mere notion of the Specific God hold the keys to a good part of the future of people on Earth in their hands. They set the objectives of their software and systems. They program artificial intelligence, triggering warnings by some tech futurists that these robots and devices are cats just waiting to be let out of the bag, and that people will be put in danger or harmed by them.

This kind of power, advanced technologies fueled by mountains of investment capital, is a confluence that extends far beyond governments. It is already more powerful than most nations, including the U.S., because altogether systems from cellphones to internet to satellite and more actively reach and are used by most people in the civilized world. This kind of power defines the pride of life, warned against in 1 John 2:16. It will pass away because it is not of the Father but of the world.

Jesus Christ, God revealed in the flesh, was promised in the Scriptures from Genesis through Malachi in the Old Testament. With hundreds of prophecies pointing to Him, fulfilled by His coming, the fullness of the godhead bodily and His resurrection is acknowledged even by scholars.

With confirmation in history over and over based on archeological finds, and increasingly so, Jesus Christ is the Only Specific God of history, unique in all the universe — and as real as the nose on your face.

A person may believe whatever that person wants to believe. But belief alone does not equal truth. In the case of our Specific God, Truth has a first name, and that name is Jesus, the Lord and Christ of both believers and unbelievers. For He came not to condemn the world, but to save it, including all those in Silicon Valley. In all the universe, there is none like Him.

by Sam Rohrer
Originally published on the Lifezette website HERE.

American Pastors Network 2018 Challenge: Be Unwavering in Preaching Whole Counsel of God

/0 Comments/in , /by

For now, the 1954 Johnson Amendment is still law, with a repeal of the measure not included in the most recent tax reform bill. But that should not stop pastors from preaching the whole counsel of God or addressing the most pressing societal topics.

“There is perhaps no more crucial time than the present for pastors to preach fervently on the most crucial issues of the day,” says APN President Sam Rohrer. “Many pastors may not choose to address these tough topics for a variety of reasons—fear of the Johnson Amendment, concerns about creating an uncomfortable environment, even resistance from donors or ministry leaders—but God implores those He has called to ministry to inform His people of every matter that may affect their daily lives and their walks with God. That includes the subjects that are perhaps difficult, unsettling or controversial.

“In 2018,” Rohrer continued, “the American Pastors Network is challenging all pastors not to hold back when it comes to the subject matter God is calling them to address from the pulpit. The people in the pews are looking for guidance from their pastors, and in this dark world, they desperately need the light of Scripture and to know what God’s Word says about ALL things.”

Pastors who want to commit to sound, truth-filled preaching in 2018 can sign onto APN’s “We Will Stand” initiative, which invites America’s pastors to intentionally band together and faithfully stand for biblical truth in the public square, and let their congregations and communities know they, too, can be involved.

Pastors who sign the “We Will Stand—Preach, Pray, Encourage, Engage” pledge will commit to the following:

  • I WILL PREACH PASSIONATELY the whole counsel of God, with a biblical worldview that communicates the priority of the Gospel to a fallen, broken humanity. It means exhorting the saints to apply biblical principles to their own lives, the lives of their family, and the culture of their neighborhood, state, and country.
  • I WILL PRAY FERVENTLY with faith, obedience, discipline, fasting.
  • I WILL ENCOURAGE CONGREGATIONS to be salt and light by engaging the culture with truth, practicing good citizenship and voting informed by sound information and biblical principles.
  • I WILL ENGAGE AS A MINISTER TOGETHER with civic leaders through prayer, encouragement and education on critical issues.

For more about “We Will Stand,” click here.

Give the Greatest Gift this Christmas!

/0 Comments/in , /by

Perhaps the greatest gift born again Christians can give at Christmas is to share the same Good News the shepherds did so many centuries ago.

But few Christians are sharing the Gospel, according to a new survey from the American Culture & Faith Institute (ACFI), and it may be having a negative impact on the number of born again believers as a whole—a trend that is concerning to the American Pastors Network.

The research uncovered two alarming facts. First, just one out of every five adults (21 percent) “strongly affirms a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs with people who hold different beliefs than they do.” And second, the proportion of adults who meet the born again criterion has been on a downward trajectory since 2010.

“At a time when Christians should be sharing the Gospel more than ever before, this study is not only discouraging, but the findings also have grave consequences for our culture,” said APN President Sam Rohrer. “Indeed, this is also distressing information for the church, and pastors must take up the charge to reverse these trends in our society by committing to preach the whole counsel of God and remain entrenched in the Word.

“If we believe that Christ can transform lives, bring peace in a storm, replace hate with love, and even reconcile the relationship with our enemies, shouldn’t we now more than ever share this Good News?” Rohrer asked. “If we don’t, no one else will.”

