Archive for the ‘religion’ Category

Liberals ‘Religion’ Is The ‘Religion’ Of Abject Hypocrisy, Cynicism And Fascism

July 30, 2014

It’s a funny thing, liberals and Jesus.

On the one hand, they loudly and shrilly denounce conservatives from talking about religion and most certainly for actually trying to make their religion part of public policy in any way, shape or form.

“How DARE you?!?!” they declare with über self-righteous indignation and moral outrage.  “The separation of church and state is the foundation of our democracy!!!”

Only that’s an outright lie, or course, as is easily proven by reading the words of our founding fathers – including our very greatest founding father who was the father of our country:

What are the foundations of America? After 45 years of public service, George Washington, our greatest patriot and the father of our country, gives his farewell address. He says, ‘We need to remember what brought us here. We need to remember what made us different from all the other nations across Europe and the rest of the world. We have to remember what our foundations are.’ It was the road map, showing us how we’d become what we were, and how to preserve it. It has long been considered the most important address ever given by any US president. President Lincoln set aside an entire day for the entire Union Army and had them read and understand it. Woodrow Wilson did the same during WWI. But we haven’t studied it in schools for over 45 years, so your lack of understanding is understandable. Washington said:

“Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.” — George Washington, Farewell Address

If you want your politics to prosper, the two things you will not separate will be religion and morality. If you want your government to work well, if you want American exceptionalism, if you want the government to do right, if you want all this, then you won’t separate religion and morality from political life. And America’s greatest patriot gave a litmus test for patriotism. He says in the very next sentence (immediately continuing from the quote above):

“In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.” — George Washington

Washington says, Anyone who would try to remove religion and morality from public life, I won’t allow them to call themselves a patriot. Because they are trying to destroy the country.

I have a lengthy volume of quotes in the article I link to above proving that “separation of church and state” was not a value our founding fathers cherished.  What modern progressive liberals wanted is most clearly seen in the near-contemporaneous events of a very different worldview that emerged in the French Revolution and ended in “the Reign of Terror” as a truly ugly and tragic spirit of atheism became a toxic, murderous cancer across France.

But what is most interesting about liberals isn’t merely their hatred of the morality of religion and their determination to suppress and exterminate religion by essentially banning it from government and from culture.

It is the amazing hypocrisy that they immediately show when they believe they can twist, pervert, distort religion to their side.

As an example, let’s consider what liberals – and I mean the liberals who are most toxic in their rants against the “Christian right” – are doing to subvert Jesus into their political ideology.

I came across on the editorial page of the überleftist Los Angeles Times a cartoon by the liberal cartoonist Jimmy Margurilis one such example:

Who Would Jesus Deport

Well, I suppose I’d like to ask Jimmy Margulies – since the opinion of Jesus is clearly so important to him – who Jesus would TAX?  Who would Jesus regulate?  Who would Jesus oppress with government bureaucracy?  Who would Jesus, for that matter, sentence to prison on Margulies’ deeply flawed understanding?  If Jesus wouldn’t deport anyone, He wouldn’t imprison anyone either, would He?  He’d just forgive them and let them go scott free to torture and rape and murder and oppress the rest of us.   That’s the Jesus the left loves: the benign Jesus who morally stood for NOTHING but “tolerance.”

Here’s another liberal telling us we should be a theocracy:

“Revised Tea Party Gospel: ‘Suffer the little children come unto me. Unless they’re undocumented kids from Central America,'” tweeted King Tuesday before adding: “Much easier to be a Christian when the little children aren’t in your back yard, isn’t it?” — Stephen King

It turns out that Christian groups – the very people Stephen King is most demonizing – are doing by far and away the MOST work to help these people who are flooding across the border.  And they rightly asked the secular humanist progressive liberal turd, “What are YOU doing to help these people???”

But here Stephen King is quoting the Bible for us, quoting the Jesus who said, “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life.  NO MAN comes to the Father except through ME.”  The same Jesus also said, “I did not come to abolish the Law, but to fulfill it.”  In fact, Jesus said, “not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished.”  And oops, Stephen, that includes the parts about homosexuality being an abomination and a detestable act and the like.  And oops, that includes abortion and the systematic murder of more babies than the total number of dead – civilian and military alike on both sides alike – of the bloodiest and most murderous war in the history of the human race.

Liberals believe in the separation of church and state.  Oh, until it suits their purpose NOT to believe in the separation of church and state.  To put it more accurately, liberals believe in the separation of church and state for Republicans and conservatives.

See, I could actually LIVE in a world where Jesus was taken seriously and obeyed.  It’s LIBERALS who would be violently revolting.  Because liberals are people who are so toxic to Jesus that they literally put Him in a jar of urine and funded it as “art.”

I ask you, liberal, to produce for me ONE Bible verse that says it is secular government – and not the church’s and not God’s people’s – role to provide welfare.  I’m just going to state it categorically until you do, that your worldview is found NOWHERE in the Bible.

When the disciples came to Jesus because there was a crowd of 5,000 men (probably a good 15,000 people) who had nothing to eat, do you know what Jesus did NOT tell them to do?  He didn’t tell them to go to King Herod or to Governor Pilate for a government welfare program to feed the poor.  He said YOU feed them.  And after a little humming and hawing the disciples finally did the right thing: they did their best to put some food together and came to Jesus and asked HIM to bless it.

In 1 Samuel chapter 8, we find that the people, in wanting to be like all the other nations with a human king and a human big government, were rejecting GOD.  If you don’t believe me, why don’t you read 1 Samuel 8:7 for yourself?  And God warns the people, saying over and over again, when you have your big government king, HE WILL TAKE… HE WILL APPOINT FOR HIMSELF… HE WILL TAKE… HE WILL TAKE… (and redistribute them to his cronies according to 1 Samuel 8:14).   HE WILL TAKE (and redistribute them to his cronies according to 1 Samuel 8:15).  HE WILL TAKE (and exploit what he takes for his political and ideological projects according to 1 Samuel 8:16).  HE WILL TAKE … and you will become HIS servants.

And God will not answer you because you made GOVERNMENT your God and your master.

And that is exactly what liberals have done and exactly what liberals want.

Unless, that is, in their twisted and perverted way, they think they can twist and pervert Jesus into their socialist elf.

It’s actually true that the Bible tells us not to harm the sojourner in your land.

But let’s see if that’s an all-encompassing and all-inclusive edict that should apply to illegal immigrants who break our laws to enter our country and consume our resources like locusts when they arrive.  Let’s see what God had to say to Israel about how to treat the Jebusite, the Hittite, the Canaanite, the Philistine, etc:

“Only in the cities of these peoples that the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, you shall not leave alive anything that breathes.  But you shall utterly destroy them, the Hittite and the Amorite, the Canaanite and the Perizzite, the Hivite and the Jebusite, as the LORD your God has commanded you, so that they may not teach you to do according to all their detestable things which they have done for their gods, so that you would sin against the LORD your God. — Deuteronomy 20:16-18

I wonder if liberals are going to quote that passage to me when it comes with how to deal with illegal immigrants???

Oh, wait, I DON’T wonder.  Because liberals are the worst kind of self-serving, dishonest HYPOCRITES who despise the Bible in any kind of actual, legitimate CONTEXT.

I state for the factual record that there are a lot more verses like that one regarding “immigrants” in the Bible than there are the kind the liberals cite as categorical commands to allow illegal immigrants to come in and take over our country as Democrats exploit them to “fundamentally transform” America.

And how did Obama instruct the people the liberals demand we let in?

“If Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2.”

But I’m sure that leftist propagandist Jimmy Margulies would fully agree that Jesus would instruct His followers to “punish your enemies.”  And of course Jesus would use the IRS as a political weapon to harass, intimidate, dismantle and persecute – and yes, “punish” – His political opponents, wouldn’t He???

Let me assure you of something: if Hispanic illegal immigrants voted Republican, you would see the rabid, poison-dripping FANGS of Democrats come out in a spirit of rage and hate unlike nothing you’ve ever seen on the faces of Republicans as they went completely poop-flinging nuts over the invasion of our border.

I attend a church that has an English and Hispanic congregation.  And I regularly take part in ministry to Hispanics, quite a few of which are here illegally.  As a true Christian, I DON’T hate illegal immigrants.  I realize as a moral human being that if I were a poor Mexican or Central American living in a completely failed state the way these people are, I would come to America too – either legally or illegally.  I recognize that for many illegal immigrants, work is a good thing that they are grateful for.  And that they send a lot of the money they earn home to their families.  These are virtuous things.  What I rabidly despise is a cynical and dishonest liberal ideology that wants to politically benefit from these poor people’s misery and ignorance.  I blame the left for its hostility to America as they seek to cynically grab further political advantages by exploiting these people.  Liberals are like drunken braggarts in a bar, buying drinks for everyone in order to be popular and then refusing to pay the tab when the bill comes.  America cannot afford to continue living so wildly and wickedly beyond our means.  We are going to completely economically and socially collapse because of the vile wickedness of Democrats.  And then you will see suffering as you have never seen before – suffering that Democrats forced upon the America that they destroyed.

I believe, therefore, that we ought to treat the illegal immigrants who are coming here as human beings.  And that we should protect our nation, protect our borders, protect our culture, protect our way of life by controlling our borders and enforcing our laws.

And, like the Christians that Stephen King demonizes, I’ve actually put both my time and my money where my mouth is.

Liberals don’t want to follow God or His ways.  They HATE and DESPISE God and His ways.  Instead, they want to REPLACE God with their human government and they want to replace God’s ways with the ways of “political correctness” that they can shape and distort and control by first banning God from our discourse and then replacing God’s ways with their ways in the vacuum that they created with their “separation of church and state.”

If you actually follow Jesus and His Word and regard both as your moral authority, fine, you go ahead and quote Jesus and quote the Bible.  But when I know and YOU know that you really despise both Jesus and the Word of God, THEN DON’T YOU DARE DISHONOR CHRIST BY SUBVERTING HIS TEACHING WITH YOUR WICKED IDEOLOGY THAT IN EVERY WAY, SHAPE AND FORM ABANDONS HIM.

I tell you what, liberal.  Since what you really want is more big government, instead of quoting the Jesus whom you clearly don’t follow, why don’t you quote the sources that actually represent your real belief system?  Quote me fellow adherents and proponents of your monster-sized (and frankly monstrous) government system.  Quote me Chairman Mao, quote me Joseph Stalin, quote me Adolf Hitler, quote me Kim Jong-Il on illegal immigration.  But, oh, that’s right: these people EXTERMINATED immigrants they didn’t like.  You’d be completely and utterly long, but at least you’d have the virtue of integrity.

But instead what you do is falsely masquerade behind an artificial Jesus when we both damn well know you don’t follow Jesus and never will.  There’d be nearly 57 million more babies born to grow up and come to the feet of Jesus if you believed Him, just for starters.

What liberals really want isn’t Christ, but the Antichrist.  They want the ultimate big government tyrant who will viciously persecute the people of God and impose the complete socialist takeover of the world in the economic system known as the “mark of the beast” such that no one can buy or sell ANYTHING without government approval.  THAT’S the “Christ” liberals want.

Jesus told us in the last days prior to “the Democrat Jesus” – the Antichrist – coming, people would come in His name claiming to represent Him.

And in the warped, dishonest left, that’s what we’re seeing.

Which is how we can know the beast is coming.

 

 

How To Be God’s Gift To Women: A Christian Guide

July 28, 2014

I’ve heard the phrase “God’s gift to women” used quite a few times in my life.  In all the times I’ve ever heard a woman use that phrase, I don’t think I’ve ever once heard it used in a positive way.

Who are women talking about when they describe a man as “God’s gift to women?”  He’s a vain, arrogant, self-absorbed narcissistic man who believes that his appearance, and/or his wealth, and/or his success, and/or his fame, and/or his physique, and/or the size of his “equipment” – and heaven help you if you meet a man who checks off all of the above as applying to himself – make him irresistible to women.  And, of course, once he’s gotten what he’s wanted from one woman, he’s off to be “God’s gift” to the next one.  He might literally be narcissistic enough to reason that he’d be selfish to remain with one woman when there are so many others desperate for “the gift” that he believes he is.

That’s a shame and a tragedy, because the fact of the matter is that God truly intended men to actually BE God’s gift to women.

The purpose of the rest of what you read is to describe and explain HOW a man truly CAN be “God’s gift” to a woman.

I need to specify something in advance: what I will be talking about is how to be “God’s gift” to a GODLY woman.  While one could reasonable argue that God created women to respond a certain way to the right kind of love and support, I believe that the Fall of Adam and Eve messed up both man and woman alike.  And just as Lucifer rebelled even against God’s perfect love, I believe that an ungodly, unrighteous woman will rebel against even the most perfect man’s love.

If you’re a liberal, progressive, secular humanist feminist woman, I don’t have a doubt in my mind that you’ll reject the kind of man I’m going to describe who would be “God’s gift.”  You reject God HIMSELF; of COURSE you will reject God’s gifts and any man who professes to believe in either of them – if not all men in general.

The kind of woman who will rejoice to find the kind of man I’m describing is the kind of woman who has placed her trust in Jesus Christ, been saved by Him, been filled with the Holy Spirit and made it the purpose of the remainder of her life to follow Jesus as His disciple and live according to His teaching in His Word, the Bible.

At some point, therefore, I need to talk about a woman’s proper response to the man who strives to be “God’s gift” to her according to God’s Word.  But let me begin with the responsibility of a man to his wife.

The key verse is found in Ephesians 5:25, which says:

 “Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her”

What does it mean to love your wife just as Christ loved the church?

To begin with, it means literally being willing to DIE for her.  A husband’s duty is to literally lay down his life for his wife, if that’s what it takes to keep her safe.

Given the fact that a husband’s role model should be Christ, and that husband’s should love their wives the way Christ loved the church, another passage illustrates this concept as well as an even more radical one for a husband:

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” — Mark 10:45

The notion that a woman exists to serve and service a man is simply flat-out WRONG.

A godly husband SERVES his wife.  A godly husband SACRIFICES for his wife.  A godly husband lays down his life for his wife.

Let me now introduce a wife’s proper response to this kind of love and explain why it is the right response.

We actually have it told to us several times:

Wives, be subject to your husbands, as is fitting in the Lord — Colossians 3:18

Wives, be subject to your own husbands, as to the Lord.  For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself being the Savior of the body.  But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives ought to be to their husbands in everything. — Ephesians 5:22-24

In the same way, you wives, be submissive to your own husbands so that even if any of them are disobedient to the word, they may be won without a word by the behavior of their wives, as they observe your chaste and respectful behavior.  — 1 Peter 3:1-2

We are ALL – men and women alike – to submit to Jesus Christ.  But the Word of God instructs godly women to be willing to submit to their husbands.

We don’t know precisely why that is.  In the aftermath of the Fall, God cursed every participant (even including the earth that bore the two trees!).  See Genesis 3:14-18.  Particularly relevant to our discussion, God cursed the woman, saying:

“To the woman He said, “I will greatly multiply Your pain in childbirth, In pain you will bring forth children; Yet your desire will be for your husband, And he will rule over you.” — Genesis 3:16

One might argue that “men rule over women” as part of God’s judgment/curse for Eve’s part in the rebellion against Him.  But I do NOT believe that is what is being played out in a Christian marriage.  Rather, I believe that Eve usurped her rightful role and God pronounced a curse – you could call it a factually correct prediction – on her sinful role in a sinful world system.

