I do not know how or why, but the Lord has made me such that I see connections where most people do not.  It is difficult to explain what I see, but I feel compelled to try — for the benefit of whomever it may help.  So, when the Lord shows me how I can share some of what He has shown me with others, I will do my best to share what i see.  This is such a time, and I hope I can paint the picture so that others can see and understand.  It will take a bit of explaining, so I hope you will stay with me.  For those who have eyes to see and ears to hear:

After Cain slew Abel, God condemned him to wander the face of the earth.  But Cain’s heart was rebellious, and he sought to thwart God by taking his destiny into his own hands.  Thus, Cain built the first city (Gen 4:17).  In that passage, the Hebrew word translated as ‘city’ can refer to any permanent settlement, however small.  Thus, by building this ‘city,’ Cain was rebelling against God by trying to avoid his fate to wonder the face of the earth forever.  Therefore, Cain became the father of all those who dwell in cities.

Next, we have Nimrod.  God commanded man to spread out across the whole face of the earth and to multiply so that they could do so.  But Nimrod rebelled.  He followed Cain.  Rather than obey God, Nimrod built Babylon (Gen 10:10).  What’s more, Nimrod further rebelled by becoming the first king and by starting polytheism (paganism).  He made himself into the first man-god and compelled all those who followed him to worship him.

At some point, Nimrod started to build his tower to the sky and boasted that he would make a name for himself.  To the Hebrews, a name is about the purpose or function of a thing, not a description of it.  Therefore, Nimrod was boasting that he and his followers would throw off God’s rule and seize hold of their own destiny.  This is where God said that, if left alone, man could do anything and He confuses their language (Gen 11:1-9).  God did not mean that man could become a god, himself, as many have believed, but that man could and would make it such that all knowledge of God was erased (as he had nearly done before the flood).  So He dispersed them and confused their language to make it harder for them to cooperate.

[ Consider this: Nimrod made his tower from bricks.  Bricks are man-made and uniform.  As such, this is an image of collectivism.  The Hebrew word translated ‘mortar’ in the passages about the tower is connected to the notion of materialism.  Collectivism and materialism are the essential building blocks of Marxism and all other forms of secular humanism.  As such, they represent man’s attempt to direct his own destiny, his own moral and natural laws.]

Nimrod, the world’s first king and man-god, built Babylon, and thus, Babylon became a symbol of man’s rebellion against God:

I have one last person to discuss before I can show you what I see.  Judas Iscariot: or, more specifically, the meaning of his name.  Iscariot can be translated as “Man of Cities.”  What’s more, the meaning of ‘man’ in this translation can have a decidedly feminine connotation (think feminism).

[NOTE: I strongly urge you to read this article:  Etymology of the name Iscariot, especially the final summary/conclusion, as it ties the name ‘Iscariot’ to the bricks and mortar of the Tower of Babel.]

Now, if you have followed me — especially if you have done some additional reading into the men I have mentioned (Cain, Nimrod and Iscariot), then you should have noticed they are all tied to those who live in cities for the purpose of material gain.  You should have also noticed that they all rebelled against God.  Now, have a look at this and consider the attitude that the people represented by blue have toward God and material wealth, and ask yourself if you see what I see?

Political Map of America:

Look at this same information again, but from a more focused perspective:

Now, look at a map of where God’s people still reside in America:

I don’t know what you see, but I see the legacy of Cain carried down through some 4 millennia.  No, it is not a direct mirror of beliefs, but that is because there is a mixing of those beliefs in the regions depicted.  Still, I see a correlation.  So, to me, this affirms the Truth of Scripture.  You may disagree, but I hope not — for your sake.

[Hold on to the feminine connection to Judas Iscariot’s name.  I will write another post very soon in which it will raise its head yet again.  Just remember, we are dealing with spiritual influences here.  Keep that in mind — so that we do not make people the focus, but rather, the spiritual forces behind their actions.]

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

The time has come for me to start sharing my personal testimony with those who read this blog.  I want to start with how the Lord showed me that the message in this meme is a lie!

This is pure, unadulterated propaganda, intended to create envy and jealousy which can then be used to turn those who listen into slaves of those who push this lie.  And it is a lie.  I know.  I learned it first hand.

For the majority of my life, I consumed more than I made.  I was usually living hand-to-mouth and with debt.  But because I lived this way, and because I did not want to do the things which are required to not live this way, I allowed myself to believe the lie that I was poor because of what someone else was doing to me.  Then the Lord grabbed hold of me, I accepted Him as my Lord and Savior and I submitted to His will, His Wisdom and His Ways.  Once I did that, things changed.  Now I can look back and see the Truth.

First, I realized that ‘rich’ and ‘poor’ are not only relative terms, they are political tools.  If you have $25,000, in America, you are not ‘rich.’  You might even be considered ‘poor.’  But in the majority of the rest of the world, you are most definitely ‘rich!’  And if you are ‘rich,’ then the spirit behind the thinking in the meme above says it is not only permissive to take your $25,000 and give it to those with less, it is moral and righteous, and that those who think this way are noble.  LIE!

What if I have $5 — just $5 — but the man next to me has nothing?  The world may see me as poor, but I can choose to see myself as not only rich, but blessed.  I have been given more than another.  But does that mean that it is now just and righteous to take my $5 and give it to him?  NO!  Whether the man next to me has or does not have, what belongs to me is mine.  It cannot be taken away and given to another without just cause.  If it is, it is called theft.  And the only just reason to forcibly take what is mine and give it to another is because I have caused tangible harm to that other person.  That means I have to have caused a harm, due to a positive action, that you can actually see and describe, and for which you can show actual damage.  The man next to me cannot do this, as I have done nothing to him.  The same applies to the rich and the poor: the poor cannot claim they have been directly harmed, so they cannot lay a just claim to what another has.  Therefore, taking from ‘the rich’ to give to ‘the poor’ is theft, and it is wrong — period!

But how did the rich get rich if not by stealing from the poor?  The answer is simple: they worked for it!

When the Lord became the Lord of my life and the way I lived, I changed.  I put away my way of thinking and started to follow His.  That meant working for Him, not me and not others.  I do this by serving others, but I work for Him.  So my reason for working changed.  This helped to motivate me to work harder, longer and with a different attitude.  I took on a servants attitude toward others.  Then I got out of debt.  I also started to look at debt as slavery to another master.  If I owe another, then that person has some control over my life.  I cannot serve both man and God, so I learned to avoid debt.  Then I learned the difference between want and need.  Scripture tells us that we need food and clothing, but nothing more!  Everything else is a ‘want:’ a nice-to-have.  If we have these things, Scripture says we are not poor, not materially, anyway.  Now, by these standards, there are very few of us in America who are poor.  The majority of us can find enough work to eat and clothe ourselves — if we want to do so.  So, if we are on welfare, by Biblical standards, we are rich!  Now, tell me, how did the rich keep such people poor when Scripture says they are actually rich?

