Florida Professor (And High-Ranking Member Of Palm Beach County Democrat Party) Orders Students To Literally Stomp On Jesus Christ

I have been saying it since I started writing this blog: Democrats despise Jesus Christ, despise Christianity, despise Christian morality and despise the Judeo-Christian worldview.

The Democrat Party is the Party of abject moral wickedness and depravity in America.  It is the Party that has murdered 55.7 million babies in America alone even as it has exported the culture of abortion to the rest of the world.  It is the Party of sodomy.  It is the Party of the depraved militant homosexual agenda.  It is the Party of Antichrist and the Party of the totalitarian government Mark of the Beast.

One day all of these sons of hell are going to receive the eternal destruction of their souls in hell that they have reaped in their bodies.

Take a look at the shockingly ugly demoniac face of liberalism and everything liberalism truly stands for.

Here’s the new daily dose of outrage that is the Democrat Party in God damn America.  And if you don’t think that Democrats will burn in hell, put this in your crack pipe and smoke on it:

Professor/Dem Party Official Makes Students Stomp on Jesus
by Jennifer Kabbany – Associate Editor on March 22, 2013

A Florida professor and high-ranking member of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party recently instructed his students to take out a piece of paper, write “JESUS” on it, then put it on the floor and stomp on it – and the Mormon student who refused to do so, calling the assignment morally offensive – was suspended.

“Anytime you stomp on something it shows that you believe that something has no value. So if you were to stomp on the word Jesus, it says that the word has no value,” the Florida Atlantic University student in question, Ryan Roleta, told a CBS news affiliate. “I am not going to be sitting in a class, having my religious rights desecrated.”

So Roleta – a junior at the school who is also a devout Mormon – told his professor, Dr. Deandre Poole, that he refused to do the assignment, calling it inappropriate, offensive and unprofessional – and his religious objections got him suspended from the class, CBS News’ WPEC reported.

After he complained to Poole’s supervisor, Roleta said he was suspended from the intercultural communications class and advised not to return.

“I’m being punished, and I am still waiting for an apology from somebody,” Roleta told WPEC.

In an emailed statement the university sent to CBS, campus officials stated “faculty and students at academic institutions pursue knowledge and engage in open discourse. While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate.”

Apparently the exercise is a suggestion in the textbook, “Intercultural Communication: A Contextual Approach, 5th Edition,” and the school would not say if Poole would face disciplinary action, WPEC reports.

After news of the incident spread Thursday, it came to light that Poole is not only a professor but also a high-ranking official in the region’s Democrat Party. In particular, reports BizPacReview, Poole is vice-chairman of the Palm Beach County Democratic Party.

Poole’s bio blurb on the Palm Beach County Democratic Party website states that he is a member of Lighthouse Worship Center Church of God in Christ who “prides himself in being actively engaged in civic affairs.” It also notes Poole is a “new junior faculty member in the School of Communication and Multimedia Studies at FAU.”

According to his profile page on Florida Atlantic University’s website, Poole earned his PhD from Howard University and is writing a book called “Obamamania: The Rise of a Mythical Hero.”

Every single Democrat in America participated in this vile Nazi act.  These “progressives” have been progressively voting for more and more evil for the last fifty years.

It’s amazing.  Democrats love sodomy.  They love terrorist Muslims and the Muslim Brotherhood.  They love “mothers” who murder their babies.  They love everything but Jesus Christ and Christians and people having the right to defend themselves against the government fascism that Barack Obama is seeking to impose on what is left of this nation.

When Democrats haven’t been massacring babies by the tens of millions through their votes and their appointments and their policies, they have been destroying families and family values through their votes and their appointments and their policies.  Through their easy no-fault divorce, through their celebration of casual sex, through their elevation of single mothers to secular sainthood, they have destroyed as many families as they have babies.  And then in their wicked depravity they have cynically exploited the resulting tsunami of poverty they have created by destroying families by pimping welfare and a culture of dependency in exchange for votes.  Let’s take black people – the ultimate wards of the state due to the strategems of the Party that had actually enslaved them and fought an ugly Civil War to keep them in chains – and the 72% out-of-wedlock birthrate of the black community.  Let’s consider that these wards of the Democrat Party’s statism are five times more likely to kill their own babies through abortion than whites.  And let’s consider the crime and gang and homicide rates of blacks and understand that they are living out the causual-but-brutal indifference toward life that they have been so thoroughly indoctrinated in.  Their poverty isn’t in spite of the efforts of Democrats; it is BECAUSE of the efforts of Democrats.

Hypocrite Democrats dishonestly and hypocritically slandered and demonized George Bush out of golfing as president while dishonestly and hypocritically celebrating Barack Obama as he played more than four times as much golf in his first four years than Bush played in eight.  It was immoral for Bush to play golf while our soldiers were perishing on the battlefield until it was right for Obama to play golf while our soldiers were perishing on the battlefield.  But would George Bush have ever taken a closed-to-the-press golf vacation with Tiger Woods after that turd had been caught red-handed committing adultery with women numbering in the scores???  I think not.  Because it takes a Democrat to endorse that kind of moral sewage.

This most recent example of Democrats’ walking all over that which is Jesus Christ is the continuation of false messiah Obama’s war on religion that he began when he declared war on anybody who didn’t want to be forced to participate in the holocaust of babies in America.

This is the poster boy for the Democrat Party.

In God damn America, people aren’t rewarded for doing the moral thing or the right thing; quite the contrary.  They are persecuted for doing what is right.  By Democrats.

In God damn America, right and wrong are turned on their heads.  Wrong is right and right is wrong.  And doing wrong merits reward and doing right merits punishment.  The one student who wasn’t so brainwashed by liberal Democrat hatred of Jesus Christ discovered that refusing to stomp on Jesus was a violation of the student code of conduct.  He received a letter stating, “You are requested to attend a Student Conduct Conference.”

Next time, when a Democrat Party professor tells you to stomp on Jesus, you’d better stomp on Jesus.  And do it with gusto, too.  Because when a Democrat asks you to stomp Jesus, you ask, “How high?”

This insane world will culminate in the Tribulation and the Mark of the Beast.  And that hell on earth when big-government liberals create mass suffering and death on a scale never before witnessed in the history of the world is coming soon.

Remember, true Christian, that you have heaven.  Democrats, aka secular humanists, have only this earth.  And while they will thrive in God damn America, the time is coming when they will reap what they have sown.

The day is coming when Democrats will stand before Jesus Christ and claim that they were Christians.  And Jesus will sadly tell them, “I was a baby in my mother’s womb and you murdered Me.  I was never able to live a perfect life on earth and die in your place for all of your vile wickedness.  Depart from Me.  I never knew you.  Especially when you were desecrating Me by placing Me in a jar of urine and calling it “art” and stomping on My name.”

Vote Democrat.  Vote to burn in hell forever.

Your time is coming.

Progressive Liberals Are The Pharisees And Sadducees Of Modernity In America

Liberals love to castigate conservatives by labels such as “fascist” and “pharisiacal.”  But in both cases, they are actually looking into a mirror when they point their finger and hurl out that label.

First, allow me to make a very important distinction between “progressive liberalism” and “classical liberalism.”

Here is classical liberalism:

Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates civil liberties and political freedom with limited government under the rule of law and generally promotes a laissez-faire economic policy.^[1][2][3]

Classical liberalism developed in the 19th century in Europe and the United States. Although classical liberalism built on ideas that had already arisen by the end of the 18th century, it advocated a specific kind of society, government and public policy as a response to the Industrial Revolution and urbanization.^[4] Notable individuals whose ideas have contributed to classical liberalism include John Locke,^[5] Jean-Baptiste Say, Thomas Malthus, and David Ricardo. It drew on the free-market economics of Adam Smith and on a belief in natural law,^[6] utilitarianism,^[7] and progress.^[8]

The term classical liberalism was applied in retrospect to distinguish earlier 19th-century liberalism from the newer social liberalism.^[9]

With that understanding, the fact of the matter is that conservatives are the inheritors of classical liberalism.  We are the ones who want limited government under the rule of law with a laissez-faire economic policy.  The progressive liberals who dominate today are the “social liberals” whom we can now accurately call “socialist liberals.”

Liberalism is good in the classical sense; it is truly evil in the socialist sense.

I have many times asked liberal Democrats to explain how they disavow Karl Marx’s central defining statement of economic Marxism: “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.”  To this day I have never received a response.

But I understand that our liberals are not honest people and will not wear the label “socialist” no matter how much it applies to them and to their purpose in establishing a giant totalitarian government that increasingly centrally plans the economy.  So I’ll call them “progressive liberals” instead.

The word “progressive” helps us understand Obama’s prophecy that his administration would “fundamentally transform America.”  That’s what they want: to reshape America not in the founding fathers’ image, but in their own self-image.

I have described liberals as trying to establish “Government as God.”   It is also called “statism.”  Here’s another way to put it: Who is your Savior? Do you turn to the God of the Bible – Who actually rather specifically warned man against big government - to provide to you?  Or do you want to turn to your government to meet your needs?  Our coins say, “In God we trust,” and progressive liberals have been trying to stomp that nonsense out for decades.  Because they trust in human government, not in God.

Here let me again cite Karl Marx.  In one of his most famous statements, after first stating that man invented religion, Marx said:

“Religion is … the opium of the people.  The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions.”

Aside from the obvious fact that it is the Democrat Party who removed God from their party’s platform and cynically and frankly illegitimately put Him back in to a loud chorus of boos by the Democratic National Convention, aside from the fact that it is the Democrat Party that is at open war with religious freedom in America today, what did Karl Marx mean by this statement?

Basically, Marx taught that the world is divided into the economic haves and the economic have-nots – which is everywhere being shouted around us today by the Democrat Party and by progressive liberals who energize that party.  And the have-nots were being oppressed by the haves, in both Marx’s and Democrats’ understanding.  But rather than the people rising up in rage and taking what is theirs by force as Marx wanted them to, they were happy in their religion, which had been invented by the rich to keep the proletariat in bondage.  Since religion is an illusion, and materialism is all there actually is, the happiness that the people had in their Christianity was nothing more than a narcotic that kept them in bondage.  The only “real” reality is economic reality.  And therefore the solution presented by Marx was for the people to set aside their shackles of religion and rise up in a spirit of rage and take what was theirs by force.  Only then could the people have actual, “material” happiness.

And how is the Democrat Party today not arguing the same damn case that Marx made?