But women were ALWAYS intended by God to be helpers rather than the leaders of their men.  God created the man first, and then He created woman as “a suitable helper” (Genesis 2:18).

Paul commented on this in another passage that liberal progressive secular humanist feminists find frankly evil:

But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.  For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.  And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman being deceived, fell into transgression.  — 1 Timothy 2:12-14

Let me begin with the fact that St. Paul is NOT talking about a woman as a business leader or even as a political leader; he is speaking spiritually in a spiritual context.

What St. Paul is pointing out is that man WAS created first and intended by God to BE first and to LEAD.  He created woman as a suitable helper, not as a usurper who would take man’s legitimate role away from him and unrighteously supplant him.  And he further points out that there is something about man’s makeup and woman’s makeup that equips them to perform their God-given roles but that which KEEPS women from performing the roles that God intended men to have.  There are many attributes about women that made them wonderful for the roles that God intends for them to have: they tend to be more compassionate than men, for instance, more gentle, less harsh.  And these things and many other things that make women different from men are all good in themselves, and help balance men out in a godly relationship with women.  But when women usurp men’s roles and rule over men, then these very good things become bad things: because all of these differences between men and women result in the fact that women are more easily deceived by Satan masquerading as a good, caring, sensitive, compassionate, sophisticated angel of light.  The very same emotional and psychological differences that make women more caring also make them more likely to be spiritually deceived.  Where men – who are more equipped and more empowered to stand up and FIGHT – see the true nature of evil more clearly.

Adam KNEW what he was doing was wrong.  In his case his wife had already committed the deed and he frankly chose Eve over God.  But Eve had been deceived to believe what she was doing was actually good.

I’d put it in its simplest form thus: the same sensitive nature of women that make them more sensitive to other points of view make them more open to deception from the wicked point of view that they are by their nature also more sensitive to.

We’re seeing that a great deal today.  And the polls clearly demonstrate that women are on the wrong side of most of the most serious cultural departures from God, whether it be abortion or homosexuality or socialism where the State replaces God.

As a caveat, I submit that women can and should be pastors, but not senior pastors, according to the clear teaching of St. Paul.  A woman pastor should be under the overall authority of a senior male pastor.  That would satisfy the requirement of 1 Timothy 2.

That was a necessary digression to try to provide some grounds for explaining why God has ordained a system in which husbands do more leading and wives do more following.  And I don’t state that because I’m a man and I get to rule over women; I say it because the Word of God says it.  And since liberal progressive secular humanist feminists defiantly won’t place themselves under the Word of God, it is no wonder they will refuse to place themselves under any man, either.

That’s one nasty pill for any liberal progressive secular humanist feminist woman to swallow, I have no doubt whatsoever.  It is clearly not even a very easy thing for a godly, Christ led woman to willingly choose: a submitted life.

But here’s how it should work in a biblical marriage:

A wife submits to her husband.  Wherever there is more than one mind/soul, there needs to be a leader.  If we always take a vote and we each get to do what we want, I’ll just skip to the end of the story and tell you what happens: divorce, where both “partners” choose to go their separate ways.  It literally cannot end much any other way if taken to its conclusion, can it?  Which is why our divorce rate is so sky-high in this “emancipated” age of ours.

So the biblical wife makes the choice to humble herself and submit to her husband.

And what should the biblical husband do?  Should he rule over her, dominate her, make her his servant if not his slave?

Only if that’s how Jesus related to us, it is.

But that’s NOT how Jesus related to us.

The godly husband, recognizing that his wife made the sacrificial decision to submit to her husband and follow him, ought to LAY DOWN HIS LIFE FOR HIS WIFE.  Every day and in every way.

She’s trusting him, trusting his leadership, trusting that he will take care of her, and will love her, and will protect her and lead in such a way that blesses her and seeks her highest good and well-being.

The godly man’s duty is to respond with “servant leadership.” 

“The servant-leader is servant first… It begins with the natural feeling that one wants to serve, to serve first. Then conscious choice brings one to aspire to lead. That person is sharply different from one who is leader first, perhaps because of the need to assuage an unusual power drive or to acquire material possessions…The leader-first and the servant-first are two extreme types. Between them there are shadings and blends that are part of the infinite variety of human nature.

“The difference manifests itself in the care taken by the servant-first to make sure that other people’s highest priority needs are being served. The best test, and difficult to administer, is: Do those served grow as persons? Do they, while being served, become healthier, wiser, freer, more autonomous, more likely themselves to become servants? And, what is the effect on the least privileged in society? Will they benefit or at least not be further deprived?“

A servant-leader focuses primarily on the growth and well-being of people and the communities to which they belong. While traditional leadership generally involves the accumulation and exercise of power by one at the “top of the pyramid,” servant leadership is different. The servant-leader shares power, puts the needs of others first and helps people develop and perform as highly as possible.

As a servant leader of his wife, as a husband who is willing to lay down his life for his wife, a godly husband makes every meaningful decision of his life with the blessing and happiness and joy of his wife and his family. He’s not seeking his good; he’s seeking HER good and the good of his FAMILY first.  His needs come second to theirs.

A godly wife doesn’t tell her husband how to serve her.  She doesn’t tell him how she needs to be blessed.  She trusts him and she waits to see how he will bless her, what direction that blessing will take, how he will lead her to a better life and a deeper relationship with him and with their Lord.

And a godly wife will blossom and bloom and thrive with that kind of a husband.  He will be God’s gift to her and she will thank God for him every day of her life.

What follows may not be a perfect analogy, but I had an opportunity to live this out for a young woman I know.  Please understand, I am not trying to claim that every woman would be like the one I am describing below in the same situation.

She learned that I love to take frequent long hikes – and I’m talking ten miles – in the desert and she wanted to go with me on one of my hikes.  She said that she had wanted to go hiking out in the desert for quite a while, but was afraid to go alone or even with another woman.

She knew I’d been a paratrooper – and presumably knew what I was doing – and that I am a Christian and she could trust me.

Anyway, due to the 110 degree heat of the Coachella Valley that’s routine in the summers, I usually leave around six o’clock p.m.  I take my dog with me, and when you do all your sweating out of your tongue, you just can’t release enough body heat in the heat of the day.  She needs late afternoon shade to get out of the direct sun and she just needs it a little bit cooler.  If I leave early in the morning on one of these long hikes, I’ve got the same problem backwards: it’s pitch black when I would have to leave at 4 AM.  Because by 8 AM it’s already baking and too hot for the dog.  It’s easier to go in the early evening than an hour plus before the crack of dawn.

So we’re hiking along up the last of one of the few blind canyons I take – where you just keep going up and up and up but not so steeply that it’s overly hard to come back down – and it is getting DARK.  It had just so happened that our first hike together occurred on an overcast evening right near a new moon.  And the steep, high walls of the blind canyon just took what little light there was away.  You could see the white sand beneath your feet, but the rest of the landscape was just pitch black.

And she began to become frightened.

During the daylight, she’d been peppering me with questions about coyotes and rattlesnakes – and I had told her how a couple of weeks before I had encountered two rattlesnakes on the same hike – along with a number of other questions such as how often I ran into scary men out here.  I’d told her that a lot of guys shot guns in the area, and I think she had the idea of hillbillies in pickup trucks and then the people who came to shoot were of course driving pickup trucks.  And when the darkness came it simply began to overwhelm her overstimulated imagination.

I stopped walking and asked her, “If I were to suddenly leave you right now – just walked away in the dark and left you on your own – would you be scared?”

And she said, “I’m scared RIGHT NOW.  If you left, I’d be absolutely terrified.”

She also said, “Please don’t play any games with me.”  And I could tell she was extremely frightened by her voice.

I assured her right away that I wasn’t playing any games – that only a true fool would play a vile game like that – and that I wasn’t going to leave her out of my sight until she was safe.

It was a good thing that she told me she would have been scared if I’d left her, because that helped make my following point a lot more impactful.

I made her a solemn promise: that as long as she was with me out there, I would protect her, I would take care of her, I would if necessary lay down my life to ensure her safety.  I promised her that it would literally be over my dead body that anything would harm her.

And so I led the way home and she walked behind me, most of the time either holding my hand or my shirt.  I know that she could see me in the dark, but I think she wanted some kind of physical connection as a form of reassurance.  She was – appropriately I might add – most afraid of running into a rattlesnake.  Unfortunately, they’re out the most during the same times that we tend to be out the most: in the evenings, nighttime and in the early mornings when it’s cooler.  I’ve encountered dozens and dozens of rattlesnakes in the desert.  You either deal with them or you stay home and hide.  I told her to follow me, to walk behind me and follow my steps, so that I would be the one to deal with whatever was in our path.  If there was a rattlesnake in the darkness, I would be the one to come upon it and deal with it.  That was MY job.  It was MY job to keep her safe and to put myself between her and anything that could harm her.

And that was where I gave her the example of a husband and a wife, and a husband leading while his wife trusted him to lead her.  And I asked her to trust me.  I was literally asking her to let me be what God wants me to be as a man.

We made it home, safe and sound.  And she’s actually been on several of my long hikes since.  She goes a little bit nuts with her flashlight – if there’s so much as one bush in the desert she doesn’t shine her beam at I would be shocked – but it’s truly nice to have her company.  We’re not romantically involved, but it is still a considerably more pleasant walk than it is to be alone or to be with a male friend.  It’s nice to be a man alone, it’s even nicer to be a man among other men; but there’s just something special about being a man with a woman who appreciates it when that man acts like a man.

Obviously, not every situation where a man and a woman are involved is like that.  But it certainly provides a visceral illustration of how God wants a man to act.  It’s not about the glory of leading; it’s about the duty to provide a place of safety and security.  But as every gallant little boy who ever killed a spider for a girl knows, it feels good to be the noble knight in shining armor riding to the rescue of his damsel in distress.

The more fundamental question is how that knight acts when there’s no longer a spider to kill.  Does he think he’s entitled to slavish devotion and gratitude for his wonderfulness?  Because that is the worst possible attitude to have as a man.  And of course women who encounter it very rightly resent it.

I digress at this point to mention that I actually prefer to follow the path of my dog – who has something like 100,000 times better sense of smell than I have to go along with her dramatically superior night vision and hearing – as opposed to overly relying on my flashlight.  If there’s a rattlesnake, she’ll tip me off.  I use my flashlight for brief spot checks to look for coyotes (their eyes glow green in the beam of the light) – who will try to lure her away from my ability to protect her.  And when I see a coyote in the area I’ll put her on the leash rather than risk her racing off to possibly get ambushed by a group of killers.

It’s an interesting experience to be completely out on your own in the desert.  For one thing it’s incredibly romantic, with the pitch black silhouette of the hills beneath a sky filled with stars unless a giant moon is crowding out their light.  Sometimes its really spooky, with the wind making it seem like something is moving around in every one of the thousand shrub bushes all around you.  I do my praying on these walks.  I do my meditating.  I do my reflecting.  It’s just you and God.

I’ll also say this: in my youth, I went through my own “God’s gift to women” phase.  I wasn’t interested in marriage because there were SO many women out there and I didn’t seem to have an awful lot of problems finding a new one.  I took a lot of women for granted in those days.

But experience is a marvellous teacher.  On the one hand, good decisions are invariably the result of experience; but on the other hand, experience very often unfortunately comes from making bad decisions.  As you get older, you finally begin to appreciate things that you just weren’t capable of appreciating when you were younger and racking up all that “experience” from making all those bad decisions.

Now I know that a good woman is worth more than her weight in gold, that when you find the right woman, and the right woman finds you, you are a truly fortunate man.  And if you treat such a woman as anything less than a queen, you are a fool.

Those final words don’t come right out of the Bible – although there are Proverbs such as found in chapter 18 and 31 that come real close – but they are very much in harmony with it: “A good woman is hard to find, and worth far more than diamonds,” Proverbs 31:10 begins.  And damn right she is.

I end this by pointing out a fact: that my mother is my life hero.  I’m a mamma’s boy through and through.  My mother was for all of my life and remains to this day a foundation of love, of integrity, of virtue that I have depended upon in times good and times bad.  If it weren’t for my mother, if it wasn’t for her teaching when I was a child, for her prayers as I became older, I wouldn’t be saved.

Anyone who wants to demonize me as having some harsh, hateful attitude against women is simply profoundly wrong.  I’ve got the Bible and I’ve got the noblest and godliest woman I’ve ever known on my side to tell me that.

 

Who Is Jesus … REALLY?

July 21, 2014

I grew up going to church.  I’m talking about from my earliest childhood: from the nursery right into Sunday School.

And yet I didn’t actually become a Christian until I was fifteen years old.

I can easily explain why: I had never, until that fifteenth year, truly been introduced to a Jesus I was willing to truly follow.

Oh, the Jesus the kindly Sunday School teachers described was nice enough.  The pictures they had of Him on the walls of the Sunday School room were illustrative: a nice, rather wimpy-looking man surrounded by a bunch of children.  Oh, and He always seemed to be carrying a lamb around His shoulders.

It wasn’t that I “rejected” that Jesus; it was rather more of, “That’s nice,” and I continued on going about my life.

I was, I suppose, too young to ask the questions that I existentially needed the answers to.  Or at least, I was too lazy to ask them, anyway.

Well, between my fifteenth and sixteenth year on this earth I went to a Christian camp called “Forest Home” in California.  And it was there that I first really understood who Jesus was and saw in Him someone for whom I would lay down everything and follow.

The Jesus I welcomed as my Savior and as my Lord was a Man, a tough Man, a bold Man, a Man who stood up for God and refused to back down even when hell itself got in His face.  He stood up to everyone and to everything that was wrong about the world He confronted, from the culture to the government to even His own followers.  This Jesus was the ultimate Hero, who came to save helpless people who otherwise would have perished.

Who is our Jesus, who is our Christ?

According to Colossians, He is the image of the invisible God, which means that Jesus is literally the answer to the question, “What is God like?”  The Gospel of John in the eighteenth verse of chapter one says, “No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten God who is in the bosom of the Father, He has explained Him.”  And that verb “explained” is the word from which we get “exegesis.”  It means, “to show the way, to explain.”  That’s what Jesus did: He explained and literally showed us God.  That’s why when Philip said,”Lord, show us the Father, and it is enough for us,” Jesus responded, “Have I been so long with you, and yet you have not come to know Me, Philip? He who has seen Me has seen the Father.”

St. John explained the relationship between God the Father and God the Son in his introduction:

“In the beginning was the Word (Christ), and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.  All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.  In Him was life, and the life was the Light of men.”

Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses tragically distort the true nature of Christ and in so doing preach “another Jesus” from the Jesus God’s Word presents.  They insert the article “a” to teach that the Word was merely “a god” rather than God.  They artificially manufacture a rule that literally excludes them from ever receiving a higher degree in biblical language.  And they further show their hypocrisy by applying their “rule” only when Jesus’ deity is ascribed.  For instance, by the same “rule,” their translation would say, “In a beginning” rather than “In the beginning.”  Which just gets downright weird, doesn’t it?

