Question: "What is a Christian worldview?" Answer: A “worldview” refers to a comprehensive conception of the world from a specific standpoint. A “Christian worldview,” then, is a comprehensive conception of the world from a Christian standpoint. An individual’s worldview is his “big picture,” a harmony of all his beliefs about the world. It is his way of understanding reality. One’s worldview is the basis for making daily decisions and is therefore extremely important. An apple sitting on a table is seen by several people. A botanist looking at the apple classifies it. An artist sees a still-life and draws it. A grocer sees an asset and inventories it. A child sees lunch and eats it. How we look at any situation is influenced by how we look at the world at large. Every worldview, Christian and non-Christian, deals with at least these three uestions: 1) Where did we come from? (and why are we here?) 2) What is wrong with the world? 3) How can we fix it? A prevalent worldview today is naturalism, which answers the three questions like this: 1) We are the product of random acts of nature with no real purpose. 2) We do not respect nature as we should. 3) We can save the world through ecology and conservation. nat uralistic worldview generates many related philosophies such as moral relativism, existential ism, pragmatism, and ut o pianism. A Christian worldview, on the other hand, answers the three questions biblically: 1) We are God’s creation, designed to govern the world and fellowship with Him (Genesis 1:27-28; 2:15). 2) We sinned against God and subjected the whole world to a curse (Genesis 3). 3) God Himself has redeemed the world through the sacrifice of His Son, Jesus Ch rist (Genesis 3:15; Luke 19:10), and will one day restore creation to its former perfect state (Isaiah 65:17-25). A Christian worldview leads us to believe in moral absolutes, miracles, human ignity, and the possibility of redemption. It is important to remember that a worldview is comprehensive. It affects every area of life, from money to morality, from politics to art. True Christianity is more than a set of ideas to use at church. Christianity as taught in the Bible is itself a worldview. The Bible never distinguishes between a “religious” and a “secular” life; the Christian life is the only life there is. esus proclaimed Himself “the way, the truth, and the life” (John 14:6) and, in doing so, became our worldview. Recommended Resource: Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview by William Lane Craig & J.P. Moreland. What's new on GotQuestions.org? What are the five solas? What is a bishop, biblically speaking? Who are the "least of these" in the Bible? What is a Christian life coach, and is the concept biblical? Does the Bible say that abandonment is a valid reason for divorce and remarriage? What does it mean to be an ambassador for Christ? What does it mean that we will judge angels? Why is corporate worship important? What is a benediction in the Bible? Is there a heavenly language? What language will we speak in heaven?

TaxPayers' Alliance Bulletin - 03 February 2012 - TaxPayers' Alliance on BBC Question Time - A message from our Development Director: Now accepting credit cards! - Average family pays £656,000 in tax over their lifetime - Grassroots - Best of the Blogs TaxPayers' Alliance on Question Time Last night our Campaign Director Emma Boon gave a strong performance on BBC One's Question Time. It’s the first time one of our team has been on the BBC’s flagship political discussion show and we’re immensely proud of her. Discussions centred on honours for bankers, international aid and NHS reform, with Emma receiving the loudest applause of the evening. Throughout the programme Emma and the TaxPayers’ Alliance were top trending topics on Twitter worldwide. During the course of the evening it became clear International Development Minister Alan Duncan MP wasn’t particularly happy about our forthright criticism of the increases in the aid budget. The audience clearly backed Emma’s opposition to giving development money to nations which can afford their own space programme. If you missed the show you can still watch it on iPlayer. A message from our Development Director: Now accepting credit cards! Thank you to all of those who have contributed to our 2012 Fighting Fund Appeal. To make it easier to donate to the TPA, we can now accept donations via credit and debit card over the phone.* Not only will it make it easier to make one-off donations, but you might also consider making a regular monthly, quarterly or annual donation. We couldn’t do any of our important work without your help. All of our policy victories are down to the generosity of our 65,000 supporters and we hope you can support us in 2012, too. Simply call me on 020 7340 6021 during normal office hours, I can take your card details and you can make an instant donation over the phone. All the best, Sara Rainwater Development Director *We can accept MasterCard, Visa, Maestro, Visa Electron, but not American Express. Average family pays £656,000 in tax over their lifetime At the start of the week we revealed the incredible lifetime tax bill faced by British households. The average family pays £656,000 in direct and indirect taxes over their working lifetimes and in retirement. Our research broke down the tax bill for families of different incomes, revealing that the poorest fifth pay £235,000 over their lifetime while the richest fifth pay £1.3 million. Click here to read the research, including a full tax breakdown. Households in the UK now pay an incredible amount in tax over a lifetime, a hefty slice of their income. VAT not only hits the poorest households hardest, but is also the second most burdensome tax on the average family. The Chancellor's decision to increase the rate to 20 per cent has led to price increases at a time when taxpayers can least afford it. A simpler, fairer tax system would decrease our lifetime tax bill and leave families with greater discretion over how they spend their money. Grassroots A number of local authorities have announced council tax increases in the coming year. These Town Hall Tyrants are rejecting a Government grant in favour of squeezing more cash out of hard-pressed taxpayers. In Yorkshire in particular, councils are explicitly choosing tax rises instead of savings as they plan the year’s budget. One of the councils which has already announced that it is planning to go ahead with a council tax rise is Richmondshire. We will be holding an action day in Richmond at the end of February to collect signatures against the rise. We hope you can join us, you can contact National Grassroots Coordinator Andrew Allison for more details. Watch our Campaign Manager Robert Oxley criticising councils for wanting to hike council tax here. Best of the Blogs Economics 101: Stephen Hester was right to turn down his bonus -TPA Director Matthew Sinclair's reaction to the RBS bonus saga. Better Government: Windsor & Maidenhead cut council tax for third year in a row - While a number of local authorities propose raising council tax, the chiefs at Windsor & Maidenhead have announced they are cutting it for the third year in a row. Grassroots: Cornish councillors named and shamed - The saga of councillors not paying their council tax rolls on in Cornwall, as those taken to court are finally named. 2020 Tax Commission: Lower and simpler taxes are part of combating tax evasion - TPA Director Matthew Sinclair on BBC Radio 4's World Tonight discussing tax evasion. Better Government: Wandsworth leading on transparency - Chris Daniel writes about the latest initiative by Wandsworth Council - which has the lowest council tax in the country - to publish its performance in comparison to other councils.