As we shall see, this is important.  Marx’s anti-God message has been supplanted by a cynical Democrat Party who has replaced God with a flagrantly anti-God ideology (e.g., homosexual marriage and abortion) while dishonestly refusing to acknowledge that they did so.

The message of Barack Obama and the modern Democrat Party is not the message of Jesus Christ, who most assuredly did not come to earth to either make Caesar’s government larger or to replace him with another version of big human government totalitarian tyranny.  The message of the former is that the poor should be angry and rise up to seize what is rightfully there’s either by vote or by force; the message of the latter was for the poor to be cheerful and content in the God Who watched over them and to trust in Him for His provision.

It’s interesting what does not happen when Jesus says, “Show me a coin.”  What Jesus does NOT say is that giving to Caesar (human government) is the same thing as giving to God.  Jesus makes a very clear contrast between the two.  Which do you want to empower?  Which do you want to give to?  Giant totalitarian human government, or God?  I want to give more to God; liberals want to stop me and force me instead to give more to government.

So why do I call the progressive liberals the “Pharisees and Sadducees” of modern America?

Well, first understand who the Pharisees and Sadducees were.  The Sadducees were the secular branch of Judaism.  They did not believe in a resurrection or an afterlife; they were the closest things to secular humanists or atheists in their day.  And thanks to the Romans the Sadducees largely controlled the lucrative Temple and the money and political clout that went along with it.  The Pharisees were a group who had the people behind them because they were the champions of the Law.  And yet they were no longer using the Law of Moses as their guide; they had long since turned to the Mishnah, which they considered “a hedge around the Law.”

Basically, the Pharisees piled laws on top of laws on the backs of the people that had nothing to do with the Word of God.  That’s what Jesus rails on them for in Matthew 23.  When I hear Jesus say, “They tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger,” I think of Barack Obama taking away guns from parents’ while his own family will be safely protected by men with guns for their entire lives.  I think of the liberals like Obama’s Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner who put people in prison for not paying their taxes when he himself was a tax cheat.  I think of Jesus’ takedown of the most vile human beings in the world of His day – government-power-seeking thugs who used the law to exploit and burden the people – and I think of the Democrat Party and the stubborn ass that is its symbol.

If you broke the laws as handed down by the Pharisees and Sadducees, you were punished by the system.  With the full weight of the government backing that system.

Which is the same thing the progressive liberals who run the Temple of big government do.  They burden the people with taxes and regulations and laws and tell the people that thinking like them is the only way to be a good person.

Pharisees and Sadducees had different agendas, but John the Baptist said they were both the same in their hostility to God and called them both ”a brood of vipers” (Matthew 3:7).  Jesus also lumped them together (Matthew 5:17).  Both exploited the Law to get what they wanted and to burden and oppress those whom they wanted to burden and oppress.

In Jesus’ day, when you talked about “the law” it connoted the religious laws.  But our progressive liberals today talk about the law, the law the law every bit as much with every bit as much of an intent to impose their will on the people they are determined to dominate and rule over.  I can assure you that there are a LOT more laws that have been erected in the United States than there ever were in the Mishnah – as burdensome and unjust as that was.

Democrats are the Pharisees and the Sadducees of American culture today.  They are the priests of big government who demand more and more control the laws and by controlling the laws they exploit and burden the American people.  They erect more and more and more onerous and burdensome and loathsome laws and force us to abide by them or be punished.

By the way, Jesus did a lot of denouncing of the scribes, too.  Who were they?  They were the lawyers of the day.

Just look at which party the lawyers of our day support and which party has a buttload of system-manipulating lawyers, and my case is made complete.

The scribes, Pharisees and Sadducees murdered Jesus in his day.  They are murdering America in our own.

Obama The Narcissist Pseudo-Messiah: Republicans Only Want To Punish Me Because, Really, Everything Is ALL About Me.

I heard Obama say the following and was happy that I always carry my mental barf bucket with me these days when a president who loves the sight of himself on television suddenly pops up and starts blathering:

But you know, the fact of the matter is, is that what — what would violate my commitment to voters is if I ended up agreeing to a plan that put more of the burden on middle-class families and less of a burden on the wealthy in an effort to reduce our deficit. That’s not something I’m going to do. What would violate my commitment to voters would be to put forward a plan that makes it harder for young people to go to college, that makes it harder for a family with a disabled kid to care for that kid.

And there — there’s a threshold where — that you reach where the balance tips, even in making compromises that are required to get something done in this town, where you are hurting people in order to give another advantage to folks who don’t need help. And we had an extensive debate about this for a year. And not only does the majority of the American people agree with me, about half of Republican voters agree with me on this.

So, you know, at some point there’s got to be, I think, a recognition on the part of my — my Republican friends that — you know, take the deal. You know, they will be able to claim that they have worked with me over the last two years to reduce the deficit more than any other deficit reduction package, that we will have stabilized it for 10 years. That is a significant achievement for them. They should be proud of it. But they keep on finding ways to say no, as opposed to finding ways to say yes.

And I don’t know how much of that just has to do with, you know, it is very hard for them to say yes to me. But you know, at some point, you know, they’ve got take me out of it and think about their voters and think about what’s best for the country.

And if — and if — and if they do that, if — if — if they’re not worried about who’s winning and who’s losing, you know, that they score a point on the president, that they extract that last little concession, that they — that they — you know — you know, force him to do something he really doesn’t want to do just for the heck of it, and they focus on actually what’s good for the country, I actually think we can get this done.

Republicans don’t have any values to defend or advance, you see.  Anybody who tells you Republicans believe in lower taxes and less spending are just liars, I guess.  They’ve never had any commitments to voters.  Nope.  Only Obama’s voters matter.  They’re only doing this because of their [racist, of course] hostility to Obama.

Please recall, ye dumbasses, that the Republicans won the election, too.  Nancy Pelosi predicted Democrats would retake the House.  Voters instead re-elected Republicans by a large majority to stand up to Obama.  Republicans made promises to the voters who re-elected them, too.

As I heard Obama wax narcissistic, I couldn’t help but think of the words of Jesus when He told His disciples:

“If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you.  If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.  Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’  If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.  But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me.” — John 15:18-21

Obama is telling the liberal world, “If the Republicans hate you, you know that it has hated me before it hated you.”  And actually history is rather clear that it was the other way around.  Republicans despised Democrats long before the name “Barack Hussein” meant a damn thing.  Do you remember when the government shut down under Clinton’s war with the Republican House over mostly the same stuff?  Do you think THAT was because Republicans hated Obama, too?  Do you think Republicans were united saying to each other, “Let’s shut down the government because we can’t stand that Barack Obama guy” back in 1995?

You start to see just how truly narcissistic and deluded this guy is to even THINK that kind of crap, let alone actually say it.

You see, when Jesus said “They hate you because they hated Me first” it was because it was true; when Obama says it it’s because he’s a narcissistic pseudo-messiah – and a complete hypocrite, as you’ll see soon.

This reminds me of a line I heard in a debate.  Allow me to paraphrase it for Obama’s sake:

“Obama, I serve Jesus Christ, I know Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ is a friend of mine.  Obama, you are no Jesus Christ.”

I know that your campaign guru David Axelrod said you were “Black Jesus.”  I know that you think that there are no red states or blue states, only Obama states.  I know that you literally altered the American flag to impose yourself onto the nation.  I know that you think that the human race will read about your exalted magnificence “generations from now” and marvel about how you lowered the level of the oceans and healed the planet.  I know that your same followers who say that “the white man is the skunk of the planet earth” have called you “the messiah” and have claimed that history will be rewritten so that instead of “Before Christ” and “Anno Domini” the world will be divided into “Before Barack” and “After Barack.”  I know that your followers consider you “prophecy fulfilled.”

Barack Obama, I know that you really, really think you’re the messiah.  I know that you truly believe that the entire world revolves around you.  I know that if you don’t get your way, you believe that it could only be because the people who don’t think just like you do must be out to personally sabotage you.

I know how sick and toxic and delusional and truly demon-possessed you and your followers are.  I also know that you are totally wrong about damn near everything you stand for.  And I know that the Republicans oppose you out of their values and out of the Republican Party Platform that was there long before YOU came along.

Republicans CAN’T “take you out of it,” Obama.  As much as we’d like to do that, YOU’RE the damn president.  We’re painfully aware of that fact.  You’re the man who has presided over the worst economy in my lifetime.  You’re the Slanderer in Chief.  We can’t just “take you out of it.”

But I tell you what, Barry Hussein: prove me wrong.  Because I’m here to promise that if you agree to the Republican demands, you would immediately find that they will agree with you and vote with you and even publicly praise you.

Which is another way of my telling you that I know that you are a liar and a demagogue and a slanderer without shame, honor or decency.  Because for all your rhetoric, you know as well as I do that if you gave the Republicans their way the way you want your way, they would take that deal in a heartbeat.  And I know that because you would be a genuine sociopath NOT to know that.

Your tactic to demonize as the nation slides off a cliff couldn’t be more vile.

Please stop pretending that somehow it’s all about you and that if Republicans oppose you it’s only because they are people with no values and no commitments and that somehow all they want to do is hurt you out of your pseudo-messiah persecution complex.

I’ve got to ask you Democrats: if you really needed to make a deal for your business or for your personal life, why would you viciously attack and slander and demonize the people you needed to deal with you?  How can you possibly think that this is a good negotiating tactic and that Obama is doing anything other than trying to do do anything other than piss into every pot from which a good-faith deal could possibly happen?

People who listen to Obama’s pure, distilled bullcrap ought to learn the truth about Obama as revealed even in the New York Times:

[...]

Even by the standards of the political world, Mr. Obama’s obsession with virtuosity and proving himself the best are remarkable, those close to him say. (Critics call it arrogance.) More than a tic, friends and aides say, it is a core part of his worldview, formed as an outsider child who grew up to defy others’ views of the limits of his abilities. When he speaks to students, he almost always emphasizes living up to their potential. [...]

But even those loyal to Mr. Obama say that his quest for excellence can bleed into cockiness and that he tends to overestimate his capabilities. The cloistered nature of the White House amplifies those tendencies, said Matthew Dowd, a former adviser to President George W. Bush, adding that the same thing happened to his former boss. “There’s a reinforcing quality,” he said, a tendency for presidents to think, I’m the best at this. [...]

For someone dealing with the world’s weightiest matters, Mr. Obama spends surprising energy perfecting even less consequential pursuits. He has played golf 104 times since becoming president, according to Mark Knoller of CBS News, who monitors his outings, and he asks superior players for tips that have helped lower his scores. He decompresses with card games on Air Force One, but players who do not concentrate risk a reprimand (“You’re not playing, you’re just gambling,” he once told Arun Chaudhary, his former videographer).