What St. John did in Greek was to perfectly differentiate between the Father and the Son.  There was a heresy called Modalism that taught that the Father WAS the Son, like the same actor who put on different hats to play different roles during a play.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses demand an article – a “the” – in the Greek for the translation to be “… and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.”  But if that article were present, the translation would declare Modalism, that “the Word was God” in exclusion to the Father also being God.  Instead, what St. John is teaching is that Christ, the Word, the Son is God, was WITH the Father from the very beginning, but is not numerically identical with God the Father.  John 1:1 is actually a masterful construction that precisely differentiates the true Jesus between two heresies – the heresy of Modalism that presents God as an actor wearing three hats and the heresy of Arianism that teaches Jesus as a lesser being who was merely a creation rather than truly being God.

The Word of God teaches that it was Christ who created the world: “All things came into being through Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”  And therefore, logically, it is IMPOSSIBLE for Christ to have Himself been a created being.  How could Christ create “all things” and have “all things come into being by Him” and He Himself be created???  It’s logically absurd.  And so Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses manufacture a word that is NOT present in the Bible and assert, “all other things came into being by him.”

There’s a short, simple, powerful rhyme that explains it well: “He came to die on a cross of wood, yet made the hill on which it stood.”

Our Christ is the preeminent One over Creation.  Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses falsely seize upon the description of Christ as “the firstborn over all creation” and assert that it means He was “born” in the sense of having been “created.”  That isn’t true: “firstborn” is a title of preeminence, a statement that Jesus – as the Creator as the following verses prove – has a preeminent position over all of creation.  Think of Abraham’s firstborn: who was it?  Isaac or Ishmael?  Think of Isaac’s sons, Jacob and Esau: who was the “firstborn”?  And no matter how you answer I can say, “Wrong!”  Because the “firstborn” son in birth order was NOT the firstborn son who inherited the birthright.  In both of these crucial cases, the “firstborn” turned out NOT to be the “firstborn.”  Isaac was given the inheritance of “firstborn” even though he was NOT born first.  And so was Jacob over Esau, with Esau literally cavalierly selling his birthright for a bowl of stew when he was hungry.  And the point being that “birth” has nothing to do with being “firstborn.”  It is a TITLE in its most important sense that Paul uses in Colossians 1:15.

And so the passage in its context reads:

He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities– all things have been created through Him and for Him.  He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together.

By WHOM were “all things created”?  By the One who is called “the firstborn over all creation,” by the One who is “the image of the invisible God.”  And note again He created ALL things, NOT “all other things.”  And not only were all things created THROUGH Him, but FOR Him.  We’re taught in Ephesians chapter one that the Father had a plan to glorify His Son, to literally create a world just so He could point to His Son and say, “Look at My Son!  Isn’t He WONDERFUL!?!?”

Who is our Jesus, who is our Christ?  The entire universe was created through Christ and for Christ.  Our Christ is before ALL things “and in Him all things hold together.”

Jesus Christ is literally the mysterious force that prevents every atom from literally flying apart.  If THAT isn’t absolute power over the universe, what is?

Quite a far cry from the meek little wimp who hangs out with children with a lamb around his neck, you know?

THAT is who our Jesus is.

It was this Christ, who we now know is the Creator who made ALL THINGS according to His Father’s plan to glorify Him, who created Adam and Eve in Genesis 1:27:

God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

You should now understand: in creating human beings, Christ created us in HIS image such that one day He could assume OUR image.

And in the Virgin Birth, prophesied hundreds of years beforehand in Isaiah 7:14, “Therefore the Lord Himself will give you a sign: Behold, a virgin will be with child and bear a son, and she will call His name Immanuel.”   St. Matthew completes the picture in chapter one and verse 23 of his gospel:  “BEHOLD, THE VIRGIN SHALL BE WITH CHILD AND SHALL BEAR A SON, AND THEY SHALL CALL HIS NAME IMMANUEL,” which translated means, “GOD WITH US.”

Isaiah 9:6 tells us more about this miracle Baby:

For a child will be born to us, a son will be given to us; And the government will rest on His shoulders; And His name will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Eternal Father, Prince of Peace.  There will be no end to the increase of His government or of peace, On the throne of David and over his kingdom, To establish it and to uphold it with justice and righteousness From then on and forevermore. The zeal of the LORD of hosts will accomplish this.

Does that sound like an ordinary human to you?  Does that sound like the work of anything less than God?

The angel who appeared to Joseph, the soon-to-be husband of Mary, didn’t believe so:

But when he had considered this, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream, saying, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife; for the Child who has been conceived in her is of the Holy Spirit.  She will bear a Son; and you shall call His name Jesus, for He will save His people from their sins.” — Matthew 1:20-21

Who does the Bible teach saves people from their sins?  GOD and God ALONE.

The angel who appeared to Mary didn’t believe so:

The angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary; for you have found favor with God.  And behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name Him Jesus.  He will be great and will be called the Son of the Most High; and the Lord God will give Him the throne of His father David and He will reign over the house of Jacob forever, and His kingdom will have no end.” — Luke 130-:33

In the Incarnation, which resulted in the Virgin Birth of Jesus, Christ – who was God – assumed a human nature, a human nature untainted by the sin of the Fall that corrupted us, so that He could come to live a perfect life in our place that we could not live and then die as our substitute as “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world.”

Understand the dilemma: on the one hand, mankind had sinned and mankind had to pay the penalty – which is death – for the wages of sin.  On the other hand, only God can truly save us from sin.  No mere man, no mere angel, can take my sins away from me, such that God cannot see them to hold them against me and rightly judge and condemn me for them.

Only God Himself can do that.  That is why God Himself declares:

I, even I, am the LORD, And there is no savior besides Me.”

And again:

Yet I have been the LORD your God Since the land of Egypt; And you were not to know any god except Me, For there is no savior besides Me.”

That ought to tell you what the real story of the very first Christmas, heralded by an angel, truly was:

In the same region there were some shepherds staying out in the fields and keeping watch over their flock by night.  And an angel of the Lord suddenly stood before them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them; and they were terribly frightened.  But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people; for today in the city of David there has been born for you a Savior, who is Christ the Lord.” — Luke 2:8-11

My Savior is none other than God Himself; and that’s why I can know that I am going to heaven.  Because only God can do that work in me.  Anyone else who relies on anything else is lost in their sins.  Because no man and no angel has the power to be your true Savior.

Some day I plan to ask the angel who came to those shepherds and said, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy…” to perform a dramatic reenactment of that scene.  Because for all eternity that announcement will send shivers through my spine.

God was born when God the Son assumed a human nature and entered the world through Mary, a descendant of King David, in Bethlehem as God’s Word foretold centuries before:

“But as for you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, Too little to be among the clans of Judah, From you One will go forth for Me to be ruler in Israel. His goings forth are from long ago, From the days of eternity.” — Micah 5:2

He came to die on a cross of wood, yet made the hill on which it stood.

What did our Jesus do?  In one of the most beautiful passages in all Scripture, St. Paul gives us a moral lesson for how we should live our lives based on what Jesus did:

Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; 4do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. 8Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. — Philippians 2:3-11

The New Living Translation just flat-out says it in verse 6: “Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.”

Although Jesus was truly God, God the Son, the Christ, the Word, as God He did not regard His deity something to cling to, something to be exploited for its own advantage.  But instead, in His other-centered love that ONLY God can manifest, He emptied Himself.  He laid aside the exercise of His deity so that He could become an ordinary man and live among us and fulfill the salvation plan of His Father that Ephesians 1 teaches His Father had established from eternity.

And so Christ came into the world, not to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.  That’s not my notion, but Jesus’ Himself:

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.” — Mark 10:45

What did our Jesus do?  He lived a perfect life in my place when I couldn’t.  And then He died the death in my place that I should have died for my sins.  The One who created the entire universe, who created me, took the blame for my sins upon HIMSELF.  On the cross, Jesus literally took the blame of the sin of the whole world upon Himself so that we could be free of the power and death of sin.  And by faith we die with Him – as depicted by going under the water in baptism – and by faith we are raised with newness of life with Christ.  Jesus died because He assumed a human nature.  BUT GOD CAN’T STAY DEAD.  And so He rose bodily from the dead in Resurrection Power.

I love the words of Colossians 3:3-4

For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.  When Christ, who is our life, is revealed, then you also will be revealed with Him in glory.

What is God like?  He’s just like Jesus.  And in what way does Jesus show us what God is ultimately like?  In His incarnation.  What did He show us about the nature of God?  Love so astonishing that it is hard to believe.

Jesus showed us what God is truly like.  And what a beautiful God He truly is.

Because no one else would have come to me the way Jesus came for me.

I’ve always believed in God.  The Bible declares it is only the worst kind of fool who does not believe in God.  The Bible declares that the existence of God is self-evident in Creation.   The Bible points out that even the demons believe in God.  What is miraculous beyond belief isn’t that God IS, but that God is so good and so loving and so gracious and so … wonderful that He would come to me even at my very worst and most loathsome point and love me enough to save me when all I deserve is hell.

That’s what my Jesus did.  My Creator saved me from myself and from my sin, which many times seems like an even greater and even more profound miracle than the Creation of the whole universe.  Because it’s one thing to create something from nothing; quite another to fix something that was so hopelessly broken and ruined that for anyone short of God it needs to be destroyed because it is simply too impossible to fix.

Jesus is my hero because I was lost.  I was even worse than lost, I was DEAD.  And Jesus saved me:

 1And you were dead in your trespasses and sins, 2in which you formerly walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, of the spirit that is now working in the sons of disobedience. 3Among them we too all formerly lived in the lusts of our flesh, indulging the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, even as the rest. 4But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; 9not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. 10For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.  — Ephesians 2:1-10

Every time a new believer enters the Kingdom of Heaven because of the finished work of Jesus on the cross, there is a staggering miracle of Creation: what was dead is made alive.  What was broken beyond human or angelic repair is made whole.  A destroyed, ruined, broken life becomes transformed in new life.

That transformation is at work in my own life.  It will not be complete in this world, but at the moment of the Rapture I know that no matter what happens in this world I will be the ME that God always intended me to be.  And I will have joy as I share all eternity with my Creator and my Savior and my Lord Jesus.  St. Paul described this moment in 1 Corinthians 15:51-58:

51Behold, I tell you a mystery; we will not all sleep, but we will all be changed, 52in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet; for the trumpet will sound, and the dead will be raised imperishable, and we will be changed. 53For this perishable must put on the imperishable, and this mortal must put on immortality. 54But when this perishable will have put on the imperishable, and this mortal will have put on immortality, then will come about the saying that is written, “DEATH IS SWALLOWED UP in victory. 55“O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR VICTORY? O DEATH, WHERE IS YOUR STING?” 56The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law; 57but thanks be to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.

58Therefore, my beloved brethren, be steadfast, immovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, knowing that your toil is not in vain in the Lord.

It’s like that hymn, “Because He Lives“:

Because He lives, I can face tomorrow.
Because He lives, All fear is gone.
Because I know He holds the future,
And life is worth the living just because He lives.

Jesus is my hero because where I had no hope, I now have hope that will literally carry me through this world and into and through the world to come.

I don’t know what anyone else has; I just no it very certainly isn’t better than what I have in my Jesus.

Jesus is my hero, because in a world filled with lies He came to testify to the TRUTH:

Therefore Pilate said to Him, “So You are a king?” Jesus answered, “You say correctly that I am a king. For this I have been born, and for this I have come into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone who is of the truth hears My voice.” — John 18:37

I heard you, King Jesus.  Thank God Almighty, I heard you.

I hope you can hear Jesus too.

 

 

Four Blood Moons: The Beginning Of The End? Israel Invades Hamas After Over 1,200 Terrorist Rockets And Two Broken Cease Fires

July 17, 2014

As of yesterday, at least 1,241 terrorist rockets had been fired at Israel and Hamas had broken TWO cease fires – including one just hours ago.  I’d call that more than enough patience.

About two hours ago, Israel began the ground offensive necessary to root out the tunnels that Hamas is exploiting in their efforts to indiscriminately kill and maim as many Jews as possible.

Some 40,000 troops had been massed on the border waiting for the order to go in.  You can’t just keep that kind of force idly hanging around.  When Hamas violated yet another cease fire, it was time to pull the trigger and go.

There’s no reasoning with terrorists.  There’s no chance for peace as long as Hamas has anything to do with the Palestinian government.  You either kill them or let them kill you and your women and children.

Not that the world or the political left cares.

It’s truly amazing: liberals will literally fight to the death and go to extreme lengths for the “right” to murder as many babies as they possibly can.  But they don’t believe the Jews have a right to defend even their own lives against violent terrorist attack.

I put it in 2 Corinthians 4:4 terms:

The god of this age has blinded the minds of unbelievers, so that they cannot see the light of the gospel that displays the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.

They also cannot see truth, because as Jesus Himself put it:

“If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated Me first.  If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own. As it is, you do not belong to the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. That is why the world hates you.” — John 15:18-19

Israel fights because Israel is FORCED to fight by those who hate her.  Israel “occupies” because if they DON’T “occupy” their enemies will use the ground Israel gives up to murder Jews.  And the reason people cannot see the obvious is because there is a personal Satan – “the god of this age” – who owns them and controls their thoughts and their emotions.

What we see now – both in America and throughout the world – is a spiritual war more than it is a political war.  The Democrat Party is the party that is radically opposed to the God of the Bible and His righteousness as declared in His Word.  They mock it.  They hate it.  They literally decry the Bible as the most evil book ever written because it opposes the homosexuality and the abortion and human government socialism that they worship and love above all things.  They are completely blind.  They have no clue and no desire to have any clue.

And the Bible assured us that in the last days, the world would be truly FILLED with such people.  And that they would turn in violence and hate against the people of God.

And that is surely coming to pass.

The Bible in both the Old and New Testaments repeatedly prophesies that Israel would be surrounded and hated by literally every nation on earth.  That has come to pass exactly as the Bible – which prophesied the rebirth of Israel from dry bones as happened in 1948 – declared it would.  Especially since Barack Hussein Obama was elected president of the United States and turned America’s back on Israel.

A number of significant Bible scholars have seen something that is part biblical and part extrabiblical: the ominous sign of four consecutive blood moons that would occur over four consecutive Jewish holy days.

John Hagee’s book – describing these four blood moons and their ominous portent for the last days – was published in late 2013 to describe what he believed would happen this year.

I’d say he’s got some added credibility now, myself.

There’s a little about that in this article:

In his latest book, Four Blood Moons: Something Is About to Change, Hagee lays out what he calls celestial signals. He describes how a series of blood moons in 2014 and 2015 will have great significance for Israel.

Although single blood moons happen fairly regularly, four appearing so closely together is extremely rare. There have only been a series of blood moons a handful of times over the past 500 years. [...]

Blood moons are set to appear in April 2014, on Passover, and then again in September 2014 during the Feast of Tabernacles, or Sukkot.

