The absolute dither of the left over the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court only makes sense when you understand that it is about religion. The creed of the Left is Secular Humanism, but that has been defined by SCOTUS as a non-theistic religion in such historic cases as Torcaso v. Watkins in 1961, and Fellowship of Humanity v. County of Alameda in 1957. Although denying any deity or that it is a religion, humanism includes all the essential elements of religion: a god, a form of worship, a theology, and a sacrifice.
The god of humanism is self; the worship of self is the exposure of the human body and sexual acts; the theology of humanism is evolution; and the blood sacrifice in humanistic worship is abortion.
Jesus Christ and biblical Christianity are the enemies of this hedonistic belief. That is why Leftists are so virulently anti-Christian and anti pro-life. They are outspoken zealots for this religion of the devil. Should not we as Christians be as zealous for the true God and the true religion of Jesus Christ?
Monday, July 16, 2018
The Truth About Abortion
According to the Guttmacher Institute, there have been 476,781 abortions so far this year, 179,320 by Planned Parenthood, and only 4,624 of all those were for rape or incest. The health of the mother is almost never a consideration. In other words, 99.1% of all abortions are for convenience. Note also that this number only includes surgically induced abortions and not chemically induced abortions, so the actual numbers are far worse.
There have been 60,546,761 abortions since Roe v Wade, almost the entire population of the Philippines (64 million) when I first arrived there in 1985. World wide there have been over 1.5 billion abortions since 1980. To put that in perspective, it is estimated that the world's population only reached 1 billion in 1830, and 2 billion in 1930. The number of babies aborted is equal roughly to the entire world's population about 120 years ago. Let that sink in for awhile. This is a blood bath of unprecedented proportions. Does anyone think a righteous God will not hold us accountable?
President Trump is looking for a Constitutionalist to replace Anthony Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court. This will necessarily mean a conservative, pro-life, pro-Second Amendment jurist. The left has been in a tither since Kennedy’s announcement. The real battle is going to be getting the 51 votes in the Senate to approve the president’s choice. At least three Republican Senators including Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine have indicated they may not vote for a pro-life nominatee.
The argument for Roe at its base is the right for a woman to live whatever promiscuous lifestyle she chooses and not have to pay the consequences for it. The Supreme Court even addressed this issue in Roe but rejected it as an argument against women’s rights. I think, however, that the president should not be afraid to make a strong pro-life nomination because Roe is its own worst enemy.
First, the law is based on the false premise of a pregnant woman unable to get an abortion in Texas. In Section IV, p. 124 of Roe v Wade, the Court ascertained that Jane Roe, although a pseudonym, was established as a living person who was pregnant at the time the suit was file. Years later Norma McCorvey, who was Jane Roe, confessed publicly that she was not pregnant at the time.
Second, the Court reasoned in Section VII, pp. 148-149, that the reason for laws prohibiting abortion was to protect women from a hazardous procedure that although rarely performed resulted in a high mortality rate for the mothers. On p. 150 the Court writes that the State’s interest is to see that the procedure “is performed under circumstances that insure maximum safety for the patient.”
With approved medical clinics and safe procedures this was not supposed to happen anymore. However, as we have seen through the years, and as they are becoming more and more prominent, there are many unclean, unhealthy abortuaries where thousands of women have had to be rushed to hospitals and many have died. At the very least this should be an argument from Roe to shut down all abortion clinics outside of regular medical facilities.
Third, in Section IX, p. 161, the Court maintains that the law does not endorse any theory that life begins before live birth. Therefore, in Section X, p. 162 the Court does not allow States to hold to a theory of life that prevents abortion. The Court uses the 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th Amendments to defend this position. However, such an intrusion on the rights of the States and the will of the people of a State is a violation the 10th Amendment, which limits Federal interference in State matters, and is an unconstitutional overreach of authority by the Court.
Fourth, in Section X, p.165, the Court allows States to establish restrictions on Roe based on the viability of the child. Stating that a sister case, Doe v Bolton, must be considered along with Roe, the Court sets viability at 24-28 weeks, p. 160. Therefore partial-birth abortions, as well as any prohibitions on abortions after viability are constitutionally valid.
Medical technology has since improved to the point where babies have survived birth as early as 22 weeks. It has also shown that babies in the womb have a heartbeat at only six weeks, and are able to feel pain as early as 20 weeks. The House passed a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks, but in January of this year the Senate rejected it.
Now I’m no lawyer, of course, and I imagine those who are fighting for life in the courts have already considered and made better arguments than these, but I don’t think the next Supreme Court nominee should be afraid of Roe. Roe can be used to defeat itself.
The fact that the entire case was based on a lie and falsely presented should be enough to overturn it but that isn’t going to happen. The crux of the matter rests on when life begins. Medical science very clearly shows a living being from conception; viability isn’t the issue. The zygote is alive. SCOTUS took no position on this in Roe, but it is the issue that should be drilled home to the Court.
There is precedence to go by. Ohio recently banned all abortions declaring that life begins at conception. More States are considering the same proposition.
Pro-abortion zealots, who are literally anti-science, will never accept the truth, but this is reality. The argument that the Court rejected in 1973, that the real reason behind abortion is the protection and or promulgation of immorality, is exactly what it is all about. How sad that personal pleasure eclipses the beauty and the miracle of life. How tragic that people could be so hedonistic and cold as to feel no shame at the malicious destruction of innocent life. And these people call pro-lifers Nazis.
It is high time Roe v Wade to be overturned before the hand of God’s judgment falls. We need to do all we can to support any pro-life candidate that President Trump nominates for the Supreme Court.
There have been 60,546,761 abortions since Roe v Wade, almost the entire population of the Philippines (64 million) when I first arrived there in 1985. World wide there have been over 1.5 billion abortions since 1980. To put that in perspective, it is estimated that the world's population only reached 1 billion in 1830, and 2 billion in 1930. The number of babies aborted is equal roughly to the entire world's population about 120 years ago. Let that sink in for awhile. This is a blood bath of unprecedented proportions. Does anyone think a righteous God will not hold us accountable?
President Trump is looking for a Constitutionalist to replace Anthony Kennedy on the U.S. Supreme Court. This will necessarily mean a conservative, pro-life, pro-Second Amendment jurist. The left has been in a tither since Kennedy’s announcement. The real battle is going to be getting the 51 votes in the Senate to approve the president’s choice. At least three Republican Senators including Murkowski of Alaska and Collins of Maine have indicated they may not vote for a pro-life nominatee.
The argument for Roe at its base is the right for a woman to live whatever promiscuous lifestyle she chooses and not have to pay the consequences for it. The Supreme Court even addressed this issue in Roe but rejected it as an argument against women’s rights. I think, however, that the president should not be afraid to make a strong pro-life nomination because Roe is its own worst enemy.
First, the law is based on the false premise of a pregnant woman unable to get an abortion in Texas. In Section IV, p. 124 of Roe v Wade, the Court ascertained that Jane Roe, although a pseudonym, was established as a living person who was pregnant at the time the suit was file. Years later Norma McCorvey, who was Jane Roe, confessed publicly that she was not pregnant at the time.
Second, the Court reasoned in Section VII, pp. 148-149, that the reason for laws prohibiting abortion was to protect women from a hazardous procedure that although rarely performed resulted in a high mortality rate for the mothers. On p. 150 the Court writes that the State’s interest is to see that the procedure “is performed under circumstances that insure maximum safety for the patient.”
With approved medical clinics and safe procedures this was not supposed to happen anymore. However, as we have seen through the years, and as they are becoming more and more prominent, there are many unclean, unhealthy abortuaries where thousands of women have had to be rushed to hospitals and many have died. At the very least this should be an argument from Roe to shut down all abortion clinics outside of regular medical facilities.