This leads us to the truth: the divide between the rich and the poor is actually driven by envy.  ‘The poor’ are actually ‘have lesses’ who are envious of the ‘have mores.’  But the ‘have mores’ did not make the ‘have lesses’ that way.  Human nature does that.  We all want to live like kings off the labor of another.  We want the reward, but we do not want the hard work.  But Scripture tells us wealth does not come from being lazy:

Proverbs 6:6-11

⁶ Go to the ant, you sluggard;
    consider its ways and be wise!
⁷ It has no commander,
    no overseer or ruler,
⁸ yet it stores its provisions in summer
    and gathers its food at harvest.

From my other blog, The Road to Concord:

DEDUCTIVE vs INDUCTIVE NATURAL LAW

One of the most common objections to the notion of Natural Law I have encountered is the complaint that, if one cannot see the enforcement or consequences of Natural Law then it must not exist.  To put it another way: people see the consequences of breaking a human law, such as theft.  You get caught, you go to jail.  However, if I violate a supposed Natural Law governing the Social Contract, for example, I do not see any consequence.  Therefore, these people argue, since there is no observable consequence for violating the Natural Law governing the Social Contract, there must not be such a thing as the Social Contract.  On the surface, this may seem a rational objection, but it is deeply flawed, and here’s why.

Natural Law includes the laws of physics.  Jump off a cliff without any means of breaking your fall and you will see a consequence for challenging the Natural Laws governing gravity and motion (most notably, the laws concerning differential speed).  Most Natural Laws connected to the material world (i.e. physics) have an immediate consequence.  This makes them deductive laws: you learn them by observing a direct cause-and-effect relationship.  Therefore, very few people challenge them.  But there are other Natural Laws where the consequences are not immediately appreciated.  These laws are usually found in the area of Morality.  This is the area where we usually find people rejecting the existence of Natural Law.  But morality is different.  It deals with human interaction, not physics. So we should not expect it to have immediate consequences.

We are moral agents.  This means we are more than just a collection of matter.  While our bodies may be subject to the Natural Laws governing matter, that part of us which makes us a moral agent is not.  It is subject to the Natural Laws governing morality — universal right and wrong.  These laws are meant to teach us how we should behave toward and treat each other.  Consequently, they are designed to allow us time to learn from our mistakes before the consequences of our actions finally bring about correction.  That is why we do not always see the consequences of violating the Natural Laws governing morality: because they are often delayed for our benefit.  This makes them inductive laws: you learn them by observing an indirect cause-and-effect relationship.

The area of morality includes many things that we may not immediately connect to the notion of universal right and wrong.  For example: economics.  There is a moral aspect to the Natural Laws governing economics.  If a society allows for un-just economic practices, such as socialism, then that society violates the Natural Law governing the moral aspect of economics.  Socialism is built on theft.  It takes from those who have earned and gives to those who have not.  If allowed to grow large enough, or exist long enough, Natural law eventually kicks in and corrects the injustice.  Look to any Socialist economy in history.  It eventually fails — period!  There are no exceptions!  This is indirect evidence of the moral connection between economics and morality, as well as the Natural Laws governing the two.

Now, let’s go back to the Social Contract.  If a society agrees to live by a certain set of laws and moral norms, it is functioning under a Social Contract.  Now, if a minority within that society starts to subvert it by violating those moral norms and by perverting the laws, it has violated the Social Contract.  At this point, that society has the right to defend itself from this minority.  However, if the society does not do so and the minority is allowed to continue its subversive actions, eventually, there will come a point when a majority within that society no longer wishes to live according to the Social Contract which created that society.  At that point, society breaks down into civil war.  It is at that point that we see the consequences of violating the Social Contract: at the point where the Natural Right to self-defense over-rides any commitment to the Social Contract.  We saw this in the American Civil War and we are seeing it repeat today in America where a large ‘Progressive’ minority is pushing a ‘politically correct’ agenda on a small majority.  If this situation continues, we will see the consequences of violating the Social Contract we call the U.S. Constitution.

So, the take-away from this post is that, just because we do not see an immediate consequence for violating the Natural Laws governing morality, we should not take that as ‘proof’ that they do not exist.  What we should do instead is broaden our view of history to look for patterns.  Once we do that, we will notice that history tends to repeat?  Why?  Because there is a Natural Law governing morality.  Those repeating patterns are the consequences for violating this moral law.  They are the ‘proof’ which so many who reject the notion of Natural Law demand, yet do not see (mostly because they refuse to see).

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

I often write in response to personal encounters.  My purpose is not to point fingers at others, but to share what I learn from these encounters.  So it is that I write now in response to yet another encounter with a fellow believer.  It started when I tried to warn this person that God’s Word does not allow us free reign in this world.  He has placed limitations on the things we should and should not do, as well as the types of people with whom we should and should not join ourselves.  However, when I offered Scripture to make my point, I was accused attacked, insulted and my faith and salvation were questioned.  I was immediately reminded of John telling Herod it was unlawful for him to be married to his brother’s wife, but the Lord quickly corrected me.  That was me talking, and I was looking for a way to defend and justify myself.  Had I done so, I would have been guilty of the things I was accused.  Instead, the Lord took me to another passage.  If you’ll let me, I’d like to share what I learned from Ananias and his wife.

[In case you do not know or do not remember the story of Ananias and Sapphira, it starts here and ends here.]

We have every reason to believe that Ananias and Sapphira were saved believers — ‘Christians.’  But, when they sinned, God killed them both.  Why?

Today’s Church has this false idea that, if you claim to love Jesus, ‘love’ others and do ‘good’ deeds (like give to the church and go to Sunday services), this covers all our sins.  What’s more, many believe that, if they meet certain requirements, God is going to make them ‘healthy, wealthy and prosperous.’ But none of this is promised in the Bible: either in the New or Old Testament.  In fact, Jesus tells us that, if we truly love Him, we will meet with opposition and persecution.

But God did not stop with Christ’s verbal warnings.  To make sure that the disciples of His Son would understand that He says what He means and means what He says, He killed Ananias and Sapphira!  He did this to hammer home the point: you are saved by trusting faith, but you are justified by your works, and your works come directly from obedience.  This means, if you are not obeying, you will not yield good fruit; and if you do not yield good fruit, you will be cut from the vine and cast into the fire!

Now, the mere fact that I made what so many believers will consider ‘judgmental’ statements will be — in their eyes — proof that I am the one who does not understand Scripture.  To them, I am taking Scripture out of context.  Many would even tell me that I am being self-righteous and that I do not hear the Holy Spirit.  But how could they say this if they knew and understood God’s Word better than I do?  If they were actually following the Lord, and obeying His commands, wouldn’t they know where those words come from?

James 2:14-26

Faith and Works

¹⁴ What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can ^[a]that faith save him? ¹⁵ If a brother or sister is without clothing and in need of daily food, ¹⁶ and one of you says to them, “Go in peace, ^[b]be warmed and be filled,” and yet you do not give them what is necessary for their body, what use is that? ¹⁷ Even so faith, if it has no works, is ^[c]dead, being by itself.