The timing is the same for 2015 — a total of four blood moons, all appearing on Jewish feast days.

“The sun and the moon and the Earth are controlled by God almighty,” Hagee said. “He is the one that is getting them in a direct alignment on a certain day at a certain time — but each time, it’s a Passover or Sukkot.

Is it a coincidence that we have what is happening right now in Israel and Gaza right smack dab in the middle of “blood moon” time?

I support Israel and I support Israel’s right to the land that GOD gave her and I support Israel’s right to defend herself.  I do this as a Christian who believes with St. Paul that ultimately, eventually, “all Israel will be saved” as “they look upon Me whom they pierced and mourn as for an only son” when Jesus Christ returns in His glory to reclaim planet earth from the devil and his human tools.

These are frightening times – as the establishment of a caliphate across Iraq and Syria, the shooting down of a commercial jet with nearly 300 souls BY RUSSIA through their separatist proxies, and now this.

But Jesus told us that the end would be characterized as nation arising against nation, and that the violence would come closer and closer together as birth pangs come upon a woman about to give birth.

Christians can be steadfast and immovable because we alone can know beforehand where the world is going and where WE’RE going.

The Rapture is at hand.  And if you aren’t looking up you are in danger of being left behind to see the coming Antichrist and the coming Tribulation and the coming Armageddon that the Bible describes.

I pray for the Israeli soldiers, that they be safe.  I pray for the safety of the Israeli people, whom God has miraculously protected just as He declared He would in the last days.  And I pray for the safety of innocent Palestinians who are forced to endure misery because they allowed a terrorist state to represent them.  Most of all, I pray for the salvation of people – Jew, Muslim and all other Gentiles – as the world prepares to worship the beast and take his mark in these last days.

For the record, let me give you this spoiler alert: if you read the Bible, you find that God wins.  Jesus Christ will return at the end of the seven-years Great Tribulation that is coming upon the world as King of kings and as Lord of lords.

Maranatha, Lord Jesus.  I pray You come quickly.

 

Moral Outrage About Liberalism’s Vile ‘Moral Outrage’

May 28, 2014

I came across an all-too typical liberal op-ed from a Harvard professor from the Kentucky School of Government named Moshik Temkin.

The subject in this case was the death penalty.  Basically, Professor Temkin says that Obama ought to once again ignore the constitutional limits on his power and declare as our Führer that the death penalty is immoral and he will not stand for it.  He ends his screed saying:

What abolitionists need to do is call for change to emanate from the very top. The president (whether the current one or a future one) will need to express a principled opposition to the death penalty in terms of the sanctity of human life and dignity.

Here I see some room for guarded optimism. Obama does not need to worry about his political future. This could be the moment for him to take a stand against capital punishment, the way he did on gay marriage. But he will probably not do this on his own; public pressure is the key.

Those of us horrified by the death penalty should not look to the courts or the states. We must look toward our national leaders and demand that they do what is right.

In the print version, the giant bold type face screamed, “Outrage over botched executions isn’t enough.  It’s about a moral stand.”

It’s an interesting thing to consider what the left would do if a right-wing president used the tyrannous dictatorial power the way Obama has to merely impose his law in place of the rule of law.  Basically, liberals are people who shout, “It’s never fascist when WE do it; it’s ALWAYS fascist when you do what wasn’t fascist for us to do!”

And they are morally idiotic enough to actually believe it, which is the truly astounding thing.

I leave my case to a LIBERAL legal scholar who has had more than enough of Obama’s fascism.  What is Jonathon Turley saying about Obama?

I have great trepidation of where we are headed, because we are creating a new system here – something that is not what was designed. We have a rising fourth branch in a system that was tripartite. The center of gravity is shifting and that makes it unstable. And ithin that system, you have the rise of an Uber-Presidency. There could be no greater danger for individual liberty. I really think that the Framers would be horrified by that shift, because everything they dedicated themselves to was creating political balance – and we’ve lost it.”

And:

“…the President is outside the line… we have the most serious Constitutional crisis I view, in my lifetime… this body (Congress) is becoming less and less relevant.”

And:

“The president is using executive power to do things Congress has refused to do, and that does fit a disturbing pattern of expansion of executive power under President Obama. In many ways, President Obama has fulfilled the dream of an imperial presidency that Richard Nixon strived for. On everything from (the Defense of Marriage Act) to the gaming laws, this is a president who is now functioning as a super legislator. He is effectively negating parts of the criminal code because he disagrees with them. That does go beyond the pale.”

Our system of government is intentionally tripartite, with each branch holding certain defined functions delegated to them by the Constitution. The President is charged with executing the laws; the Congress is charged with writing the laws; and the Judiciary is charged with interpreting them.

The Obama Administration, however, has blatantly, repeatedly and defiantly ignored the Constitution’s carefully balanced separation of powers and unilaterally granted itself the extra-constitutional authority to amend the laws and to waive or suspend their enforcement at his dictate.

In place of the checks and balances established by the Constitution, President Obama has proclaimed that “I refuse to take ‘no’ for an answer” and that “where [Congress] won’t act, I will.” Throughout the Obama presidency we have seen the same pattern repeated over and over again: President Obama circumvents Congress when he doesn’t get his way.

And fascists like Temkin – a vile hypocrite in that he would be SCREAMING FROTHINGH RABIDITY if a right wing president declared anywhere NEAR similar power for himself – is encouraging him to go farther.

And I am outraged that a documented FASCIST like Moshik Temkin is allowed to hold a position whereby he can pollute the minds of young people with ideas that history has declared to be truly evil.  Fascism is ugly.  It is immoral.  We fought a World War to stop it.  We shouldn’t be forced to have to fight the same war over again.  But fascist progressive liberal secular humanist atheists appear to be ensuring that we will have to.

People like Moshik Temkin yearn for a dictatorship, so long as the dictator is a liberal progressive secular humanist atheist like themselves.  These roaches WELCOME Big Brother as long as they get to choose their Stalinist totalitarian dictator.

I frankly laugh in disgust and contempt at anyone who wants to impose “morality” on a people not through the legislative process, but through the unconstitutional dictate of a tyrant.

On that “secular humanist atheist,” aspect, I quote Temkin as declaring that the death penalty is immoral in terms of “the sanctity of human life and dignity.”

As I read that line, I thought about Isaiah 5:20:

Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who substitute darkness for light and light for darkness; Who substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!

I want you to stop and think about what Temkin is asserting: the people who have now murdered well over 55 million innocent human babies in their abortion mills are now asserting that “the sanctity of human life” that they have viciously refused to apply to the most helpless and the most innocent among us – and if you didn’t have your start in your mother’s womb, this doesn’t apply to you – ought to apply to the most depraved torture-rapist-murderers among us.

Let us see what the Bible says about children in the womb, with this being but one example:

For You created my inmost being; You knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise You because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from You when I was made in the secret place. When I was woven together in the depths of the earth, Your eyes saw my unformed body. All the days ordained for me were written in Your book before one of them came to be (Psalm 139:13-16).

In 1999, Clayton Lockett – the heroic martyr of liberalism – kidnapped, beat, and shot nineteen-year-old Stephanie Neiman and ordered an accomplice to bury her while she was still breathing. She slowly died after having been buried alive from two wounds from a shotgun fired by Lockett. In 2000, Lockett was convicted of murder, rape, forcible sodomy, kidnapping, assault and battery and sentenced to death.

According to progressive liberal secular humanist atheist, this monster deserves to be honored with the recognition of the “sanctity of his life” and his “dignity.”  But you can and should go on exterminating human beings in the womb in a vicious manner that these selfsame self-righteous liberals would be weeping over if we did the same thing to rats.

“A rat is a pig is a dog is a boy,” declares these truly morally stupid and morally evil people.  That is the soul-diseased left talking.

God declared capital punishment in very simple terms:

“Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind. — Genesis 9:6

I want you to notice here that God explains that it is precisely BECAUSE of “the dignity of human life” – that results from being made in the image of God and from NOTHING less and nothing ELSE – as the reason why there should be a death penalty.  It comes down to this: when one human being literally takes the power of GOD into his or her own hands to destroy the image of God in another human being, that murderer needs to die in order for the dignity of human life to be honored.  To allow such a murderer to live after that murderer took another human life is to DISHONOR and DISGRACE the image of God and to spit on the memory of the victim(s) of such a monster.

To argue that murderers ought to be spared but helpless innocent babies ought to die horrifying deaths as they are literally torn to pieces while they try to avoid the medical implements that are killing them, burned alive by acid, and ripped apart by suction (see also here), is evil.  And to repeat that evil more than fifty-five million times makes the Nazis look positively humane.

But the thing is that that means absolutely NOTHING to a genuine moral idiot like Moshik Temkin.

No, liberal secular humanists stand in JUDGMENT of God and they have declared Him evil and His ways wicked.  They have placed themselves above God and condemned Him.  And that is why they hate Christians and conservatives who try to live according to the morality God provided in His Word.

Jesus taught in John 15:18-22 (NLT):

“If the world hates you, remember that it hated Me first.  The world would love you as one of its own if you belonged to it, but you are no longer part of the world. I chose you to come out of the world, so it hates you.  Do you remember what I told you? ‘A slave is not greater than the master.’ Since they persecuted Me, naturally they will persecute you. And if they had listened to Me, they would listen to you.  They will do all this to you because of Me, for they have rejected the one who sent Me.  They would not be guilty if I had not come and spoken to them. But now they have no excuse for their sin.”

Progressive liberal secular humanists hate me and hate my ways because they love evil and because they hated Jesus first.

That is why they have become the official party of the wrath of God according to the divine condemnation of Romans chapter one (see here and here).

Liberalism is a rejection and a replacement of all ten of the Ten Commandments.

Liberalism is the defiant contempt of God and God’s ways and God’s people, nothing more and nothing less.  Liberals are people who kicked God out of America with their contrived “separation of church and state” myth that is NOT found in our Constitution but IS found in the Constitution of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics.  And having exorcised God much the way Jesus exorcised demons and banished God in the name of “secularism,” they rapidly moved in to replace God with their totalitarian State that abrogated all of the divine prerogatives of God unto themselves.

Communism is State atheism.  And it is therefore no surprise that progressive liberal secular humanists would embrace the essence of Communist theory: The dictatorship by the proletariat embodied in their leader will bring about a Utopia.  And I still hear the Satan that is Obama shouting, “We are the ones we’ve been waiting for. We are the change that we seek” while his followers worshiped him like a god.  I still think of Obama actually saying that as a result of his presidency, “this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth.”  I still remember liberals literally teaching their own children – along with as many OTHER people’s children as they could – to worship Obama in songs to their deity.  I wanted to puke.  But liberals are a stupid enough, depraved enough, leader-worshiping enough bunch of moral idiots to fall on their knees before this pseudo-messiah.

You show me doing any of that crap with Bush.  By a wide margin over the 2nd place Abraham Lincoln, Americans say that Ronald Reagan was our greatest president.  But even with Reagan, conservatives never worshiped the man the way liberals have worshiped Obama even as Reagan led America upward versus Obama who has led this nation downward and further downward.  Liberals are quintessentially FASCIST; they YEARN for a Führer.  They’ve basically found one in Obama – and they want him to keep moving his Führership forward to the next level and then the next one after that.

It is and always has been the LEFT that 1) purges God from society and 2) establishes a cult of personality for its leaders.  Something must fill the vacuum when God is removed.  And leftists fill that vacuum with the State as epitomized in their current Stalin, their Obama.

In progressive liberal secular humanism, just as in Stalinsim, we have an ideology that suggests society would be better if it could be purified.  Stalin purged “kulaks” by the millions.  HE alone got to define what or who a “kulak” was.  Just being so labeled pretty much meant you were finished.  And now we’re seeing JUST ALL OVER THE LEFT that the same fascist murderous heart that beat in Hitler and in Stalin beats in the liberal progressive as well.  A modern “kulak” today in America is pretty much anybody that says or does anything progressive liberal secular humanists don’t like.  And they will come after their “kulaks” with a rabid hate that is astounding because the very same people endlessly talk about how “tolerant” they are at the same time they’re dumping hate on you for disagreeing with them:

Howard Dean, who is still alive, told attendees at a fundraiser for a Democratic congressional hopeful that Republicans “are not American” and would “be more comfortable in the Ukraine or Russia.” He also screamed that GOP supporters should “stay away from our country.”

Dean, a former Vermont governor, a former Democratic National Committee chairman and a 2004 presidential candidate, made the statements last week in a fit of zeal as he was speaking in support of Colorado 6th Congressional District candidate Andrew Romanoff.

“This is a Republican party that has decided they like power so much that they think it’s okay to win by taking away the right to vote,” Dean told the gathered assembly of 750 people at Dora’s Mexican Restaurant in Aurora, Colo.

“They are not American,” he bellowed. “They could be more comfortable in the Ukraine or Russia but stay away from our country. This is based on the right to vote.”

Amusingly, Dean then lectured Republicans on tolerance and love:

“We have had enough of the extreme right wing,” Dean continued. “We have had enough of the politics of anger, we have had enough of the politics of hate, we have had enough of the politics of division,” Dean told the estimated 750 in attendance at Dora’s Mexican Restaurant.

You’d think their skulls would explode trying to contain all the massive contradictions, but not progressive liberals; their very ideology is pathological hypocrisy.  And so what they say versus what they do and how they demonize others for doing a fraction of the evils they do is an intrinsic part of liberalism.  Such that if you removed the hypocrisy from a liberal he or she would utterly dematerialize never to be seen again.

Progressive liberals say they’re like Jesus because they want socialism to care for the poor.  No.  You’re NOT like Jesus because Jesus never taught socialism: when the disciples came to Jesus and told Him that there were 5,000 men (probably on the order of 15,000 people altogether), Jesus did NOT say to call Herod or Pilate and urge them to begin a government welfare program; He said “YOU feed them.”  The ONLY places that talk about big government in the Bible, such as 1 Samuel chapter 8, CONDEMN IT.  No, you’re not like Jesus for wanting socialism, liberal; you’re like Hitler and Stalin.  You’re like Hamas and Hezbollah and other terrorist groups with supposed programs to care for the poor.  And oh, yes, you really are like them.

Jesus very definitely found nothing of Himself in a liberal system by which one group forcibly seizes the wealth of another group and then gives that money not to the poor but to a totalitarian State that endlessly promises to help the poor but which year after year and decade after decade pisses away more than a half a billion dollars every single day.

If you think that Jesus believed in homosexual marriage, you’re beyond morally idiotic and you’re just plain evil.  Jesus taught that He had come to fulfill ever single jot and tittle of the lawwhich very definitely called homosexuality an “abomination” and “a detestable act.”  And Jesus commissioned the New Testament, which very clearly condemns homosexuality every bit as forcefully as does the Old Testament that Jesus lived and breathed.

For the record, one of the things Jesus lived and breathed and said He came not to abolish but to fulfill was the commandment concerning the death penalty for murderers.  That’s there, too, you know.

