Tag Archives: United States Constitution

The Good Muslim

But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;  (45)  That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. ( Matthew 5:44-45)

At the time of this writing (November 1, 2017), the news is all abuzz over the latest act of jihad by another Muslim terrorist. On Tuesday, October 31, 2017, Halloween, Sayfullo Habibullaevic Saipov, drove his rented Home Depot truck onto a bike lane along Manhattan’s West Side Highway killing at least eight and injuring half a dozen others. Saipov, a recent Muslim import, hails from Uzbekistan and entered by way of the “green card lottery” in 2010. The odious piece of legislation that opened the door for Saipov sprang from the frothing cesspool of Demoncrat minds known as the “Diversity Visa Program” – it sounds nice. Demoncrat Senate Minority Leader, Chuck Schumer pushed the legislation through in 1990, as if our nation is not “diverse” enough!

Several people interviewed reported that Saipov was a “nice guy.” No one that knew him suspected that he was capable of such a heinous act. They all thought he was one of the “good Muslims.” I found an interview of one of Saipov’s “Mosque-ovites” (one who worships at the same mosque) less than amusing. The FOX street reporter prompted the “Mosque-ovite” by asking, “How do ‘good Muslims’ respond to these acts of terror?” (or something to that effect). Of course, the “Mosque-ovite” denounced the act in the strongest terms even calling the culprit “an animal.” Apparently, “good Muslims” harbor no tolerance for Muslims who perform acts of terror. But, how do we know that they really believe what they proclaim? Where is the outcry from the Muslim community calling for these acts to stop!

Allow me to say at the onset that I do not believe all Muslims are out to wage war on the “infidels” and convert or kill us all. Surely many Muslims want to live in peace and have a “normal” life; but how can we distinguish “the good Muslim” from the one that seeks to convert infidels through force or otherwise eliminate the infidel from the earth? Good and “bad” Muslims are indistinguishable until one of them receives the inspiration to wage jihad and kill a bunch of innocent people. Then we know—that was one of the bad ones.

From what I have learned about the Muslim religion, “the good Muslim” – “good” by American standards – can be likened to the nominal Christian. The nominal Christian claims the name of Christ. They may or may not attend church services on a regular basis. They probably own a Bible, but rarely open it. If they carry their Bible to church, they will read what is put on the big screen, but they will not open their Bible to see if the preacher quoted the Scripture correctly. A nominal Christian might say, “the Bible says” and then quote some pious platitude that has no basis in Scripture. A nominal Christian believes that all people are basically good and that anyone can go to heaven as long as they exercise good moral behavior and follow the “golden rule.” They conduct themselves by the motto, “live and let live.”

Likewise, “good Muslims” acknowledge Allah as their god.[1] They go to the mosque every Friday and pray five times a day. They may own a Qur’an but not really read it. The Qu’ran is written in Arabic, although there are some parallel versions that have the English translation on one side. I would venture to say that a good majority of American Muslims can neither read nor speak Arabic, so that must rely on the teachings of their Imams. Good Muslims believe that Islam is a religion of peace and that “jihad” is an “inner struggle” to please Allah. While they may believe that infidels are going to hell, they are happy enough to let them go there. They share the same motto with nominal Christians: “Just live and let live.”

From an American perspective, “good Muslims” are just like us. Americans believe that Muslims share the same values, and that “good Muslims” just want to live their lives in peace. However, Americans view the world through a skewed westernized lens that, like it or not, originates from a biblical foundation. Ideas like “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matthew 5:44) are basic to the American psyche. “Thou shalt not murder” (Exodus 20:13) and “all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets” (Matthew 7:12) are all principles taught in the Bible. Americans, whether they know the Bible or not, pretty much live by these principles; and because they do not know the source, they assume the rest of the world lives by these principles too. Consequently, Americans believe “good Muslims” live by the same principles.

The Bible instructs us to love our enemies, to do good to them that hate you, and to pray for those who despitefully use you and persecute you. It teaches that we should treat others as we would have them treat us. We are told not to murder or to lie (Exodus 20:16; Proverbs 14:5). We are instructed to care for the poor, the widows and the orphans. How does the Qur’an[2] compare with what the Bible teaches?