¹⁸ But someone ^[d]may well say, “You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works.” ¹⁹ You believe that ^[e]God is one. You do well; the demons also believe, and shudder. ²⁰ But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless? ²¹ Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up Isaac his son on the altar? ²² You see that faith was working with his works, and ^[f]as a result of the works, faith was ^[g]perfected; ²³ and the Scripture was fulfilled which says, “And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness,” and he was called the friend of God. ²⁴ You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone. ²⁵ In the same way, was not Rahab the harlot also justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way? ²⁶ For just as the body without the spirit is dead, so also faith without works is dead.

Matthew 7:19

¹⁹ Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.

This is what the Lord used my latest encounter to teach me: not that I should point fingers at others, but that I should take His commands as seriously as He does.  The catch here is, one of those commands is to watch over each other and, when we see another brother or sister about to fall into a ditch, to warn them:

Matthew 18:15-17

Correcting Another Believer

¹⁵ “If another believer^[a] sins against you,^[b] go privately and point out the offense. If the other person listens and confesses it, you have won that person back. ¹⁶ But if you are unsuccessful, take one or two others with you and go back again, so that everything you say may be confirmed by two or three witnesses. ¹⁷ If the person still refuses to listen, take your case to the church. Then if he or she won’t accept the church’s decision, treat that person as a pagan or a corrupt tax collector.

Scripture also says that, if we do this properly, and with the right heart/motivation, we are doing good:

Galatians 6:1-5

Doing Good to All

6 Brothers and sisters, if someone is caught in a sin, you who live by the Spirit should restore that person gently. But watch yourselves, or you also may be tempted. ² Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfill the law of Christ. ³ If anyone thinks they are something when they are not, they deceive themselves. ⁴ Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else, ⁵ for each one should carry their own load.

But notice: there in that last passage is part of what the Lord has taught me from my last encounter.  If we do not watch ourselves (i.e. look to the planks in our own eyes first), we run the risk of going astray, ourselves.

There is a fine line here, but we are commanded to walk it.  If we do not, then we do not have the type of trust/faith in the Lord which leads to obedience, and without obedience, we cannot yield good fruit (deeds).  So, for me, I study the Lord’s Word as though my very soul depends on it — because it does!  I search it, I beg His help in understanding and — as His word says — I nag Him to reveal Himself to me through it.  I know how damaged and depraved I am.  Studying the Lord’s Word has made this painfully clear to me.  This is why I seek His teaching: so that I may learn to obey, and by obeying, I might be found useful to do His work.  Part of doing His work means that, when I find another believer about to fall in a ditch, if I have a Christ-like love for them, I will try to warn them.  If I don’t, then I do not love them, and if I do not love them, I do not Love the Lord; and if I do not love the Lord…

Anyway, this is what the Lord has taught me today.  What has He taught you?

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

This is another of those posts that is difficult to write.  It is difficult to write because it has been prompted by yet another conflict with one of God’s people.  It is also difficult to write because I am being prevented from writing what I want to write.  I feel the Lord’s hand upon me, and it is holding me down while telling me to share what I have learned from this latest conflict with His people.  I would prefer to lecture others, because I am a hypocrite.  But the Lord is infinitely gracious to all of us, even when His blessing comes in the form of a painful rebuke.  So, instead of telling you how and why this other believer was wrong, I am going to share how the Lord took it as an opportunity to hold it up as a mirror to my face.  What follows is not about anyone else.  It is about the reflection I saw in my fight with another believer.

On the surface, this ‘fight’ was over whether or not a Christian should support a certain political candidate.  However, in reality, it was actually over something much more important than that.  The fight between me and this other believer was about whether or not a believer should support or join forces with someone they know (or should know) is not a fellow believer.  God’s Word speaks to this subject over and over again, and His answer is easily discovered, crystal clear in meaning and forceful in its command.  The problem is, we are very good at ignoring God’s Word when it disagrees with our own desires.  It was in the reflection of my own desires that I saw my own guilt over this very same issue.

The first thing I have to tell you is that I learned that I am no one you should count as friend.  This is not my ‘opinion,’ it is The Word of the Lord!  My initial reaction to this other believer was to throw Scripture at them, so I started looking up all the Scriptures I could use as ammunition.  And I am ashamed to admit, I used some of it in reply.  Fortunately, however, I used it after the Lord had showed me my reflection.  I replied because, even though I knew everything I was telling this other believer applied to me,  Scripture still commands us to offer correction when we see other believers going astray and I want to be obedient.  So, when the Lord showed me that everything I was about to hurl at my brother/sister was speaking to and about me, I still offered the Scriptures to them, but in a totally different heart.  I offered it to try to help them avoid the same mistakes the Lord had shown me I have been making my whole life.  Now, let me share the reflection I saw with you.  After I do, you will understand why I am not someone another believer should call a  friend.

The first thing I discovered is that God clearly speaks to His people about staying away from joining themselves to the lost:

2 Corinthians 6:14-15

¹⁴ Do not be ^[a]bound together with unbelievers; for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness? ¹⁵ Or what harmony has Christ with ^[b]Belial, or ^[c]what has a believer in common with an unbeliever?

1 Corinthians 5:11

¹¹ But ^[a]actually, I wrote to you not to associate ^[b]with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one.

Psalm 26:4-5

There is no doubt that the fabric of Western society is coming apart.  It doesn’t matter what your personal or political world view is, we all feel it, and we all want to ‘fix’ it.  However, no matter who we elect or what policies we enact, things just keep getting worse.   So, if we know things are bad and getting worse, and we want to ‘fix’ it, why can’t we?  Well, there is no shortage of opinion as to why we can’t fix things, but the answer is simple — and the founders of this nation knew it.  In fact, it is why they succeeded where we are failing.  The answer is…

I have read this passage many times, and heard it repeated many more.  However, I did not understand just how wide-sweeping this statement really is — until just recently, that is.  The truth is, whether a person believes or not, this proclamation governs every aspect of our lives.  If you want to be a principled person, you have to have a moral standard or ideal.  Well, unless that moral ideal is God’s Law, then you creating your own law, and no matter how good you may think it is, your efforts will be in vain.  This is because God is Supreme, and He has already established an ever-lasting moral law.  We cannot change that, and any attempt to do so is kicking against the boards.  It is only when we surrender to God’s Law (either Revealed or Natural) that we can establish a lasting moral ideal.  Then, unless we also accept God’s ordinances as to how to live according to His law, we start our fruitless efforts all over again.  The only principles that last are those which the Lord directs.  This is why so many have such difficult lives: they refuse to let the Lord lead them.

The same applies to nations.  When we look to leaders, or political parties or ideologies to ‘save’ us, we are looking to ourselves.  If we look to ourselves, then God can have no part in whatever we are trying to build.  This condemns us to failure.  Now, God is patient, so it may take time to reveal itself, but the failure will come just as surely as the sun will rise tomorrow.  We need but look to the history of socialism for the proof.  Many have tried, convinced that they are the first who has understood how to ‘do it right.’  But no socialist system has lasted more than 7 or 8 decades (a single lifetime).  The same applies to anything which is built on human effort and not on a reliance on and trust in God.