Daily Crux reader,

Here is your Crux AM update:

This morning's "fantastic" jobs report is hiding some shocking news
"This is the largest absolute jump on record..."

Top analyst Rosenberg: This could be the best way to profit from gold now
"The past decade of consistent gains doesn't mean investors should be stashing all their wealth in gold coins..."

DHS to use full body x-ray scanners on fans at this weekend's Super Bowl
"They have failed to inform the public that scanners, linked with cancer risks by numerous prestigious health bodies, will be in use..."

Three of last year's most-hated assets are now rocketing higher
"Look for this trend to continue..."

Incredible post: A simple but powerful way to fight back against corrupt, out-of-control gov't
"Imagine if 90% of the population refused to comply..."

New report reveals Federal Reserve president owns millions in gold and platinum
"It's a damn joke... It's like going to a doctor who has taken out an insurance policy that pays off on your death..."

Regards,

Justin Brill
Managing Editor, The Daily Crux
www.thedailycrux.com

Fool Me Twice

By CAROLINE B. GLICK

Jewish World Review Feb 3, 2012 / 10 Shevat, 5772

The useful idiot who pre-election promised American Jewish leaders that Obama was Israel's best friend and only hope, was back in the Holy Land shilling. This time, though, he was pushing more territorial compromises in the name of peace.

A reminder of the damage Former US Congressman Robert Wexler has done --- and a warning of what he intends to do

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Former US Congressman Robert Wexler is a man worth listening to. Wexler served as then-senator Barack Obama's chief booster in the American Jewish community during the 2008 presidential campaign. He appeared everywhere and said anything to convince the American Jewish community that the same man who sat in the church pews listening to Rev. Jeremiah Wright's anti-Semitic vitriol for two decades, and listed among his closest friends and associates a whole host of Israel haters as well as former terrorists, was the greatest friend Israel could ever have.

Once Obama was elected, Wexler continued to serve as his Jewish shill. Wexler traveled to Israel multiple times in the early months of Obama's presidency to pressure Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to submit to Obama's demand and embrace the cause of Palestinian statehood. After Netanyahu finally announced his support for Palestinian statehood at his speech at Bar Ilan University outside Tel Aviv in September 2009, Wexler returned with a new demand - that Netanyahu enact a moratorium on Jewish property rights in Judea and Samaria.

In an interview with the Jerusalem Post at the time, Wexler promised that Israel would be richly rewarded if it took the unprecedented step of denying Jews the right to their property in Judea and Samaria simply because they were Jewish. Even if the moratorium were temporary, Obama would view the discriminatory measure as proof of Israel's good intentions. Moreover, he would expect the Palestinians and the wider Arab world to respond to Israel's move by taking steps to normalize their relations with Israel.

For instance, Wexler claimed that Obama had demanded that the Arabs respond to an Israeli moratorium on Jewish property rights by among other things opening trade offices and direct economic ties; conducting cultural and economic exchanges and permitting Israeli airplanes to overfly their territory.