Infidels – anyone who does not adhere to Islam – are enemies according to the Qur’an (2:98; 4:101).[3] The Qur’an teaches that Allah does not love the infidels (3:32, 140), unlike the Bible that teaches that “God is love” (1 John 4:8) and He is not willing that any should perish (2 Peter 3:9). Therefore, since Allah does not love infidels, they must be persecuted (4:104-105; 2:217). Unlike the Bible’s teaching that Christians are to witness for Christ (Matthew 28:18-20; Acts 1:8), the Qur’an teaches that Muslims should “not take the infidels for friends … whoever does this has nothing to do with Allah” (3:28: 4:144; 5:51; 60:1-2). That is pretty harsh! Is it any wonder that Muslims do not assimilate into the American culture? To be sure, Allah encourages emigration for the sake of jihad (2:218), which explains their invasion of Europe, Canada, the U.S., and others. Moreover, Allah encourages the killing of infidels (4:89), and if the Muslim dies in the process of jihad, they automatically gain entry into heaven (3:169; 4:95). Sadly, even this effort carries with it no guarantee: “O you who have believed [i.e. the Muslim], fear Allah and desire the way to him. And perform jihad for his sake, perhaps you may prosper: (5:35, emphasis mine).

More could be said concerning the contrast between the Bible and Qur’an, but from this brief review, Americans should hope that “good Muslims” do not take seriously the Qur’an. When they do take it seriously the contents of this satanic book and convert to “good Muslims” (according to the standards of the Qur’an), it only spells danger for us poor infidels. The problem is further exacerbated when one realizes that Muslims are not obligated to deal honestly with infidels (2:225; 3:28, 54; 9:3; 16:106; 40:28; 66:2). Unlike the Bible that exhorts truthfulness and honesty (Exodus 20:16; Psalm 101:7; Proverbs 12:22; Colossians 3:9-10; et al), the Qur’an encourages Muslims to lie[4] to infidels if it is to their advantage. The practice is known as taqiyya.[5] Knowing this, how can one discern one “good Muslim” from another? One cannot know if a Muslim is nominal, moderate, or a full-fledged jihadist, because their “holy” book discourages them from befriending an infidel unless it is for the dishonest purpose of gaining some advantage. Can the distrust of Muslims honestly be labeled “Islamophobia” when the Muslim “holy” book instructs “good Muslims” to lie to infidels? The Qur’an itself claims that Allah is the greatest liar of all (3:54; 4:142; 8:30). Compare that to the Bible’s teaching that God does not lie (Numbers 23:19). Additionally, the Bible identifies the “father of lies” as Satan (John 8:44).

What are we to do? Surely, there are Muslims that hold their religion in name only and they truly want to live in peace with their neighbors, but the tenets of that religion are incompatible with the American way of life. I desire that they would all convert to Christianity, but barring that, I would be happy if they would just renounce that satanic religion, embrace the law of this land, the United States Constitution, and assimilate into the American culture.

Notes:


[1]  “God Is Not Allah” – https://erniecarrasco.com/2013/09/29/god-is-not-allah/

[2]  A English/Arabic paperback copy of the Qur’an can be obtained at Amazon.com. I would recommend the one translated by Abdulla Yusuf, which is the copy I have. For my study, however, I use The Generous Qur’an: An accurate, Modern English Translation of the Qur’an, Islam’s Holiest Book, translated and annotated by Usama K. Dadok. It too is available from Amazon.com.

[3]  Citations from the Qur’an follow the format of Chapter:Verse, e.g. (2:98). The Qur’an does not have “books” like the Bible.

[4]  “Islam Permits Lying to Deceive Unbelievers and Bring World Domination!” – http://muslimfact.com/bm/terror-in-the-name-of-islam/islam-permits-lying-to-deceive-unbelievers-and-bri.shtml

[5]  “Deception, Lying and Taqiyya” – https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/taqiyya.aspx

Leave a comment

Filed under Current Events, Random Musings, Religion

Stand For the Flag!

Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour. (Romans 13:7)

I tire of all the airtime given to overpaid prima donnas who “take a knee” at the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner” in disrespect of the symbol of our nation – the American flag, Old Glory, the Stars and Stripes. That flag represents the nation – the republic – that affords these crybaby egotists the opportunity to earn outrageous salaries to play a game for fans that can ill afford the admission to attend the games in person. Granted, these players possess uncommon athletic talents that few of us will ever have, but the truth is that most of them have gotten a “free ride” to hone the “God-given” talents they display on the field of contest. That “privilege” comes from the fact that they were born (most of them) under the flag they now dishonor.

The flag they disrespect represents a republic, a nation of laws, which guarantees them the right to express their political views even in opposition to the very law that protects them. The First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America protects the right of every citizen to exercise his/her freedom of speech, the freedom to peaceably assemble and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. These impertinent showboats latch onto the First Amendment to justify their disrespect. If that is not bad enough, an abundance of left-wing ideologues sound off in their defense, like the local sports idiot for the Dallas-Fort Worth area.[1] No one denies these paid athletes the right to “peaceably assemble” and exercise their freedom of speech in protest to a perceived injustice, but their protest – their grievance – is misplaced. Rather than “petition the Government” for redress of their grievance – they show contempt for the very flag, and indirectly the majority of Americans that honor the flag, that has given them a platform from which to speak.

Just what is the egregious injustice that warrants such a shameful demonstration of ingratitude? It all started last year when the now unemployed, cop-hating quarterback, Colin Kaepernick, refused to stand for the playing of the National Anthem in protest for all the hundreds of poor young black men unjustly slain by racist police (his perception). If the charge is factual, there is certainly reason to protest, not only by black Americans but also by all Americans. Any citizen – no matter what ethnicity – unlawfully executed by one sworn to uphold the law has been denied his/her constitutional “right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury” (the Sixth Amendment). Such an offense would warrant the free expression of speech in protest (not rioting), and to “petition the Government for redress” of the grievance. If such abuse of police authority is really taking place, every freedom-loving American should be up in arms. However, is this really what is taking place? Is there really an epidemic of local police[2] singling out young black men for execution? If this is true, there should be plenty of evidence to corroborate the claim.

The truth is that cops killed almost twice as many whites as blacks in 2015. More whites and Hispanics die from police homicides than blacks. A 7 to 1 ratio of “unarmed” black men shot by police are shot in the process of resisting arrest, usually in an attempt to disarm the officer or beat the officer with the officer’s own equipment. Black and Hispanic police officers are more likely to fire a gun at blacks than are white officers. (I wonder why?) Blacks are more likely to kill cops than to be killed by cops. (The preceding statistics were obtained from The Dailywire.)[3] It is also commonly known that more blacks (in epidemic proportions) are killed by other blacks than are killed by cops of any color.

The record indicates that the protest, by these unlearned[4] prima donnas and their equally ignorant sycophants, enjoys no basis in reality. Rather than publically disrespect the flag, they should turn that activism into action by edifying (building up) those who they consider downtrodden. However, maybe that would be too much in keeping with real American values!

The Bible teaches us that we must “Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour” (Romans 13:7).  As citizens, we must pay our taxes (“tribute” and “custom”). We should respect and obey (“fear”) those in authority like the police. The police are there to do a job, to keep law and order. Most of them have families, and many of them are members of our churches. The majority of them took the job to “serve and protect” their community. They do not deserve to be disrespected. When they are disrespected, they are within their authority – the authority we give them – to arrest us. Too many of those poor black men that get shot by police were never taught by their parents, teachers or anyone to respect and (above all) obey the police. They were not taught to “fear” those “to whom fear” is due.