On the other hand, we have the Christian Church.  Early on, it was hunted by Jew and Roman alike.  For the first few centuries of its existence, those in power sought to exterminate Christianity.  Islam and Secular Humanism in all its many forms are still trying to eradicate it today.  But, in spite of all man’s efforts to do so, those who have clung faithfully to the Lord and His teachings have not only survived, they have changed the world.  This applies equally to God’s second (actually first) witness, the Jews.  The world has tried to rid itself of the Jews since before Christ’s time, yet, because they seek human desires and not the will of God, they have failed and God’s people have flourished.  But then, those who are at war with God cannot see this.

Well, our founders were not at war with God.  In fact, they depended upon Him.  They expressly stated that they sought His blessings on their efforts to build a nation according to His laws.  But then, the world would like to deny this, too.  There’s just one problem with denying this truth, and it lies with one of the founders we are told was among the least religious of all: a deist — at best.  Before I prove that the founders understood they had to let the Lord build this nation, let me remind you of what Psalm 127 says about trying to rely on yourself:

Psalm 127

Prosperity Comes from the Lord.

I do not know how to write this.  Anything I say will seem arrogant to some, but remaining silent is not an option.  The Lord will consume me from within if I try to stay quiet.  So I must write.  I have no choice — not if I want to remain obedient.  At the same time, I am fully aware that pride and arrogance are at the top of my list of sins.  They are also a fire, but not the type of fire which purify, but which destroy.  So I have to be careful to keep a wall between what I write out of obedience and what I write out of my own mind.  Inevitably, realizing this keeps bringing me to the point where I have to face the possibility that this means I truly am called by God to be a messenger.  It’s just that I have such a hard time believing this could possibly be true.  I know how much of a sinner I have been…  How much of a sinner I still am.  So, when I feel compelled to write, I always ask “Who am I to presume to tell others what God says or wants?  I have no theology degree.  I am not a prophet.  Who am I and why would anyone listen to me?”  Well, I don’t know.  I don’t know!  All I know is that there is a storm coming, and I have been told to warn God’s people.  So, while there is still time, I need to clear the air with whoever may follow this blog.

For whatever reason, I have never specialized in anything.  I never became an ‘expert’ on any one subject.  I have too many interests.  Every time I start to spend a lot of sustained time in any one area, I see a squirrel and find myself chasing off in another direction.  For the majority of my life, I believed this was a character flaw and I despised myself for it.  I believed this was proof that I was not a serious person, and that I was lazy.  I saw it as the source of my perceived ‘failure.’  I was a failure because I couldn’t dedicate myself to anything for long enough to become ‘something.’  My father stuck to his job his whole life, and he is one of the greatest men I have ever known.  But I couldn’t be like him.  My younger brother became an architect, and I envied his success.  But I, with such intelligence, talent and promise?  I was a failure.  At least, that was what I believed — until about two years ago.  Now I know that the Lord was teaching me for this time, for this purpose.

About two years ago, the Lord showed me His hand in my life.  You see, while everyone else was learning everything they could about one subject so they could become ‘experts,’ I was studying about everything I could.  I never studied anything enough to be an ‘expert,’ but the Lord had put a curiosity in me that drove me to learn much more about so many things that I became a modern version of what was once called a ‘renaissance man.’  My child hood friend noticed this years before, and tried to explain it to me by telling me I had “learned so much about so little that I had learned everything about nothing.”  But I didn’t understand what he was trying to tell me.  By worldly standards, there is little value in knowing ‘everything about nothing,’ so I dismissed him as ‘crazy.’  But the Lord showed me that, while it may not make me a worldly success, I have been perfectly prepared for succeeding at the purpose He has for me.  That purpose is to look at current events through my knowledge of history and human nature and hold them up to Scripture so I can warn God’s people by connecting dots that no one else can see.

This brings me to the primary purpose for this post.  The only other person I know of who I can even come close to comparing myself is Glenn Beck.  But there are huge differences between us, and, if you follow this blog, you need to understand them.  Otherwise, you may get the wrong idea from my blog posts — both past and future — responding to Beck.

First, Beck is not one man.  He presents a great deal of material as though he has been the one to learn it and make sense of it, but, were he more honest about things, he would be clear about the people behind him who do most of his research for him.  Now, don’t get me wrong: I know Glenn gives credit to others when and where it is deserved.  I am not accusing him of taking credit for others.  What I am saying is that he is not consistently clear on this fact: that most of what he brings to his audience is a compilation of effort by many people.  This is important, and I’ll explain in a minute.

The next thing we need to understand is that Beck believes he is a prophet.  No, he has never said so in that language.  However, I took time to learn his religion, and their language, so I recognize the key words and phrases, as well as the undertones that are in his language.  If you are a devout Mormon, you know I am correct.  He sends enough signals that other Mormons know he believes himself to be a prophet.  The problem is, I do not accept the Mormon religion as being of Yahweh and Jesus Christ.  When I hold the Mormon religion up against Scripture, I see an apostate religion against which God, His Son and His Prophets and Apostles warned us to beware.  This is also important, and I’ll tie it together in a moment.

The last thing we need to understand is that much of what Beck has predicted — the things that I believe have convinced him he is a prophet — most of them have come from people who are in a position to know things the majority of us would never even suspect.  The majority of these people are cowards.  They will tell their secrets to Beck because they know he will share it with the public, so they think they are doing good.  But, if they had any courage at all, they would be telling the public, themselves.  So Beck listens to these people and is either brave enough of foolish enough to share what he is told.  This is how he has been so correct about so many worldly things: he has simply ridden the knowledge gained from other people.  Now, let’s tie everything together.

Beck has been correct about worldly events.  He has been correct about human nature, history, about Islam, about financial matters, about politics.  He has been so correct that he has been able to make accurately make many detailed predictions which have come to pass.  At the moment, I believe Beck, and not Limbaugh, has the best pulse of the political mood in this country.  This also gives him the best sense of where we are likely heading.  All of this is why I listen to him: because there is value in his understanding of these things.  But there is one major problem with Beck: he has a dangerously flawed understanding of Spiritual matters!

This is where the people behind Beck and Beck’s religion come together.  He is correct about worldly events because he has so many people helping him with them.  But long-term listeners may have noticed that Glenn tends to ‘float’ from one learning to the next.  He does not seem to have knitted any of the things he’s learned together into a coherent ant and consistent world view.  One week, he is reading Gandhi, then next, he is reading Martin Luther King, Jr, and tomorrow he will be reading about some Atheist tech guru who thinks we are about to transcend into man-machines.  And, sometimes, he can’t even remember what he learned or where he learned it from.  Now here is the problem (and again, long-term listeners might already be aware of this): Beck gives equal weight to all of these teachings.  If you believe in Scripture, you should not, cannot do this.  All of this stuff is man and man’s wisdom.  It has nothing to do with God, but Beck often presents it as if it does.  This is because, as a Mormon, he believes man is his own god.  Beware!  Dear reader, believing in our hearts that we are our own god is straight out of 2 Thessalonians 2!