Third, in Section IX, p. 161, the Court maintains that the law does not endorse any theory that life begins before live birth. Therefore, in Section X, p. 162 the Court does not allow States to hold to a theory of life that prevents abortion. The Court uses the 4th, 5th, 9th and 14th Amendments to defend this position. However, such an intrusion on the rights of the States and the will of the people of a State is a violation the 10th Amendment, which limits Federal interference in State matters, and is an unconstitutional overreach of authority by the Court.
Fourth, in Section X, p.165, the Court allows States to establish restrictions on Roe based on the viability of the child. Stating that a sister case, Doe v Bolton, must be considered along with Roe, the Court sets viability at 24-28 weeks, p. 160. Therefore partial-birth abortions, as well as any prohibitions on abortions after viability are constitutionally valid.
Medical technology has since improved to the point where babies have survived birth as early as 22 weeks. It has also shown that babies in the womb have a heartbeat at only six weeks, and are able to feel pain as early as 20 weeks. The House passed a bill to ban abortions after 20 weeks, but in January of this year the Senate rejected it.
Now I’m no lawyer, of course, and I imagine those who are fighting for life in the courts have already considered and made better arguments than these, but I don’t think the next Supreme Court nominee should be afraid of Roe. Roe can be used to defeat itself.
The fact that the entire case was based on a lie and falsely presented should be enough to overturn it but that isn’t going to happen. The crux of the matter rests on when life begins. Medical science very clearly shows a living being from conception; viability isn’t the issue. The zygote is alive. SCOTUS took no position on this in Roe, but it is the issue that should be drilled home to the Court.
There is precedence to go by. Ohio recently banned all abortions declaring that life begins at conception. More States are considering the same proposition.
Pro-abortion zealots, who are literally anti-science, will never accept the truth, but this is reality. The argument that the Court rejected in 1973, that the real reason behind abortion is the protection and or promulgation of immorality, is exactly what it is all about. How sad that personal pleasure eclipses the beauty and the miracle of life. How tragic that people could be so hedonistic and cold as to feel no shame at the malicious destruction of innocent life. And these people call pro-lifers Nazis.
It is high time Roe v Wade to be overturned before the hand of God’s judgment falls. We need to do all we can to support any pro-life candidate that President Trump nominates for the Supreme Court.
Wednesday, May 23, 2018
Farewell Clint Walker
I'm sad tonight. On the wall behind my desk hang four pictures of men I've admired and been a fan of for most of my life. The largest is of John Wayne, great actor, American, and patriot, and in spite of some moral flaws, a man who had his feet on the ground, humble, not arrogant. After a heroic battle with cancer he passed away in 1979.
To the left and slightly above is a picture of Ronald Reagan, the greatest president of my lifetime, and one of the greatest in our history. Also a man from humble beginnings who became the leader of the free world, but never forgot where he came from. He was a man of the people, a man of wisdom and acclaim until Alzheimer's took him in 2004.
To the left of Reagan above a personal letter to me that I framed is a picture of Bobby Richardson, fine baseball player and MVP of the 1960 World Series, a man with a great Christian testimony who won many of his teammates to the Lord and who has been an invaluable influence on my life.
In the middle below Reagan is Clint Walker, star of the Cheyenne TV show from 1955 to 1963, and many great movies including Night of the Grizzly. Walker, like Reagan, was born in Illinois and lived along the Mississippi River. He grew tall, 6'6", and big with a 52 inch chest and 32 inch waste, and handsome. He was perfectly sculpted, the heart throb of women and the envy of men. He was working as a security officer at the Sands Hotel in Las Vegas when an actor got him an interview with Cecil B. DeMille, and then Warner Brothers bought his contract and put him in the lead role of the first hour long prime time western TV series, Cheyenne. Almost off the street he became a major star.
He was also a patriot, enlisting in the Merchant Marines at the end of World War 2 before age 18, and a conservative, a life member of the NRA, a supporter of Ronald Reagan, and often a guest on Mark Levin's radio program. He always portrayed characters with wholesome, moral values, even referring to the Bible several times in the Cheyenne series. He never used foul language, and turned down a number of roles that he felt were inappropriate or inconsistent with the principles that he lived by. He was also a humble man, never too busy to talk to his fans.
My brother, Randall, met him in Branson, Missouri back in 2005. Randall was the lead singer in a western show and Walker was there for a TV cowboy convention. Between shows Randall had an opportunity to talk with him for several minutes. Clint encouraged Randall to do wholesome, family oriented entertainment.
Several years ago I joined the only official Clint Walker fan club on Facebook. Last year the moderator asked members to make a short video greeting for his 90th birthday so I did. Every August there is a Western Roundup in Kanab, Utah, and Clint was usually there every year. Last August I was in a mission conference in Cortez, Colorado during the same week and asked the pastor of the church for a day off to make the four hour drive to Kanab and back.
A week before the roundup the word came that Clint would not be able to attend. I was greatly disappointed. Sometime back in the 70s I put Clint Walker on my prayer list and prayed for him for many years. Last summer I began to wonder about his health and prayed for him again.
I was five years old and he was my first hero. Yesterday, nine days before his 91st birthday, he passed from this life into eternity. His wife and daughter were holding him in their arms. I saw the notice early this morning and tonight my heart is heavy. I hope someday I'll get to meet him in heaven.
Maybe a proper farewell comes from the last lines of the Cheyenne theme song:
Move along, Cheyenne, next pasture's always so green.
Drifting on, Cheyenne, don't forget the things you have seen,
And when you will settle down, where will it be?
Cheyenne.
To the left and slightly above is a picture of Ronald Reagan, the greatest president of my lifetime, and one of the greatest in our history. Also a man from humble beginnings who became the leader of the free world, but never forgot where he came from. He was a man of the people, a man of wisdom and acclaim until Alzheimer's took him in 2004.
To the left of Reagan above a personal letter to me that I framed is a picture of Bobby Richardson, fine baseball player and MVP of the 1960 World Series, a man with a great Christian testimony who won many of his teammates to the Lord and who has been an invaluable influence on my life.
In the middle below Reagan is Clint Walker, star of the Cheyenne TV show from 1955 to 1963, and many great movies including Night of the Grizzly. Walker, like Reagan, was born in Illinois and lived along the Mississippi River. He grew tall, 6'6", and big with a 52 inch chest and 32 inch waste, and handsome. He was perfectly sculpted, the heart throb of women and the envy of men. He was working as a security officer at the Sands Hotel in Las Vegas when an actor got him an interview with Cecil B. DeMille, and then Warner Brothers bought his contract and put him in the lead role of the first hour long prime time western TV series, Cheyenne. Almost off the street he became a major star.
He was also a patriot, enlisting in the Merchant Marines at the end of World War 2 before age 18, and a conservative, a life member of the NRA, a supporter of Ronald Reagan, and often a guest on Mark Levin's radio program. He always portrayed characters with wholesome, moral values, even referring to the Bible several times in the Cheyenne series. He never used foul language, and turned down a number of roles that he felt were inappropriate or inconsistent with the principles that he lived by. He was also a humble man, never too busy to talk to his fans.
My brother, Randall, met him in Branson, Missouri back in 2005. Randall was the lead singer in a western show and Walker was there for a TV cowboy convention. Between shows Randall had an opportunity to talk with him for several minutes. Clint encouraged Randall to do wholesome, family oriented entertainment.
Several years ago I joined the only official Clint Walker fan club on Facebook. Last year the moderator asked members to make a short video greeting for his 90th birthday so I did. Every August there is a Western Roundup in Kanab, Utah, and Clint was usually there every year. Last August I was in a mission conference in Cortez, Colorado during the same week and asked the pastor of the church for a day off to make the four hour drive to Kanab and back.
A week before the roundup the word came that Clint would not be able to attend. I was greatly disappointed. Sometime back in the 70s I put Clint Walker on my prayer list and prayed for him for many years. Last summer I began to wonder about his health and prayed for him again.