His idea of birthday relaxation is competing in an Olympic-style athletic tournament with friends, keeping close score. The 2009 version ended with a bowling event. Guess who won, despite his history of embarrassingly low scores? The president, it turned out, had been practicing in the White House alley. [...]

Mr. Obama’s fixation on prowess can get him into trouble. Not everyone wants to be graded by him, certainly not Republicans. Mr. Dowd, the former Bush adviser, said he admired Mr. Obama, but added, “Nobody likes to be in the room with someone who thinks they’re the smartest person in the room.”

Even some Democrats in Washington say they have been irritated by his tips on topics ranging from the best way to shake hands on the trail (really look voters in the eye, he has instructed) to writing well (“You have to think three or four sentences ahead,” he told one reluctant pupil).

For another, he may not always be as good at everything as he thinks, including politics. While Mr. Obama has given himself high grades for his tenure in the White House — including a “solid B-plus” for his first year — many voters don’t agree, citing everything from his handling of the economy to his unfulfilled pledge that he would be able to unite Washington to his claim that he would achieve Israeli-Palestinian peace.

Those were not the only times Mr. Obama may have overestimated himself: he has also had a habit of warning new hires that he would be able to do their jobs better than they could.

“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,” Mr. Obama told Patrick Gaspard, his political director, at the start of the 2008 campaign, according to The New Yorker. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

Though he never ran a large organization before becoming president, he initially dismissed internal concerns about management and ended up with a factionalized White House and a fuzzier decision-making process than many top aides wanted.

Now Mr. Obama is in the climactic contest of his career, about to receive the ultimate judgment on his performance from the American people. It is a moment, aides say, he has been craving: during some of the darker days of his tenure, he told them that he wanted the country to evaluate him not in isolation, but in contrast to the Republican alternative. The tough, often successful attacks from the right have hardened and fueled him, aides say, driving him to prove that “we’re right and we’re better,” as one ally put it. [...]

Not only do the White House, the Supreme Court and a budgetary crisis hang in the balance, but so does a national judgment on whether Mr. Obama’s agenda was a good idea in the first place. So perhaps it is not surprising that he cites not just his record, but also every other accomplishment he can think of.

Then again, he is just as competitive in private, when there is little or nothing at stake. At one of his farewell meetings for White House interns, Mr. Obama dispensed some life advice.

THIS is the man demonizing Republicans about worrying over “who’s winning and who’s losing”?  Seriously?  Democrats are that seriously stupid and hypocritical that they buy this guy’s giant load of bovine feces?

Obama wants America to go off the cliff.  That way, he can spend the next four years blaming Republicans for his failure to lead the same way he spent the last four years blaming Bush for his failure to lead.

And while Obama is not the Antichrist, he 1) is one of the false messiahs Jesus warned us would come in the last days before the ultimate Antichrist; and 2) an example of how the true Antichrist to come will deceive with politics, rhetoric and lies with a media machine that is in love with him and literally worshiping him reporting it all in glowing terms.

A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 4-5

See part one: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 1-3

Every believer from the Old to and through the New Testaments has dreamed of eternity with God.  But what’s the process?  How does it happen – and most important of all WHEN does it happen?  We find that it doesn’t fully happen when we die: we are with the Lord, but those who have died up to now have not yet received their glorified bodies.  So when does it happen?  How?

For the first three chapters of the Book of Revelation, the word “church” – referring to believers in Jesus Christ on earth – is mentioned seven times with the word “churches” being mentioned twelve times.   That’s a total of nineteen times, all ye math whizzes.  For the first three chapters, it’s church, church, church.  And yet, after referring to the church and addressing the churches over and over again, “the church” is not referenced in any way, shape or form until Rev 19 when Christ returns to earth with His saints.  And the only believers referenced in between are the  two witnesses and the 144,000 Jews– and we aint them.  So what explanation makes sense?

This one: Rev 4:1 begins with the phrase “after these things” (NIV “after this”) and we hear the command to “come up here.”  And next thing you know we’re in heaven with John.  And the Church mysteriously appears to remain in heaven until we return with Christ as King of kings in Rev 19.  This can be nothing other than the Rapture of all true believers that occurs prior to the Tribulation.  No other answer makes sense to explain the complete absence/omission from the Church on earth during the Tribulation.  Want a little more proof?  In Rev 1:12 we have a reference to “seven golden lampstands.”  In Rev 1:20 Jesus Himself explains that the seven golden lampstands are the seven churches that He tells John to write to.  John is called up to heaven, and what does he immediately see?  Among other things surrounding the throne of God, he sees “seven lamps of fire burning before the throne” (Rev 4:5).  And I’m just going to tell you that those seven lamps are going to be resting on seven golden  lampstands!  Because the Church is in heaven where it belongs serving as the seven golden lampstands for those lamps.  As a further proof, Jesus seven times says in chapters 1-3, “He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches.”  Yet in Rev 13:9 we hear, “If anyone has an ear, let him hear.”  Either God is so angry at the churches He’s no longer even talking to them, or He isn’t talking to them because they’re in heaven and in Rev 13 God is urging the inhabitants of the earth to wisdom.  Another proof that the church is now in heaven is the twenty-four elders.  We know they aren’t angels because they are wearing crowns  (Rev 4:4) – and angels NEVER wear crowns ANYWHERE in the Bible because that honor is reserved only for God and for believing humans whom God honors.  The Bible mentions five crowns for believers: 1) the imperishable crown for believers who faithfully run their race (1 Cor 9:24-25); 2) the crown of rejoicing to those who win new believers for Christ (1 Thess 2:19-20; Dan 12:3); 3) the crown of life for Christians who endure trials even to death (James 1:12; Rev 2:8-11); 4) the crown of righteousness to those who love the appearing of Christ (2 Tim 4:8); and the crown of glory to shepherds who faithfully minister their flocks (1 Pet 5:1-4).  Further, “24” is symbolic of priestly service and priestly service is associated with human believers, not with angels.  As an example, there were 24 classifications of priests in 1 Chronicles 24-25.

Rev 3:10 promises that believers will be “kept from the hour of testing which is about to come upon the whole world.”  We have the promise of the sign of Noah and the sign of Sodom where Noah, Lot and their believing families are removed before divine  judgment falls upon the earth.  There’s a clear pattern: God prophetically warns the world of judgment; God removes His people; judgment falls.

So, by way of conclusion, John epitomizes a glorified believer prophetically called up to heaven at the beginning of events in Revelation 4 just as we shall be, and then seeing the rest of events through the eyes of a glorified believer.  We will have “a bird’s eye view” of what happens if there ever was one.

And we’ll be surrounding the throne of God, with the throne of God being the central focal point of the book of Revelation.  Everything that proceeds does so first from God on His throne.  John’s description of God on His throne is awesome in its majesty: God’s glory radiates like a precious multi-faceted gem (Rev 4:2).  Jasper is a white diamond representing divine purity; the sardius stone is a blood-red ruby symbolic of divine wrath and judgment.  God’s judgment is tempered,  however.  Because both God’s purity and wrath are enveloped in a rainbow of emerald representing divine life and mercy.  The NIV correctly says “encircled.”  Circles represent continuity and eternity.  And apparently every Christian is going to find out quickly that surrounding the throne of God is the place to be.

Surrounding the throne are four living beings (Rev 4:5-8).  They are apparently a class of angel in addition to the seraphim (Isaiah 6:1-7) and the cherubim (Gen 3:24; Ezekiel chap 1).  These four living beings may be a type of cherubim because they guard the throne of God (Psalm 89:1; 99:1).  What is most interesting about them is that their features resemble the description accorded to the different portraits of Christ in the four Gospels:  In Matthew Jesus is presented as a lion, the king.  In Mark Jesus is described as the hard-working ox who is fully obedient to the will of the Father.  The living being with the face of a man is recognized in Luke’s portrayal of Jesus as the perfect Man.  And the soaring eagle is fulfilled in John’s emphasis of Jesus’ heavenly and divine origin.

The word “sea” is also important.  In Rev 13 “the sea” is used to describe sinful humanity tossing around in fury and violence and confusion.  Isaiah repeatedly uses the metaphor of a restless ocean to describe the nations as “a troubled sea in a storm” (see Isaiah 57:20).  See also Jer 49:23 and Jude 1:13.  By way of contrast, we who surround God’s throne will be the picture of divine calm and peace, like a sea of crystal flowing out from the throne of God.  I like that picture a lot more than the always-raging sea of sinful humanity.

As we view the throne of God we begin Revelation 5: the exalted majesty of God on His throne leads to one thing – to the exaltation of the Lamb “standing in the center of the throne” (Rev 5:6).  Consider the incredible concept of God’s throne being a battle chariot from Daniel 7:9-10.  The battle chariot used by Old Testament warriors was a 2-3 man operation, with one steering the chariot while an archer/s and/ or spearman fought.  God’s throne is a Trinitarian throne.  And it is a throne that goes wherever God goes.

You see in Revelation chapter 5 Christ receiving worship in a manner that is impossible to deny.  As an example, in John 20:28 Thomas says, “My Lord and my God!”  And Mormons and JWs say it’s just an exclamation rather than a recognition of deity.  Jesus stands in the center of the throne of God (Rev 5:6).  The elders fall down on their knees before Jesus (5:8).  They and the angels pronounced Jesus as “worthy” (Rev 5:12).  And then God the Father and God the Son TOGETHER are worshiped (5:13-14).  It is merely unbelievable unbelief to deny that Jesus  is truly and fully God given the statement of Rev 5.

Now, we have a seven-sealed scroll with writing on both sides on the hand of the Father with the question, “Who is worthy to open it?”  And NO ONE is found who is worthy except one and ONLY one Person: the Lamb who was slain.  The physical characteristics of the scroll make one thing abundantly clear: it is a legal document that was seen in the ancient world: the contract would be written on the inner side, rolled up and sealed with seven seals, and a short description would be written on the outer side.  There are actually six different interpretations of what this scroll represents in various schools of thought.  But I’ll only mention the two that are genuine candidates.  The scroll is either: 1) the title deed to the earth (God gave man dominion over the earth, but Satan usurped that dominion; and Christ won the title deed back but had never exercised His claim until now); or 2) the decree to issue the judgment that will result in the eschaton (end of days) and ultimately in eternity.  I believe it is this second possibility because Christ opens the scroll and we initiate the unfolding of judgment and the beginning of the ushering in of the glorious eternal state.  So on that view, why does John weep when no one is found worthy (“qualified”) to open the scroll?  Because mankind is in this terrible state and nothing can be done to advance their condition and bring this terrible condition of the human race and planet earth to a good conclusion.  Only by Jesus opening the scroll can history move to the conclusion that a righteous, holy and merciful, loving God had foreordained for the world.