I will continue to blog in response to Glenn Beck.  He has been too ‘in tune’ with this world to ignore.  But His Spiritual teachings are a threat, and I will continue to caution and warn as I feel lead.  Beck is correct: there is a storm coming.  But he does not see it as clearly as he believes.  This is because his religion has left him Spiritually blind.  I now know that I am being called to warn God’s people about this storm.  I do not claim to see them clearly, myself, but I see them more clearly than most.  I see what is coming because of the way the Lord trained me my entire life.  I see connections most cannot, and they have allowed God to show me a picture of what is on the horizon.  Now God is telling me to share what I  see with His people.  God made all of this crystal clear to me just this morning, while I was reading Isaiah.  His Word suddenly spoke to me more clearly and more forcefully than ever before.  It sprung to life, as though He, and not I, were the one reading.  So I will obey, and I will warn those who will listen.  This means, when I am directed, I will warn about the things Glenn beck tells his audience — to help those of God’s people who listen to him separate the wheat from the chaff.  I only pray the Lord protects my writing from me!

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

Now that it appears as though we are going to be forced to chose between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, it suddenly strikes me that we are about to repeat the election of 1912 — and with the same potential for damage to what little is left of our republic. In 1912, America had to chose between Progressive, Theodore Roosevelt, and Progressive, Woodrow Wilson.  Today, many have a favorable opinion of both men, but that is a condemnation of our ‘education’ system.  So, naturally, out of unnecessary ignorance, we are about to repeat all our old mistakes all over again.  But, before you follow the lemmings blindly over the cliff and into the abyss, at least make sure you understand what 1912 means for us today.

First, we need to understand that a ‘Progressive’ is an American term for ‘Socialist.’  This is not my ‘opinion,’ but the bold assertion of both Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson.  In fact, Wilson went so far as to say that, under the label ‘Progressive,’ America would be made to embrace Communism — and so it has.  In fact, these men had a great deal in common, as explained in this link and book:

Compare and Contrast Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson

Theodore and Woodrow: How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom

“Either the Constitution means what it says, or it doesn’t.”

America’s founding fathers considered liberty a basic part of our nature―something to be guarded, not usurped by the federal government. As a result, they enshrined separation of powers and guarantees of freedom in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

But a little over a hundred years after America’s founding, those God-given rights were laid siege by two presidents―Republican Theodore Roosevelt and Democrat Woodrow Wilson―who cared more about the advancement of progressive, redistributionist ideology than the principles on which the country was founded.

Both men share something else in common.  One can easily make a convincing argument that they were the first of the 20th Century dictators.  If they weren’t, they certainly laid the foundation for them.  So, if they had so much in common, what made them different?  Well, basically, the same things that separate Hillary and Donald.

Teddy was a socialist who believed in national sovereignty (patriotism), a strong military and government control over privately owned business.  Essentially, Teddy was a Fascist, and so is Donald trump.  Trump shares most of the distinguishing characteristics of Teddy Roosevelt, right down to his pronouncements on immigration:

On the other hand, Woodrow Wilson was a globalist.  He was the father of the League of Nations (the precursor to the UN).  He believed in the direct control, if not ownership, of everything in society by the government.  He also believed that the President should be an elected dictator, and he said so.  Essentially, Wilson was a Communist, and in his writings, he admitted to this.  This is who Hillary Clinton is, and she has said so.  She has self-identified as an ‘early 20th Century Progressive.’  Well, since Wilson wrested Progressiveness from Teddy after Teddy created it, we can assume Hillary was pointing to Wilson.

So there we go: we are about to chose between a Fascist and a Communist once again.  The first time, the Communist so screwed thing up that the Progressive movement had to change their name to ‘Liberal.’  America recognized them for what they were and they became so reviled that, for the better part of the next eight decades, Progressives had to hide their true identity and desires.  But now that America has forgotten, the Progressives have reclaimed their old name and are open about their agenda.  We survived their first attack — but just barely, and then as a much diminished shadow of our former selves.  I can’t help but wonder whether there are enough Americans left to salvage whatever is left this next go around.

As an aside, I can’t help but wonder: if the Progressives are correct, and the Constitution is irrelevant because we have ‘Progressed,’ how is it we are repeating ‘ancient history?’

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

I have already written about Christians defending their support of unrepentant and ungodly people by saying “God can use sinners” and “We’re electing a leader, not a pastor.”  Now I am encountering a third misuse of scripture to defend the indefensible.  This one is “God’s ways are not our ways.”

Now, it’s true, God’s Word does say:

Isaiah 55:8

But it is a mistake to imply that this means we cannot know anything about God’s ways.  Scripture clearly tells us that God gave us His Word — in large part — so we can learn more about Him and His ways.  What do we think the Torah is all about?  It is God giving us His Law — His Way.  What do we think the Sermon on the Mount is all about?  It is Christ reaffirming God’s Law — His ways.  And if we are to assume that Isaiah 55:8 means we cannot know anything bout God’s ways, then what are we to make of the majority of the New Testament, which is filled with the Lord’s servants tell us about God’s ways?

But Scripture is God-breathed, and because God is omniscient, He addressed this issue long ago when He told us — through His servant:

2 Timothy 3:16

¹⁶ All Scripture is ^[a]inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for ^[b]training in righteousness;

This is also why the Bible records history — the good, the bad and the ugly.  It is so we can look to what has happened in the past and how the Lord dealt with His people as well as those who do not recognize or obey Him (i.e. Gentiles).  The events of the Old Testament most certainly do tell us about God’s ways, both in word and in deed.  And we are expected to learn the lessons and apply them to our lives.

So, when someone tells me they are free to support an unrepentant and self-proclaimed enemy of God because “God’s ways are not ours,”…  Well, all I can say in response is I do not find a single Scripture to support this claim, but I can list many that bear witness against it.

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

 

So, once again, we are at a point where people are starting to make the same old tired argument of: “If you don’t vote for my candidate, you are voting for the other candidate.”  I used to accept this argument — but then I surrendered to the Lord, and to His wisdom, not mine.  Now, every time I hear someone say those words, I hear the serpent telling Eve: “God didn’t really say you’d die…”

First of all, the idea that not doing A means you are doing B a fallacy.  I explain the logic on my other blog dealing with Natural Law.  You can find the explanation here:

LESSONS IN LOGIC: ‘If You Don’t Vote A, You Vote For B’ Is A Fallacy

However, when we deal with issues of God’s Law and morality, the claim that not doing A means you are doing B is not as clear.  First, we need to understand that, unless I actually do B, I am not doing B.  So telling me that not doing A means I am doing B is a lie.  However, whether or not I actually acquire a moral guilt by not doing B is a different question, so we should take a look at it.

To make it easier to consider, let’s paint a better illustration than thing A and thing B.  We will start with a case where not doing something does create a moral guilt.  We will use the crowed calling for Barabbas to be freed instead of Jesus.