I was five years old and he was my first hero. Yesterday, nine days before his 91st birthday, he passed from this life into eternity. His wife and daughter were holding him in their arms. I saw the notice early this morning and tonight my heart is heavy. I hope someday I'll get to meet him in heaven.
Maybe a proper farewell comes from the last lines of the Cheyenne theme song:
Move along, Cheyenne, next pasture's always so green.
Drifting on, Cheyenne, don't forget the things you have seen,
And when you will settle down, where will it be?
Cheyenne.
Wednesday, March 21, 2018
School Shootings
Five weeks ago a deranged student took an AR-15 rifle into his former high school in Parkland, Florida and killed 17, wounding over 30 more, and walked out with other students fleeing the building while four police officers stood around outside doing nothing. In response students across the country, encouraged by liberal teachers, politicians and media, staged a walkout to condemn the NRA, criticize the president and demand that AR-15 "assault" rifles be banned. We must listen to the children declared many as Chuck Schumer and other Democrats, protected by armed policemen, joined some of the protests calling for more gun control.
President Trump was vilified for suggesting that qualified teachers should be armed in the schools. "Our safety is more important than the Second Amendment," many students shouted. "We should feel safe in our schools and not have to fear for our lives," others said. What viable solutions did these amazing "wunderkinds" in their simple wisdom offer? Nothing but more gun control.
Yesterday at a high school in Maryland a deranged 17 year old student proved the fallacy of the left's entire argument. He walked into a classroom with a handgun and shot two fellow students. Reacting to the gunshots a school human resource officer, armed with a handgun, confronted the student and shot him. The only one that died was the shooter.
The fallacy of leftist demands to overturn the Second Amendment and ban assault weapons like the AR-15 is found first in its non understanding of the weapons they consider to be assault rifles. They often refer to the AR-15 as an automatic weapon. It is not. It is a semi-automatic, meaning, one bullet per one trigger pull. There are many semi-automatic rifles on the market, but the AR-15 is the one singled out only because it looks like an M-16 military rifle.
The second fallacy is found in the emotional naiveté of all gun control proponents. They focus on the AR-15, but the reality is the AR-15 has rarely been used in mass killings. AR-15s had been banned by Clinton in 1994 and were not for sale in America for ten years until W. Bush rescinded the ban. In the first school shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton Colorado in 1999 the perpetrators used handguns and shotguns. In 2012, after the ban was lifted, the Sandy Hook shooter used a Bushmaster XM-15 that he stole from his mother after murdering her first. In 2016, out of over 11,000 gun-related murders in the country, less than 300 involved an AR-15. Emotional appeals to ban the AR-15, overturn the Second Amendment, and blame the NRA may make unthinking people feel good, but they provide no solutions to the problem. For one thing, not one mass shooter has ever been associated with or linked to the NRA in any aspect. In fact, it was an NRA member with an AR-15 that put a stop to the church shooting in Sutherland Texas last year.
The answer to the problem is much deeper and goes to the heart of the culture. Our Founders gave us a country based on biblical values and self-government. John Adams made it clear that this type of culture would only work for Christian people who feared God and revered the Bible. America has drifted a long way from those moral precepts.
From a country that once believed "out of the many we became one," we now celebrate diversity of belief, which has led to division. In our schools we teach children they have evolved and are nothing more than a higher form of animal life. There is no morality except that which is right for you. The Ten Commandments are banned and Christianity is mocked. Bullying those who are different is common and for all the talk of free love there is no love instilled in our children. In our homes parents have reneged on disciplining their children and teaching them values. What we have created is a valueless society that trends toward lawlessness because it is godless.
The answers we come up with are nothing more than platitudes that blame straw man scapegoats and deal only with symptoms rather than root causes. The problem with listening to the wisdom of the children in these student walkouts is that there is no wisdom in them. Sure they have a right to be concerned. Yes they have a right to voice their opinions. But opinions based on a leftist ideology that has taken us down from a Christian moral high ground to the depths of humanism and a philosophy that worships the individual above the Creator doesn't begin to address the reason for the problem or offer rational solutions.
Thomas Jefferson gave us this warning: "God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of a Gift of God?"
The only real answer to the godless nature of our culture is a return to the founding principles that made our country the envy of the world. These are the "general Principles of Christianity," according to John Adams. They are the principles of the Ten Commandments which are etched in stone at the United States Supreme Court. "The gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life," declared Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. Self-government is impossible without a Christian foundation.
The answer to the problem of our culture is to teach our children (and our childish self-centered adults) that the first two great commandments that need to be followed are to "love the Lord their God with all their hearts and souls and minds," and to "love their neighbors as themselves" (Matthew 22:37-39). The answer to all of our nation's problems begins in a relationship with Jesus Christ. Until that happens, all protests, all pontificating, all laws and bans passed in Congress are meaningless and will accomplish nothing.
President Trump was vilified for suggesting that qualified teachers should be armed in the schools. "Our safety is more important than the Second Amendment," many students shouted. "We should feel safe in our schools and not have to fear for our lives," others said. What viable solutions did these amazing "wunderkinds" in their simple wisdom offer? Nothing but more gun control.
Yesterday at a high school in Maryland a deranged 17 year old student proved the fallacy of the left's entire argument. He walked into a classroom with a handgun and shot two fellow students. Reacting to the gunshots a school human resource officer, armed with a handgun, confronted the student and shot him. The only one that died was the shooter.
The fallacy of leftist demands to overturn the Second Amendment and ban assault weapons like the AR-15 is found first in its non understanding of the weapons they consider to be assault rifles. They often refer to the AR-15 as an automatic weapon. It is not. It is a semi-automatic, meaning, one bullet per one trigger pull. There are many semi-automatic rifles on the market, but the AR-15 is the one singled out only because it looks like an M-16 military rifle.
The second fallacy is found in the emotional naiveté of all gun control proponents. They focus on the AR-15, but the reality is the AR-15 has rarely been used in mass killings. AR-15s had been banned by Clinton in 1994 and were not for sale in America for ten years until W. Bush rescinded the ban. In the first school shooting at Columbine High School in Littleton Colorado in 1999 the perpetrators used handguns and shotguns. In 2012, after the ban was lifted, the Sandy Hook shooter used a Bushmaster XM-15 that he stole from his mother after murdering her first. In 2016, out of over 11,000 gun-related murders in the country, less than 300 involved an AR-15. Emotional appeals to ban the AR-15, overturn the Second Amendment, and blame the NRA may make unthinking people feel good, but they provide no solutions to the problem. For one thing, not one mass shooter has ever been associated with or linked to the NRA in any aspect. In fact, it was an NRA member with an AR-15 that put a stop to the church shooting in Sutherland Texas last year.
The answer to the problem is much deeper and goes to the heart of the culture. Our Founders gave us a country based on biblical values and self-government. John Adams made it clear that this type of culture would only work for Christian people who feared God and revered the Bible. America has drifted a long way from those moral precepts.
From a country that once believed "out of the many we became one," we now celebrate diversity of belief, which has led to division. In our schools we teach children they have evolved and are nothing more than a higher form of animal life. There is no morality except that which is right for you. The Ten Commandments are banned and Christianity is mocked. Bullying those who are different is common and for all the talk of free love there is no love instilled in our children. In our homes parents have reneged on disciplining their children and teaching them values. What we have created is a valueless society that trends toward lawlessness because it is godless.
The answers we come up with are nothing more than platitudes that blame straw man scapegoats and deal only with symptoms rather than root causes. The problem with listening to the wisdom of the children in these student walkouts is that there is no wisdom in them. Sure they have a right to be concerned. Yes they have a right to voice their opinions. But opinions based on a leftist ideology that has taken us down from a Christian moral high ground to the depths of humanism and a philosophy that worships the individual above the Creator doesn't begin to address the reason for the problem or offer rational solutions.
