The new service, from the Open Episcopal Church "host in the post"...... including atheists and even satanists-Apostasy

CHRISTIAN BIBLE STUDIES

AGAINST APOSTASY

Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.

By Martino Gerber and Giuliano Lattes

**********************************

The new service, from the Open Episcopal Church "host in the post"...... including atheists and even satanists

In recent years the communion wafer has been made available in a variety of forms - including patterned, wholemeal, crumb-proof and gluten-free - to satisfy the demands of modern life. Soon, altar bread will become even more convenient and accessible with the advent of the "host in the post".

The new service, from the Open Episcopal Church, is aimed at people who either cannot attend Eucharist, through age or ill-health, or those who have drifted away from church, (including atheists and even satanists).

Jonathan Blake, the Open Episcopal Church bishop,he said the organisation was taking "care and concern" over appropriate packaging for the wafer, which is no more than a millimetre thick, to ensure it remained intact on arrival, before adding that anyone - including atheists and even satanists - could avail themselves of the service. "Jesus did not make these distinctions. He gave himself to anyone and everyone. It makes no difference, the body of Christ is redeeming."

06-09 2009

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/09/worship-communion-wafers-post



***********************************************************************************

Against Apostasy

Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.





1 Corinthians 11 ; 23-32

11,23 For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread:

24 And when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me.

25 After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.

26 For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord’s death till he come.

27 Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.

28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.

29 For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body.

30 For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.

31 For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged.

32 But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world.



http://www.carm.org/kjv/1Cor/1cor_11.htm

1 Corinthians 5 ; 9-13

5,9 I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators:

10 Yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world.

11 But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat.

12 For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within?

13 But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person.



http://www.carm.org/kjv/1Cor/1cor_5.htm

2 Corinthians 6 ; 14-18

6,9 As unknown, and yet well known; as dying, and, behold, we live; as chastened, and not killed;

10 As sorrowful, yet alway rejoicing; as poor, yet making many rich; as having nothing, and yet possessing all things.

11 O ye Corinthians, our mouth is open unto you, our heart is enlarged.

12 Ye are not straitened in us, but ye are straitened in your own bowels.

13 Now for a recompence in the same, (I speak as unto my children,) be ye also enlarged.

14 Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?

15 And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that believeth with an infidel?

16 And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

17 Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,

18 And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.


http://www.carm.org/kjv/2Cor/2cor_6.htm



http://groups.google.com/group/christianbiblestudies?hl=it

Praise the Lord and post the Host: church's plan to woo worshippe

Praise the Lord and post the Host: church's plan to woo worshippe
Riazat Butt, Religious affairs correspondent
The Guardian, Tuesday 9 June 2009

Article history
In recent years the communion wafer has been made available in a variety of forms - including patterned, wholemeal, crumb-proof and gluten-free - to satisfy the demands of modern life. Soon, altar bread will become even more convenient and accessible with the advent of the "host in the post".

The new service, from the Open Episcopal Church, is aimed at people who either cannot attend Eucharist, through age or ill-health, or those who have drifted away from church.

Although the pre-consecrated wafer is free, there will be a charge for postage and packing. Receiving one host costs £2; receiving 500 costs £10.

Jonathan Blake, the Open Episcopal Church bishop who officiated at Jade Goody's wedding this year, said the initiative was also designed to reverse the way the church presented itself to people.

"The sense they have to go to places to worship is something their parents did. The churches we work with have got respect for the fact that we're taking the church to places it hasn't been before.

"It is a mistake to locate a church as those who gather in a building. There is a large population who have haemorrhaged away from church but regard themselves as committed Christians."

He said the organisation was taking "care and concern" over appropriate packaging for the wafer, which is no more than a millimetre thick, to ensure it remained intact on arrival, before adding that anyone - including atheists and even satanists - could avail themselves of the service. "Jesus did not make these distinctions. He gave himself to anyone and everyone. It makes no difference, the body of Christ is redeeming."

News of Blake's latest innovation did not elicit a response from the Church of England, which, as a rule, does not comment on the internal affairs of other churches.

One of his previous projects was a street mass using language more commonly associated with text messages: "JC said: 'I am the bread of life. Whoever eats this bread will live 4ever.'"



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/jun/09/worship-communion-wafers-post

Boy chosen by Dalai Lama turns back on Buddhist ord

Boy chosen by Dalai Lama turns back on Buddhist ord
Dale Fuchs in Madrid
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 31 May 2009 23.11 BST


As a toddler, he was put on a throne and worshipped by monks who treated him like a god. But the boy chosen by the Dalai Lama as a reincarnation of a spiritual leader has caused consternation – and some embarrassment – for Tibetan Buddhists by turning his back on the order that had such high hopes for him.

Instead of leading a monastic life, Osel Hita Torres now sports baggy trousers and long hair, and is more likely to quote Jimi Hendrix than Buddha.