When Pilot offered the crowed a choice with clear ramifications — in this case, death to whichever man was not freed — then everyone who cried for Barabbas accepted the blame for the result.  This is because, when faced with a choice between freeing a guilty man or an innocent man, the crowed chose a person they knew to be guilty over one they knew to be innocent.  Therefore, they chose to do something which they knew would lead to a moral wrong.  This made them all equally guilty.

Now let’s look at a modern political example.  Evey election, we are told we have to chose one candidate over another or we are electing that other person.  But what if we object because we know both candidates are morally corrupt?  If you make that objection, both sides will usually argue that you have to chose the ‘lesser evil,’ and that the ‘lesser evil’ is their candidate.  So, they will say, you either vote for their candidate, or you are the same as the people who chose Barabbas.  But this is a lie!

Suppose we have two choices: Trump and Hillary.  Both are morally corrupt, lawless people.  This is true by their own admission and action.  So who is the ‘lesser evil?’  The answer is: neither — they are both evil!  This means, no matter which one you chose, you are knowingly choosing someone you know to be immoral and lawless.  This means, whichever one you choose, you are accepting guilt for whatever they do.

Scripturally, we are morally accountable for our own actions and only for our own actions.  We cannot be made morally guilty for not doing something unless we know — beforehand — that we will be giving aid to or empowering the person to do something we know to be wrong.  If we do this, we become an accomplice.  This means we willingly become part of that moral wrong.  However, if we know someone will do wrong, and because we do not support them, another person who will do wrong gains power, we are not guilty either way.  And this is our Scriptural solution.

If you vote for either Hillary or Trump, it doesn’t matter because you know (or should know) that both will do wrong.  So no matter who you chose between them, you are accepting guilt for whatever they do.  But, if you know someone you believe will at least try to do right, and you vote for that person, then, if Trump or Hillary win, you are not guilty of any wrong they do because you did not accept blame for their actions.

This is logically and Scripturally sound, and it is at the heart of John Quincy Adam’s admonishment:

“Always vote for principle, though you may vote alone, and you may cherish the sweetest reflection that your vote is never lost.”

You will have to make your own decision, but I am going to vote so I can answer to the Lord — not men.  This is why I cannot vote for either of these two people. 

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

In my first post, I addressed something I have been hearing Trump supports — who claim to be Christians — have been saying to defend their support of Trump (LESSONS IN SCRIPTURE: Trump Supporters And The Cry Of ‘God Uses Sinners’ Reveals Christian Ignorance!).  In this post, I’d like to address something I’ve been hearing a lot of Christians telling me in support of whoever they favor: “We’re electing a leader, not a pastor.”  If you are a Christian, and you have ever found yourself agreeing with this sentiment, you might want to give this a quick read.

You can tell yourself that God does not exist, and that this is not a Christian nation — but God’s Word and the confessions of this nation’s founders testify against you.   And, even if you do believe and are a Christian, you can tell yourself that this does not bind us to vote for Christians to lead this nation — but God’s Word and the confessions of this nation’s founders testify against you.  You see, this nation was founded upon Biblical principles and dedicated — by its leaders — to the God of the Bible.  When Washington did this, he bound our fate to how well we follow and obey those principles.

Faith, the Culture, and other Small Topics

“Since we ought to be no less persuaded that the propitious smiles of Heaven, can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right, which Heaven itself has ordained: And since the preservation of the sacred fire of liberty, and the destiny of the Republican model of Government, are justly considered as deeply, perhaps as finally staked, on the experiment entrusted to the hands of the American people.”

Therefore, we should head the Lord’s warning about what happens to a nation that breaks its covenant with Him — even the nation He loves most:

(Hosea 8:1-3)

So, how does this apply to picking our leaders?  It applies because God expects His people to pick Godly leaders, and to seek His counsel — and not our own — in picking them.  When we do not do this, the nation will suffer:

The Political and Cultic Sin of Israel (Hosea 8:4-6)

God destroyed Israel for picking leaders who did not fear Him or honor His Laws.  They chose their ways and trusted in what they thought was their own wealth, created through their own works.  They forgot that everything comes from the Lord, and it is to the Lord we should turn for guidance — even in electing leaders.  And it is in the Lord we should trust — especially for guidance in electing leaders.

Our founders knew this, but we no longer listen to them.  Today, we just think of them as archaic, rich, white slave owners.  Well, how can a ‘Christian’ claim to follow the Lord if they are going to turn a blind eye and deaf ear to Abraham — an archaic, rich slave-owner?  I mean, Abraham is only the father of the Hebrew (Judeo/Christian) faith.  Why does he matter today, right?  Well, for all our ‘technological advancement,’ our founders were far wiser than we are today.  They understood the perils of pride and arrogance, and that, if we allowed it to govern us instead of God’s Word, it would cost us our liberty.  If you doubt this, then open this link and start reading their words.  I am pretty sure they would condemn anyone who says “we’re electing a leader, not a pastor.”  But then, you might disagree…

In the Founders’ Words: the Essential Role of Religion in Public and Civic Life

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

Now that it appears that Donald Trump is going to be the Republican nominee, the predictable cries to ‘rally around Trump’ have started.  I understand why those of the world would say this, but I simply do not understand why anyone who calls themselves by the Lord’s name would do so.  I was reading some Christian sites, and I saw a few brothers and sisters trying to warn Trump supporters that he is not the person they believe him to be, and almost without fail, Trump’s supporters reply with “God uses sinners, look at Paul.”  Ignorance!   Don’t these Christians know the difference between the repentant and unrepentant sinners that God has raised up to do His work?  Don’t they read God’s Word?  Don’t they know His laws?  Don’t they know His ways?  Obviously they do not.  Otherwise, they would not be championing a man who may turn out to be a modern day Assyrian?

Scripture is very clear: God can and does raise up sinners to do His work.  Many times, they are homely in appearance and lowly in stature and social status.  They may not have charming personalities, or even be able to speak well.  But this is precisely why God uses them: because they are humble, the most unexpected of people to be doing His work. This insures that these people cannot boast in themselves, but must give credit and glory to the Lord for whatever they do.

1 Corinthians 1:27-29

²⁷ but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong, ²⁸ and the base things of the world and the despised God has chosen, the things that are not, so that He may nullify the things that are, ²⁹ so that no ^[a]man may boast before God.

Whether it was a leader such as Moses, David, Gideon or a prophet such as Daniel, Isaiah, or Jeremiah, every sinner God raised up to help build His kingdom had something in common which is absolutely imperative to doing the Lord’s work.  They were repentant!  This means they acknowledged they were sinners, confessed their sins, ended their evil ways, begged the Lord for forgiveness and south to live by His commands from that day forward.  However, there are those in Scripture who were not repentant, and God still raised them up, but — in every case — they were raised up for a different purpose.