Thomas Jefferson gave us this warning: "God who gave us life gave us liberty. And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are of a Gift of God?"
The only real answer to the godless nature of our culture is a return to the founding principles that made our country the envy of the world. These are the "general Principles of Christianity," according to John Adams. They are the principles of the Ten Commandments which are etched in stone at the United States Supreme Court. "The gospel of Jesus Christ prescribes the wisest rules for just conduct in every situation of life," declared Benjamin Rush, a signer of the Declaration of Independence. Self-government is impossible without a Christian foundation.
The answer to the problem of our culture is to teach our children (and our childish self-centered adults) that the first two great commandments that need to be followed are to "love the Lord their God with all their hearts and souls and minds," and to "love their neighbors as themselves" (Matthew 22:37-39). The answer to all of our nation's problems begins in a relationship with Jesus Christ. Until that happens, all protests, all pontificating, all laws and bans passed in Congress are meaningless and will accomplish nothing.
Tuesday, March 20, 2018
Billy Graham
March 2, 2018
This morning we watched the Billy Graham funeral. There were marvelous testimonies given by his family about the kind of man he was, humble, compassionate and forgiving. Franklin Graham preached a very clear gospel message. It was an entirely God honoring service and caused me to hope that the president and his wife, who attended, as well as millions of others watching, may have been convinced of their need to trust Christ alone as their Savior.
It was disappointing, however, watching Fox News and their regular priest guest completely miss the message. The priest said the emphasis from Franklin Graham was for people to try their best to reach God. That wasn't it at all. Salvation is by God's grace when you repent of your sins and ask Him by faith to save you. Not of your own works or efforts as Franklin clearly quoted Ephesians 2:8.
For the last week the accolades from the press and world leaders have rightfully flowed forth pointing out that in Billy Graham's life and ministry there were no moral or financial scandals. Such a testimony is to be lauded, but Graham's ministry was not without controversy. I have in my life met many people who were saved in Graham crusades and will not hear any criticism of him. I also know many Fundamentalists who do not have a kind word to say about him. I would like to try and reach some balance without offending everybody if that's possible.
Graham came to Christ in a Mordecai Ham evangelistic meeting and attended a semester at Bob Jones College before transferring to Wheaton. In his early days he was considered to be a Fundamentalist. He followed a long tradition of fundamentalist preachers including D.L. Moody, J. Wilbur Chapman, Billy Sunday, Ham and Bob Jones. In 1954 he was the featured speaker at the annual Bible conference at Bob Jones University.
Having graduated from BJU myself I've often wondered why he left Bob Jones College. It's an issue that has never been explained or examined as far as I know but I think I have an idea. BJC, as most colleges in the deep south in the 1930s were, was a segregated institution, something that I think Graham probably could not abide. In one of his early crusades in Florida the local city had decided to cordon off a section for black people in the stadium, but Graham said he would not come if they made such a restriction. The gospel is open to all. This may have been one of the things that led him to leave the Fundamentalist camp.
In 1952 at BJU a time capsule was buried on the campus to be opened in 1977. It included a taped message by Bob Jones, Sr. in which he spoke of Billy Graham and warned him of the danger of desiring the spotlight and the praise of men. HIs fear seemed to have been realized at the 1957 New York City crusade. The crusade saw an outpouring of the Holy Spirit and went on for nearly sixteen weeks. It was during this crusade that George Beverly Shea introduced to the world the great hymn, How Great Thou Art.
At that crusade, however, Graham broke with the Fundamentalists and invited Catholics and modernists to join him on the platform. In years to come he would have celebrities, some with dubious testimonies, appear with him. He then became the chief evangelist for the New Evangelical movement, which preaches a watered down social gospel that compromises the truth of the Word of God. When we visited the Billy Graham museum in Charlotte, North Carolina some years ago there was a wall with life size pictures of Graham's mentors, which included Harold John Ockenga, who was also known as the father of the New Evangelicalism.
While Graham's public preaching was as hot and straight as any hell-fire and brimstone preacher, away from the pulpit or in personal settings he seems to have been almost timid and non-confrontational. After a celebrated crusade in Hungary in the 1970s, he came back saying that Hungarian Christians were not being persecuted by the communists, a statement that was blind or oblivious to the reality of the time.
As a teenager I saw a TV talk show shortly after Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in which the host, Noel Harrison (son of the actor, Rex Harrison), asked Graham if he believed in hell. Graham's answer was noncommittal. He then asked him if he thought RFK might have been saved because after he had been shot someone put a crucifix in his hand and he grasped it. Graham nodded that it was possible.
More recently Glen Beck stated that when he talked to Graham, Graham indicated he thought Beck was saved and going to heaven. Beck is a Mormon and doesn't even believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible. Graham was the pastor to twelve presidents and that is well and good, but you have to wonder what it was he might have said to the Muslim loving Obama, who didn't even have time to view his casket in the Capital Rotunda, or to Bill Clinton, JFK or LBJ, all of whom were shameless womanizers. Did he ever call them out for their immorality? There didn't appear to be any change in their lives.In his crusades Graham sent those who came to receive Christ back to the same churches they came from, whether Catholic, modernist, or even cultist, where they had never before heard the saving message of faith in Christ alone.
On the other hand, many Fundamentalists took the position that anyone compromising on their associations or not walking in lock-step with them in their scriptural convictions was to be condemned and opposed. While Graham preached love and compassion, they came across as cold and self-centered. Their criticism of Graham became vocal and loud. They boycotted his crusades. And they shot themselves in the foot because the more they openly opposed Graham, the higher his star rose and they in turn looked petty and small.
Besides, Graham did not completely abandon fundamentalist churches. When he came to Denver in the 1960s he sent a letter to every fundamental Baptist church in the city asking for their church information and offering to give them the names of everyone in their areas who received Christ at the crusade so they could follow up, but they refused because Graham had become ecumenical. "What an opportunity we missed," my uncle, who had been one of those pastors, in reflection told me.
So while I believe Fundamentalists, of which I am one, had legitimate concerns about the methods and associations of Graham's ministry, I think they went about it all wrong. In Luke 9:49-50, the disciples saw one ministering and they told him to stop because he was not one of them. But Jesus replied, "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us."
Regardless of the theological differences Fundamentalism has had with him, Billy Graham was a man of unquestionable integrity who preached the gospel in his crusades as clear as it has ever been preached. God certainly used him. An estimated 200 million people heard the gospel through Graham. Scores of millions came to Christ. For that Billy Graham should be remembered as a man of God who loved sinners compassionately and glorified God by spending his life trying to win the lost to Christ.
And by the way, when we visited the Graham museum, the last stop on our way out was in a little chapel where a counselor asked us about our salvation and offered to share the gospel with us.
This morning we watched the Billy Graham funeral. There were marvelous testimonies given by his family about the kind of man he was, humble, compassionate and forgiving. Franklin Graham preached a very clear gospel message. It was an entirely God honoring service and caused me to hope that the president and his wife, who attended, as well as millions of others watching, may have been convinced of their need to trust Christ alone as their Savior.
It was disappointing, however, watching Fox News and their regular priest guest completely miss the message. The priest said the emphasis from Franklin Graham was for people to try their best to reach God. That wasn't it at all. Salvation is by God's grace when you repent of your sins and ask Him by faith to save you. Not of your own works or efforts as Franklin clearly quoted Ephesians 2:8.
For the last week the accolades from the press and world leaders have rightfully flowed forth pointing out that in Billy Graham's life and ministry there were no moral or financial scandals. Such a testimony is to be lauded, but Graham's ministry was not without controversy. I have in my life met many people who were saved in Graham crusades and will not hear any criticism of him. I also know many Fundamentalists who do not have a kind word to say about him. I would like to try and reach some balance without offending everybody if that's possible.