The seven years of the Tribulation will be the most fateful years in all of human history.  They initiate the countdown to the end of human law and lawlessness, and at the culmination of these seven years Jesus will finally personally return in a cataclysmic appearance on earth to establish the long-anticipated Kingdom of God.

The Tribulation will result in the Millennium in which Jesus Christ sits on the earthly throne of David in the earthly city of Jerusalem and rules over the world as is His right that He won for all time on the cross.  What is the purpose of all this?  It is twofold: 1) to literally fulfill every single promise that God gave to Israel, to God’s physical DNA-people the Jews.  Every promise of prominence, of blessing, of wealth and abundance, of shalom, in which Messiah rules from His David throne while all the peoples of the earth come to Jerusalem to worship Him, will be literally and completely fulfilled.  And 2) to also literally demonstrate to secular, unbelieving, sinful humanity that they can NOT create a better world – or even a world capable of surviving – apart from God and most especially apart from Jesus.  The world is saying, “We could evolve to our highest potential and solve all of our problems if only it weren’t for those damned Christians.”  Jesus is going to give them their chance: and in only seven years they will degenerate to the point that they will destroy themselves and literally destroy the planet they’re living on unless Jesus comes to personally intervene and take control.  By the time the Tribulation ends, no one will be able to say, “We were doing fine until Jesus showed up and ruined everything.”

Finally, the twenty-four elders, as glorified human saints, also give us a glimpse into our future work and ministry.  God will give believers crowns to honor our faithful service to Him while on earth, but we will primarily use those crowns not to exalt ourselves but rather to have something to exalt our God with as we cast our crowns at the feet of Jesus (Rev 4:9-11).  But in Rev 5:5-9 we also see these glorified believers being able to encourage and explain (“Stop weeping; behold!”); they carry “the golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints” as priests who minister before God.  And, yes, we WILL have harps in heaven and the ultimate capacity to make a truly joyful noise before the Lord.

Part Three: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 6-7

Part Four: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 8-9

Part Five: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 10-11

Part Six: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 12-13

Part Seven: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 14-15

Part Eight: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 16-18

Part Nine: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 19-20

Part Ten: A Midlevel Flight Across Revelation: Rev 21-22

United Nation’s Global Tax, Amazing Liberal Hypocrisy And The Frightening Reality Of How Truly DANGEROUS Obama’s Policies Are To America’s Poor

Ask your liberal friends to finish this sentence: “If the rich get richer, the poor get ______.”

Betcha a dollar your liberal will reflexively say, “poorer.”

The problem is that that is simply not true.  Unless an economy is a fixed sized pie such that if you get more of the pie, I by definition get less.  And as I shall try to explain, that is NOT the way a free market economy works.

The reality that liberals are too morally stupid to understand is that if I start a business, I start making my OWN pie.  By starting a business and becoming successful, I’m not stealing from anyone and I’m not exploiting anybody; rather, in direct opposition to what Barack Obama and Elizabeth Warren – the brains behind Obama’s Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to go along with a genuine fake American Indian (read, “fake oppressed minority = fake victim”) believe - I AM BUILDING SOMETHING if I create a business.  And no, you liberal dumbass, I am NOT stealing from somebody else; I am building something where there had been nothing before.  I am putting a positive attitude that you have never had and will never understand into action and I am starting something.

That’s right. I said the “A” word, liberals.  I said ATTITUDE:

“The longer I live, the more I realize the impact of attitude on life. Attitude, to me, is more important than facts. It is more important than the past, the education, the money, than circumstances, than failure, than successes, than what other people think or say or do. It is more important than appearance, giftedness or skill. It will make or break a company… a church… a home. The remarkable thing is we have a choice everyday regarding the attitude we will embrace for that day. We cannot change our past… we cannot change the fact that people will act in a certain way. We cannot change the inevitable. The only thing we can do is play on the one string we have, and that is our attitude. I am convinced that life is 10% what happens to me and 90% of how I react to it. And so it is with you… we are in charge of our Attitudes.”  — Charles R. Swindoll

That 10% versus 90% is particularly relevant with Obama, who has the tiny little insect testicles to say he’s ninety damn percent not to blame for his insane and frankly demonic government spending.  When like everything else the man thinks he’s completely back assward.

That’s right, liberal.  Nobody’s taken anything from you; nobody’s oppressed you; and the only reason that you’re a victim is because you have spent your life victimizing YOURSELF and allowing your messiah Obama and liberals like him to talk you into being a weak, useless human being.  If you have the kind of positive attitude that Swindoll is describing, nothing is going to hold you down or hold you back – and the LAST thing you’re ever going to do is start whining like a liberal victim who is pathetic and cannot do anything unless government does it for you.

Here’s the thing: I’d love it if somebody asked Obama to complete that sentence I began with: If the become richer, the poor become ______.  And after the Marxist said “poorer,” I’d ask him what he thinks Americans should do given the fact THAT AMERICANS HAVE ABOUT THE WEALTHIEST DAMN LIFESTYLE ON THE PLANET.  I would demand that Obama explain on his view why Americans should redistribute trillions of dollars of American gross domestic product so that the desperately poor people in Africa and China and India and the Middle East and pretty much all over the damn planet could have more.

Here’s the thing. “If the rich get richer, the poor get poorer” the way liberals will invariably say, then what about the question, “If America gets richer, the rest of the world gets ______”???  How would the answer not be the same???  If America gets richer, then by liberal doctrine the rest of the world – particularly the poorest regions of the world – must necessarily get poorer.

Go to the Congo, where the GDP per capital is just $348.  That means the average person is forced to live (“subsist” is probably more fitting) on the currency equivalent of just 348 dollars per year.  That’s 29 bucks a month total.  That’s living the good life on 95 cents a day.  These people have NOTHING.  They don’t have houses; they have tiny little shacks that they build from whatever they can find; they don’t have air conditioning or refrigerators or laundry machines or for that matter electricity or plumbing.  Their kids don’t have disposable diapers.  Because they’ve never tried the free market economics or limited government you liberals despise, they’ve got squat diddly butkus and they’ll never have anything BUT squat diddly butkus.  And so hey, liberal poor person, unless you’ve never had more than $348 of welfare benefits or permanent unemployment benefits or allowance from daddy or however the hell you get your money and benefits in the course of a year, YOU DAMN WELL OWE THAT TRULY POOR SONOFABITCH IN THE CONGO.   And by your own rhetoric if you don’t send pretty much everything you get to the Congo, to Liberia, etc. etc. etc., then you are a greedy one percenter and shame on you.  You owe those poor people every single SCINTILLA as much as the rich guy in America owes YOU.  And what you know if you’ve ever had an honest moment in your entire life is that you keep demanding somebody ELSE give to YOU but YOU’VE never given people who’d rejoice on a tiny fraction of what you’ve got SQUAT.

I’m talking to you, resident of Detroit’s poorest neighborhood.  Because if you aint nearly starved to death you’ve got it FAR better than most of the population of the planet have it.  And it’s damn time you quit reaching your hand out and being a liberal TAKER and instead putting it in your wallet and becoming a liberal GIVER.

I’m talking to you, you damn liberal socialist hypocrites.  All you know how to do is justify redistribution when it applies to YOU or, in the case of liberal politicians, when it applies to your constituency as you pimp somebody else’s money in exchange for your damn votes so you can live like a fat cat like Charlie Rangel.

So a truly consistent liberal must therefore need to require America to lose wealth so the rest of the world can get richer instead.

So what’s Obama’s answer to the United Nations imposing a global tax?  Is Obama going to say he’s against the people of the Congo getting richer?  Then how DARE he allow America to produce more wealth?!?!?  What’s YOUR answer for why YOU shouldn’t have to pay right out of your ass because if you live in America, then compared to the majority of people on earth, you are a greedy one percenter compared to them???

The UN says America should pay a tax:

Global Taxes Are Back, Watch Your Wallet

Like a bad sequel to a rotten horror movie, the debate over global taxation once again is rearing its ugly head — courtesy of the United Nations. And, despite lacking the requisite hockey mask and chain saw, the seemingly countless proposals for the imposition of global taxes are truly terrifying.

In July, Inter Presse news service reported that a top U.N. official was preparing a new study that will outline numerous global tax proposals to be considered by the General Assembly at its September meeting. The proposals will likely include everything from global taxes on e-mails and Internet use to a global gas tax and levies on airline travel. If adopted, American taxpayers could wind up paying hundreds of billions of dollars each year to the United Nations.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan is among those leading the charge, having stated that he “strongly supports finding new sources of funding” for the U.N. through global taxes, according to Inter Presse. In fact, Annan made very clear his support for the imposition of global taxes in a 2001 Technical Note that he authored for a U.N. conference. “The need to finance the provision of global public goods in an increasingly globalized world also adds new urgency to the need for innovative new sources of financing,” Annan wrote. The Note goes on to describe and evaluate the merits of several global tax proposals.

Global tax proposals are not new. Various plans have been flitting around in academic circles and liberal and socialist think-tanks for decades. And while the United States and other developed nations have staved off such proposals in the past, third world nations have increasingly dominated the U.N. General Assembly by sheer numbers since 1970. As a result, they have begun to see promise in their quest to take and keep for themselves the wealth of citizens from nations like the United States — specifically using the term “redistribution.” Recent U.N. actions have also provided a new excuse and set the stage for the third world to not only renew its pursuit of global taxes but also hold out hope for eventual success.

What do the poor liberal whiners in America have?  They not only have television sets (plural); they have CABLE television.  They’ve got refrigerators.  They’ve got air conditioning.  They’ve got cell phones.  They’ve got computers and video games.  They have got stuff coming out of their EARS compared to the poor in most of the rest of the world.

A lot of conservatives hate using the good word “liberalism” to describe liberals.  That’s because classical liberalism is actually a refutation of everything your progressive “liberal” Democrat stands for:

Classical liberalism is a political ideology, a branch of liberalism which advocates individual liberties and limited government under the rule of law and emphasizes economic freedom.

That aint modern liberalism, boys and girls; that’s MODERN CONSERVATIVISM.  And the more you explain what classical liberalism is, the more modern liberal progressives are disqualified from it.