Many start out repentant, but they lose their way.  Men such as Sampson and Solomon started out obedient to the Lord, but they started to believe in themselves and turned their backs on God.  They paid the price for this disobedience, too.  But these men, in some form or another, still knew they were wrong and came back to the Lord at their very end.  So these men lie in the middle.  They repented, lost their way, but eventually returned to the Lord.  They were prodigal sons.  So they were not unrepentant sinners.  But there are unrepentant sinners who God uses, and one of the most famous of these was (is) ‘The Assyrian!‘

I am not talking about the figure so many know as ‘The Anti-Christ.’  I am talking about the king of Assyria.  If you read the prophets, you will find that, through them, God declares He will punish Israel by raising up the Assyrian to destroy them.  And it is Assyria that eventually does destroy Israel — just as God proclaimed.

God Will Raise Up the Assyrians to Attack Israel (Hosea 8:1-3)

Now here is the lesson Trump’s supporters should take away from this:

The Assyrian was an unrepentant sinner, and God did use him: not to build God’s kingdom, but to bring judgment down upon Israel!

Israel claimed they believed, but God rejected them!  Just as Jesus said there will be many who claim to be His disciples, yet He will tell them He never knew them!  But it doesn’t end here.  There are two more lessons in this for Trump’s supporters.  However, before I share them, I want to remind them of why God destroyed Israel by reminding them of what Israel was like right before God sent the Assyrian down on them:

The Political and Cultic Sin of Israel (Hosea 8:4-6)

Notice that Israel was doing things its way and was not relying on God.  This is what led God to send the Assyrian to destroy Israel.  But here is the next lesson Trump’s supporters should take from the unrepentant sinner who is raised up by God.  After God uses that person, God destroys them for their sin:

Isaiah 10:5-6

Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger
And the staff in whose hands is My indignation,
⁶ I send it against a godless nation
And commission it against the people of My fury
To capture booty and to seize plunder,
And to ^[g]trample them down like mud in the streets.

Isaiah 14:24-27

Judgment on Assyria

²⁴ The Lord of hosts has sworn saying, “Surely, just as I have intended so it has happened, and just as I have planned so it will stand, ²⁵ to break Assyria in My land, and I will trample him on My mountains. Then his yoke will be removed from them and his burden removed from their shoulder. ²⁶ This is the plan ^[m]devised against the whole earth; and this is the hand that is stretched out against all the nations. ²⁷ For the Lord of hosts has planned, and who can frustrate it? And as for His stretched-out hand, who can turn it back?”

Now, Ted Cruz may have many faults.  He is not the best looking man.  He does not have a particularly captivating personality.  And the way he speaks does not necessarily captivate his audience.  But he is humble, obeys the law and keeps his word.  Contrary to what Trump has claimed, Cruz also tells the truth.  Most importantly, however, there is no doubt that Cruz at least knows and understands God’s Word.  All of this is praised in Scripture are signs of a virtuous and righteous man, yet, for some reason, many people who claim to love the Lord rejected Cruz — the very ‘type’ God tends to raise up to build His kingdom.

Instead, these people support Trump: a man who has openly boasted that he has no need to ask God for forgiveness.  A man who boasts about his money, his wealth, his achievements — including serial adultery and theft!  Trump is lawless and proud of it.  He openly admits to bribing political leaders and expecting them to do favors for him in return for his ‘gifts.’  He also boasts about taking private property and abusing the bankruptcy laws for personal gain.  But, most of all, he is arrogant and filled with pride — just like the Assyrian.  Now, if anyone thinks God is going to raise up such a person to ‘save’ this nation, I would remind them of what God’s Word actually says about such a man:

Proverbs 11:2-4

A final lesson for those who reject the lawful and support the lawless: the unrepentant who walk according to their own ways and reject those of God:

Romans 1:28-32

²⁸ And just as they did not see fit ^[a]to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, ²⁹ being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, ³⁰ slanderers, ^[b]haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, ³¹ without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; ³² and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them.

Maybe Cruz was not chosen by God, but I suspect he was chosen by God as a choice.  Cruz offered this nation one last chance to turn from our ways and back to God, to lawfulness.  Instead, we chose a man who may have also been chosen by God — not to lift us up; but to tear us down in judgment.  And all those claiming to follow this man while also claiming to be disciples of Christ…  Well, all I can say is you either do not know God’s Word, or you have chosen not to listen because there is now way Donald Trump has been chosen to build God’s kingdom (at least, not as he is now).

Still, I have no fear.  I know God likes to act just as there appears to be no way out of catastrophe.  So I cling to the hope that He will do so again and save us at the last moment.  And maybe, just maybe, Trump will convert and lead us out of the abyss — like Lincoln did in the last two years of his life.  But, even if this is not to be and we are to be destroyed for our nation’s sin, I still do not fear.  For I know that God has a plan, and my hope and trust is in Him and His Son’s atoning work on the cross!

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

From my other blog, The Road to Concord:

APPLIED LOGIC: What Is The Difference Between Communism And Fascism?

I just wanted to write a short note and ask you to consider something.  If you follow politics, you may have heard that people are comparing Ted Cruz to Lucifer.  One Congressman even went so far as to say that such a comparison may give Lucifer a bad name.  Now, like him or hate him (and if you are a Christian, I hope you wouldn’t hate anyone), let me ask you to consider an honest question:

What — exactly — has Cruz done that has people comparing him to Lucifer? 

None of us are perfect.  We all sin.  However, by all accounts, Ted Cruz has spent his life obeying our laws and keeping his promises to his constituents that he would continue to uphold and defend those laws.  So, how does obeying the law connect one to evil?

Might I suggest that the accusation says less about Cruz and more about the people making and agreeing with it?  After all, the primary assertion that Cruz is a liar has been coming from a man who has boasted about his theft, adultery, wealth and even his refusal to acknowledge he is a sinner and ask God for forgiveness.  So, why are so many Christians actually supporting that man over Cruz, who — by all appearances — is a man who has tried to live the Lord’s commands?  And why should anyone accept the accusations of men and women who have spent their careers perverting the laws?  When lawless men compare someone to Lucifer, what does that say about them?

The reader is free to decide for themselves.  Personally, I was a Cruz supporter — right up until he chose a lawless running mate.  But that choice does not necessarily make Cruz lawless, himself: it just means he is as human and susceptible to mistake as any of us.  But what I do know is that the other three ‘front runners’ in the race are wantonly lawless, and so are the men comparing Cruz to Lucifer.  So, to me, this tells me more about who the father of all these people is than it tells me about the character of a man who has demonstrated he tries to obey the law.

But then, none of that is of any consequences, is it?  I mean, it’s not like God’s Word says He hates the lawless and loves the one who obeys and upholds the law.  And if it did, what would that matter?  As long as we ‘love,’ God forgives, right?  I mean, nothing in His Word says we have to obey His commands if we ‘love,’ right?

Isaiah 5:20-21

The relationship between ‘principle’ and ‘ideal’ can tell us a great deal about ourselves.  For starters, it can tell us whether or not we truly value the things we claim to value.  If our actions are in line with our stated values, then there is a good chance that we actually believe in them.  However, if our actions are not in line with our stated values, then there is a good chance that we do not really believe the things we say.  In this case, if there is a pattern or consistency in our actions, that may actually tell us what we truly do believe in or value.  What’s more, when we understand this relationship between ‘principle’ and ‘ideal,’ it helps us determine whether or not others believe what they say, whether they may be confused about something, or whether they actually do not believe the things they claim to believe  (i.e., it will help us distinguish true hypocrisy from honest misunderstanding).  This is why we should all understand the relationship between ‘principle’ and ‘ideal.’