Graham came to Christ in a Mordecai Ham evangelistic meeting and attended a semester at Bob Jones College before transferring to Wheaton. In his early days he was considered to be a Fundamentalist. He followed a long tradition of fundamentalist preachers including D.L. Moody, J. Wilbur Chapman, Billy Sunday, Ham and Bob Jones. In 1954 he was the featured speaker at the annual Bible conference at Bob Jones University.
Having graduated from BJU myself I've often wondered why he left Bob Jones College. It's an issue that has never been explained or examined as far as I know but I think I have an idea. BJC, as most colleges in the deep south in the 1930s were, was a segregated institution, something that I think Graham probably could not abide. In one of his early crusades in Florida the local city had decided to cordon off a section for black people in the stadium, but Graham said he would not come if they made such a restriction. The gospel is open to all. This may have been one of the things that led him to leave the Fundamentalist camp.
In 1952 at BJU a time capsule was buried on the campus to be opened in 1977. It included a taped message by Bob Jones, Sr. in which he spoke of Billy Graham and warned him of the danger of desiring the spotlight and the praise of men. HIs fear seemed to have been realized at the 1957 New York City crusade. The crusade saw an outpouring of the Holy Spirit and went on for nearly sixteen weeks. It was during this crusade that George Beverly Shea introduced to the world the great hymn, How Great Thou Art.
At that crusade, however, Graham broke with the Fundamentalists and invited Catholics and modernists to join him on the platform. In years to come he would have celebrities, some with dubious testimonies, appear with him. He then became the chief evangelist for the New Evangelical movement, which preaches a watered down social gospel that compromises the truth of the Word of God. When we visited the Billy Graham museum in Charlotte, North Carolina some years ago there was a wall with life size pictures of Graham's mentors, which included Harold John Ockenga, who was also known as the father of the New Evangelicalism.
While Graham's public preaching was as hot and straight as any hell-fire and brimstone preacher, away from the pulpit or in personal settings he seems to have been almost timid and non-confrontational. After a celebrated crusade in Hungary in the 1970s, he came back saying that Hungarian Christians were not being persecuted by the communists, a statement that was blind or oblivious to the reality of the time.
As a teenager I saw a TV talk show shortly after Robert F. Kennedy was assassinated in which the host, Noel Harrison (son of the actor, Rex Harrison), asked Graham if he believed in hell. Graham's answer was noncommittal. He then asked him if he thought RFK might have been saved because after he had been shot someone put a crucifix in his hand and he grasped it. Graham nodded that it was possible.
More recently Glen Beck stated that when he talked to Graham, Graham indicated he thought Beck was saved and going to heaven. Beck is a Mormon and doesn't even believe in the Jesus Christ of the Bible. Graham was the pastor to twelve presidents and that is well and good, but you have to wonder what it was he might have said to the Muslim loving Obama, who didn't even have time to view his casket in the Capital Rotunda, or to Bill Clinton, JFK or LBJ, all of whom were shameless womanizers. Did he ever call them out for their immorality? There didn't appear to be any change in their lives.In his crusades Graham sent those who came to receive Christ back to the same churches they came from, whether Catholic, modernist, or even cultist, where they had never before heard the saving message of faith in Christ alone.
On the other hand, many Fundamentalists took the position that anyone compromising on their associations or not walking in lock-step with them in their scriptural convictions was to be condemned and opposed. While Graham preached love and compassion, they came across as cold and self-centered. Their criticism of Graham became vocal and loud. They boycotted his crusades. And they shot themselves in the foot because the more they openly opposed Graham, the higher his star rose and they in turn looked petty and small.
Besides, Graham did not completely abandon fundamentalist churches. When he came to Denver in the 1960s he sent a letter to every fundamental Baptist church in the city asking for their church information and offering to give them the names of everyone in their areas who received Christ at the crusade so they could follow up, but they refused because Graham had become ecumenical. "What an opportunity we missed," my uncle, who had been one of those pastors, in reflection told me.
So while I believe Fundamentalists, of which I am one, had legitimate concerns about the methods and associations of Graham's ministry, I think they went about it all wrong. In Luke 9:49-50, the disciples saw one ministering and they told him to stop because he was not one of them. But Jesus replied, "Forbid him not: for he that is not against us is for us."
Regardless of the theological differences Fundamentalism has had with him, Billy Graham was a man of unquestionable integrity who preached the gospel in his crusades as clear as it has ever been preached. God certainly used him. An estimated 200 million people heard the gospel through Graham. Scores of millions came to Christ. For that Billy Graham should be remembered as a man of God who loved sinners compassionately and glorified God by spending his life trying to win the lost to Christ.
And by the way, when we visited the Graham museum, the last stop on our way out was in a little chapel where a counselor asked us about our salvation and offered to share the gospel with us.
Reagan Reading
February 17, 2018
I've just finished reading two books on Ronald Reagan, one of which I recommend to you, and the other I won't.
In Way Out There in the Blue, Frances Fitzgerald examines the Strategic Defense Initiative and gives an adequate chronological review of the Reagan administration, but completely misunderstands Reagan and the events that led to the end of the Cold War. She presents Reagan as the "amiable dunce," stubbornly clinging to a vision he didn't create or understand, and seemingly riding the waves of history that he had no influence over. She concludes with Time magazine that Gorbachev was the man of the decade and the hero of the Cold War, that it was his idea to reduce the INF in Europe, that Gorbachev was in control of the Geneva and Reykjavik summits, and that his economic proposals to save the USSR had nothing to do with Reagan's military buildup. She conveniently ignores the collapse of the USSR and Gorbachev's hapless efforts to save it. The book is lengthy, written from an obvious liberal bias, and not worthy of your time.
The other is called The Reagan I Knew, by William F. Buckley. It is relatively short, but a marvelous read about the forty year friendship between Buckley and Reagan. Buckley founded and edited the National Review for thirty-five years, was the founder of the modern conservative movement, and probably the greatest influence on Reagan's switch from being a Democrat to being a Republican. Relying on extensive letters between the two and Nancy Reagan, Buckley presents a man who understood the world better than most, who refused to be intimidated by his detractors, and was likely the greatest president of the twentieth century. The INF treaty was indeed Reagan's idea that Gorbachev was forced to accept. In a letter to Buckley May 5, 1987 Reagan writes, "I warned the General Secretary in Reykjavik that his choice was to join in arms reduction or face an arms race he couldn't win." Buckley concludes, "The 1980s are most certainly the decade in which Communism ceased to be a creed, surviving only as a threat. And Ronald Reagan had more to do with this than any other statesman in the world."
The Reagan I Knew is a very compelling read that addresses Reagan's distant nature as well as his warmth, that examines his passions and touches on the Alzheimers that would eventually overtake him. It is unfortunate that Buckley died before the book was finished as there may have been more coming, but it is an incredibly revealing book and I highly recommend it to you.
I've just finished reading two books on Ronald Reagan, one of which I recommend to you, and the other I won't.
In Way Out There in the Blue, Frances Fitzgerald examines the Strategic Defense Initiative and gives an adequate chronological review of the Reagan administration, but completely misunderstands Reagan and the events that led to the end of the Cold War. She presents Reagan as the "amiable dunce," stubbornly clinging to a vision he didn't create or understand, and seemingly riding the waves of history that he had no influence over. She concludes with Time magazine that Gorbachev was the man of the decade and the hero of the Cold War, that it was his idea to reduce the INF in Europe, that Gorbachev was in control of the Geneva and Reykjavik summits, and that his economic proposals to save the USSR had nothing to do with Reagan's military buildup. She conveniently ignores the collapse of the USSR and Gorbachev's hapless efforts to save it. The book is lengthy, written from an obvious liberal bias, and not worthy of your time.