Finally, we are to give “honor to whom honor” is due. Our flag and our National Anthem are due honor. Our flag led our founders to fields of battle to gain our freedom. The red in our flag represents the many gallons of blood that birthed our nation. Many men sacrificed their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor to provide for us the freedoms we enjoy, even the freedom to legitimately protest perceived injustices. That flag led Union soldiers (mostly white men) into bloody battle in defense of the black man’s right to be free. Sadly, many blacks today shackle themselves to the racism of self-deprecation that deceives them into viewing themselves of less value than whites – a deception straight from the pit of hell. “So God created [all] man [kind] in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them” (Genesis 1:27). “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation;” (Acts 17:26, emphasis mine). That “one blood” is all red, the color of the stripes on our flag.

Our flag has draped many a coffin of soldiers, police officers, and firefighters that have paid the ultimate price for our freedom and our protection. Our flag is worthy of honor and respect. Give honor to whom honor is due. Stand for the flag! Our flag represents our freedom of speech to protest any perceived injustice. For that, it should be honored. Stand for the flag!

P.S. If you feel the need to kneel, kneel at the cross of Jesus where His precious blood was shed for you.

Notes:


[1]  “Sportscaster Dale Hansen’s take on the #TakeAKnee protests is an absolute must-watch” – http://mashable.com/2017/09/26/dale-hansen-unplugged-anthem-protests/#NJalYem2Liqa

[2]  “Local police” are governed by local municipalities, not the federal government, which is just one more reason why this “protest” is misplaced.

[3]  “5 Statistics You Need To Know About Cops Killing Blacks” – http://www.dailywire.com/news/7264/5-statistics-you-need-know-about-cops-killing-aaron-bandler#

[4]  They are “unlearned” because even though a majority of them hold college degrees, many of them “earned” that degree through their participation in their field of athletics rather than their achievement in academics. They certainly failed to receive any training in civics.

Comments Off on Stand For the Flag!

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Current Events, Politics, Random Musings

Reclaiming the Rainbow

And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth. And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth. (Genesis 9:16-17)

When you see the colors of the rainbow displayed on clothing, placards, flags, or emblazoned at night on lighted buildings, what comes to mind? Is the first image produced in the mind’s eye the tableau of Noah kneeling before a stone altar with a flaming holocaust? Can you picture the Ark in the background teetering on an escarpment with thousands of animals exiting in different directions? Do you envision a clouded sky with the arc of a perfectly formed rainbow in the brilliantly arrayed in the heavens? Sadly, that is probably not the first thought to enter your mind.

The LGBTQ group, composed of probably less than 2% of the population, has hijacked the colors of the rainbow[1] as a symbol of their perversion. They take great pride in their perversion and demand that not only all should accept their deviance, but that all should give unrestricted support and approval of their abomination (Romans 1:32). In an unprecedented move, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled in June 2015 that homosexual “unions” were legal “marriages” under the Constitution of the United States. Then, in a blatant show of approval, the foolish President of the United States, Barrack Hussain Obama, bathed the White House with lights in the colors of the rainbow.

“Enough is enough!” many Christians protest. God first displayed these colors to remind us of His judgment on such perversion as demonstrated by these deviants, to recall His mercy in saving some to replenish the earth, and to promise not to destroy the earth again by water. (The next time will be by fire – 2 Peter 3:12.)  In a defiant effort to reclaim the rainbow for God, Ken Ham of Answers in Genesis and the Ark Encounter followed Barrack Obama’s example and bathed the massive Christian attraction in the colors of the rainbow.[2] Take that, perverts!

While I applaud Ken Ham’s gumption and bravado in defending the Word of God, I am not so sure about his method. For sure, the rainbow does belong to God, and the message of the rainbow rightly belongs to God – no question. However, the colors of the rainbow have been so distorted by the LGBTQ bunch that the perversion overshadows God’s message of redemption. Granted, Christians, by all means, should immediately associate Noah’s Ark bathed in rainbow colors with the message of the Bible. However, given the heavy re-messaging and marketing by the LGBTQ movement, the Bible message is probably not the first one that enters the mind when structures are lighted up with the rainbow. For all the good intentions, Ken Ham’s message is a mixed and confusing one. The Christian might be confused at first and then upon further consideration correctly assess the message. However, the non-Christian will assume automatically and wrongly the approval of the LGBTQ lifestyle. If they have the initiative to investigate further, they will learn otherwise, but not at first sight.