So if modern liberals aren’t really ”liberals” at all, then what are they?  They are a bunch of self-centered, greedy, narcissistic little whiners who harbor the basic worldview, “Everybody owes me something and forced redistribution is wonderful as long as its somebody else’s money that’s getting redistributed.”  That’s what they are.  They are people who have perverted the teachings of Christ and warped American history and the Constitution and system of government our founding fathers gave us to mandate socialism.  Unless you can find where Jesus taught, “Rendering to Caesar IS rendering unto God.”  Unless you can find where Jesus taught that a giant socialist government (or ANY kind of government for that matter) should forcibly seize and redistribute people’s property based on naked demagoguery and cynical political partisanship.

Hey, tell you what: just show me where Jesus taught, “If you earn less than $200,000 a year, you don’t have to give ANYTHING to the less fortunate; you get to use the raw power of government to take stuff from others so you can vote to redistribute it to yourselves.”

No, that’s not in the teachings of Jesus and it’s not in the writings of the founding fathers who forged a republic for Americans based on the principles of liberty and freedom.

Instead you pervert the wisdom of Jesus and of the American founding fathers and distort them to falsely claim that they taught the doctrine of your REAL ideological master:

“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” – Karl Marx

If you want to know where modern liberalism comes from, THAT’S WHERE IT COMES FROM.

Jesus never absolves the poor from giving; to the contrary, HE calls for the poor to give:

Jesus sat down opposite the place where the offerings were put and watched the crowd putting their money into the temple treasury. Many rich people threw in large amounts. But a poor widow came and put in two very small copper coins, worth only a few cents.  Calling his disciples to him, Jesus said, “Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put more into the treasury than all the others.  They all gave out of their wealth; but she, out of her poverty, put in everything—all she had to live on.” — Mark 12:41-44

So you aren’t off the hook any more than that rich guy you feel so self-righteous to hate and demonize and demagogue, poor liberal.

You, who judge and condemn the rich and demand the state confiscate more and ever more of what they work to earn, another teaching of Jesus applies to YOU:

“For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you.” — Matthew 7:2

It’s time you lived up to your own damn hypocritical rhetoric and slogans, you liberals (and especially you POOR liberals).

But don’t you worry, you pathological hypocrites who would never DREAM of paying taxes yourselves that you want everybody else to pay for YOU, if Obama gets reelected, HE’LL FORCE YOU TO REDISTRIBUTE YOUR WEALTH THE SAME WAY YOU WANTED HIM TO FORCE RICH PEOPLE TO REDISTRIBUTE THEIRS.

If the so-called “rich” don’t deserve their money because they’ve got more than you do, poor, stupid liberal; what the hell makes you think that YOU deserve YOUR money given that you’ve got a damn sight more than most of the world’s poor?

Somebody ought to take all your stuff away that the poor people in the Congo don’t have, have never had, and probably never WILL have (because the poorest countries are usually also the most socialistic countries and their failed economic system guarantees the constant destruction of wealth as corrupt government officials keep “redistributing” a shrinking economy into their own pockets).  Because that’s “economic justice” by your own rhetoric.

And Obama’s just the man to do it.  Because that’s the way he thinks; it’s the “Dream From His Father.”  And Obama literally “became” an American in order to chop America down to the size he believed as a “citizen of the world” that it ought to be.

And Obama has done an incredible job advancing that vision of America.

He’s the man whose entire history is that of anti-colonialism and hating the West for its prosperity when the have-nots of the planet have naught.

If we taxed the wealth of those who earned more than $250,000 a year at 100% – literally confiscated their wealth and left them with nothing – we would ruin those people and still only get 38% of what we needed to close Obama’s massive budget deficit.  We’d have to tax them at the logically impossible rate of 134%, which means we would seize everything they owned and them demand that they pay MORE than everything they owned.  And with the rich people ruined, where would Obama go to collect the other 62%?  We’d have to then have ANOTHER group of people to demonize and confiscate from, wouldn’t we???

You can’t win with what the left is saying.  What they claim is guaranteed destruction and it is only bought by bad people who are selfish and greedy hypocrites who demand that somebody else should be forced to take responsibility for their failed lives.

As I pointed out earlier, liberals often use an incredibly flawed perversion of the Bible to try to justify their flawed Marxist economic system.  But when you understand what the Bible has to say about taxation, you realize that the left pretty much takes everything the Bible actually says and turns it completely upside down.

The truth is this: Wealth is not a fixed-sized pie.  The left is wrong; human creativity and ingenuity is such that people can always come along with new ideas that make them rich and create jobs for other people and improve the lives of other people who use their product or service.  They won’t be getting rich at somebody else’s expense; they’ll be building a pie where no pie existed before and that pie will make the overall pie of an economy larger.  If the rich get richer, other people can learn from that rich person’s example and be encouraged by it and also get richer.  The left is simply flat-out wrong.

Time To Shed Some Good Tears: Entire Community Of Cedar Falls, Iowa Shows Up To Welcome Wounded Hero. And A Truly Heroic Girlfriend.

Boy, what a great town to welcome a great hero:

Basically, the ENTIRE TOWN came to welcome Taylor Morris home.

Taylor Morris received the Bronze Star Medal with Valor for his heroism as an EOD (Explosive Ordinance Disposal) technician.  He was seriously wounded with traumatic amputations of both legs and most of most of both arms in an IED explosion in Afghanistan.

The horror of war:

Is overcome by the beauty of the human spirit.

It’s hard to imagine the aftermath of being literally blown apart like that.  You can easily imagine a hopeless, bitter, angry young man lying alone in some dingy apartment slowly drinking himself to death.  But Taylor Morris is a bright, shining example that we don’t have to be destroyed by our tragedies, whatever those tragedies are.

Here’s the thing that got my tears flowing: that pretty little girlfriend of his (soon to be his wife, I heard) helped him with and through his rehabilitation.  That gal literally CARRIED him on her back upstairs before he was ready for his new legs:

The above pictures and several others are available at this UK Daily Mail article.

I don’t say this to make light of Taylor’s obviously incredibly serious wounds; I say it to draw attention to his incredible girlfriend Danielle Kelly: it’s got to be a real lift – in every sense of the word – to be carried around by the woman who loves you the way Danielle has demonstrated she loves Taylor.

There’s that expression, “I’ve got your back” that communicates complete support.  In this case, Danielle took it to the next level: she said to her man, “You’ve got MY back” as she literally carried him.

With a woman like that, we can literally look Taylor in the eye – wounds and disabilities and all – and tell him honestly, “Dude, you’re a lucky man.”

I wasn’t able to document that either of these two are Christians, but Danielle’s love-in-action for Taylor was a beautiful illustration of a truly beautiful poem about the kind of love Jesus Christ shows for us when we’re struggling:

I saw the above picture of Danielle carrying Taylor on a beach and realized there were only one set of footprints.  And what a beautiful picture!

Here’s a picture of Taylor and Danielle dancing:

May God in all of His abundance bless them BOTH.  I literally couldn’t tell you which one of these heroes is the greater hero.

They say you can’t keep a good man down. In this case that’s literally true because of a good woman.

Thank God for men like Taylor Morris.  And thank God for women like Danielle Kelly.

But let’s not forget to thank God for communities like Cedar Falls, Iowa, that gathered around their heroes to raise $250,000 (so far!) to build Taylor’s dream home.

Just thank God.

Here’s a link to a more detailed story about this couples’ transition from hell to happiness.

God bless our warriors who volunteer to go to dangerous places where they will face hardship and deprivation to risk their lives and limbs for America; and God bless the people – the wives and husbands, the mothers and fathers, the brothers and sisters and family members, the friends – who stand by their warriors through anything and everything.

Michelle Obama’s Speech: Red And Yellow Black And White, All Are Precious In Jesus-Obama’s Sight. Barry Loves The Little Tea Partiers Of The World.

Michelle Obama gave a nice speech, I’m sure (I preferred to gag myself with a giant spoon to watching it, but that’s another story).

I have to admit that as I was really choking on that damn spoon, there was a point when it actually occurred to me that maybe listening to Michelle’s speech might be more fun.

Having heard some of her top lines, I now know that I made the right choice gagging on that damn spoon.

Damn did that woman invent her own crazy reality:

“I love that for Barack, there is no such thing as “us” and “them” – he doesn’t care whether you’re a Democrat, a Republican, or none of the above…he knows that we all love our country…and he’s always ready to listen to good ideas…he’s always looking for the very best in everyone he meets.”

I mean, holy crap.  Barry Hussein loves us all the same?  Seriously???

When Rush Limbaugh stated that hard core liberal activist Sandra Fluke was a “slut” for saying that she used so much damned birth control that she was spending $3,000 on it when for ordinary people it cost $9 a month, Barack Obama called her to say how sorry he was for such harsh dialogue.  Just as he called Sarah Palin every time Bill Maher called Her a “cunt” or a “dumb twat” or every time David Letterman said Sarah Palin’s 14-year old daughter was a little slut, right?  I mean, right?

Oops.  Barry doesn’t love Sarah Palin quite as much as he loves Sandra Fluke, after all.  As I pointed out at the damn time.

Wrong.  Not only did Obama not treat Sarah Palin like Sandra Fluke even though Palin was viciously assaulted a thousand times worse, but Obama happily took the million dollars that Bill Maher gave him in what amounts to an endorsement of what Maher said (most times when a slimebag gives a campaign contribution the candidate returns it or gives it to a charity).

Charles Krauthammer, brilliant psychologist as always, hit the reason Michelle Obama was so damn crazy right on the nutty head:

Her whole task was to say why. And her answer was,“Why? Because essentially he’s a saint.”

Because of his upbringing and because of his emotions and because of his humanity. He does of this because he cares. And the brilliance of it is this: It drained Obama of any, either, ideological motivation, or any having to do with self interest or ambition, which I think is sort of a more plausible explanation.

He’s a man highly who is liked and highly ideological. A man of the left who sees the role of the government as ordering, the reorderering, of society in a way to make it more just, as he understands it . And also, extremely ambitious. A self made man who makes himself out of nothing, rises out of nowhere. But all of that, in her telling, doesn’t even exist. The only reason he does what he does, he cares about women, he cares about immigrants, he cares about the poor. He cares about the unemployed. He cares, he cares, he cares.

She told the story of a Gandhi. And, you know, looking at the scene, looking at how he’s conducted himself in the presidency and particularly in the campaign, with ruthlessness and determination and drive, it’s not quite a plausible story. I’m sure in the arena, it was a plausible story. I saw the tears, but I’m afraid, I thought it was a great speech, but I didn’t buy a line of it.