The other is called The Reagan I Knew, by William F. Buckley. It is relatively short, but a marvelous read about the forty year friendship between Buckley and Reagan. Buckley founded and edited the National Review for thirty-five years, was the founder of the modern conservative movement, and probably the greatest influence on Reagan's switch from being a Democrat to being a Republican. Relying on extensive letters between the two and Nancy Reagan, Buckley presents a man who understood the world better than most, who refused to be intimidated by his detractors, and was likely the greatest president of the twentieth century. The INF treaty was indeed Reagan's idea that Gorbachev was forced to accept. In a letter to Buckley May 5, 1987 Reagan writes, "I warned the General Secretary in Reykjavik that his choice was to join in arms reduction or face an arms race he couldn't win." Buckley concludes, "The 1980s are most certainly the decade in which Communism ceased to be a creed, surviving only as a threat. And Ronald Reagan had more to do with this than any other statesman in the world."
The Reagan I Knew is a very compelling read that addresses Reagan's distant nature as well as his warmth, that examines his passions and touches on the Alzheimers that would eventually overtake him. It is unfortunate that Buckley died before the book was finished as there may have been more coming, but it is an incredibly revealing book and I highly recommend it to you.
Why Christians Voted for Trump
February 1, 2018
A Trump critic wrote that it is confusing to unbelievers when they see Christians voting for an immoral man like Trump to be president. The person didn't believe God has anything to do with elections. Here is my answer:
It's not confusing at all. The option was a man who has a flawed character, but who is pro-America, concerned about secure borders, knows economics and how to spur the economy, and how to deal with foreign governments obviously already better than the last two presidents, and who was seeking advice from leading evangelical leaders in the country and changed his position on abortion to pro-life, or a woman who is every bit as morally flawed, who is a dyed in the wool socialist, who would have continued the same destructive economic policies of Obama and his anti-American week-kneed, apologetic, Muslim loving foreign policies, who is in favor of open borders and no restrictions on immigration, is pro-abortion up to and even after the birth of a child, who has a history of opponents mysteriously dying behind her, who sold 20% of America's uranium reserves to our Russian enemies for hundreds of million of dollars in donations to her foundation, who had obstructed justice by destroying 33,000 emails that had been subpoenaed, who sent classified information on an unsecured private email server in her house, a felony offense, and who rigged her primary election to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning.
It's a no-brainer. Trump may have a sordid past, and I have no idea if he's actually truly converted to Christianity, but he has regular Bible studies and prayer meetings with evangelical leaders in the Oval Office, and he's taken steps to remove the Johnson Amendment which has put restrictions on religious liberty and First Amendment rights of free speech for the last sixty years. God has everything to do with who gets into office. Romans 13:1 says those in power are ordained by God to do good, not evil. Proverbs 21:1 indicates He uses them to accomplish His will. In Obama's case, I believe God used him to take America to the brink of destruction to wake Christians up from their lethargy, and I believe He is using Trump to bring the country back. That doesn't make him a messiah, and it remains to be seen how successful he will be, but I also believe that if Hillary had been elected it would have meant the end of constitutional government and freedom in America, which likely would have been God's final judgment on our wicked, morally corrupt society. That's how bad she is, and that's why a vote for Trump was and is the most logical vote a Christian could make.
And to my never-Trump friends who castigated me for voting for him, who told me I was naive and worse, who said Trump was a charlatan and I was being duped, I would like to know your opinions: Is he still a charlatan? Is his conversion to a pro-life position still a political ploy? Is his pro-American patriotism fake? Are his prayer meetings in the Oval Office God honoring? I didn't say is he a messiah, but has his first year in office been good for America? If you think not, why not?
A Trump critic wrote that it is confusing to unbelievers when they see Christians voting for an immoral man like Trump to be president. The person didn't believe God has anything to do with elections. Here is my answer:
It's not confusing at all. The option was a man who has a flawed character, but who is pro-America, concerned about secure borders, knows economics and how to spur the economy, and how to deal with foreign governments obviously already better than the last two presidents, and who was seeking advice from leading evangelical leaders in the country and changed his position on abortion to pro-life, or a woman who is every bit as morally flawed, who is a dyed in the wool socialist, who would have continued the same destructive economic policies of Obama and his anti-American week-kneed, apologetic, Muslim loving foreign policies, who is in favor of open borders and no restrictions on immigration, is pro-abortion up to and even after the birth of a child, who has a history of opponents mysteriously dying behind her, who sold 20% of America's uranium reserves to our Russian enemies for hundreds of million of dollars in donations to her foundation, who had obstructed justice by destroying 33,000 emails that had been subpoenaed, who sent classified information on an unsecured private email server in her house, a felony offense, and who rigged her primary election to prevent Bernie Sanders from winning.
It's a no-brainer. Trump may have a sordid past, and I have no idea if he's actually truly converted to Christianity, but he has regular Bible studies and prayer meetings with evangelical leaders in the Oval Office, and he's taken steps to remove the Johnson Amendment which has put restrictions on religious liberty and First Amendment rights of free speech for the last sixty years. God has everything to do with who gets into office. Romans 13:1 says those in power are ordained by God to do good, not evil. Proverbs 21:1 indicates He uses them to accomplish His will. In Obama's case, I believe God used him to take America to the brink of destruction to wake Christians up from their lethargy, and I believe He is using Trump to bring the country back. That doesn't make him a messiah, and it remains to be seen how successful he will be, but I also believe that if Hillary had been elected it would have meant the end of constitutional government and freedom in America, which likely would have been God's final judgment on our wicked, morally corrupt society. That's how bad she is, and that's why a vote for Trump was and is the most logical vote a Christian could make.
And to my never-Trump friends who castigated me for voting for him, who told me I was naive and worse, who said Trump was a charlatan and I was being duped, I would like to know your opinions: Is he still a charlatan? Is his conversion to a pro-life position still a political ploy? Is his pro-American patriotism fake? Are his prayer meetings in the Oval Office God honoring? I didn't say is he a messiah, but has his first year in office been good for America? If you think not, why not?
Trump's First SOTU
January 31, 2018
Tonight, after a rather turbulent first year in office, President Trump gave his first State of the Union address to Congress and the nation. The president is not an eloquent speaker, but what he lacks in style he more than makes up for with confidence and facts. His list of accomplishments in face of Democrat resistance aided by liberal media are astounding. He has done more to spur the economy than any president in history and he's just begun.
The speech itself was phenomenal, introducing many American heroes, as well as people who have suffered loss due to illegal immigrants and the North Korean regime, and calling for a renewed military buildup as well as securing our borders. It was a speech about the American people and what the American people can do if we get the government off our backs and get back to Constitutional governing. His theme was triumphantly America first.
The big story of the night, however, was the Democrats. You would expect that they would at least show a little approval of a booming economy, but no matter what Trump said, they sat in their seats with ugly frowns on their faces. They refused to stand or even applaud tax cuts, 2.4 million new jobs, booming stock market, or unemployment at a 45 year low. The African-American delegation didn't even smile at the announcement of black unemployment at its lowest level ever.
They sat and pouted like children that didn't get their candy, refusing to stand or applaud when the president praised the military, gave a plan to fight terrorism, and declared that we will stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and National Anthem. When the president said we will trust in our God and the people will make America great again the Democrats just sat. They showed beyond doubt that their concern is not for America or Americans, but rather contempt.
The Democrat response by Joe Kennedy III was simply the stupidest response I've ever heard. It was a typical liberal diatribe, all talking points and no substance. Kennedy had not one original thought. Everything he accused Trump and the Republicans of the Democrats are guilty of. Trying to sound passionate, he looked more like a bad actor in a deplorable movie. By fear-mongering he tried to push the liberal narrative of an administration bent on impoverishing the people. The same old class warfare they always spew. He was all platitude and no plan, and after speaking to his audience in Spanish, he made it clear that the Democrat agenda is immigrants first over American citizens.