I understand that it is not something most people enjoy doing, but, before we have a discussion about ideas, we should start by looking at the definition of the words we will be using — just to make sure we have the proper understanding of what those words are supposed to mean, so we can be sure to use them properly:

Full Definition of ideal

In other words, an ‘ideal’ is the model of perfection: the ‘perfect’ scenario or model of whatever we are discussing.  In this sense, an ‘ideal’ answers the question(s) ‘what?‘ and ‘why?‘  In the case of a direction, North might be the ‘ideal,’ especially in terms of navigation.  In the case of morality, the ultimate ideal might be ‘The Sermon on the Mount.’   In the case of America, our ideal is found in The Declaration of Independence.

Full Definition of principle

In other words, a ‘principle’ is the system of per-determined rule by which we make our daily decisions to assure we stay on the path that leads to our stated ‘ideal.’   In this sense, a ‘principle’ answers the question ‘how?‘  In the case of direction, a compass could be our ‘how?‘  In the case of morality, the Ten Commandments would be our ‘how?‘  And, in the case of the American ‘ideal,’ our how is found in the Constitution.

So, to put it in the simplest terms, an ideal is the destination (ex. the Declaration of Independence); while a principle is a per-determined rule intended to help you stay on the correct path to that destination (ex. the U.S. Constitution).

But this is just the understanding of the proper relationship between ‘ideal’ and ‘principle.’  That understanding only comes into full use when we actually apply it examining our own actions.  Only when we do this — and do it honestly — can we know what things we truly value.  For example:

Suppose I claim to value the ‘ideals’ set forth in the Declaration of Independence, but I support abortion, ‘equality’ laws and social security.  What do my actions tell me about my stated beliefs?  Well, since the Declaration states that life is among our primary rights, that it is granted by our Creator, and that all our rights belong to us from the moment of creation, then my support for abortion tells me I do not really believe that part of the Declaration’s ideal.  And since I support ‘equality’ laws, which are based in forcing one person to accept another who they may find morally questionable, then my actions do not conform with the Declaration’s ideal of liberty. Finally, if I support social security, which is based on taking from one and giving it to another, my actions contradict the Declaration’s ideal of ‘pursuing happiness‘ — at least, not the happiness of others.

So, in the hypothetical above, what do my actions tell me?  They tell me that I either A — do not think of the Declaration in the same terms as the men who drafted and adopted it intended, or B — I do not actually believe those stated ideals are true.  If A, and I have a different understanding of the ideals asserted in the Declaration, then I may be ignorant or confused.  Either way, I need to study the founders words more closely to decide.  However, if I properly understand the original intent of the Declaration, and I claim their ideals, yet my actions are in conflict with those ideals, then I am deceiving myself, as ell as everyone else around me.  In this case, I am walking a fine line between criminal ignorance and deliberately lying — both of which speak directly to my character.

Once we can take an honest look at ourselves and determine whether our actions (i.e. ‘principles’) agree with our stated beliefs (i.e. ‘ideals’), then we can use this understanding to evaluate the beliefs of others.  In this case, I will not provide any examples.  I’ll leave that to the reader.  However, if the reader has a firm understanding of the relationship between ‘principle’ and ‘ideal,’ then I have no doubt that the reader will find many such examples in our society today — namely because so few of us actually live a principled life any more that their consistency sticks out against the overall backdrop of hypocrisy which surrounds those few principled souls left in this world…

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]

 

From my other blog, The Road to Concord:

Like mathematics, Language is a form of logic.  This means, like mathematics, Language is governed by a known set of rules.  In order for mathematics to work, the rules which govern it cannot change.  If 2+2 equals 4 here but 5 where you are, then we cannot be sure of the result of any equation we use.  This means we cannot be confident in anything that uses mathematics, most especially engineering.  So, if the rules governing mathematics can change, you should not cross a bridge or get on an aircraft as you cannot know they will hold up or fly.  The same is true for Language.  In order for us to have any confidence that we can make ourselves understood, or that we properly understand what others are saying to us, the rules governing our language cannot change.  Now, let’s look at one of the most fundamental rules of any language: words have specific meanings and you cannot change that meaning without making it abundantly clear to all parties that you have redefined the word!  This especially applies to the ‘gender’ issue in our society today.

Read the rest…

WARNING!

THIS POST IS NOT POLITICALLY CORRECT

It’s just logically correct

When properly applied, logical extension is a powerful tool.  For example, if we apply it to the bathroom/gender issue currently in the news, we find that our sexual orientation is not an accident of birth after all, but a choice — just as many have claimed.  But how do we arrive at this conclusion?

The easiest way is to just notice that the people who support the GLBT agenda have now added a ‘Q’ — for ‘Questioning.  If you Google it, you’ll find it.  Here is just one example:

Lesbian, Gay, Bi, Trans, or Questioning

Now, simple logic says that, if you are born hetero or homosexual, then you are not going to ‘question:’ you will know.  Even the assertion that you can question implies choice, which implies that it is not pre-determined.  But there’s more.

If you will do another Google search, you will find that the people pushing this gender/bathroom agenda say that we must allow people to use the bathroom that matches how the ‘identify’ at that time.  Well, there is yet another choice only, this time, it is not even connected to your sexual organs or orientation, but your whim.  This is a direct admission that one can ‘chose’ their gender and, because the people pushing this non-sense have equated gender with sex (which it is not, but that is an entirely different post), then the logical conclusion is:

One is not born gay, one choose to be!

And this means (again, by logical extension) that the LGBTQ agenda has nothing to do with ‘fairness’ or ‘equality’ and everything to do with political power of a minority over the majority — period!  (in this case, the forced normalcy of deviancy along with the creation of special — not equal — rights and protected classes).

Now, before you decide to pull out your politically correct stakes and start kindling a fire for me, let me try one more thing to make my case.

What if I declare that I identify as a ‘conservative male lesbian’ and demand that I then be afforded the same protections as any other lesbian?  Do you think the LGBTQ community is going to accept me — a male lesbian living as a heterosexual male?

HONESTY TEST:  If you are honest with yourself, you know the answer to that last question.  And with that answer, I rest my case.

Ain’t logic a bugger?  OK, let the hate begin 🙂

[NOTE: I no longer think of my voice as anything special.  There was a time when I believed I had something important to say, but not so much these days.  I write now because I feel driven to do so.  Something inside me will not let me rest until I post the pages you just read.  I’d just as soon not bother anymore.  It all seems like no one is listening and I do more harm than good.  So I have come to trust that whatever it is driving me has all this under control.  Personally, I believe it is God, but others may not.  All I ask is that, if anything I write helps you, or you think it might help others in any way, please, share this page.  Re-blog it, share it on FB or send the link to your friends.  So long as you feel it will do more good than harm, then please, use this page however you wish.  Thank you.]