Krauthammer was being too kind.  Michelle wasn’t implying that Obama was any mere saint.  The Obamas are far too grandiose in their narcissism to settle for such mendacity.  She was letting us know that Barack is our messiah, our Jesus.  And “black Jesus” – as Obama campaign manager David Axelrod calls him – loves us all the same.  Because he’s a messiah, he’s a god, and he’s just that much better than you are, you trifling mortal.

The president who used the incredibly vile term of “tea baggers” to describe the Tea Party, the president who is on the record saying that Republicans are despicable people who want dirtier air and dirtier water, as people who want more children born with Autism and Down Syndrome, the same president who once told Hispanics to racially rise up and punish their white Republican enemies, etc. etc. etc., is a black Jesus who is really saying of Republicans, “Forgive them, Great Barack in the Sky, for they know not what they do.”

The marketing of Obama as “Jesus” is as demonic as it is widespread from the left:

Artwork Likens Obama to Jesus
Sep 4, 2012
By Todd Starnes

Street vendors across downtown Charlotte are selling posters and artwork depicting President Obama as Jesus Christ and the Democratic National Convention is expected to feature a stained-glass window backdrop during their meeting.

FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE!

One poster features an image of the president in prayer with the headline, “Prophecy Fulfilled.”

“Barak is of Hebrew origin and its meaning is ‘flash of lightning,” the poster notes, referencing a passage in in the Old Testament book of Judges.

Hussein, they allege, is a Biblical word meaning “good and handsome.”

“So you see, Barak was destined to be a good and handsome man that would rise like a flash of lightning to win victory in a battle against overwhelming odds,” the poster read.

The posters were being sold outside security zones at the Democratic National Convention. The posters are not sanctioned by the DNC.

An Obama calendar, obtained by Fox News, features two religious images of the Commander-in-Chief.

The month of August includes a photograph of Obama’s birth certificate with the words “Heaven sent.”

The president was born on Aug. 4th.

The entry also includes a photograph of Obama along with a passage of Scripture from the New Testament.

“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life,” the entry read — referencing John 3:16.

The month of November includes an image of individuals with their hands on Obama’s back — with the words “The Lord is my Shepherd, I shall not want.”

Fox News also obtained a photograph of a DNC stage design. It resembled a giant stained glass window. It’s unclear what the imagery will be used for.

The comparisons to Jesus Christ have brought strong condemnation from some evangelicals — including Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church in Dallas, TX.

“If Barack Obama is the promised Messiah, I think there are going to be many Christians who are profoundly disappointed,” Jeffress told Fox News. “One only has to look at Obama’s record to understand that he is absolutely, positively not the promised One.”

Todd Starnes is the author of “Dispatches From Bitter America.” The book is endorsed by Sarah Palin, Mark Levin and Sean Hannity. Click here to get your copy!

But there’s that nasty truth that has Lady MacBeth I mean Michelle saying, “Out, damn spot!”

 ** Obama: “They Bring a Knife…We Bring a Gun”
 ** Obama to His Followers: “Get in Their Faces!”
 ** Obama on ACORN Mobs: “I don’t want to quell anger. I think people are right to be angry! I’m angry!”
 ** Obama to His Mercenary Army: “Hit Back Twice As Hard”
 ** Obama on the private sector: “We talk to these folks… so I know whose ass to kick.“
 ** Obama to voters: Republican victory would mean “hand to hand combat”
 ** Obama to lib supporters: “It’s time to Fight for it.”
 ** Obama: “My administration is the only thing between you and the pitchforks.”
 ** Obama: “I will be happy to see the Republicans test whether or not I’m itching for a fight on a whole range of issues. I suspect they will find I am.”
 ** Obama: “It’s tempting not to negotiate with hostage takers”
 ** Obama: “We’re going to punish our enemies”
 ** Obama: “Those aren’t the kinds of folks who represent our core American values.”

Since there’s no “us and them” when it comes to Barack Obama, I am counting on Obama to look at his audience of Democrats tomorrow night and say, “You aren’t the kind of folks who represent our core American values.”  Because it sure seemed to be pretty damned “us” and “them” when Obama said that about Republicans.

Glad I chose to gag on that spoon.  Because lies make me a lot more nauseous than any stupid spoon could.

Why Do Depraved Democrats Deceitfully Distort Jesus To Demagogue Republicans???

This is so par for the course it’s simply beyond unreal:

Look up the term “socialist” in ANY reasonably legitimate source and tell me that a socialist is somebody who wants to force people to give all of their money to the Judeo-Christian God of the Holy Bible. No. Rather, a socialist is somebody who wants to create an all-powerful State in PLACE of God and give that all-powerful State the power to confiscate and redistribute wealth and resources as it wills.

I would first like you to consider what Jesus actually said about taxes, God and government as found in Matthew 22:15-22.  Allow me to set the stage for you.  The Pharisees who DESPISE Jesus are trying to entrap Him.  The come upon a great plan to force Jesus into an impossible dilemma; force Jesus to either say that Jews should pay taxes to Caesar, making Him a religious heretic, or force Him to say that Jews should NOT pay taxes to Caesar, making him a full-fledge traitor against Rome.  Here is the story:

Then the Pharisees went and plotted together how they might trap Him in what He said.  And they sent their disciples to Him, along with the Herodians, saying, “Teacher, we know that You are truthful and teach the way of God in truth, and defer to no one; for You are not partial to any.  “Tell us then, what do You think? Is it lawful to give a poll-tax to Caesar, or not?”  But Jesus perceived their malice, and said, “Why are you testing Me, you hypocrites?  “Show Me the coin used for the poll-tax.” And they brought Him a denarius.  And He said to them, “Whose likeness and inscription is this?”  They said to Him, “Caesar’s.” Then He said to them, “Then render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s; and to God the things that are God’s.”  And hearing this, they were amazed, and leaving Him, they went away.

It’s too damn bad we can’t make Democrats go away the same way.

Does Jesus endorse socialism here?  Does Jesus answer the Pharisees by saying, “There is no difference between giving unto Caesar and giving unto God, for God and the State are one and the same such that when you give to Caesar you ARE giving to God”???  Does Jesus say that?

Does Jesus EVER say anything remotely CLOSE to that???

Jesus is telling us that whatever money you give – or are forced to give – to Obama’s regime doesn’t do your soul one tiny bit of good.  Because there is a very real distinction between giving to the State and giving to God according to Jesus.  And it is a wicked, despicable state indeed that forces people to give so much damn money to their government that they don’t have enough left to give to their God.

Liberal states such as New York and California expect you to pay more than HALF of everything you earn to the state if you are in the top income bracket.  And that is immoral.

Let’s look at the passage of Scripture the Democrat alludes to in the cartoon above (Matthew 19:16-21):

And someone came to Him and said, “Teacher, what good thing shall I do that I may obtain eternal life?”  And He said to him, “Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments.”  Then he said to Him, “Which ones?” And Jesus said, “YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER; YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT ADULTERY; YOU SHALL NOT STEAL; YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS;  HONOR YOUR FATHER AND MOTHER; and YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.”  The young man said to Him, “All these things I have kept; what am I still lacking?”  Jesus said to him, “If you wish to be complete, go and sell your possessions and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow Me.”

A couple of things follow from this passage: first of all, is it not the Democrat Party that appoints the judges and holds that the Ten Commandments that Jesus says from the first we need to inherit eternal life should be BANISHED from our schools and from all public discourse???  It most certainly is – which is already one gigantic strike against any hypocrite Democrat who wants to claim this passage.  But let us go on to the second point: does Jesus instruct this man to go, be taxed for all of his possessions and give it to Obama??? 

Obama and the Democrat Party are wailing in sheer unmitigated RAGE at what Jesus tells the man to do: DON’T give it to Obama; DON’T give it to the government; DON”T give it to the socialist regime.  Whatever you do, do not allow Obama to have one red stinking cent of it; rather, give it to the poor people.  Give it not to the State, but to the CHURCH.

Democrats have so utterly perverted this passage that it is insane.  It is for this reason I point out what “Democrat” truly means: it means, “Demonic Bureaucrat.”

Let’s look at what God thinks about big government as found in 1 Samuel 8:5-19:

and they said to him, “Behold, you have grown old, and your sons do not walk in your ways. Now appoint a king for us to judge us like all the nations.”  But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, “Give us a king to judge us.” And Samuel prayed to the LORD.  The LORD said to Samuel, “Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them.  “Like all the deeds which they have done since the day that I brought them up from Egypt even to this day– in that they have forsaken Me and served other gods– so they are doing to you also.  “Now then, listen to their voice; however, you shall solemnly warn them and tell them of the procedure of the king who will reign over them.”

So Samuel spoke all the words of the LORD to the people who had asked of him a king.  He said, “This will be the procedure of the king who will reign over you: he will take your sons and place them for himself in his chariots and among his horsemen and they will run before his chariots.  “He will appoint for himself commanders of thousands and of fifties, and some to do his plowing and to reap his harvest and to make his weapons of war and equipment for his chariots.  “He will also take your daughters for perfumers and cooks and bakers.  “He will take the best of your fields and your vineyards and your olive groves and give them to his servants.  “He will take a tenth of your seed and of your vineyards and give to his officers and to his servants.  “He will also take your male servants and your female servants and your best young men and your donkeys and use them for his work.  “He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his servants.  “Then you will cry out in that day because of your king whom you have chosen for yourselves, but the LORD will not answer you in that day.”

Nevertheless, the people refused to listen to the voice of Samuel, and they said, “No, but there shall be a king over us…

Now, after reading this, if you still actually believe that high taxation and a king who would take and take and take was what God actually wanted, you are a genuine fool.  Which is another way of saying, “You are a Democrat.”

That king who takes and takes and takes – that’s King Obama.

Jews in Old Testament times paid no more than 25% a year in taxes.  And that was in the perverted system that God had explicitly condemned.

Professor of Old Testament Studies Dr. Claude Mariottini noted about the 1 Samuel passage above:

In the Old Testament, the people had to pay their taxes to the state. In the history of Israel it seems that it was with the establishment of the monarchy that taxation became a permanent obligation for every citizen. With the establishment of the monarchy in Israel, the people were required to pay for the extravagances of the government and many people did not like the demands imposed upon them by the state. There is evidence in the Bible that the people resisted taxation and the compulsory exaction of revenues.