Trump called for unity but he isn't going to get it. The Democrats are too selfish, greedy, bitter, hateful, pompous and arrogant to do anything that would actually help the American people. But considering what Trump has accomplished in his first year without Democrat cooperation, it will be interesting to see what he will be able to do in the next. What he needs more than anything is our prayers for the hand of God to guide him along the way.
Tonight, after a rather turbulent first year in office, President Trump gave his first State of the Union address to Congress and the nation. The president is not an eloquent speaker, but what he lacks in style he more than makes up for with confidence and facts. His list of accomplishments in face of Democrat resistance aided by liberal media are astounding. He has done more to spur the economy than any president in history and he's just begun.
The speech itself was phenomenal, introducing many American heroes, as well as people who have suffered loss due to illegal immigrants and the North Korean regime, and calling for a renewed military buildup as well as securing our borders. It was a speech about the American people and what the American people can do if we get the government off our backs and get back to Constitutional governing. His theme was triumphantly America first.
The big story of the night, however, was the Democrats. You would expect that they would at least show a little approval of a booming economy, but no matter what Trump said, they sat in their seats with ugly frowns on their faces. They refused to stand or even applaud tax cuts, 2.4 million new jobs, booming stock market, or unemployment at a 45 year low. The African-American delegation didn't even smile at the announcement of black unemployment at its lowest level ever.
They sat and pouted like children that didn't get their candy, refusing to stand or applaud when the president praised the military, gave a plan to fight terrorism, and declared that we will stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and National Anthem. When the president said we will trust in our God and the people will make America great again the Democrats just sat. They showed beyond doubt that their concern is not for America or Americans, but rather contempt.
The Democrat response by Joe Kennedy III was simply the stupidest response I've ever heard. It was a typical liberal diatribe, all talking points and no substance. Kennedy had not one original thought. Everything he accused Trump and the Republicans of the Democrats are guilty of. Trying to sound passionate, he looked more like a bad actor in a deplorable movie. By fear-mongering he tried to push the liberal narrative of an administration bent on impoverishing the people. The same old class warfare they always spew. He was all platitude and no plan, and after speaking to his audience in Spanish, he made it clear that the Democrat agenda is immigrants first over American citizens.
Trump called for unity but he isn't going to get it. The Democrats are too selfish, greedy, bitter, hateful, pompous and arrogant to do anything that would actually help the American people. But considering what Trump has accomplished in his first year without Democrat cooperation, it will be interesting to see what he will be able to do in the next. What he needs more than anything is our prayers for the hand of God to guide him along the way.
The Culture War by Evan Sayet
December 28, 2017
This article by Evan Sayet explains the culture war going on in our country, how it is being waged and President Trump's role in it better than anything I've ever seen. It doesn't deal with the spiritual roots or causes but how the battle has been fought and what is going on now. Please take the time to read it.
My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”
Here’s my answer:
We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.
We tried statesmanship. Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain? We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney? And the results were always the same.
This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party. I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks. I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent. Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”
The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today. The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.
With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America’s first wartime president in the Culture War.
During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming. Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”
General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, s-o-b. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum, then Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.
Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!” That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics.
That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.
Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do.
First, instead of going after “the fake media” – and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri – Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal. Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”
Everyone gets that it’s not just CNN – in fact, in a world where Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow, Paul Krugman and Nicholas Kristof are people of influence and whose “reporting” is in no way significantly different than CNN’s – CNN is just a piker.
Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. With Trump’s ability to go around them, they cannot simply stand pat. They need to respond. This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery.
The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.
Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s, church.
Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up. This makes “going high” a non-starter for CNN. This leaves them no other option but to ratchet up the fake news, conjuring up the next “nothing burger” and devoting 24 hours a day to hysterical rants about how it’s “worse than Nixon.”
This, obviously, is what CNN has chosen to do. The problem is that, as they become more and more hysterical, they become more and more obvious. Each new effort at even faker news than before and faker “outrage” only makes that much more clear to any objective observer that Trump is and always has been right about the fake news media. And, by causing their hysteria, Trump has forced them into numerous, highly embarrassing and discrediting mistakes. Thus, in their desperation, they have lowered their standards even further and run with articles so clearly fake that, even with the liberal (lower case “l”) libel laws protecting the media, they’ve had to wholly retract and erase their stories repeatedly. Their flailing at Trump has even seen them cross the line into criminality, with CNN using their vast corporate fortune to hunt down a private citizen for having made fun of them in an Internet meme. This threat to “dox” – release of personal information to encourage co-ideologists to visit violence upon him and his family -- a political satirist was chilling in that it clearly wasn’t meant just for him. If it were, there would have been no reason for CNN to have made their “deal” with him public. Instead, CNN – playing by “Chicago Rules” – was sending a message to any and all: dissent will not be tolerated. This heavy-handed and hysterical response to a joke on the Internet has backfired on CNN, giving rise to only more righteous ridicule.
So, to my friends on the Left – and the #NeverTrumpers as well -- do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do. These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.
So, say anything you want about this president – I get it, he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights!.....Evan Sayet
This article by Evan Sayet explains the culture war going on in our country, how it is being waged and President Trump's role in it better than anything I've ever seen. It doesn't deal with the spiritual roots or causes but how the battle has been fought and what is going on now. Please take the time to read it.
My Leftist friends (as well as many ardent #NeverTrumpers) constantly ask me if I’m not bothered by Donald Trump’s lack of decorum. They ask if I don’t think his tweets are “beneath the dignity of the office.”
Here’s my answer:
We Right-thinking people have tried dignity. There could not have been a man of more quiet dignity than George W. Bush as he suffered the outrageous lies and politically motivated hatreds that undermined his presidency.
We tried statesmanship. Could there be another human being on this earth who so desperately prized “collegiality” as John McCain? We tried propriety – has there been a nicer human being ever than Mitt Romney? And the results were always the same.
This is because, while we were playing by the rules of dignity, collegiality and propriety, the Left has been, for the past 60 years, engaged in a knife fight where the only rules are those of Saul Alinsky and the Chicago mob.
I don’t find anything “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper” about Barack Obama’s lying about what went down on the streets of Ferguson in order to ramp up racial hatreds because racial hatreds serve the Democratic Party. I don’t see anything “dignified” in lying about the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi and imprisoning an innocent filmmaker to cover your tracks. I don’t see anything “statesman-like” in weaponizing the IRS to be used to destroy your political opponents and any dissent. Yes, Obama was “articulate” and “polished” but in no way was he in the least bit “dignified,” “collegial” or “proper.”
The Left has been engaged in a war against America since the rise of the Children of the ‘60s. To them, it has been an all-out war where nothing is held sacred and nothing is seen as beyond the pale. It has been a war they’ve fought with violence, the threat of violence, demagoguery and lies from day one – the violent take-over of the universities – till today. The problem is that, through these years, the Left has been the only side fighting this war. While the Left has been taking a knife to anyone who stands in their way, the Right has continued to act with dignity, collegiality and propriety.
With Donald Trump, this all has come to an end. Donald Trump is America’s first wartime president in the Culture War.
During wartime, things like “dignity” and “collegiality” simply aren’t the most essential qualities one looks for in their warriors. Ulysses Grant was a drunk whose behavior in peacetime might well have seen him drummed out of the Army for conduct unbecoming. Had Abraham Lincoln applied the peacetime rules of propriety and booted Grant, the Democrats might well still be holding their slaves today. Lincoln rightly recognized that, “I cannot spare this man. He fights.”
General George Patton was a vulgar-talking, s-o-b. In peacetime, this might have seen him stripped of rank. But, had Franklin Roosevelt applied the normal rules of decorum, then Hitler and the Socialists would barely be five decades into their thousand-year Reich.