ACFI also reported that for the 15-year period from 1991 through 2005, an average of 40 percent of the adult population qualified as born again. That average rose slightly, to 44 percent, during the five years from 2006 to 2010. Since that time, however, the mean has plummeted to just 36 percent, with 2017 producing the lowest proportion of born again adults since well-known social science researcher George Barna began tracking the trends in 1991. The 2017 average indicates that just 31 percent of adults are born again, he wrote.

“This research also tells us that the outlook is not positive for the numbers of born again Christians to grow,” Rohrer added. “Older Americans are more likely to be born again, with the younger population consisting of much smaller numbers of born again Christians. Likewise, these millennial- and Generation X-aged parents will be raising children who will know less and less about confessing their sins to Jesus, asking Christ for forgiveness and looking forward to eternity with the Savior.”

Rohrer added that one way born again Christians can help spread the Gospel this Christmas season is to simply invite another person to a Christmas church service. A 2015 LifeWay Research survey found that six out of 10 Americans typically attend church at Christmastime. Among those who don’t attend at Christmas, a majority (57 percent) say they would likely attend—if someone they knew invited them.

For the research, Barna developed and continues to use a measure for “born again” that evaluates if a person has confessed their personal sin, asked Jesus Christ to save them, and believes they will live eternally in Heaven only because of His grace toward them. Read the full ACFI study here.

A National Dilemma: From Prestige to the Basements of Banishment

/0 Comments/in /by

The headline for this past year could be “Guilty”—whether declared by court or by accusation. The worlds of government, business, media, entertainment and even the pulpit are not immune from the current casting of societal leaders from the pinnacles of prestige to the basements of banishment. This firestorm produces gusts of justice against those who are guilty, but also destructive winds of injustice for those falsely accused for personal gain. So, what do the guilty do? What do the innocent do? What does society do in response?

From where did this sudden societal outrage come? What is the motivation to expose certain unacceptable behaviors? What is considered acceptable behavior in our society today, and what will “proper behavior” be in years to come? Who decides?

We would like to believe that our nation is experiencing a genuine return to decency; but that assumption is false because the acknowledgement of God is nowhere in the public debate. His moral standards of good and evil found in the Bible are conspicuously absent from the national outrage.

There are two major competing supernatural forces that must be understood through spiritual insight found in the pages of Scripture. The primary force at work is God’s judgment on individuals, as well as on our nation at large. We are witnessing the truth of the biblical principles that “no sin is hidden that will not be made known” and “you will reap what you sow.”

God is calling attention to our sins as individuals and as a nation. Are we listening? This raging fire of accusation, mistrust and skepticism is consuming the soul of our society, which was built on trust, duty and integrity. If we humbly respond with repentance, it can be a cleansing fire of healing and restoration. However, if we ignore God’s warnings, the fire will destroy.

The competing force at work is the devil himself, who attacks all that is good. Aided by hypocritical enemies of truth and fanned by the reach of modern communications, the devil’s fire encourages denial or self-defense rather than repentance.

How does God want us to individually respond to the scandals all around us? Each of us must realize that we are guilty of ‘scandal’ in God’s eyes because we are sinners. How can we choose to be free from the bondage that sin holds on us? We must acknowledge that because God is our Creator and Judge, only He can define what is holy or evil. We need to realize that our own sin prevents us from entering into His presence. We need Jesus Christ to mediate for us through the ransom that He paid when He took the punishment for our sin on the cross. After our repentance of sin and our acceptance of Christ’s gift of salvation for us, God will transform our life from scandalous to sanctified.

Our other choice is to reject God by defying His right to determine what is right and wrong. If instead, we choose our own “god”—our self, government or some other ideology, then there is no hope of healing or transformation in our life.

How does God want us as a nation to respond to the sin that pervades every corner of society? We must reinstate Him as the Judge of all mankind. His laws must dictate what is right and wrong—rather than man-made rulings. God’s moral code—the Ten Commandments—should be the foundation of our national statutes. His sacred value of life must replace the humanistic value of life based on personal inconvenience of pregnancy, disabilities or old age.

We must again respect the honor that God gives to human sexuality. We must accept who He has made us to be—male or female. We must enjoy the pleasures of a sexual relationship within the bounds of marriage that God has established.

Our dependence on Him must be acknowledged through prayer in public as well as in private.

The swirling chaos of the cultural tempest should be no wonder. Many think that man has no purpose, has evolved with no soul and is answerable to no higher authority than one’s own mind. Without a God-given purpose, many pursue their own lusts and fleeting gratifications. Believing they are their own god, they believe they are the sole determiner of their actions. All of life becomes relative to their personal whims. Our lives are transformed when we understand that we not only answer to God, but we are put on Earth to honor Him in what we say and do!