Yesterday he bemoaned the misery of a youth deprived of television, football and girls. Movies were also forbidden – except for a sanctioned screening of The Golden Child starring Eddie Murphy, about a kidnapped child lama with magical powers. "I never felt like that boy," he said.

He is now studying film in Madrid and has denounced the Buddhist order that elevated him to guru status. "They took me away from my family and stuck me in a medieval situation in which I suffered a great deal," said Torres, 24, describing how he was whisked from obscurity in Granada to a monastery in southern India. "It was like living a lie," he told the Spanish newspaper El Mundo. Despite his rebelliousness, he is still known as Lama Tenzin Osel Rinpoche and revered by the Buddhist community. A prayer for his "long life" still adorns the website of the Foundation to Preserve the Mahayana Tradition, which has 130 centres around the world. The website features a biography of the renegade guru that gushes about his peaceful, meditative countenance as a baby. In Tibetan Buddhism, a lama is one of a lineage of reincarnated spiritual leaders, the most famous of which is the Dalai Lama.

According to the foundation biography, another leader suspected Torres was the reincarnation of the recently deceased Lama Yeshe when he was only five months old. In 1986, at 14 months, his parents took him to see the Dalai Lama in Dharamsala, India. The toddler was chosen out of nine other candidates and eventually "enthroned".

At six, he was allowed to socialise only with other reincarnated souls – though for a time he said he lived next to the actor Richard Gere's cabin.

By 18, he had never seen couples kiss. His first disco experience was a shock. "I was amazed to watch everyone dance. What were all those people doing, bouncing, stuck to one another, enclosed in a box full of smoke?"



http://www.guardian.co.uk/



http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/may/31/dalai-lama-osel-hita-torres

Partial Birth Abortion: Mercy or Infanticide?

Partial Birth Abortion: Mercy or Infanticide?


Abstract

Partial birth abortion is a controversial method of abortion late in a woman’s pregnancy in which the baby is aborted by a craniotomy. Two organizations are commonly affiliated with abortion: Pro-choice supports abortion saying that what is in a woman’s body is her “property”, while Pro-life believes it is murder of innocent babies. Partial birth abortion is murder of innocent children and an abomination to basic human rights and values.

Partial Birth Abortion: Mercy or Infanticide?
Thesis Statement: Partial birth abortion is murder of innocent babies and an abomination to basic human rights and values.
I. The differing sides on Intact D&X are distinctly
opposite
A. Pro-choice supports abortions
1. Done 650 times a year and only when the
mother’s life is endangered or the child is
deformed
2. Says the public is mistaken in its knowledge
of Intact Dilation and Extraction
B. Pro-life doesn’t support abortions of any kind
1. Backed by medical experts it is claimed that
80% of partial birth abortions are purely
elective
2. Believes the baby is a living human being and
deserves the rights of a human
II. There are benefits and harmful consequences to P.B.A.
A. Many abortionists claim that the benefits far out
way the consequences
1. It is safer, quicker, and easier
2. Intact D&X is less traumatic to the mother
B. There are also many harmful effects
1. Risk of uterine and breast cancer is increased
2. Rates of depression also increase
III. The issue of partial birth abortion has come into our
courtrooms
A. Congress made its first attempt to ban P.B.A in 1996
1.Brenda Shafer R.N. testified to what she saw in
abortion clinic
2. Congress passed the ban, but President Clinton
vetoed the bill
B. The second attempt was made in 1997
1. Passed Congress again
2. President Clinton vetoed the bill

Imagine being in excruciating pain from a gaping hole in the back of your neck. Then you hear a slight “whirr” before your brains are sucked out through a tiny tube. Sadly this happens to many babies each day because they are unwanted, inconvenient, or imperfect. The abortionist first delivers the baby breech style except for the head, scissors are then jammed into the head at the base of the skull, and the brains sucked out, the skull then collapses. This procedure is commonly known as partial birth abortion or Intact Dilation and Extraction (Intact D&X) (“Partial Birth Abortion”, 1996). Adolph Hitler often used pregnant women for experiments, and procedures similar to this were used to torture the soon-to-be mothers. Partial birth abortion is murder of innocent children and an abomination to basic human rights and values.