Jesus admonished, “Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves” (Matthew 10:16).  On more than one occasion, the LGBTQ people have proven themselves ravenous wolves seeking to devour “the sheep of His pasture” (Psalm 100:3). Therefore, Ken Ham’s blatant assault may be misconstrued as a provocation rather than a proclamation of truth. The wisdom of a serpent would be more subtle. Ken Ham could convey the same message more directly and more accurately by constructing a large illuminated arch behind and above the Ark and light that up in the colors of the rainbow.  The dove Noah sent out from the Ark returned to him with an olive leaf in its beak (Genesis 8:11) – the symbol of peace. Bathing the Ark in rainbow colors, as President Obama did the White House, is neither wise, nor harmless, and it is certainly not a symbol of peace.

The rainbow belongs to God. He will reclaim it in due time. Suffice that His children recognize its significance and declare its message in a manner “wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.”

Notes:


[1]  “The Rainbow” – https://erniecarrasco.com/2015/07/05/the-rainbow/

[2]  “Ministry Takes Back ‘God’s Rainbow,’ Despite LGBT Threats” – http://www.charismanews.com/opinion/american-dispatch/66369-ministry-takes-back-god-s-rainbow-despite-lgbt-threats, accessed 07/21/2017.

2 Comments

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Creation, Current Events, Religion

Liberty

And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family. (Leviticus 25:10)

Liberty. Dictionary.com defines “liberty” as freedom from arbitrary or despotic government control, external or foreign rule, or from control, interference, obligation, restriction or hampering conditions. It is the power of right doing, thinking, speaking, etc., according to choice.

The Webster’s Dictionary 1828 – Online Edition – published nearer the time of our nation’s founding – defines it more precisely, and its definition includes our leading verse. The 1828 Webster’s says that “liberty” is freedom from restraint and applicable to the body, or to the will, or mind. It is the power of acting as one thinks fit, without any restraint or control, except from the laws of nature. It goes on to say that this liberty is abridged by the establishment of government. This governmental abridgment is necessary and expedient for the safety and interest of the society, state or nation. However, a restraint of natural liberty not necessary or expedient for the public, is tyranny or oppression. “Civil liberty” is an exemption from the arbitrary will of others, which exemption is secured by established laws, which restrain every man from injuring or controlling another. Hence the restraints of law are essential to civil liberty. The liberty of one depends not so much on the removal of all restraint from him, as on the due restraint upon the liberty of others. “Religious liberty” is the free right of adopting and enjoying opinions on religious subjects, and of worshiping the Supreme Being according to the dictates of conscience, without external control. More follows, but for now this will suffice.

It is worth noting that the modern definition makes no mention of “natural law” or the “laws of nature.” Nor does it mention the “Supreme Being” and the “free right” to religious liberty. It is easy to see why using the modern definition to interpret our founding documents dampens the meaning to words like freedom, liberty and the laws of nature and nature’s God.

In the first paragraph of the Declaration of Independence, the Founders appealed to “the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.” They affirmed that “these truths” are “self-evident that all Men are created equal … they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.”

From where did such a notion arise? Arguably, such ideas were adopted from enlightened philosophers of the time, who borrowed from the ancient Greek philosophers. However, it goes beyond that. These laws ultimately come from “Nature’s God.” The “Creator” created “all men” equal, and He “endowed” them with inherent rights that cannot be taken away – they are “unalienable.”[1]

God does as He pleases. “For I am the LORD: I will speak, and the word that I shall speak shall come to pass; it shall be no more prolonged: for in your days, O rebellious house, will I say the word, and will perform it, saith the Lord GOD” (Ezekiel 12:25, emphasis mine). God is Creator. “For thus saith the LORD that created the heavens; God himself that formed the earth and made it; he hath established it, he created it not in vain, he formed it to be inhabited: I am the LORD; and there is none else” (Isaiah 45:18, emphasis mine). God created man in His image (Genesis 1:27). God first gave man the “breath of life (Genesis 2:7), and “endowed” him with the attribute of autonomy that He Himself possesses. Hence, “liberty,” i.e., “freedom,” is a God-like attribute inherent to man that cannot be taken away. Therefore, those who would deprive another of “Life” (even unborn life) violate the “Law of Nature” and are called murderers, and likewise, those that would deprive another of “Liberty” (autonomy) violate the “Law of Nature’s God,” and are called tyrants.