And in the event that the Arabs refused to rise to the occasion, Wexler proclaimed, "You can rightly say that all bets are off."

Wexler continued, "I want to call their bluff. I want to see, if Israel makes substantial movement toward a credible peace process, whether they are willing to do it. And if they are not, better that we should find out five or six months into the process, before Israel is actually asked to compromise any significant position."

In the event, Netanyahu bowed to Obama's demand and enacted a temporary ban on the exercise of Jewish property rights in Judea and Samaria. And in the aftermath of his stunning move, the Arab world did nothing.

Amazingly, far from calling their bluff, Obama doubled down on his pressure on Israel. Among other things, since squeezing the first temporary ban on Jewish property rights out of Netanyahu, Obama has demanded that the moratorium be made permanent and extended to Jerusalem.

As for his vision of the "peace process," Obama has demanded that Israel accept the 1949 armistice lines as the basis for future negotiations. He has used the US veto at the UN Security Council as a means of pressuring Israel to make further unreciprocated concessions to the Palestinians. And the pro-Israel US president has demanded no similar concessions from the Palestinians.

This week Wexler, now the head of the far-left S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace was back in town. Speaking at the Herzliya Conference, Wexler said that Israel should consider extending the ban on Jewish property rights to within the 1949 armistice lines. Wexler based his claim on then prime minister Ehud Olmert's 2008 peace offer to Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas.

Olmert's offer, which Abbas rejected, involved a "land swap," in which in the framework of a comprehensive peace deal, Israel would give the Palestinians land from within its 1949 boundaries in exchange for land in Judea and Samaria that Israel would permanently retain. According to media reports, Olmert offered Abbas 4.5 percent of Israeli territory in exchange for a similar amount of land in Judea and Samaria.

While Wexler appeared at the Herzliya Conference as the president of a non-partisan non-profit organization, his continued intimate relationship with Obama is well known. Last fall Commentary's Omri Ceren documented that Zvika Krieger, Wexler's vice president at the Daniel Abraham Center authored documents for Obama's reelection campaign. Among other things, those documents cited articles authored by Krieger and Wexler in which they championed Obama's record on Israel from their nonpartisan perch at the Daniel Abraham Center.

Given Wexler's close ties to Obama, it is reasonable to assume that his suggestion that Israel cease exerting its national sovereignty over its sovereign territory in the interests of the peace process is not simply his personal view.

There is much to criticize about Wexler's suggestion. But more important than its arrogant, insulting absurdity, and more disconcerting than Wexler's own hypocrisy, is what his suggestion tells us about the dangers inherent in Netanyahu's current negotiations with the Palestinians. To understand the connection we need to recall the nature of Olmert's offer to Abbas.

Olmert's negotiations with Abbas were based upon the proposition - repeated ad nauseum to the Israeli public -- that "nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to." The idea was clear. True, on the one hand, the prime minister was conducting negotiations far from the spotlight, and refusing to tell the public what was on offer. But on the other hand, we could rest assured that that nothing he offered would have any significance whatsoever unless the Palestinians agreed to a final peace deal with Israel. If they rejected peace, then everything Olmert said would become null and void, and tossed down the memory hole.

In accordance with this basic proposition, when Abbas rejected Olmert's offer, and made no counteroffer, it was naturally assumed that Olmert's proposal was rendered null and void. Yet four years later, here is Wexler, Obama's surrogate, advocating a policy of unilateral abrogation of Israeli sovereignty over 4.5percent of its national territory in order to enable the eventual implementation of an offer that was predicated on the notion that "nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to."

And this brings us to the current negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. For the past month, under the aegis of the Middle East Quartet, Netanyahu's representative Attorney Yitzhak Molcho has been conducting negotiations with Abbas's representatives in Amman, Jordan. Last week Molcho reportedly outlined the government's general positions on lands it is willing to cede to the Palestinians.

Without presenting any maps, Molcho reportedly said that a permanent agreement would involve most of the Israelis living in Judea and Samaria remaining in Israeli territory. The media interpreted this to mean that like Olmert, Netanyahu expects for Israel to retain perpetual control over large blocks of Israeli communities that take up less than ten percent of the overall landmass in Judea and Samaria.

For his part, Netanyahu this week reiterated his position that Israel must maintain a long-term military presence in the Jordan Valley. This has been interpreted to mean that Netanyahu is willing to cede sovereign rights to the area to the Palestinians.

Taken together, what Molcho's statement and Netanyahu's statement indicate is that at a minimum, in exchange for peace, the Netanyahu government is willing to expel some portion of the 350,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria from their homes and to transfer sovereignty over a significant portion of the territory to a Palestinian state.