I read through articles in which people actually try to argue that the Bible doesn’t condemn homosexuality and simply marvel at the determination to self-deceive and to deceive as many others as possible.  Paul spoke of these minds that “profess themselves to be wise, but become fools” (Romans 1:22) as “always learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth” (2 Timothy 3:7).

You’re definitely not like Jesus when it comes to children; Jesus said, “Let the little children come unto Me.”  In the entirety of the Bible and the biblical worldview, children were (and are) a sign of blessing from God.  But YOU say, “we define fifty-five million dead children as ‘a good start.'”

I recently wrote an article titled, Evolution Vs. The 10 Commandments: And The Winner Is…?.”   Secular humanists routinely and constantly mock and slander “Christian morality,” but I’ll take that over “Darwinian morality” every day of the year given the catastrophic consequences of embracing the “morality” of the left.  One moral system is timeless and based on God; the other continually evolves at the whim of a group of people who crave for themselves the place of God.

If there is no God, there IS no “morality.” We should act like the beasts we are. But what these people are truly looking for is to stand in the place of God over the human race (which they are strangely part of even as they view themselves as inherently superior over it) and impose THEIR vision, THEIR stamp, on the human race. We shouldn’t do what GOD says, we should do what Barack Obama says.

Such a person’s “moral outrage” is itself morally outrageous.

 

 

 

A Warning To The Republican Party Establishment RE: Trying To Force ‘Moderates’ On Conservatives

May 24, 2014

As a California conservative, politics are almost invariably less than “happy.”

A conservative trying to be happy in the People’s Republic of California is rather like like trying to be “Happy” in Iran; we just don’t get to be.

Even when the people vote our way, some fascist liberal judge dictates that the will of the people WILL NOT be respected.  As an example, TWICE now, with Proposition 22 and again with Proposition 8, a judge has overturned the clear will of the people and acted like an ayatollah.  Progressive liberal activists exploited the donor lists as well as their own innate fascism to pursue a vendetta of political thuggery against Prop 8 donors.  And of course we just saw that hard-core leftist fascism demonstrated again when a CEO who had helped build a major company was destroyed because he foolishly thought he had a right to donate to political issues that he believed in (and see here).

So, yeah, as a California conservative, I know that things will rarely ever work out the way I want them to.

And therefore, I’m willing – eager even – to compromise if I can at least have some of my core priorities maintained.

But that won’t happen in California.  Or California would stop being California, wouldn’t it?

We’ve got our primaries coming up and there are two candidates for governor on the ballot to oppose Democrat Jerry Brown in November.

One of them is – by most media accounts – a rabid nutjob who is a racist, who hates immigrants and who has an unnatural love of gunsThe other one is a “moderate” who celebrates homosexual marriage and the right of women to kill their babies with those children’s fathers being denied any rights to their children whatsoever.

Turnout in June is expected to be far older, more white and more conservative than the overall California electorate, posing additional challenges for moderate candidates like Kashkari, who supports gay marriage and abortion rights.

Concern over Donnelly’s emergence prompted businessman Bill Bloomfield to put $142,000 into an independent expenditure campaign for Kashkari. Bloomfield quit the GOP in 2011 over what he saw as extremist views.

So do I vote for the whackjob conservative or the baby-murdering sodomite worshiper?  Decisions, decisions.

I’m not a fan of Donnelly.  I think he’s an inferior candidate at best.  But at least I don’t have to participate in two of the most grievous sins in order to vote for the guy.

It’s not exactly a happy pace to be.  So Iran doesn’t have to worry about my “Happy” video.  There will be no Snoopy dancing for conservatives in California.

Do you know why California is going to have a truly disastrous “wrath of God” style earthquake soon?  Because it will deserve it.  We’re already experiencing the wrath of God in the form of devastating drought.

Let me tell you who I am going to vote for in the primary, California Republican Party.  I’m going to vote for the guy who ISN’T a baby-murdering sodomite worshiper.

There are a lot of hills that as a conservative I’m not willing to die on.  I’m willing, for instance, to support a candidate who favors immigration policies that I would rather not see implemented.  Because I would just like to have somebody who represents me at least a little bit on the issues I most care about.

But I will NOT violate my conscience.

I am NOT going to add my name to the list of people who are directly, personally responsible for the murder of more than 55 million innocent human beings since 1973.  I’m just not.

I am NOT going to add my name to the list of people who are defying God to impose His wrath according to Romans Chapter One.  I’m just not.

That is why I am NOT going to cast my vote for Neel Kashkari.  I am not going to vote for him now in the primary and I am not going to vote for him if he is the candidate in November.  I am not going to be put in a position where I am saying, “Hmm.  This baby-murdering sodomite worshiper isn’t quite as bad as this baby-murdering sodomite worshiper.”

I’ve been amazed at Neel Kashkari’s ads.  He keeps calling himself a “conservative.”  Like that means ANYTHING when a guy like him is saying it.  And his ads keep announcing “I’m not a politician.”  Nope – you are just desperate to BECOME one.  But you’ve already sold your soul.

I understand that Donnelly doesn’t have a chance in hell of winning.  Because California has BECOME hell and will soon surely burn in hell due to it’s wrath-of-God drought as it collapses into the ocean due to its wrath-of-God earthquake.

The funny thing is that in spite of ALL the big money going to Kashkari, Donnelly is STILL well ahead of the leftist “moderate” RINO in the polls.  So it doesn’t look like Kashkari has much of a chance of winning, either, does it?

I’m just writing this to the so-called “moderates” who want to expand the Republican Party base.  There are issues you can “expand” on and there are issues you can’t and hope to keep voters like me WHO CAN BE COUNTED UPON TO GO OUT AND VOTE.  The Republican Party platform very clearly states that the Republican Party is pro-life – which means anti-abortion – and pro-marriage – which means anti-homosexual marriage.  Don’t betray the foundation of the party to “reach out” to people who will ultimately end up voting for the other side, anyway.

Abortion and the perversion of marriage are my two hills to die on.  And that is going to remain true even as I watch the American people and the people of California become increasingly wicked in these last days just as the Bible warned me would happen.

DO NOT THINK THAT I (OR CONSERVATIVES LIKE ME) WILL BE WILLING TO PUT ASIDE MY CONSCIENCE IN ORDER TO SUPPORT SOMEBODY JUST BECAUSE THERE IS AN ‘R’ IN PARENTHESES AFTER HIS OR HER NAME.  THAT AINT GOING TO HAPPEN.

If Neel Kashari wins, I will leave my ballot blank for governor.  And that’s a promise from a guy who truly is NOT a politician.

 

Evolution Vs. The 10 Commandments: And The Winner Is…?

May 22, 2014

One of the things that makes living a moral life – keeping the 10 commandments – discouraging and disheartening these days is the fact that people all around us are NOT keeping them.  If you’ve been around kids you know how kids invariably look at other kids as the measure of what should and shouldn’t be okay.  When exasperated children say, “But all the other kids are doing it!” parents offer the knee-jerk response: “If all the other kids jumped off a cliff, would you do that, too?”  And that’s a valid point, of course.  But your kid isn’t asking to jump off a cliff; he’s asking to stay out late or he’s asking to go to a concert or something else that he simply doesn’t view as tantamount to leaping off a cliff to his certain death.  What that child sees is a fun thing that the other kids are doing that he can’t do, and as a child who has himself been confronted with “the cliff” question, I can tell you that it might end the argument but it hardly ends a kid’s angst.

It would be a very different world if someone received heavenly electroshocks from God every single time they violated the 10 commandments.  But that isn’t the way it happens.  David and later Jeremiah famously asked the question we’ve all likely asked at one time or another: “Why do the wicked prosper?”

It’s not merely that so many people break God’s laws all around us and seem to get away with it and even seem to get rewarded for it that creates discouragement, however.  It’s also that there is an entire worldview that explains this apparent state in terms of a presentation that God’s laws aren’t really even “laws” at all but merely intolerant edicts written by intolerant, superstitious and frankly bigoted human beings who invented God as a means to control and dominate people.  Sometimes it very much seems like the whole world system has been designed to confuse and discourage God’s people into wondering why we bother to follow God’s commands.  In place of God today we are instead being offered a Darwinian system of evolution that is being held up as “science” and therefore beyond question.

We’ve all heard about the Ten Commandments in the Bible.  And it occurred to me that it would be interesting to explore them from the viewpoint of Darwinian evolution – consistently applied – and see how the results strike your moral intuitions.  I submit to you that sometimes the best way to finally put your trust on God’s system is to consider the results of man’s systems and see their end.  That’s ultimately how David began to receive his answer to his question of why the wicked prosper: in verse 17 of Psalm 73 David said, “then I understood their final destiny.”  We need to be able to do that with Darwinism.

When Jesus Christ and His Word are your source for ideas, you simply do not need to be afraid of the competition.  The best antidote to all the lies that surround us is the truth.  And so I would like to take some time to survey the truth: the truth about science and where it came from; the truth about some very interesting issues in which science is surprisingly ignorant; the truth about a giant flaw in Darwin’s presentation; and finally an examination of what Darwinian “ethics” would look like to show you its end.  And what I want you to see is that God’s law makes absolute sense in light of its vicious Darwinian competition.

So I begin with the origin of science: how did we get science?  Should we view it as incompatible with Christianity?  Well, it turns out that we got science from Christianity.  Here’s an interesting fact I link to in my notes: The scientific method itself and the founder of virtually every single branch of modern science was discovered by a publicly confessed Christian.  Dr. Rodney Stark, a sociologist, “researched the leading scientists from 1543 [– the beginning of the scientific revolution –] to 1680 and found that of the top 52 scientists, one was a skeptic, one was a pantheist and 50 were Christians, 30 of whom could be characterized as devout because of their zeal.”  We find that science arose only once in human history – and it arose in Europe under the civilization then called “Christendom.” Christianity provided the worldview foundations necessary and essential for the birth of science: The earth was not the illusion of Eastern religion and philosophy, but a physical, tangible place. And the material world was not the corrupt and lower realm of Greek religion and philosophy, but God created it and called it “good.” And God endowed the capstone of His creation, man – as the bearer of His divine image – with the reason, the curiosity, and the desire to know the truth. And God – who designed an orderly and law-abiding universe and earth for man – made man the caretaker of His creation. And thus the great astronomer Johannes Kepler described his project as “thinking God’s thoughts after Him.”  And that is frankly why 106 of the first 108 colleges in America were founded as religious Christian institutions.  My point is this: is Christianity at war with the essence of science?  NO!  Atheism is at war with the essence of science.  It is simply a demonstrable lie that legitimate science is at odds with Christianity; and this lie should not trouble you no matter how often you hear the lie or who repeats it.

There’s another myth that I would like to briefly examine; and that is the myth of science as some monolithic field that has answered all of the profoundly important questions.  That is how it is frequently presented in the media; but when you listen to scientists themselves you get a very different story.  I’ve recently began watching a Science Channel program called “Through the Wormhole.”  And I’ve been shocked at just how little science genuinely knows when the scientists and not the news media discuss science.

For example, take black holes:  We find that “black holes are places where the accepted laws of physics break down.”  Dr. Gabor Kunstatter of the University of Winnipeg physics department, defines black holes as a “a tiny region of space where the known laws of physics break down.”  It turns out that every system of physics known to man – Newtonian, Einsteinian, Quantum Mechanics, String Theory – all are falsified inside black holes.  And by the way, this is kind of a big deal because there are something like 100 million black holes in our galaxy.  It’s simply not true to claim that science accounts for all reality.  It simply doesn’t.

Here’s another one that surprised me.  If you try to reconcile Einstein’s relativity with Quantum Mechanics, a strange thing happens: you’re left with an equation that has no ‘t’ variable for time.  Time gets cancelled out of any equation that tries to harmonize these two widely held theories.  Since this runs counter to observable reality, most scientists rightly believe that quantum physics and relatively theory “don’t play well together.”  In fact, they invalidate one another.  It is rather astonishing that modern physics can’t account for something as basic to human existence as time.  But some physicists are so determined to believe their theories that they literally argue that if their equations says time doesn’t exist, then time doesn’t exist.  I laughed as a Rutgers University philosopher of physics named Tim Madulin explained that these guys are spending way too much time with numbers and not enough time with reality.  But that’s what is going on far too often in what is passing for “science” today – especially evolutionary science.

How about this one: 95% of the universe that physicists depend on for their theories is MISSING.  “An enormous chunk of the Universe seems to be invisible. We can’t see it, hear it, or detect it in any way… To crack the cosmic code that underlies our Universe, we have to understand energy in all its forms. But what if almost 95% of the Universe is made of a form of energy we can’t see and don’t understand?”  The 95% of the universe that they can’t detect in any way is there because it HAS to be there for their theories to hold up.

Here’s another one  – and it’s actually quite a doozy: the Big Bang.  99.9% of working scientists in relevant fields of astronomy accept the Big Bang.  But taking what had to happen into account, what is the likelihood of a life-supporting universe coming into existence by chance?  Think about it: there’s nothing, there’s nothing, there’s nothing.  And then POOF! There’s everything.  Just what are the odds of something like that just happening by chance?  According to the great mathematician Roger Penrose, who calculated the odds of what had to happen for the Big Bang, the odds against such an occurrence happening by chance were on the order of 10^10^123 to 1.  How big of a number against the Big Bang happening by chance is that?  I’ll let well-known theoretical physicist Laura Mersini-Houghton – who is an atheist, by the way – tell you. From “Through the Wormhole”: “The seed of this idea was planted many years ago when she realized she had a problem with the Universe – a pretty big problem. According to her calculations, the Universe should not exist. “The chances to start the Universe with the high-energy Big Bang are one in 10 with another 10 zeros behind it and another 123 zeros behind it. So, pretty much, zero.”  As a result of these odds, Mersini-Houghton wrote a paper proposing what she acknowledged to be a “highly speculative” theory denying Big Bang cosmology which might provide the materialists with a way to rescue their atheistic belief system.

The big problem with the Big Bang is that the Big Bang requires a Big Banger.  All matter, all energy, all space and all time came into existence.  You need somebody to make that “POOF” happen – someone who Himself is not limited by matter, energy, space or time.  Only the Bible identifies Him:  “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth.”  We need that Guy.  We need God.

The strongest argument against “science” disproving the existence of God is SCIENCE.

Let me leave you with one last example right out of the Bible: Jeremiah 33:22 records a statement by God that the stars in the sky are “countless.”  That may not sound like that big of a deal, but consider: In 128BC Hipparchus claimed to have counted the stars, with their number being 1,026.  That number stood as the official count of the stars of the sky for seventeen hundred years until 1600AD, when Kepler counted the stars and concluded that Hipparchus had double-counted some: and the updated number was 1,005 stars.  Was God wrong?  Well, with the aid of the Hubble telescope scientists now estimate that there are 70 sextillion – that’s a number followed by 21 zeroes – stars in over 1 billion galaxies.  And that number actually exceeds the number of grains of sand on all the seashores on earth, to complete the proof of Jeremiah 33.

We don’t have to be afraid to debate the truth.  We don’t have to be afraid of the facts.  We don’t have to play games with the numbers and the evidence in order to support our faith.  THAT’S WHAT THE OTHER SIDE HAS TO DO.  Another way to put it is this: don’t let science or anything else tell you how to read your Bible.  Because you are a LOT more warranted to let your Bible tell you how to read everything else.