The pursuit of happiness is a gift that comes from God. “For thou shalt eat the labour of thine hands: happy shalt thou be, and it shall be well with thee” (Psalm 128:2, emphasis mine). From the beginning, work has been both a curse and a blessing. “In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return” (Genesis 3:19, emphasis mine). The Preacher says, “I know that there is no good in [the sons of men], but for a man to rejoice, and to do good in his life. And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, it is the gift of God” (Ecclesiastes 3:12-13, emphasis mine). Because man bears the image of the Creator, he too creates, from his mind through his hands, that which brings him joy and happiness. “But Jesus answered them, My Father worketh hitherto, and I work” (John 5:17, emphasis mine). Indeed, God views in dishonor those who will not work; the Bible calls such “sluggards.” “The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing: but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat” (Proverbs 13:4, emphasis mine). “The sluggard will not plow by reason of the cold; therefore shall he beg in harvest, and have nothing” (Proverbs 20:4, emphasis mine). Paul reminded the Thessalonians, “For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10, emphasis mine).

Work is the means by which we “pursue happiness,” and by which we obtain private property. It is a gift of God. Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness, are the Laws of Nature that are derived from Nature’s God. They belong to all men[2] equally. The fact that ancient and modern philosophers tout these “laws” (as if conceived by their own intellect), is that they, whether they give assent to God or not, carry within themselves the image of God. We can thank God that these noble and lofty ideals found sanctuary in the founding documents of our nation. Liberty comes from God alone. “… happy is that people, whose God is the LORD (Psalm 144:15), and “If the Son therefore shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed” (John 8:36).

Notes:


[1]  This is why the Muslim religion that adheres to Sharia Law is incompatible with American Law, i.e., the Constitution of the United States of America.

[2]  By “men,” I mean mankind or humankind, male and female. I reject the political correctness that has invaded the English language whereby we must overly complicate the language by such as, he/she, his/hers, men/women, etc.

Comments Off on Liberty

Filed under Creation, Current Events, Holidays, Origins, Theology

Justice For All

12172967 - justice (greek:themis,latin:justitia) blindfolded with scales, sword and money on one scale. corruption and bribing concept

And judgment is turned away backward, and justice standeth afar off: for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. (Isaiah 59:14)

The Pledge of Allegiance of the United States is an expression of allegiance to the Flag and the Republic of the United States of America. Colonel George Balch originally composed it in 1887, and Francis Bellamy later revised it in 1892.  Congress formally adopted the Pledge in 1942, and the official name of “The Pledge of Allegiance” was adopted in 1945. The last change in language came on Flag Day, 1954 when the words “under God” were added.[1]

The closing phrase of “The Pledge of Allegiance” asserts that this republic, “under God,” offers “liberty and justice for all.” This week, following the celebration of the 240th anniversary of the birth of our nation, that assertion proved false when FBI Director, James Comey, succinctly detailed the numerous security violations incurred by former Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, when she carelessly handed classified electronic documents. The recitation of infractions enumerated by the FBI director exposed the litany of lies voiced by the Democrat Presidential Candidate.

In her position as Secretary of State under President Barack Obama, Clinton repeatedly and flagrantly violated the “Espionage Act” (18 U.S. Code § 793 (f)),[2] and then lied about having done so. She said her emails resided on a single server; there were four. She said she communicated on only one handheld device; there were several. She said she did not send or receive any communications “marked” classified. That was untrue, but even if not marked classified, in her position as Secretary of State, she should have recognized sensitive material when she saw it, so she has no excuse. She claims to have surrendered all emails to the FBI. That was false, and furthermore, Director Comey revealed that Clinton’s lawyers deleted large quantities of emails and then “scrubbed” their devices to render them insusceptible to forensic investigation.