After the return from Babylon, the Jews were required to pay an annual payment of one third of a shekel (Nehemiah 10:32). Soon, the third became a half, an amount of money that was paid by every Jew, in whatever part of the world he might be living.

Under the monarchy, a centralized government was established and with it came luxurious living and a large bureaucracy, two things that required a larger expenditure, and therefore a heavier taxation.

Samuel warned the people about how the king and his government would operate. He told the people that the king would take their sons and make them soldiers. The king would put some of the people to forced labor to work on his farms, plowing and harvesting his crops. The king would conscript some of the people to make either weapons of war or chariots in which he could ride in luxury.

Samuel also said that the kings would conscript some women to work as beauticians and waitresses and cooks. He would conscript their best fields, vineyards, and orchards and give them over to his officials. He would tax their harvests and vintage to support his extensive bureaucracy. He would take their prize workers and best animals for his own use. He also would lay a tax on their flocks and all their property and in the end the people would be no better than slaves. Then Samuel warned the people that the day would come when they would cry in desperation because of the oppressive burden imposed upon them by their king (1 Samuel 8:10-18). The day came, the people cried, but it was too late.

He also notes a number of Democrats who hypocritically didn’t pay the very high taxes that they themselves demagogued that others be forced to pay – such as Obama appointees Tom Daschle, Nancy Killefer and Tim Geithner.

H.W. Crocker noted in his book Triumph (page 240):

“The tinder had been laid by the rising nationalism in Europe. That nationalism set out to subordinate the Church—in the eyes of some, an Italian Church (as it had been a French Church while in Avignon)—to the state. This would lead, two hundred years later, to the Protestant doctrine of separation of church and state, and two hundred years after that to the irrelevance of church to state. There was also the resentment of papal taxation, corruption, and luxury. Christendom’s kings followed a low-tax-regimen. No monarchy, from the Middle Ages until the democratic age, ever taxed its subjects by more than 10 percent. Often, as in Catholic England, it taxed them not at all. High taxes are an inventionof democratic, republican, and socialist governments to pay for such services as schools, hospitals, and caring for the poor that under the Catholic monarchies had been the province of the Church, and to pay for things like armies, which had been paid for by the royal families and noblemen out of their own pockets. But the absence of royal taxes meant that the Catholic Church’s demands for money to pay for its social services, or for the monasteries, or for cathedrals, or for rebuilding Rome, or for assembling Crusades, stood out as a burden imposed by a power centered in Italy—a burden that increasingly nationalist nobles and people resented.”

In the Old Testament it was GOD through His Temple who took care of the poor, not the government.  In the New Testament age and the Christendom that followed it, it was GOD through His Church who took care of the poor, not the government.  Now it is Government that takes care of the poor while Obama literally tries to force the Church out of its God-appointed role while Democrats try to marginalize the Church and religion more and more and more.

If in fact you are a Democrat who actually wants to enter the Kingdom of Heaven – which is in HEAVEN and not in Obama’s damn White House, for what it’s worth – the first thing you need to do is fall on your face and confess your sin of throwing out the Ten Commandments which you have thrown out of public life only to then pervert with lies.  And the second thing you need to do is confess your wickedness for your part in erecting a giant State in PLACE of God.  For you have usurped the role of God in caring for the poor and said, “We shall have no God over us!  We shall have a king!  We shall replace God with Government!”

Because the Bible is crystal clear: that is EXACTLY what you Democrats have done.

You depraved people have twisted and perverted and degenerated and warped the Bible even as you have rejected it and banned it from public discourse.  And you DARE to lecture us about your demonic straw man???

I’ve dealt with these themes before.  Note the title of the article I quote from below:  “Democrats’ War On Poverty Has Been A War On America That Has Done NOTHING To Help The Poor“:

So when liberals demand the expansion of government they are not being “pro-God”; they are being ANTI-God. And it also turns out to be the case that they are tragically anti-poor, too.

In another article, I wrote the following to document how Democrats have undermined charity in favor of socialism – while being anything but “charitable” in their own lives – while hurting the people they claimed they were helping:

I once quoted Burton Folsom in his great book “New Deal Or Raw Deal?” It’s time to quote that passage again:

Throughout American history, right from the start, charity had been a state and local function. Civic leaders, local clergy, and private citizens, evaluated the legitimacy of people’s need in their communities or counties; churches and other organizations could then provide food, shelter, and clothing to help victims of fires or women abandoned by drunken husbands. Most Americans believed that the face-to-face encounters of givers and receivers of charity benefited both groups. It created just the right amount of uplift and relief, and discouraged laziness and a poor work ethic.

The Founders saw all relief as local and voluntary, and the Constitution gave no federal role for the government in providing charity. James Madison, in defending the Constitution, observed, “No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.” In other words, if relief, and other areas, were made functions of the federal government, the process would become politicized and politicians and deadbeats could conspire to trade votes for food” (New Deal or Raw Deal, page 76-77).

Prior to FDR, the American people took care of their OWN, family by family, town by town, county by county, state by state. They had NEVER had welfare, and in fact found the very concept of welfare distasteful. And I’m going to tell you right now that they were better, stronger people than we are as a result of that moral superiority and that faith in THE PEOPLE and not the GOVERNMENT.

Barack Obama – who gave virtually NOTHING to charity when giving would have demonstrated the character he proved he DIDN’T have – doesn’t trust the American people, or much care about them, for that matter. He doesn’t want to help people; he wants to grow the size of government. He wants only to make the state bigger and bigger and more and more powerful and controlling. Obama is angry because he doesn’t believe people should have the right to decide for themselves how much of their own money they “need”; HE wants to make that decision for them and then impose it on them so he can seize their money and redistribute it to people who will vote for him and for his party.

Whenever a Democrat calls for more taxes, understand that what they are really saying is that they believe that the government is too small and needs to become larger. And whenever they call for more taxes for the sake of helping people, what they are really saying is that you are a bad and immoral person who can’t and shouldn’t be trusted to help people in need and that it is better to take your money away from you and put it into the coffers of a big government socialist redistributionist agency which will piss it away on boondoggle programs that benefit the politically connected far more than they do the poor. And the fact that even as Barack Obama and the overwhelming Democrat majority that had dictatorial control of both branches of Congress made government bigger than it has ever been and yet blacks are now worse off than they’ve been for generations and women are being set way back is the icing on the cake of the proof of that fact. Liberals hurt the people they cynically and falsely claim to be helping – and then demagogically use the misery that they themselves created to accumulate even more power for themselves and their failed agenda.

Please note carefully that prior to FDR’s socialist New Deal, “Government as God” did NOT exist in America.  Americans took care of their own and they most certainly did NOT rely on wicked Government masquerading as God to do it.

I also want you to note as we enter the end of August and Obama’s convention that the facts reveal Obama has been an abject and unmitigated DISASTER for the middle class and for black people.  The so-called “Great Recession” that Obama has demagogically laid entirely on George Bush lasted from June 2007 until June 2009; and during that period households lost an average of 2.6% of their wealth.  Well, under Obama’s “wreckovery,” those same households have lost nearly DOUBLE what they lost in the actual recession – 4.8%.  And blacks during that same “wreckovery” have lost a staggering 11.1% of their wealth under Obama’s demonically failed leadership.

Don’t tell me that Barack Obama cares about the poor.  If he gave one damn about the poor he would resign from office.

Democrats demonize conservatives as “greedy” all the time because they are liars.  But the fact of the matter is conservatives are more “liberal” givers.  Conservatives are the ones who are more generous.  Conservatives are more generous givers than liberals.

The year before he announced he was running for president, Barack and Michelle Obama were among the wealthiest two percent in the entire nation.  And how much of their huge wealth did they give?  A stunningly pathetic 0.4 percent of their income.  The filthy rich Obamas gave $1,050 to charity when the AVERAGE AMERICAN HOUSEHOLD with nowhere near the Obamas’ resources gave away $1,872.

Here’s a fact:

“[D]uring a comparable period before Obama and Romney were running for president, Romney’s giving probably was at least ten times Obama’s as a percentage of their incomes, and possibly much more.”

Mitt Romney has given at least 10 percent of his wealth every year to charity.  Which means that Romney’s 10 percent amounts to 2,400 percent more giving out of his wealth than Obama gave out of his wealth at .4%.  And yet this greedy, stingy, wicked, deceitful hypocrite liberal Obama has actually demonized Mitt Romney for his “greed.”  And that is demonic.

I am beyond sick of the demonic lies of the Democrat Party and Barack Obama.  And nothing makes me more sick than when they deprave the Bible and Jesus to sell their lies.

If you are interested in the political left and its abject hostility toward God and religion, you should read this article as well: “Where Economic Marxism – And LIBERALISM -Truly Comes From: Hostility Toward God And Religion“

Why Don’t Democrats Who Demonize Chick-Fil-A Over Gay Marriage Not Demonize Black People? Look Right Here, It’s EASY!

Chick-Fil-A has received more hatred this past week than most businesses get in a lifetime.  Why?  Because its CEO expressed his constitutionally-protected opinion and because he took the same position that Liar-in-Chief Obama cynically and deceitfully took for most of his first term before betraying the American people who believed him when Obama said:

“I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the mix.”

It is very difficult to believe now that Rahm Emanuel became this incredibly hateful man’s chief of staff given that Obama “tastes like hate.”

It was only three months ago that Barack Obama tasted like hate.

Why don’t Democrats demonize anyone who ISN’T Christian for believing that marriage is the union between one man and one woman and that homosexuality is a sin?

Why won’t they demonize black people when black people more than ANY other race agree with Chick-Fil-A CEO Dan Cathy’s viewpoint?

Homophobia, to be sure, is a sadly universal phenomenon. But it is one with especially deep roots among blacks. Polling numbers bear this out. In a recent Pew poll, 65 percent of American blacks reported thinking of homosexuality as wrong, while only 48 percent of whites did; in other words, most blacks harbored this prejudice, while fewer than half of whites did. Also, black voters played a disproportionate role in getting the anti-gay-marriage Proposition 8 passed in California in 2008.

Why did Rahm Emanuel demonize Chick-Fil-A and then welcome the Nation of Islam and Loius Farrakhan with open arms when the latter is more intolerant of homosexuality than Chick-Fil-A EVER was?

Why don’t Democrats demonize “homophobic” Islamic mosques and point out that those people who largely have different skin color than white people are all evil intolerant haters?

What about Boston Mayor Menino who supported with municipal licenses and even with the gift of $1.8 million in land a mosque whose founders said that gay people should be burned or thrown off a cliff? 