So with that as a primer, let’s begin to contemplate Charles Darwin and his Darwinian evolution. There is one primary reason that Darwinism is accepted as a “valid scientific theory” and “Creationism” or even “Intelligent Design” is not so accepted: and that is that we’re told that Darwinism passes the bar of being “testable” or “falsifiable” but theories that depend on God in any way are NOT so testable or falsifiable.  We’re told that we can’t put a Creator God under a microscope and observe Him creating.  But let me show you how utterly fallacious that standard is by showing you Darwin’s “test” for his theory: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”

Well, Darwin himself said the eye as a refutation of his theory gave him cold fits.  He wrote in a letter: “I remember well the time when the thought of the eye made me cold all over, but I have got over this stage of the complaint, and now small trifling particulars of structure often make me very uncomfortable.  The sight of a feather in a peacock’s tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!”  A couple of things leap out of that: the first thing is that Darwin is clearly not an objective scientist who is willing to go wherever the evidence leads; he is passionately determined to get God out of the picture.  It makes him literally “cold” and “sick” to see any evidence of a Designer, doesn’t it?  With that said, let’s talk about Darwin’s own dilemma with the eye.  The thing about an eye is that it doesn’t work unless all the components are properly in place.  It’s not like you can grow an eyeball but not have any optical nerves and still see a little bit.  You’ve either got the whole eye or you’ve got squat.  I read Richard Dawkins’ The Blind Watchmaker during a period when I was genuinely doubting whether God really existed or not.  And when I saw his account of how the eye developed a little tiny bit at a time, it was a laugher for me, even being the skeptic that I was.  On his account, the first eye began to form from a photoreceptor cell on a depression in some early creature’s body – as though we all need to go home and check our belly buttons every day lest an eye is starting to grow out of it.  And as Dawkins presented this bizarre story of how the eye formed by “numerous, successive, slight modifications,” his story just got worse and worse.  It amounted to a fairy-tale for atheists.  It had to happen this way to keep God out of the picture, so that’s clearly how it happened no matter how implausible or even ridiculous it sounds.

And it actually gets WORSE for Darwinists, because we now know that the cell is filled with incredible tiny machines that all have to be present in a cell in order for that cell to work.  And scientists point out that it would take a good 50 times even the 4.6 billion of years earth has supposedly existed for random chance to manufacture just one useful protein for even the simplest bacteria cell.  That’s not amoeba to man; “numerous, successive, slight modifications” can’t even get Darwinism to a bacteria cell!  We now know a lot more about what the Bible describes: that we are truly “fearfully and wonderfully made” just as Psalm 139:14

But there is actually an even more glaring problem with Darwin’s “falsifiability” than most Christian thinkers have attacked.  Let’s look at the Darwin’s falsifiability standard again: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”  That is a nearly impossible standard to defeat: we have to prove something is absolutely impossible.  But let me try doing the same thing with my Creationist theory so you can see the bait-and-switch that’s going on here: “If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not have possibly been formed by God, my Creation theory would absolutely break down.”  My point is that Creationism and Intelligent Design have been ruled out without any consideration by the modern scientific establishment because they are “not falsifiable” when the Darwinism that they want to embrace is actually no more falsifiable than our Creation theories are.  The only difference is that when atheists tell their stories about how time and chance and random mutation managed to pull off one impossible miracle after another, OUR STORIES MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE!  You need to understand that there is a true spirit of delusion and hypocrisy at work in our world.

So science itself originated out of Christian thought on fundamentally Christian precepts of intelligence and design and the science that arose out of and because of Christianity clearly isn’t incompatible with Christianity; so science really truly doesn’t know that much about the ultimate nature of the universe and what it DOES know confirms rather than contradicts that our universe and life itself was the product of supernatural Intelligent Design; and so Darwinism amounts to an atheist polemic that has support merely because it illegitimately rules out its rivals on utterly fraudulent grounds.  Are you with me so far?

With all of that as our backdrop, let us now ponder the implications of Darwinian morality.  As a young man with a mangled faith, wondering if God truly existed and cared about how I lived, I realized something: if evolution is true and there is no God, then there is no such thing as human morality, either.  And I literally not only could but frankly ought to have been utterly amoral if that was the case.  As soon as that thought occurred to me, however, it frightened me far more than it reassured me.  Because I had not been raised to be amoral.  Everything I had been taught in my entire life up to that point had directed me to believing in right and wrong.  And it was a dark thought indeed that there was no God and morality flowed from Darwinism.  Because Darwinian morality is as vicious as it is violent.

Let’s start with the fact that evolutionists claim that their system of Darwinism is simply the way the world works.  Assume that’s true for a moment.  And then look at the world around you.  Because like it or not, Darwinism entails social Darwinism.  What is true for nature must be true for the individual and society.  If nature progresses by competition for survival, and the victory of the strong over the weak, then all progress must come the same way.  If life is an unceasing struggle for existence, and its outcome is the survival of the fittest, as Darwin claimed, then that is how we ought to function as individuals and as a society.

Modern Darwinists want to use their system to violently club God to death, then drop that club and say, “Now that Darwinism has killed God and religion, let’s not live as if our system that says life is a struggle for existence in which only the fittest survive and the weak are a threat to the rest of the herd is actually true.”  Like so many other elements of Darwinian thought, there is a massive self-contradiction.

Richard Dawkins has laid war and death on the back of religion, but he refuses to accept the far greater holocaust of death on the back of his atheism.  When we rightly point out that atheistic communism was responsible for the murder of more than 110 million people during peacetime alone, Dawkins claims that communism and atheism have nothing to do with each other.  But as I showed last week, that simply is false: atheism was at the very core of Marxism.  If you look up “state atheism,” you find that it is virtually identical with communism.  And it is no coincidence that not only did Karl Marx identify with Charles Darwin as strongly supporting his theory of class struggle and write that Darwinism was “the basis in natural history for our views,” but Nazism was also little more than applied Darwinism – with the rationale of both creating a master race and exterminating the Jews being profoundly Darwinian.  Hitler even made his own people the victims of his Darwinism, stating, “If the German Volk is not strong enough and is not sufficiently prepared to offer its own blood for its existence, it should cease to exist and be destroyed by a stronger power.”  That is profoundly Darwinian.  Now intellectual frauds like Richard Dawkins are trying to go back and rewrite history to expunge the incredibly tragic results of Darwinism being applied to the actual world and society.

And the horror that results in society is equally true of the individual who lives by Darwinism.

Why do we as individuals rape, murder and sleep around?  Becauserape is (in the vernacular of evolutionary biology) an adaptation, a trait encoded by genes that confers an advantage on anyone who possesses them. Back in the late Pleistocene epoch 100,000 years ago, men who carried rape genes had a reproductive and evolutionary edge over men who did not: they sired children not only with willing mates, but also with unwilling ones, allowing them to leave more offspring (also carrying rape genes) who were similarly more likely to survive and reproduce, unto the nth generation. That would be us. And that is why we carry rape genes today. The family trees of prehistoric men lacking rape genes petered out.”  Darwinism is “a scientific idea that, if true, consigns traditions of self-restraint, loyalty, the very basis of family life, to the shredder.”  Now go ye and do likewise.  Unless something inside of you screams “NO!  I will NOT live in accordance with that terrible, wicked, demonic theory of Darwinian evolution!”

I like to watch nature programs on TV, although it is often hard – because the stories end so bleakly.  In one episode, I watched a dominant female baboon whose had baby died because she couldn’t produce milk snatch the baby of a healthy mother.  And of course that baby died because the dominant baboon female couldn’t produce any milk but wouldn’t return it to its mother.  In another program, I watched a lion cub get trampled by buffalo when the herd suddenly changed direction; its pelvis was crushed and it was dragging itself around by its front lets with its hind legs useless.  What happened?  Was there a lion welfare program?  No.  The mother and its siblings and the pride abandoned it after a few days, and it surely died horribly.  Because in nature the weak, the sick and the injured are a liability and even a threat to the rest of society and they should die so the strong can live.  That’s the way the world often is in the aftermath of the Fall.

Have you ever wondered why God allows animal suffering like that?  Let me offer an answer: because God wants us to look at the animals and see that He created us different.  We are NOT animals; we are made in the image of a rational, moral God.  And we should not live or think like beings lacking the Imago Dei.

Now, in the time that I have left, let me finally get to the essence of the 10 Commandments.  God told Israel in Exodus 20:2, “I am the LORD your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery .“  Allow me to restate that in a slightly different way: “I am the Lord your God, who brought you OUT” of that animal state of bondage.  You will NOT live like animals in some Darwinian state; instead you will live like My people whom I created and whom I love and hold to a higher standard than any beast of the field.

Why is it that the first five commandments focus on man’s relationship to God?  Today, our government schools are trying to abandon the commandments focusing on God but somehow keep the ethics of the last five.  A US District Court Judge actually tried to cut the Ten Commandments down to six.  One pastor recently preached on that and said, “The educators are attempting to enact the ethics of the second half of the Ten Commandments which have to do with not lying, stealing, etc. without taking heed to the first half!  They are trying to teach young men and women how to love their neighbor without first training them to love God!  All such attempts will fall short, because unless you first love God, and have God living in you, it is not possible to live out his character, which is what loving your neighbor is all about.”

In light of what you have just heard on Darwinism, let me sing the same song again: because we are NOT to live like animals; we are NOT to live like a bunch of creatures who invent our own meanings and values for ourselves; instead we ARE to live in the light of our relationship to our Creator from which our love for our neighbor flows.  We are to live up to the image of God in us as humans.  And frankly if we truly love the Lord our God with all of our heart, mind and strength, and if we truly have the love of God in Christ in our hearts, we cannot help but love our neighbors as we love ourselves.  It flows out of us like water flows out of a spring.

There’s a powerful reason for this: it derives from the fact that community is central to the heart of the Trinity.  There’s a theological term in Greek called “Perichoresis.”  It means, “to dance around.” The divine dance within the Trinity.  It derives from passages such as John 14:10, in which Jesus asked, “Don’t you believe that I am in the Father, and that the Father is in me?”  The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father.  The Father loves the Son and the Spirit, and the Son and the Spirit cooperate together to bring joy to the Father.  You have every element within the Trinity that you need to have complete community.  God did not have to invent community the way man invented the wheel; community was central to the heart of God.

You can’t give what you don’t have.  If God were strictly one in the most rigorous sense, as Allah is in Islam, where would we get true, genuine community?  When God created man in His own image, according to Genesis 1:27, how was it that Adam and Eve were relational and communal beings unless community were an essential part of the essence of the God who had created them?  When you love your neighbor as you love yourself, as taught in both the Ten Commandments and by Jesus, what else are you doing but modeling the love that was essential to the “divine dance” of the Godhead before the Creation of the world?

You don’t get that from Darwinism.  In fact, you don’t get anything good from Darwinism at all.

In allowing the demonic doctrine of Darwinism, God allowed a very stark contrast between His way and the way of fallen man.  Joshua told the Israelites in Joshua 24:15, “choose for yourselves this day whom you will serve.”  And like the Israelites of old, we too have a choice to make.  The resurrected Jesus tells the Laodiceans in Rev 3:15-16, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other!  So, because you are lukewarm–neither hot nor cold–I am about to spit you out of my mouth.”  We need to stop living with one foot in the “survival of the fittest” world of Darwin and the other foot in the “love your neighbor as yourself” world of Jesus and truly choose this day whom we will serve.  There is a gigantic gulf between the “vicious animal” world of Darwinism and the “image of God” world of Christianity.  There are two natures – the selfish animal nature of Darwinism and the selfless divine nature of God – that are profoundly and fundamentally opposed to one another.  And they are at war within you.

The Ten Commandments as Jesus taught were not given to the descendants of animals, as Darwinism teaches; they were given to the children of God who love Him and want His love to flow through them to others.

Let’s pray that we may be radical followers of the Ten Commandments as they were taught in both the Old and New Testaments.  It’s evolution vs. the Ten Commandments; it’s Darwin vs. Jesus.  Who will be the true winner in your life?

Just In Case You Want To Know Why Progressive Liberalism Is In Bed With Islamic Fascism. Because Basically, They’re One And The Same

May 15, 2014

It’s really an amazing thing to see: the love affair between Islamic fascist jihadism and the progressive left.

I long ago documented Barack Obama’s LONG association with radical Islam.

You start throwing out radical names of dangerous people that Obama has been associated with and a pattern emerges:  the aforementioned Davis, Jeremiah Wright (see also here and here and here), Khalid al-Mansour (more here), Rashid Khalidi, Tony Rezko, Bill Ayers.  And you realize that Obama has been steeped in a profoundly Marxist worldview.  Obama isn’t stupid; he knows that the American people don’t want that ideology.  But no one can conceal his worldview completely.  Critical observers saw it clearly.

Khalid al-Monsour and Rashid Khalidi are bad, bad news if you AREN’T a radical Muslim who is very, very comfortable with terrorism in the name of your ideology.

And the left’s intimate love-affair with radical extremist (violent as hell) Islam run deep, deep, DEEP.  Just recently the uberleftist Brandeis University “disinvited” a female Muslim who has refused to shut her mouth about the viciousness of Islam toward women.  And the soon-to-open 9/11 Museum is taking a lot of flack because it has words such as “Islamic extremism” and “jihadism.”

This brave Muslim woman wanted to tell the truth about what is going on in the lives of these poor, oppressed women who are forced to undergo genital mutilation, endure rapes without having the right to report crimes against them, not be able to drive, not able to even leave the house without an escort, wear a giant tent called a hijab that covers everything but their veiled eyes and the tips of their feet, etc.

And how DARE she do that!  It’s an OUTRAGE!  And liberal Democrats are FURIOUS.  Furious enough to attack her for the cardinal sin of being “intolerant.”

Hint: it sure aint Republicans getting behind these Muslim whitewashers of truth and reason.

So there’s a good question for discussion: why the hell would liberals (well, PROGRESSIVE liberals given the fact that these cockroaches have nothing to do with ACTUAL liberalism) would be such ardent supporters of the people who quite possibly despise them even more than I do.

The answer is actually very simple.

The most fundamental reason is the fact that progressive “liberalism” is based on racism and the fabrication of various racial minority groups into a voting bloc.  Basically, if you recognize and affirm what a truly inferior and pathetic human being you are, and therefore see yourself as a victim of everybody and everything you disagree with, you too can be a “liberal.”

And radical Muslims – yes, terrorists like Osama bin Laden – very much and in the exact same “liberal” tradition view themselves as “victims” of the same “capitalism” and “Christendom” that progressive liberals so ardently despise.

Given that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend,” and given that jihadist Islamic fascists hate most of the same things that progressive liberals hate, they are bedfellows.  Even though these Muslim fanatics would love nothing more than to slit the throats of every progressive liberal on the planet when they’re through using them as useful idiots and ideological human shields.

It boils down to this: if you’re a black Muslim in America today, which party and which president do you vote for?