Opposing Views
The opposing sides on the partial birth abortion issue are distinctly opposite. Pro-choice, which supports abortion, says that partial birth abortion is rarely done, and only then when the mother’s life is endangered or the child is deformed. Abortion supporters also say that the baby is only a fetus, and cannot feel any pain when the abortion happens. According to Sykes (2000), people are misled into thinking that partial birth abortion happens thousands of times a year, bu
they only happen about 650 times a year. She also argues that the name “partial birth abortion”, which was given to the method in 1995, alone is misleading in that it implies that a full-term baby is being killed while it is in the process of being born. The name “late term” is also said to be confusing because it implies a third trimester abortion (Sykes, 2000). According to Sykes (2000), Intact D&X has been around for a while and says, “The procedure is not new- a 19th century medical textbook I own describes a method of abortion that involves a craniotomy, and so does a 1930 edition of Williams Obstetrics…”
Pro-life supporters argue that partial birth abortion is done up to 4,000 times a year, and is usually used in situations that aren’t life threatening. Captured in a direct quote from Dr. Martin Haskell, an abortionist, it is seen that the procedure is usually not necessary, “20% are for genetic purposes, and 80% are purely elective.” Medical experts have said that it is never necessary to kill an infant in order to the save the mother’s life once the baby is almost fully delivered (“Partial Birth Abortion”, 1996). Pro-lifers believe that the fetus is not just tissue, but a living breathing human being that can feel pain. By 20 weeks, the earliest an abortionist will do an Intact D&X, the infant has a regular schedule of sleeping, turning, sucking, and kicking, and all of his/her organs are completely formed (“Information Page on Abortion”). According to “Partial Birth Abortion” (1996), during an Intact D&X, a mother is given anesthesia so she won’t feel any pain. Medical experts have testified that infants of that age can experience pain. This drug has very little to no effect on the infant, which means that the infant, before it is killed, is in excruciating pain.


Benefits and Harmful Effects
There are benefits and harmful effects to an Intact Dilation and Extraction. The benefits of partial birth abortion according to Dr. Martin Haskell are that it is safer, quicker, and easier than other abortions, and there is a lessened risk of infection (Sykes, 2000). It is also less traumatic to the mother than say, Intact Dilation and Evacuation, where the baby is torn apart limb-by-limb. The harmful consequences are also definitely something to consider. According to “Information Page on Abortion”, the risk of uterine and breast cancer is greatly increased, as is the rate of depression among mothers.


Banning Intact D&X
In the past decade, the controversial issue of partial birth abortion has come to light and into our courtrooms. One of the reasons it is hard to make it ethically right is when an infant’s head sometimes slips out during an Intact D&X, the infant has full legal rights as a U.S. citizen. Yet the abortionist will still perform the abortion. The abortion is now dancing the fine line between abortion and infanticide (Sprang and Neerhof, 1998). The contentious event of Intact Dilation and Extraction finally reached Congress in 1996. The Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act was then presented before the House of Representatives and the Senate, Brenda Shafer, R.N. testified:
…The doctor stuck the scissors through the back of his head, and the baby’s arms jerked out in a flinch, a startle reaction, like a baby does when he thinks he might fall. The doctor opened up the scissors, stuck a high-powered suction tube into the opening and sucked the baby’s brains out. Now
the baby was completely limp. I was totally
unprepared for what I saw…(Shafer, 1996)
This testimony, and numerous others helped Congress pass the Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act in 1996. When this bill reached President Clinton for signing, he vetoed the ban on April 10, 1996. Clinton claims this was justified because it affects only hundreds and was necessary to save the mother. Again, on October 8, 1997, the ban was passed. President Clinton chose to veto the bill once more. The House then voted to override the veto, but the Senate
failed (“Partial Birth Abortion”, 1996).
Partial birth abortion’s biggest supporters and their biggest opponents are both adamant in their beliefs. Pro-life bases its beliefs on the Bible and what God has to say about abortion, whereas pro-choice bases its beliefs on what man has to say. Jeremiah 1:5a says, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you…” (New International Version). This shows that God loves the unborn child, and just like His children, will protect them. A clear statement against abortion is in Exodus 20:13, “You shall not murder.” (New International Version) I believe this applies to the child still in the womb. The difference of a couple weeks, and even just a few days separates the abortionist from a murderer, and the procedure from Infanticide. We need to take strong action against not only partial birth abortion, but also abortions of any kind by writing our representatives and senators.


References


Information Page on Abortion. Retrieved October 17, 2000 from the World Wide Web:
http://web.tusco.net/newone/abortion2.htm


Partial Birth Abortion (1996). Retrieved October 17, 2000
from the World Wide Web:
http://www.jeremiahproject.com/prophecy/partbirthabort.html


Shafer, B. P. (1996, March 21). Hearing on the Partial
Birth Abortion Ban Act (HR 1833). Retrieved October
23, 2000 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.priestsforlife.org/testimony.html


Sprang and Neerhof (1998, August 26). Rationale for
Banning Abortions Late in Pregnancy. American
Medical Association 280 744-747. Retrieved
October 19, 2000 from the World Wide Web:
http://www.partialbirthabortion.org/welcome/what_is.html


Sykes, M. (2000). ‘Late Term’ Confusion, ‘Partial Birth’
Lies. Retrieved October 23, 2000 from the World Wide
Web:http://prochoice.about.com/newissues/prochoice/library/bllatetermlies.htm

This essay is only for research purposes. If used, be sure to cite it properly!



http://www.essaydepot.com/essayme/589/index.php