If memory serves, the people in thirty-five states out of thirty-five states have voted.  And in every single case the people have supported Dan Cathy and Chick-Fil-A’s view of marriage.  Shouldn’t the Democrat Party’s official platform position be that the American people are clearly evil?

Look, Democrats: it’s EASY to demonize a black man.  Watch here to see how your ilk does it:

Boy, are those liberals “brave” for surrounding an old black man and dumping their hate on him.  But at least these white liberals are being slightly consistent unlike the real “99 percent” of their party who would never DREAM of being consistent and viciously attacking black people for their views about a subject they just LOVE to demonize old white men for.

Aside from the fact that to be a Democrat is to be a gutless hypocrite who “stands for everything” and therefore stands for NOTHING, I can tell you the real reason why Democrats have somehow only ever shown the moral “courage” to demonize Christians.  It’s in the Bible.  Jesus Himself taught 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.  Remember the words I spoke to you: ‘No servant is greater than his master.’ If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. If they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours also.  They will treat you this way because of my name, for they do not know the One who sent me.”  John 15-18-21

That’s why.

That’s why Democrats hate on Christians and are so “tolerant” to everyone else even when everyone else agrees with the Christian and even when those who agree with the Christian have a long-documented tradition of hatred and bigotry like Louis Farrakhan.

Democrats don’t hate Obama. Even though for three years he “tasted like hate.” Democrats don’t hate black people even though on their own view black people are far and away the most intolerant and evil people in America. Democrats don’t hate Muslims even though they want to see gay people burned alive or thrown off cliffs. Democrats don’t hate Louis Farrakhan or his Nation of Islam in spite of their numerous hateful and racist and bigoted views that of course include homosexuality. Nope.

Democrats hate Christians.

And Jesus told us exactly why Democrats would hate Christians.

Ultimately, to be a Democrat is to be a hater of Jesus Christ.  They hated Him first.  And they hate us because they hate Him.

You go ahead, Democrat.  You hate me as much as you want.  I know why and I’ve chosen my side just like you’ve chosen yours.

See also here for why God ordained marrige the way He did and why the Democrat Party in officially making homosexuality part of their party platform have finally reached rock bottom.

The Two Beautiful Names Behind ‘Merry Christmas’

Christmas – and the meaning of Christianity itself – can be summed up in two names.

The first is “Immanuel,” which translates from Hebrew to “God with us.”  It comes from a prophecy written approximately 700BC about the future Messiah 

“Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: The virgin will be with child and will give birth to a son, and will call him Immanuel.” — Isaiah 7:14

Of this same miraculously conceived child the same prophet writes about other things this same child would be called in addition to “Immanuel”:

“For to us a child is born, to us a son is given, and the government will be on his shoulders. And he will be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.” — Isaiah 9:6

I often marvel over the bickering of unbelief over whether the Hebrew word in Isaiah 7:14 should really be translated “virgin” given what is said about this same child in Isaiah 9:6.  How ELSE would one expect this child, this son who would be born, who would be called Wonderful Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father and Prince of Peace to be conceived other than by miraculous supernatural means?  Seriously?

What does “God with us” mean?

It means that this child – rightly called “Immanuel” in Isaiah 7:14 and “Mighty God” in Isaiah 9:6, would literally be God come to be with mankind in some powerful way.

It is a beautiful reference to the Incarnation of Jesus Christ, the unique, One-and-Only Son of the Living God.  Isaiah prophesied that some day in the future, God would somehow take a human nature and be born as a child, as a son.  It was a prophecy of the coming birth of One who would one day call Himself “the Son of Man” (e.g. Mark 10:45).

The other name that completes the meaning of Christmas and Christianity is “Jesus.”  It comes from the Hebrew name “Yeshua” (or ”Joshua”) which means, “Jehovah is Savior.”

Two things emerge from this name: the first is that God Himself would one day come to personally save and deliver mankind from the bondage and death sentence of sin; the second is that One particular bearer of that name would be Himself God on earth.

The same Book of Isaiah that we have been discussing amply attests of our Lord Jesus Christ taking upon Himself the name both of “Jehovah” and “Savior.”

Isaiah 43:11 makes it most clear:

“I, even I, am the LORD [i.e., Jehovah], and apart from Me there is no Savior.” — Isaiah 43:11

See also Isaiah 45:21 to see that this is no fluke description from the prophet who described the coming of “Immanuel” who would be “Mighty God”:

Declare what is to be, present it–let them take counsel together. Who foretold this long ago, who declared it from the distant past? Was it not I, the LORD [i.e., Jehovah]? And there is no God apart from Me, a righteous God and a Savior; there is none but Me.” — Isaiah 45:21

But as we celebrate Christmas, we celebrate the birth of the One of whom the angel proclaimed:

“Today in the town of David a Savior has been born to you; He is Christ the Lord.”

The mystery of Jesus, of this Savior who would be born in spite of the fact that only JEHOVAH could be called “Savior,” is given a little clarity in the first words of the Book of John as it identifies Jesus Christ as “the Word”:

“In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.  He was in the beginning with God.  All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being which has come into being.” — John 1:1-3

When St. John says, “In the beginning was the Word,” it is a direct reference of Genesis 1:1, which begins, “In the beginning God…”

When St. John says, “and the Word was with God, and the Word was God,” he is pointing out that while the Word, Jesus, is divine (i.e., is God), He is not God in the logically exclusive sense that the Father and the Spirit are not also God.  Jesus is God (the Son), and Jesus was also with God (the Father and the Spirit).

When St. John tells us, “He was in the beginning with God,” we know that Jesus was NOT a created being.  He could not have in any way, shape or form been created, because in fact He always existed; He was with God the Father from the very beginning.

If this wasn’t clear enough already, St. John further elaborates on the eternality of Jesus Christ when he says, “All things came into being by Him, and apart from Him nothing came into being which has come into being.”  All things came into being by Jesus Christ.  God the Son was the Creator Moses describes in Genesis 1:1 (“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”).  Not only that, but “apart from Him nothing came into being that has come into being.”  Which is to say that this Son of God, the Word - who would one day become Incarnate under the name of Jesus who was born of a virgin in fulfillment of Isaiah 7:14 – created every single thing which has EVER been created or come into existence.  It is a logical impossibility that the One who created ALL things could Himself have been in any way created.

A short poem sums it up more simply and more concisely that I ever could:

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

He was truly God.

But He was truly God become man.

How?  Why?

God the Son added to Himself – added to His eternal divine nature - a human nature in the Incarnation.  God became man.  And 700 years before it happened, He revealed it to His prophet Isaiah.

One verse from the first chapter of the first Book of the Bible becomes significant in understanding this:

“So God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.” — Genesis 1:27

In Genesis the Son of God, the Word, created man in His divine image; in the Incarnation, that same Son of God assumed the image He had created.  Which is to say that God made man in such a way that He could one day become man Himself.

In the most remarkable act of other-centered love in the history of the universe, Christ the Son of God did the following as recorded in Philippians 2:5-11:

“You must have the same attitude that Christ Jesus had.  Though he was God, he did not think of equality with God as something to cling to.  Instead, he gave up his divine privileges; he took the humble position of a slave and was born as a human being. When he appeared in human form, he humbled himself in obedience to God and died a criminal’s death on a cross.  Therefore, God elevated him to the place of highest honor and gave him the name above all other names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” — Philippians 2:5-11, (NLT)

In verse 7 of that marvellous passage in the original Greek language we have the word “kenosis” occur.  It means, “emptied”:  “He emptied Himself.”

In becoming a man, God had to temporarily let go of attributes of deity that belonged to Him by very right of His divine nature.  He entered into time, which means He had to divest Himself of His eternality while on earth so He could age and grow and die.  He set aside His omniscience so He would experience living as a man, depending on faith just like any other man before or after Him.  He laid aside His omnipotence, such that He could experience the helplessness and fatigue that all men feel.  And so on.

Jesus was completely dependent upon His Father and upon the Spirit for all things, because He had made Himself weak in the Incarnation in order to fully experience human frailty.  He had to walk by faith and live by the power of faith, just as we do.

We can imagine the One who created the Cosmos – and in whom all things literally hold together (Colossians 1:17) – emerge from Mary’s womb that first Christmas as a tiny, helpless baby, struggling just to open His eyes.  He grew in wisdom and stature (Luke 2:52) because He had made Himself a man in every way that it was essential to be a man.

It makes me weep to think about what Jesus laid aside so He could come to live with mankind as a man.  Think of the choice of God to do that!  We all want to become great and mighty and awesome and have all the status that accompanies our greatness; Jesus radically went the other way and took a plunge from all the glorious majesty of heaven to a trough that farm animals ate out of.

And the obvious question is, why did He do this?

He did it to take the blame that rightly belonged to me, to live and then die in my place.

He did it to be my Savior, because He as God knew that I, a miserable sinner, desperately needed saving.

In the Incarnation, Jesus lived a perfect life in our place because we could never hope to live such lives.  And then, as the perfect God-Man, He gave His life to take the death sentence earned by OUR sins upon Himself, so that we would not have to experience eternal death the way that all sinners apart from His grace will one day experience.

This mighty act of salvation was God-sized; no mere man could even attain his own salvation, let alone that of the entire human race. And yet just as sin entered the world through a man, only a man acting as a true representative of man could deliver us from that sin.

Enter the God-Man.  Enter Jesus.

Jesus explained His mission to a Jewish Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin named Nicodemus in the most beautiful and powerful words ever spoken:

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him would not perish, but have eternal life.” — John 3:16

Isaiah 64:6 says,

“But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousness are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.”

Isaiah 53:6 says,

“All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the LORD has laid on him the iniquity of us all.” — Isaiah 53:6

On Christmas morning, a little over 2,000 years ago, in the fullness of time (Galatians 4:4), God came to save me from that from which I most needed saving: from myself; and from my sins which separated me from my Creator, my King and my God.

God is holy and righteous and perfect and sinless: He can not tolerate sin in His presence; nor can any sinner survive His presence.  As a sinner, I deserved hell.  And apart from the grace of God, hell is precisely where I would have gone.

Only there is a God who loved me, and gave Himself for me (see Galatians 2:2o; Ephesians 5:2; Titus 2:14) so that I could be alive in Him and share eternity with Him in His glorious presence forever and ever.

Thank you, Jesus.  I bow down before You and thank You with all of my soul that You alone had the power to save.  I desperately needed a Savior, and You came to save me.

I pray that you, too, bow down before Jesus your King and thank Him from the bottom of a saved, delivered soul this Christmas day.