I’ll leave it to Nation of Islam founder Lois Farrakhan to put that one to bed for me:

“You are the instruments that God is gonna use to bring about universal change, and that is why Barack has captured the youth. And he has involved young people in a political process that they didn’t care anything about. That’s a sign. When the Messiah speaks, the youth will hear, and the Messiah is absolutely speaking.”

Oh, yes, when Obama campaign chief David Axelrod called Obama “black Jesus” and when liberal Newsweek editor Evan Thomas said Obama is “sort of God” and when liberal idiot Spike Lee said you can divide history into BB before Barack and AB After Barack; when Obama literally has such a God-complex that he made the whole nation and the flag which symbolizes that nation about himself, when senior Obama White House advisors literally go to churches to preach Obama; and most definitely when liberals are selling “artwork” that pictures Obama’s face and phrases such as “prophecy fulfilled,” they are mouthing Louis Farrakhan.

But you’ve got to ask, why do liberals love Islamic radicals so much?  Why are the two ideologies bedfellows?

Because they’ve got an awful (and I emphasize these people are truly “awful”) lot in common besides the fact that Muslims tend to be racial minorities and therefore are held sacrosanct by the Democrat Party no matter how utterly wicked and violent and rabid they are.  Not that being wicked, violent or rabid in any way, shape or form is a barrier to being a Democrat, mind you.

Other than the racial minority thing, which is frankly enough to solidify the connection between liberal Democrats and the radical jihadist fascist left all by its lonesome, Islamic fascist have three other things that progressive liberals hold dear:

The second thing that binds Islamic fascists and liberalism together is a love of fascism and the exaltation of the State as God.  That is a cornerstone of both fanatic Islam and fanatic progressive liberalism alike.

Muslims refer to the concept of Khilafah.  Basically, think of the world as one Muslim Caliphate.  And you have the dream of Muslims.

Liberals want the same damn thing: they want one-world government.  They want a mega-socialist all-powerful totalitarian State.

Now, progressive liberals might argue that Muslims want to rule in the name of God and liberals want a godlike all-powerful State that has absolute authority over human lives entirely apart from God.  But in point of fact, the two become the same thing.

In North Korea, dictator Kim Il-Sung, then Kim Jong Il and now Kim Jong-Un are worshiped as GOD in their atheist state.

In the atheist state of the People’s Republic of China, Chairman Mao was likewise worshiped as GOD.

Leftists cannot help themselves.  In order to BE a leftist, you have to have the insanely arrogant belief that YOU should be the one to pull or push up or down all the levers and YOU should be the one who pushes or doesn’t push all of the buttons of state.  Liberals don’t believe that individuals ought to have the freedom to govern their own lives and their own affairs; rather, they feel that THEY ought to have the power to FORCE individuals to comply with what THEY want.  Or else face the power of their State.

The most rabid Muslims really aren’t very different.

Put another way, both the Ayatollah AND Barack Obama love to dictate government by use of “executive orders.”  See here and here for just two of myriad examples of our Thug-in-Chief’s abuse of power, of the separation of powers and of the Constitution.

The third thing both the progressive liberal left and radical Islamic jihadist fascism have in common is an utter contempt for and hostility to Christianity.

Piss Christ was the result of a liberal “artist” being paid government dollars from a VERY liberal National Endowment for the Arts program created by DEMOCRATS.

I wonder how Democrats would have voted for “Piss Mohammed.”  I think all reasonable people know what these cowardly liberal cockroaches would have done.

Progressive liberal Democrats are doing everything they possibly can to advance an anti-Christian agenda to overthrow Judeo-Christianity as the moral framework for society.  Because they think they’ve got a far better framework.

The fourth thing that progressive liberal Democrats and their jihadist Islamic fascists both have in common is a rabid intolerance of free speech.  You need to understand why both come to the same exact perspective from opposite ends of the spectrum: for Muslims, the suppression of free speech and individual freedom and liberty is all about the fact that in Islam the individual is nothing and the Islamic State is EVERYTHING.  And thus you have the right to shut up in Islam if you disagree with Sharia or the Khilafah Caliphate State.  In progressive liberalism, the suppression of free speech and individual liberty is based on the opposite of Christianity: in Christianity, you are created in the image of God and you have God-given rights, including the right of free speech and individual freedom and liberty.  Under progressive liberalism, you are nothing but DNA (i.e. chemicals) conditioned by your environment; you have no free will; you are merely a herd animal.  And liberals view themselves as your masters who reserve for themselves the right to make all of your herd decisions for you.  And so under progressive liberalism, you have the right to shut up if you disagree with political correctness or the Socialist Welfare State.

What the left has done is as fascinating as it is dishonest and hypocritical.  Think of 1978 and the ACLU-backed ruling that Nazis had the right to march through a town (Skokie, Illinois) that was heavily populated by Jewish death camp survivors.

This was, of course, racism at its worst and its ugliest, given the history of 6 million Jews murdered like insects during the Nazi Holocaust.

But, under the guise of liberalism, free speech was so sacred, so sacrosanct, that even the very ugliest speech needed to be protected at all possible costs.

Now, fast forward a few decades to Donald Sterling, a man whom the left wants to strip a one-billion-PLUS dollar franchise from against his will because he said a bunch of ugly racist garbage over what he thought was a private phone line.

Let me explain what happened: liberals took advantage of free speech to get their feet and their ideology in the door and then they slammed that door shut.  They don’t need it any more.  You have the right to shut up.  Or lose your property (like Donald Sterling) or your career (like the Mozilla CEO who committed the unpardonable sin of believing he had the freedom to donate to a political cause liberals don’t support).

Don’t tell me that the precedent of going after a racist like Sterling won’t soon be exploited to go after Christians like me who believe God rather than Obama when it comes to homosexual marriage.

Think of the bastions of liberal progressivism otherwise known as “universities.”  Think of what recently came out of a liberal progressive student who basically has the same job that Obama had when HE was a liberal fanatic at Harvard:

Sandra Korn, a senior who writes a column for the Harvard Crimson newspaper, thinks radical leftism is the only permissible political philosophy, and the First Amendment only hinders colleges from brainwashing students with her viewpoint.

Stop and think (liberals being incapable of either being that as fascists they love to rush to exploit the emergency of “crisis”): liberals love the idea of destroying a Donald Sterling because, racist (LIBERAL) roach that he is, they know that they can exploit the legitimate moral revulsion against racism to “progressively” demonize OTHER areas – such as opposition to homosexuality or opposition to big government, or support for voter IDs, etc., etc. ad nauseum – to their heart’s content.

Progressive liberals, if anything, are even MORE rabidly intolerant against free speech than the most fanatic Islamic fascists.

So you see, on numerous fronts, to be a radical terrorist Muslim jihadist fascist is to be a radical totalitarian liberal progressive fascist.  The two have the same basic worldview and it is therefore no surprise at all that one protects the other.

If you get in the way of the machinery of either one, they will crush you.

 

 

 

Christ Is Risen! He Is Risen Indeed! An Easter Message On 1 Corinthians 15

April 20, 2014

Christ is risen!  He is risen indeed!  That millennia-old paschal greeting sums up the essence of Easter.  Jesus the Messiah, the Christ, as prophesied in the Old Testament as a future event and as described in the New Testament as a historical fact, was crucified and His dead body was placed in a guarded tomb.  But on the third day, on that first Easter morning, He was raised from the dead.  And by being raised from the dead Jesus was able to offer His resurrection life to anyone who would believe in Him.  According to Romans 10:9, “If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.”

In our modern age, the Christ of Easter has been replaced by what we can call an “Easter Bunny Jesus.”  2 Corinthians 11:4 points out that false culture, false religion and false science manufacture false Jesuses.  The Easter Bunny Jesus was a good man, a moral teacher, who was killed for preaching socialism, pacifism, and whatever other politically correct “-ism” is in vogue with the secular humanist, anti-supernaturalist, postmodernist, existentialist, moral-relativist crowd that has anointed itself the arbiters of truth.  Their Easter Bunny Jesus, of course, died and is still very much dead.  One of their favorite assertions is that the biblical accounts of Jesus are myths and fables written after the fact by people who were not eyewitnesses.

The problem with the Easter Bunny Jesus is that such a Jesus, like the Easter Bunny itself, ultimately means nothing, because he is nothing but a fabricated story with a fabricated theological meaning.  And a dead Messiah can’t do anything for anybody for the very simple reason that he is DEAD and BURIED.  And it is a doubly fabricated story because it has no connection whatsoever with the real Jesus and what the real Jesus really did on Easter.

So what really happened on the first Easter morning?

In 1 Corinthians chapter 15 we have an early Christian creed that dates to within the time of the crucifixion of Jesus that defines the meaning of the Gospel of Easter and defends the HISTORICAL REALITY of Easter.

Turn with me in your Bibles, if you have them, to 1 Corinthians 15:

   1Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. 2By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

3For what I received I passed on to you as of first importance: that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures, 5and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles, 8and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.

What is the meaning of the Christian Gospel of Easter?

First of all, the Easter Gospel is that by which we are saved.  According to the Bible, there are ultimately only two kinds of people: those who are saved, and those who are lost.  Jesus believed in the reality of hell.  We avoid discussing hell, because a lot of modern people find the concept very unpleasant.  But the fact is that Jesus talked more about hell than anyone else in all of Scripture.  In fact, Jesus talked about hell almost more than everyone else in Scripture COMBINED.  Jesus said in Matthew 7:23 that there will be many to whom He will say, “Depart from me.  I never knew you.”  In Matthew 8:12 Jesus spoke of a place of outer darkness, and said “in that place there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”   According to Matthew 25:41 Jesus will say to those who are not saved, “Depart from me, you cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels.”

No Easter Bunny Jesus can save you.  Only the power of the real Resurrected Son of God can save you.

What do you have to believe to have the Easter Resurrection Life of Christ?  1 Corinthians 15:3-4 tells us: “that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures, 4that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures.”  Forget the Easter Bunny Jesus; we’re talking about the REAL death and the REAL Resurrection of the REAL Christ Jesus who came in fulfillment of the Old Testament that prophesied the coming Christ.  And this real Jesus REALLY died.  The body of this real Jesus REALLY was buried.  And the body of this real Jesus was REALLY raised from the dead.

Who is Christ?  As Peter confessed to Jesus in Matt 16:16, He is the Son of the Living God.  He is God the Son.  The Gospel of John begins by teaching that Christ was with God the Father from the beginning, and ALL things came into being through Christ.  Colossians 1:16 confirms this truth about Christ Jesus, teaching that “in Him all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things have been created through Him and for Him.”

God the Son took on a human nature.  He created man and woman in His own image knowing that one day He would assume our image, so that He could live the perfect life in our place that we could not live, and then die the death that we could not die in our place for our sins.  And all you have to do to be saved, according to the Bible, is accept what He did for you on the cross, and believe that God raised Him from the dead with the kind of Resurrection Life that He alone can offer to YOU right here and right now as He takes your sin and gives you His righteousness.

Now comes the question: why should anyone believe this Gospel?  Why should anyone believe that this Christ came, died in our place for our sins that separate us from God, and was raised from the dead as the Lord of Life to offer that Life to us?  What evidence does St. Paul present that he’s telling the truth about the first Easter?

In verses 3 through 7 of 1 Corinthians 15, scholars identify an early Christian creed (there are SEVERAL early creeds preserved in the New Testament that were passed on from the very first Christian witnesses).  St. Paul – who began his own career as a Jewish rabbi and a Pharisee – in saying, “For what I received I passed on to you” – is actually using technical rabbinical terminology for the receiving and passing along of established oral tradition.  He’s pointing out that he received this creed from someone else and is now passing it on.    Paul points out that he had ALREADY given the Corinthians this creed on his first visit, which history confirms happened in 51 AD.  He uses the past tense: “I passed on to you.”  So we’re already within twenty years of the cross, aren’t we? But St. Paul tells us that just as HE passed the creed on, it had been previously passed to HIM, right?  So who did St. Paul receive the creed from?

It gets exciting: most scholars argue that Paul had to have received this creed when he made the trip to Jerusalem described in Galatians 1:18-19 to meet with Peter and James – the very people specifically named in the creed. That event is fixed historically: it happened in AD 38.  That’s just a few years from when Christ was crucified.

But the stylized, structured wording of this creed strongly suggests to many scholars that it predates even Paul’s visit to meet with Peter and James.   The underlying wording is clearly Aramaic rather than Greek, for example.  When the passages are re-translated into Aramaic, they possess the rhyme and rhythm that clearly reveals they were originally developed in that language.  That is why it’s “Cephas” rather than “Peter.”  And in the words of this creed, we are back right to the moments right after the Cross, to the Resurrection, as the eyewitnesses described what they saw and who saw it with them.

Let’s look again beginning with verse 5: “and that he appeared to Cephas, and then to the Twelve. 6After that, he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at the same time, most of whom are still living, though some have fallen asleep. 7Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles.”

For the first thousand years after the Crucifixion of Jesus, the ONLY polemic from Jews – who saw the rise of Christianity as a threat to Judaism – was that Jesus’ disciples had stolen His body from the tomb.  That was the only rival explanation that was offered.  Jesus died and stayed dead, and His disciples stole His body and started preaching a lie.  But here’s the thing: that explanation has largely been abandoned by even the most skeptical scholars today.  Do you know why?  Because in the thousand years SINCE the end of the first millennia, critics have had to contend with a brutal fact of history: that these twelve men who claimed they had seen Jesus resurrected from the dead CHANGED THE WORLD preaching about that resurrected Jesus they claimed they saw and heard and touched.  The calendar on planet earth is dated in A.D., Anno Domini, In the Year of Our Lord, BECAUSE of the testimony of the apostles about Jesus.

History records the fact that Jesus’ disciples traveled across the known world preaching about what they witnessed that Easter morning.  With the sole exception of St. John – who was himself tortured for his testimony – all of these men gave their lives as martyrs proclaiming that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the Living God, whom they had seen crucified and whom they saw raised gloriously from the dead.

Here’s the problem for skeptics and for those who prefer the Easter Bunny Jesus: these disciples were in a UNIQUE position to know whether or not they had really witnessed what they claimed they had seen and heard and touched.  While it is possible for people to be sincerely mistaken, the disciples were in a UNIQUE position to know for certain whether they saw, heard and touched what they claimed they had.

Would you be willing to die for something that you categorically KNEW was false?  Do you think you could assemble a dozen other people who would likewise all be willing to die for something that they knew was not true???  No.  Nobody dies for a lie.  Everyone pretty much agrees that the disciples clearly, sincerely believed that they had seen their Lord Jesus gloriously alive after His death by crucifixion and after having spent three days in a tomb.  There are some who want to argue that Jesus was the one who pulled off the fraud, having somehow survived being crucified, having a Roman spear shoved through His heart, waking up in a tomb and climbing out to deceive His disciples.  But the problem with that is that it makes JESUS a horrible, lying fraud and in fact the greatest villain in all of human history.  Does that work for you that the Man regarded as the greatest moral teacher who ever lived was a dishonest imposter???