With the mountains of evidence clearly stacked against her, FBI Director, James Comey declared that no “reasonable” prosecutor should find cause to bring charges against Hillary Clinton based on the premise that the evidence did not support “malicious intent.” The problem with Comey’s assessment is that the statute says nothing about “intent.” The fact is that Clinton dealt with highly sensitive material involving national security for which she was responsible, and she carelessly handled that material. The statute in question reads as follows:

Whoever [including the Secretary of State and even the President], being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense, (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both. (Emphasis mine.)

Mrs. Clinton, in her position as Secretary of State, had “lawful possession or control” of many sensitive documents relating to the “national defense.” Through “gross negligence,” she permitted those documents “to be removed from [their] proper place of custody,” i.e. secured government servers, “in violation of [her] trust.” Then attempted to obscure and obfuscate the fact, first of all, by storing them on a personal servers rather than on secure government servers, and secondly, by deleting (destroying) them from those servers. One should note that nothing in the statute addresses “intent.” In short, if a person is a lawful custodian of sensitive information related to national defense, that person is responsible and accountable for the security of that information.

Many in government have been severely punished for lesser offenses. When questioned by the Congressional investigative committee, Comey was asked if one of his FBI agents were to be charged with such offenses, what would happen to that agent. Comely admitted that such a violator would have his/her security clearance revoked and suffer such punishment as required by law. Yet, no “reasonable prosecutor” should bring any charges against Hillary Clinton.

With that FBI “recommendation,” Attorney General, Loretta Lynch exonerated Mrs. Clinton clearing the path for her presidency. Heaven help us!

In the classic novel, Animal Farm by George Orwell, one of the closing lines says, “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others.” Iustitia, the Roman goddess of justice (Lady Justice), is portrayed with a balance scale in one hand, a sword in the other, and a blindfold over her eyes. The image speaks of equality under the law. With her eyes covered, Lady Justice sees no race. She sees no rich or poor. She sees no ruler or subject. Her judgment is weighed on the scale of the law, and the guilty succumb to her sword regardless of status or stature. That is as it should be. That is as it once was in America, but it now seems that the law applies only to the masses and excuses some of a new elite class of rulers. These animals are more equal than others. Anarchy now rules in our land.

Before his death, King David said, “The Spirit of the LORD spake by me, and his word was in my tongue. The God of Israel said, the Rock of Israel spake to me, He that ruleth over men must be just, ruling in the fear of God” ( 2 Samuel 23:1-3, emphasis mine).

Notes:


[1]  Wikipedia, “Pledge of Allegiance,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pledge_of_Allegiance/.

[2]  See https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/793/

1 Comment

Filed under Apologetics, Christianity, Current Events, Politics, Random Musings

O Beautiful!

My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children. (Hosea 4:6)

O beautiful! For spacious skies,

For amber waves of grain,

For purple mountain majesties

Above the fruited plain!

Our land truly is beautiful. Arguably, no fairer land exists in all the earth. From the Smokey Mountains in the east, to the rolling plains of the Mid-west, to the Grand Tetons and the Rocky Mountains, to the Grand Canyon and the Painted Desert, to the sunny West Coast and the Pacific, our landscapes are breathtakingly beautiful. Our land is rich and productive, feeding not only our people, but much of the world. God has blessed our land tremendously.

America! America!

[May] God shed His grace on thee,

And crown thy good with brotherhood

From sea to shining sea!

God has shed His grace on our nation. Beginning with the first settlers of Jamestown to the landing of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, who set pen to paper and wrote: “Having undertaken, for the Glory of God, and advancements of the Christian faith…”, to the founding fathers who declared, “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” to the framers who gave us “a more perfect union,” God shed His grace on our nation.

O beautiful! For Pilgrim feet

Whose stern impassioned stress

A thoroughfare of freedom beat

Across the wilderness!

In less than a century, our borders stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the Pacific Ocean, and the industriousness of the American people created the wealthiest nation on earth – but not without cost.

O beautiful! For heroes proved

In liberating strife.

Who more than self their country loved,

And mercy more than life.