Trump is fighting. And what’s particularly delicious is that, like Patton standing over the battlefield as his tanks obliterated Rommel’s, he’s shouting, “You magnificent bastards, I read your book!” That is just the icing on the cake, but it’s wonderful to see that not only is Trump fighting, he’s defeating the Left using their own tactics.
That book is Saul Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals – a book so essential to the Liberals’ war against America that it is and was the playbook for the entire Obama administration and the subject of Hillary Clinton’s senior thesis. It is a book of such pure evil, that, just as the rest of us would dedicate our book to those we most love or those to whom we are most indebted, Alinsky dedicated his book to Lucifer.
Trump’s tweets may seem rash and unconsidered but, in reality, he is doing exactly what Alinsky suggested his followers do.
First, instead of going after “the fake media” – and they are so fake that they have literally gotten every single significant story of the past 60 years not just wrong, but diametrically opposed to the truth, from the Tet Offensive to Benghazi, to what really happened on the streets of Ferguson, Missouri – Trump isolated CNN. He made it personal. Then, just as Alinsky suggests, he employs ridicule which Alinsky described as “the most powerful weapon of all.”
Everyone gets that it’s not just CNN – in fact, in a world where Al Sharpton and Rachel Maddow, Paul Krugman and Nicholas Kristof are people of influence and whose “reporting” is in no way significantly different than CNN’s – CNN is just a piker.
Most importantly, Trump’s tweets have put CNN in an untenable and unwinnable position. With Trump’s ability to go around them, they cannot simply stand pat. They need to respond. This leaves them with only two choices. They can either “go high” (as Hillary would disingenuously declare of herself and the fake news would disingenuously report as the truth) and begin to honestly and accurately report the news or they can double-down on their usual tactics and hope to defeat Trump with twice their usual hysteria and demagoguery.
The problem for CNN (et al.) with the former is that, if they were to start honestly reporting the news, that would be the end of the Democratic Party they serve. It is nothing but the incessant use of fake news (read: propaganda) that keeps the Left alive.
Imagine, for example, if CNN had honestly and accurately reported then-candidate Barack Obama’s close ties to foreign terrorists (Rashid Khalidi), domestic terrorists (William Ayers), the mafia (Tony Rezko) or the true evils of his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright’s, church.
Imagine if they had honestly and accurately conveyed the evils of the Obama administration’s weaponizing of the IRS to be used against their political opponents or his running of guns to the Mexican cartels or the truth about the murder of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and the Obama administration’s cover-up. This makes “going high” a non-starter for CNN. This leaves them no other option but to ratchet up the fake news, conjuring up the next “nothing burger” and devoting 24 hours a day to hysterical rants about how it’s “worse than Nixon.”
This, obviously, is what CNN has chosen to do. The problem is that, as they become more and more hysterical, they become more and more obvious. Each new effort at even faker news than before and faker “outrage” only makes that much more clear to any objective observer that Trump is and always has been right about the fake news media. And, by causing their hysteria, Trump has forced them into numerous, highly embarrassing and discrediting mistakes. Thus, in their desperation, they have lowered their standards even further and run with articles so clearly fake that, even with the liberal (lower case “l”) libel laws protecting the media, they’ve had to wholly retract and erase their stories repeatedly. Their flailing at Trump has even seen them cross the line into criminality, with CNN using their vast corporate fortune to hunt down a private citizen for having made fun of them in an Internet meme. This threat to “dox” – release of personal information to encourage co-ideologists to visit violence upon him and his family -- a political satirist was chilling in that it clearly wasn’t meant just for him. If it were, there would have been no reason for CNN to have made their “deal” with him public. Instead, CNN – playing by “Chicago Rules” – was sending a message to any and all: dissent will not be tolerated. This heavy-handed and hysterical response to a joke on the Internet has backfired on CNN, giving rise to only more righteous ridicule.
So, to my friends on the Left – and the #NeverTrumpers as well -- do I wish we lived in a time when our president could be “collegial” and “dignified” and “proper”? Of course I do. These aren’t those times. This is war. And it’s a war that the Left has been fighting without opposition for the past 50 years.
So, say anything you want about this president – I get it, he can be vulgar, he can be crude, he can be undignified at times. I don’t care. I can’t spare this man. He fights!.....Evan Sayet
Tuesday, December 5, 2017
Laying My Aunt Elsie to Rest
Yesterday we laid the body of my Aunt Elsie Boonstra to rest. She was a wonderful woman, a great mother, grandmother and aunt. She was a perfect pastor's and missions director's wife to my Uncle Carl, and a blessing to the ladies in the church I was raised in.
She cared about people. When I was young she used to baby sit a couple of boys named Scott and Gregg. Whenever my brother, Steve, and I got to go over and play with our cousin John, Scott and Gregg became the perfect foils for us when we played army. They always got to be the Germans and we always won. They were brave lads! But I remember a day when Scott asked Aunt Elsie what church was about and she sat down with them and in a very tender voice explained to them the Gospel. Later when I was at BBC in Springfield, Steve and I, Steve Gentry, and some others from Denver would hit their house every Monday night to watch football and she dutifully made the thickest, sweetest, gooiest chocolate fudge and popcorn for us.
She always had a smile on her face and a cheery disposition. The first time I came to Springfield I was at their house and went with her to the Post Office. As we were driving through the neighborhood she told me that drivers in Springfield were the worst anywhere. Then she proceeded to pull out on a busy boulevard in front of a truck that blew its horn at us and she cheerfully kept on talking going down the road as if nothing had happened. I was in two missions conferences with my aunt and uncle in Helena and Great Falls, Montana in 2004. I drove up and they flew into Helena, and then I drove them to Great Falls. At the airport Aunt fell on the escalator and dislocated her hip and had a black eye. She was in a wheelchair for the next week during the conferences, but she laughed it off and never complained.
My favorite memory of her is the way she prayed. Many times I heard her start her prayer, "Most Precious Heavenly Father...." One Thanksgiving at their house all the adults were upstairs and us kids were at a table in the basement. Aunt prayed for us before we began to eat and I remember thinking, Why does she always start her prayers that way? Over the years as I grew up it became obvious that she prayed that way because the Father in Heaven was most precious to her. And now she is in His presence enjoying the blessings of heaven for evermore.
She cared about people. When I was young she used to baby sit a couple of boys named Scott and Gregg. Whenever my brother, Steve, and I got to go over and play with our cousin John, Scott and Gregg became the perfect foils for us when we played army. They always got to be the Germans and we always won. They were brave lads! But I remember a day when Scott asked Aunt Elsie what church was about and she sat down with them and in a very tender voice explained to them the Gospel. Later when I was at BBC in Springfield, Steve and I, Steve Gentry, and some others from Denver would hit their house every Monday night to watch football and she dutifully made the thickest, sweetest, gooiest chocolate fudge and popcorn for us.
She always had a smile on her face and a cheery disposition. The first time I came to Springfield I was at their house and went with her to the Post Office. As we were driving through the neighborhood she told me that drivers in Springfield were the worst anywhere. Then she proceeded to pull out on a busy boulevard in front of a truck that blew its horn at us and she cheerfully kept on talking going down the road as if nothing had happened. I was in two missions conferences with my aunt and uncle in Helena and Great Falls, Montana in 2004. I drove up and they flew into Helena, and then I drove them to Great Falls. At the airport Aunt fell on the escalator and dislocated her hip and had a black eye. She was in a wheelchair for the next week during the conferences, but she laughed it off and never complained.
My favorite memory of her is the way she prayed. Many times I heard her start her prayer, "Most Precious Heavenly Father...." One Thanksgiving at their house all the adults were upstairs and us kids were at a table in the basement. Aunt prayed for us before we began to eat and I remember thinking, Why does she always start her prayers that way? Over the years as I grew up it became obvious that she prayed that way because the Father in Heaven was most precious to her. And now she is in His presence enjoying the blessings of heaven for evermore.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)