So modern skeptics have devised a phenomena of mass hallucination, whereby all twelve of the disciples over and over again all thought they were seeing the same thing, hearing the same thing, even TOUCHING the same thing, but of course they had to be somehow mistaken every single time.  And when 500 people all saw and heard the same thing at the same time, well, what else could have happened except that they were suffering from a mass delusion?  A delusion so powerful most of them ultimately sacrificed their lives as martyrs for what they thought they had seen but of course hadn’t really seen.

I find it easier to simply believe that there really is a God who can do what the God of the Bible says He can do.

St. Paul provides three specific witnesses that we have to briefly discuss: Cephas (or Peter), James, and last of all, Paul adds himself to the list in verse 8.

These three men cover the panoply of possibilities and responses to Jesus: When Jesus was crucified, Peter – who had believed in and followed Jesus – was a completely broken man even before Jesus was crucified.  He had fled like a coward from the One he had previously declared he would die for.  He had denied Jesus three times that night while Jesus was on trial for His life.

Question: what would it take to make this completely broken man the boldest of the disciples who would preach until his own martyrdom by crucifixion?  What would it take to make such a man – facing his own cross of execution – ask the Romans to crucify him upside down because he did not feel worthy to die in the exact same manner as his Lord Jesus?  What would it take to restore Peter?  Only one thing: an appearance by the resurrected Lord of Life who forgave him and restored him and gave him a mission that he would doggedly pursue to the moment of his own martyrdom.

Take James, the half-brother of Jesus.  The Gospels record that James was highly skeptical of his half-brother Jesus.  John 7:5 openly declares that James didn’t believe.  Mark chapter 3 indicates that James was one of those who literally thought that Jesus had lost His mind.  Here comes the question: what would it take for you to believe that your oldest sibling was the Creator God of the Universe???  Because THAT is the point that James the brother of Jesus had to somehow arrive at.  What would it take?  How about seeing his half-brother, having been crucified, gloriously risen from the dead in proof that everything He had said about Himself was true and that He really WAS the Savior of the world???  We know that James became a believer at the worst possible time, right after his half-brother was brutally executed by Rome as a warning to anyone who would believe what Jesus had believed.

And history records that James, known as James the Just for his godly character, was murdered by a mob as a martyr for preaching, yes, that his half-brother Jesus really was Lord and God.

And we arrive at St. Paul.  Verse 8 says, “and last of all he appeared to me also, as to one abnormally born.”  St. Paul started out as Saul, a rabid Jewish Pharisee who despised Christians and literally wanted them all either dead or in chains.  Until something knocked him off his high horse when he was on the road to Damascus to persecute more Christians and changed his mind – and more – his heart forever afterward.  And so Saul the most ardent persecutor of the Church became St. Paul, the most ardent evangelist of the Church he had tried to destroy.  What could cause such a transformation?

Paul repeatedly offered only one answer: he saw the risen Jesus and he believed what he saw and heard.

On this Easter morning, I it is my privilege to declare to you that it all really happened just as the Scriptures declare: that Jesus the Christ, the Messiah prophesied in the Old Testament, really came, really lived a perfect life in your place, really took your sins upon Himself at the cross, taking the blame for what you’ve done, and really rose bodily from the dead so that you could be raised to the Resurrection Life of Easter with Him.

And all you have to do to have that eternal Easter life is believe in the Lord of Life, believe in Jesus.

What’s REALLY At Stake In The ‘Religious Liberty vs. ObamaCare’ Fiasco

March 27, 2014

When I go to the grocery store, there is frequently someone outside asking me for spare change.  When I go to a fast food restaurant, there is more than occasionally someone outside asking me for spare change (although, it’s happened quite a few times that I’ve had people INSIDE these places asking me for spare change, too).  When I get gas, there is often someone outside asking me for spare change.

Here is my response to them:

“Let me ask you a question: why should I give you anything?”

That’s a head scratcher for most of the people I deal with, I mean, beyond the pure “entitlement” mindset of, “Because you OWE me for being so wonderful.”

“Because I’m a human being,” I often hear.

“What does that mean to me?”  I demand.  “According to the theory of evolution, human beings are nothing more than a random-chance accident and you are nothing more than a slightly smarter version of a monkey.  According to Darwinism, the stronger ought to survive and the weaker ought to have the decency to perish and get the hell out of the stronger’s way.  When the lion or the wolf kills the weakest members of a herd, environmentalists point out that they’re actually doing the herd a service by winnowing out the genetically inferior members who would otherwise undermine the herd.  Frankly, according to Darwinsim, I ought to be taking what little you DO have instead of weakening my own prospects to help an inferior.

So again, why should I give you anything?”

Well, as it so happens, there is only ONE correct answer.  And here it is:

“Because I’m a human being created in the image of God, and because God loves human beings as demonstrated in His sending His Son to seek and to save me even when I’m lost.  And because Jesus cares for the poor, you should care for the poor and help me.”

And with that lesson – along with my pointing out that I am NOT giving a damn thing to you because I’m a good person, but ONLY because I’m following the example of my Savior and Lord, Jesus – I buy them food (I don’t give money to self-destructive people who will only use it to further destroy themselves with drugs and alcohol and cigarettes).

So here’s the question: is there any connection between “morality” and “religion,” or is “morality” whatever the hell Obama or the government says it is?

In my own personal case, and very definitely in the case of orthodox/genuine Christian theology, morality has EVERYTHING to do with religion.

Let me get in the face of atheists here who would interrupt me and say that they’re atheists and they’re “moral.”  Bullcrap.  And here’s why: if you are an atheist and a situation arises and a lie or doing something wrong would benefit you and you don’t think you would get caught, why wouldn’t you do what would benefit you?  And your answer as an atheist MUST be entirely subjective and completely arbitrary.  Lying, for example, is “unchristian.”  But how would lying by “unatheist?”  What IS “atheist morality” such that if you do X you are a bad atheist???  And of course there is nothing, because atheism and morality have nothing whatsoever to do with one another.  Whereas as a Christian, as a religious person, as someone who believes in God, I would tell the truth or do the moral thing in a given situation even to my own immediate harm because I BELIEVE THAT GOD REWARDS GOOD AND PUNISHES EVIL AT JUDGMENT DAY.  WHICH ATHEISTS DON’T BELIEVE.

Morality and religion are intimately connected.

Any other view on that is morally depraved.

The founding fathers had a word for the latter (non-Christian) view that Obama is taking: treason.

George Washington said, ““Of all the habits and dispositions which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism who should labor to subvert these great pillars.  And let us with caution indulge the supposition that morality can be maintained without religion…reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.”

So yeah, the view that morality comes from anywhere OTHER than religion is TREASON.  Barack Obama and the Democrat Party are traitors to America according to the father of our country and our greatest American hero.

John Adams pointed out that the Constitution was written ONLY for people who believed in God and received their morality from Him: “We have no government armed with the power capable of contending with human passions, unbridled by morality and true religion. Our constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”

Samuel Adams put it this way: “Religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness.”

Patrick Henry had this to say: “The great pillars of all government and of social life [are] virtue, morality, and religion. This is the armor…and this alone, that renders us invincible.”

You need to understand that when it comes to ObamaCare, “morality” is quite simply whatever the hell Obama says it is.  “Morality” is a game of “Simon Says,” and Obama has appointed himself as “Simon.”

Barack Obama promised to “fundamentally transform America.”  And he’s largely done it.

If morality can be completely and fundamentally severed from religion, then what IS morality?  It is nothing more than whatever Obama or whoever is in charge of the government says it is.  And nothing more.  That ought to terrify you, if you aren’t a complete moral idiot.

Here’s another question: Can the government grant Hobby Lobby a waiver when it comes to forcing them to provide the four forms of “birth control” (read “abortifacients”) given that Hobby Lobby provides coverage for the sixteen forms of birth control that DON’T actually kill fertilized eggs (babies)???

Given that Congress passed and President Clinton signed into law the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  The purpose of the LAW was to prevent any laws that substantially burdened a person’s free exercise of religion., doesn’t it seem like Obama and Democrats ought to do anything possible to prevent forcing people to perform abortions or fund abortions against their religiously-informed consciences?

Consider all the other damn waivers Obama has issued in hopes of keeping his Democrats in power in the Senate.  There is clearly another way around this because Obama has found another way at least 25 times when it came to protecting his Democrats from the consequences of their evil socialist health care takeover law.

As an example:

Could the administration extend the deadline to buy ObamaCare beyond March 31st?  Absolutely NOT, they assured us:

Coincidentally, Schrader filed his bill the same day Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius testified on Capitol Hill that, “there is no delay beyond March 31st.” Of course, that wasn’t the first, or last, time she made that claim. And, as our colleagues over at Wonkblog explain, the administration is adamant that it’s not so much an extension as an accommodation.

Heritage provides a montage of such assurances as well as some well-deserved mockery:

No, it cannot happen. It will not happen. The Obama administration absolutely, positively will NOT extend the deadline to sign up for Obamacare.

This isn’t even a laugh line anymore. It’s just an eye roller. And how silly these guys look now:

“We have no plans to extend the open enrollment period. In fact, we don’t actually have the statutory authority to extend the open enrollment period in 2014.” — Health and Human Services (HHS) official Julie Bataille, March 11

“Once that 2014 open enrollment period has been set, they are set permanently.” – HHS official Michael Hash, March 11

“March 31st is the deadline for enrollment. You’ve heard us make that clear.” – Press Secretary Jay Carney, March 21

“There is no delay beyond March 31.” – HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, March 12

There was no delay…until there was. The Washington Post reported last night that March 31 is not, in fact, the final word. To get more time, you tell the government that you haven’t been able to sign up yet:

Under the new rules, people will be able to qualify for an extension by checking a blue box on HealthCare.gov to indicate that they tried to enroll before the deadline. This method will rely on an honor system; the government will not try to determine whether the person is telling the truth.

My favorite there is Obama mouthpiece Jay Carney, who says, “March 31st is the deadline for enrollment.  You’ve heard us make that clear.”

Until he made it clear that Obama had tooted his ObamaHorn and imperiously re-issued “morality” to say that what would be wrong was now right and what is right is no longer wrong.

Kind of like what he did with homosexual marriage.  Yes, Obama said that marriage was the union between one man and one woman.  But he hadn’t said, “Obama Sez.”  And so when he said the exact opposite, well, THAT was “morality.”

So it turns out the answer mimicked Obama’s campaign slogan: “Absolutely NOT” turned into “Yes, we can!”

And they could have protected Hobby Lobby from violating their consciences, too.  They simply chose not to do so.  Kind of like homosexuals had the right to marry whatever adult of the opposite sex who would have them and they chose not to exercise their right.  Which is another way of saying that marriage between one man and one woman doesn’t violate anybody’s “rights.”  It merely rightly defines what marriage IS.

So ObamaCare didn’t HAVE to substantially burden Christians who wanted to exercise their basic rights to form a corporation.  Obama merely wanted to violate Christians’ rights because that’s the kind of demonic man he is.

There is no question whatsoever that Barack Obama is violating the Constitution and violating the law.  He is imposing a substantial burden on religious freedom when there are very clearly ways to have avoided this fascist mess.

My point in the above is to simply demonstrate that Obama didn’t have to force Hobby Lobby to violate its conscience, either as individuals or as a corporation.  There was another way, because as Obama has now proven over and over and over again, there has been another way around EVERY ASPECT of this idiotic failed law.  And so there was a way around this too.

Here’s another thing: nobody knows what the Supreme Court is going to do on this one.  It’s basically like, “Let’s spin the wheel of chance to find out what the Constitution means today!”

Laws no longer mean what they say in this country.  Which is another way of saying they no longer mean ANYTHING.

America is no longer a nation of laws.  Obama abrogates the law as he sees fit and simply issues unconstitutional waivers and unconstitutional extensions.  It is a nation under a Fuehrer, rather than under God as we mouth in our Pledge of Allegiance.

And that’s important because that’s what Hitler did: he had his minions pledge allegiance directly to HIM.  That’s what we all might as well be doing now, under Obama and his God damn America.

This is a morally sick nation that is at this point experiencing the curse of the wrath of God according to Romans chapter one, thanks to our antichrist president.

Democrats are liars without shame, without honor, without virtue, without integrity of any kind whatsoever.  They are falsely claiming that Hobby Lobby is somehow denying women birth control when in fact they provide SIXTEEN different forms of birth control on the health insurance that they offer.  This isn’t about health care OR birth control; it is about abortion and Obama wanting to demonically force Christians to violate their faith and their conscience and fund the murder of ANOTHER 55 million innocent human beings.

What does the Bible say about abortion and where babies come from?

“For You formed my inward parts; You wove me in my mother’s womb.  I will give thanks to You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made; Wonderful are Your works, And my soul knows it very well.  My frame was not hidden from You, When I was made in secret, And skillfully wrought in the depths of the earth; Your eyes have seen my unformed substance; And in Your book were all written The days that were ordained for me, When as yet there was not one of them.” — Psalm 139:13-16

I stand for human LIFE.  Which is another way of saying that I stand AGAINST this demon-possessed president and his demon-possessed Democrat Party and their genocide that is already more than nine times as murderous as Hitler’s.

And I stand for America as “One nation under God” as opposed to “One nation WITHOUT God” as godless Democrats are now demanding.

This also isn’t even about corporations.  Obama and his wicked, godless Democrat left have been persecuting small business owners (i.e., “individual Christian believers”) for refusing to participate in homosexual “marriage”.  They are being forced to either photograph queer “weddings” or participate in aforementioned “weddings” by making the wedding cakes against their consciences.

So, again, Democrats are demon-possessed LIARS for saying this is about a corporation not being a “person” and therefore not able to have religion.  Because it is a FACT that Democrats don’t want ANY PERSON to be able to practice his or her religion unless it is a “religion” of demons.

In fact, this isn’t even about “health care” at ALL.  What did liberal “Justice” Sonia Sotomayor and “Justice” Elena Kagan say?  These Injustices told Hobby Lobby that they could just drop ALL their employees from their generous health care plans and just pay the damn fine:

“Those employers could choose not to give health insurance and pay not that high a penalty – not that high a tax,” Sotomayor said.

Clement said Hobby Lobby would pay more than $500 million per year in penalties, but Kagan disagreed.

“No, I don’t think that that’s the same thing, Mr. Clement,” Kagan said. “There’s one penalty that is if the employer continues to provide health insurance without this part of the coverage, but Hobby Lobby would choose not to provide health insurance at all.

So how can this be about “health care” when these liberal judges are literally telling Hobby Lobby and Conestoga Wood Specialties NOT to provide health care, but to just dump their poor bastard employees into the sewer of ObamaCare???

The crazy thing is, as Christians, Hobby Lobby would ALSO have to violate their consciences to refuse to provide their employees health care.

Liberals are evil, pure and simple.  This isn’t about “health care.”  This is about liberals trying “to control the people.”

This is about Obama and his government having a messiah complex, pure and simple.

We’re about to lose what little is left of America.  It’s all up to the throw of the dice in the Supreme Court where a bunch of unelected judges get to sit and dictate what “religion” is and what “morality” is.

This is what “God damn America” looks like.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 513 other followers