From the vagueness of what has been reported, it is apparent that to date, Netanyahu has been far less specific about the scope of the territorial concessions he is willing to undertake than his predecessor was. But then again, Olmert made his offer after conducting negotiations with Abbas for over a year. Netanyahu only entered these talks a month ago.

And while no one in or out of government believes that these negotiations have any chance of leading to a peace deal, the fact is that Netanyahu is feverishly working to ensure that the talks continue. Netanyahu spent a good part of his day on Wednesday speaking on the phone to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and meeting with Quartet envoy Tony Blair and UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon begging the foreign leaders to convince the Palestinians not to abandon the negotiations.

As he put it in his joint press conference with Ban, "You cannot complete the peace process unless you begin it. If you begin it, you have to be consistent and stick to it."

For his part, Abbas is doing everything in his power to make clear that he does not wish to negotiate, and that even if negotiations continue, that he will never cut a deal with Israel. To underscore his bad faith, next week Abbas will travel to Egypt to meet with Hamas terror chief Khaled Mashaal. The two are set to discuss the means of implementing the unity government deal they signed last May. Netanyahu is obviously under great pressure to continue on with these talks. A day doesn't go by without some US official or European leader talking about the need for talks, or a leftist politician or political activist at home blaming Netanyahu for the absence of peace. But none of this pressure can justify the damage that is done to Israel's position by continuing to engage in these negotiations.

As Netanyahu's own experience with Obama (and Wexler) shows, concessions never bring a respite from the US leader's pressure. They only form the baseline for demands for further concessions.

Beyond the narrow confines of Obama's personal hostility towards Israel, Netanyahu's current engagement in negotiations with the Palestinians is devastating to Israel's position in two ways. First, it makes it impossible for Israel to extricate itself from the lie of PLO moderation and to start telling the truth about its Palestinian "partner."

Quite simply, as Abbas's continued courtship of Hamas and his open embrace and glorification of mass murderers such as the murderers of the Fogel family make clear, the PLO has returned to its roots as a terrorist organization. It is no longer credible to claim that the PLO has abandoned terror in favor of peace.

By engaging in peace talks with the PLO, Netanyahu renders it impossible to make this critical claim. Consequently, he damns Israel to a situation in which we continue to empower and politically legitimize a terrorist organization committed to our destruction.

The second way continued negotiations devastates Israel's position is by eroding our ability to claim our rights to Judea and Samaria and so extricate ourselves from this fake peace process with terrorists. As Wexler made clear, from the international community's perspective, everything that Israel offers at the negotiating table is catalogued. Regardless of Palestinian bad faith, irrespective of actual prospects for peace, every theoretical Israeli concession becomes the new baseline for further negotiations.

American "friends" like Wexler and Obama play Israel for a fool again and again.

In truth, we should thank Wexler for coming here this week and reminding us of his bad faith, and the bad faith of the President he serves. But it is up to Netanyahu to draw the appropriate lessons.

How Huhne Was Hunted How the Story Rolled Out... When newly appointed Minister Chris Huhne walked out on his family and went to the gym, having just told his wife he was leaving her for another person, Guido doubts he realised the untold consequences of his actions that day in 2010. It was the Sunday Times that first reported rumours "circulating" Westminster about Huhne's speeding points in early May 2011. The mystery person who allegedly took the points and was briefing out the story was revealed by Guido to be none other than Vicky Pryce in the following days. The Huhnt was on! As the story gained traction we exclusively revealed where the speed camera in question was, and where Huhne's then wife was meant to be that fateful day. Our research shredded Huhne's initial statements too. Guido's favourite revelationwas that his old number plate was: H11HNE. As the affair dragged on, Guido was keen to keep the pressure up, as were the Mail on Sunday who recreated the scenario. And it wasn't just digging, our #HuhneTunes hashtag turned Huhne into a laughing stock. Guido's favourite moment of the whole affair was putting a microphone and camera in the deluded former Secretary of State's face. He denied knowing anything about the situation.That denial looks even more absurd today... It was never really about the speeding points, it was the conspiracy to cover-up that was going to do for him. No amount of spin from Huhne's baby-faced SpAd would save him from charges in the end. So long Chris, nice try... Week's Most Read Stories Some 109,284 visitors made 315,564 visits to view 512,373 pages. The top stories in order of popularity were: + + + HUHNE WILL BE CHARGED + + + Another Young Blairite Jumps Ship Not a Single Billion More Gordon Brown Doesn’t Have A Clue Guy News Champagne Special: Cheers Chris Zero GDP Growth Has Zero To Do With €urozone + + + Fred Shredded + + + You’re either in front of Guido, or you are behind…