We as a nation can no longer look to government or education to fix America’s destiny. We cannot depend on prosperity, economic growth or the ever-elusive goals of success to satisfy our needs. Even religion does not hold the key to transformation.

Only the mirror of God’s Word can reveal who we really are. Only the Bible reveals the attributes of the One True God, who both shows us our sin and offers forgiveness for it. Only in His Holy Scriptures do we find His promise of redemption, and of a transformed life!

America can only be transformed by conforming to God’s standard of right and wrong. Our cultural values must reflect His value of life and marriage. We must seek His guidance to restore true justice to the land. Because our nation is comprised of individuals working together, the transformation must start in our own hearts.

As we surrender our personal lives to God and allow Him to transform us, our nation can also be transformed. The clock is ticking; let us not waste another minute in turning back to Him!

This article was originally published by the Christian Post HERE.

Photo by Anthony Rao on Unsplash

Has Political Correctness Silenced Us?

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Greek poet Euripides was known to say that “Silence is true wisdom’s best reply.”

But when it comes to discussing political views in this sometimes-tempestuous society, many are taking the stance that silence—especially in difficult conversations about politics, religion and other controversial topics—is preferred and safer.

As evidence, the American Pastors Network, the largest national network dedicated to equipping pastors to be a voice for truth in the public square, is pointing to a new Cato Institute study that found 71 percent of Americans say political correctness has silenced some of the discussions society must have, and 58 percent have political views they are afraid to share.

APN President Sam Rohrer says these findings are telling in regards to how Americans interact with each other, the cultural climate and the role of the church in these important conversations.

“The most pressing topics in our society are not being discussed because a culture has been created that silences our voices,” Rohrer said. “This can be due to a variety of reasons, including fear, isolation or ridicule. These are the topics, however, Americans should be discussing, and especially Christians as they hopefully bring the truth of God’s Word to our everyday conversations. Furthermore, how does this translate to the Church? We pray pastors are not silencing themselves as well, but we know that many choose not to address from the pulpit the crucial matters in our culture for whatever reason.

“One of the missional goals of the American Pastors Network is to encourage biblically faithful clergy to take seriously Jesus’ command to be the ‘salt and light’ to the culture, encourage informed Christian thinking about contemporary social issues, examine public policy issues without politicizing their pulpits and engage their congregations in taking part in the political process on a non-partisan basis,” Rohrer added. “We certainly can’t act as salt and light by hiding the light of God’s truth under a bushel, which is exactly what we resort to when we keep silent in an increasingly PC culture.”

The Cato 2017 Free Speech and Tolerance Survey, which polled 2,300 U.S. adults, also found that political party somewhat dictated how people felt about silencing their conversations. For example, a slim majority (53 percent) of Democrats do not feel the need to self-censor. Conversely, strong majorities of Republicans (73 percent) and independents (58 percent) say they keep some political beliefs to themselves.

Cato also reported, “A solid majority (59 percent) of Americans think people should be allowed to express unpopular opinions in public, even those deeply offensive to others. On the other hand, 40 percent think government should prevent hate speech.”

Despite this, the survey also found Americans willing to censor, regulate, or punish a wide variety of speech and expression they personally find offensive:

  • 51 percent of staunch liberals say it’s “morally acceptable” to punch Nazis.
  • 53 percent of Republicans favor stripping U.S. citizenship from people who burn the American flag.
  • 51 percent of Democrats support a law that requires Americans use transgender people’s preferred gender pronouns.
  • 65 percent of Republicans say NFL players should be fired if they refuse to stand for the anthem.
  • 58 percent of Democrats say employers should punish employees for offensive Facebook posts.
  • 47 percent of Republicans favor bans on building new mosques.
  • 59 percent of liberals say it’s hate speech to say transgender people have a mental disorder; only 17 percent of conservatives agree.
  • 39 percent of conservatives believe it’s hate speech to say the police are racist; only 17 percent of liberals agree.
  • 80 percent of liberals say it’s hateful or offensive to say illegal immigrants should be deported; only 36 percent of conservatives agree.
  • 87 percent of liberals say it’s hateful or offensive to say women shouldn’t fight in military combat roles, while 47 percent of conservatives agree.
  • 90 percent of liberals say it’s hateful or offensive to say homosexuality is a sin, while 47 percent of conservatives agree.

“These findings, especially the chasms between liberals and conservatives when it comes to moral and biblical issues such as a homosexuality, immigration, religion and gender, are especially important for church leaders,” Rohrer added. “While every pastor must first and foremost preach the whole counsel of God and reveal the Bible’s truth without waver, it is helpful to know where the people in the pews stand and the conversations they are having—or not having—regarding these important matters.”