About eighteen months before the end of the Civil War, November 19, 1863, on the battlefield of Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, President Abraham Lincoln addressed the crowd gathered for the dedication of the Soldiers’ National Cemetery with these words: “Fourscore and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal.” The test of the conflict would prove, “whether that nation or any nation so conceived and so dedicated can long endure.”

On this, the 240th celebration of America’s birth, the question looms more crucial than at any time in the history of America the beautiful. A land dedicated to “the glory of God and the advancements of the Christian faith,” to the equality of man, and to liberty derived from “nature’s God” now rejects God, advances all but the Christian faith, creates class warfare, and dispenses “liberty” as determined by an elite class of “elected” rulers. “Nature” is now god, and the unnatural is elevated above the natural. We have exchanged “beauty for ashes” (Isaiah 61:3), and liberty for tyranny. We call what is evil good and what is good evil. We protect those who commit evil acts in the name of Allah, and demonize those who speak truth in the name of Christ. How long can America the Beautiful endure having abandoned the principles on which it was founded?

tree-trunk-with-damage_medI used to have a huge ash tree in my backyard that looked beautiful on the outside. It extended heavy, foliage-laden boughs reaching for the sun from a massive, well-rooted trunk. The tree appeared as if it would stand forever. Then one day, a big windstorm blew in and broke off one of the heavy main branches. As the limb fell, it that split the tree all the way to the base, and it took half of the trunk with it. Upon a closer inspection, I discovered that the tree was rotten on the inside. It looked great on the outside, but on the inside, it was really sick. So, when the big storm blew it, it could not stand up to the tempest. That is how I picture America today.

America! America!

[May] God mend thine every flaw,

Confirm thy soul in self-control,

Thy liberty in law!

America! America!

May God thy gold refine

Till all success is nobleness

And every gain divine!

Blessed is the nation whose God is the LORD; and the people whom he hath chosen for his own inheritance. (Psalm 33:12)

5 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Current Events, Holidays, Religion

No Choice!

Bad Choices

Daniel answered and said, Blessed be the name of God for ever and ever: for wisdom and might are his: And he changeth the times and the seasons: he removeth kings, and setteth up kings: he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to them that know understanding: (Daniel 2:20-21)

The Republican National Convention looms ahead within a few short weeks, and it appears that Donald Trump is the presumptive GOP candidate for President of the United States. The prospect is disheartening to many Christians including me, but unlike me, many Christians are resolved to “suck it up” and vote for Trump as the “lesser of two evils.” I don’t know about you, but I am tired of voting for the lesser of two evils. I voted for the lesser of two evils in 2008 when I voted for John McCain. I voted for the lesser of two evils when I voted for Mitt Romney in 2012. What did that get us? It got us eight years of Barrack Obama! To me, Donald Trump measures up so far below either McCain or Romney that it’s like drinking the dregs of cold, stale coffee.

I have stated openly that I will not vote for that man. Unless he assumes some real principles greater than his own ambitions, I cannot with clear conscience bring myself to cast my ballot for Trump. I will vote, but I will either vote for a reasonable third or fourth party candidate or write in my choice, which at the moment happens to be Ted Cruz – the only principled, constitutional conservative that ran in the primaries. Ted Cruz also holds solid Christian values, and lives by them.

Many of my friends criticize me for making that statement saying, “That will just guarantee Hillary will be the next President” (provided she doesn’t end up in prison). Is that true?

As Christians we should make our decisions based on biblical principles. Does the Bible give us any guidance? The verse above says that God removes and sets up kings, i.e. rulers. Arguably, presidents of the United States, are not “rulers” per se – at least not constitutionally – but now that is highly suspect considering how President Obama has performed in his administration. Whether kings, rulers, or presidents, the principle holds true: God sets up and takes down rulers.

At the installation of Solomon, King David blessed the Lord saying, “Thine, O LORD, is the greatness, and the power, and the glory, and the victory, and the majesty: for all that is in the heaven and in the earth is thine; thine is the kingdom, O LORD, and thou art exalted as head above all. Both riches and honour come of thee, and thou reignest over all; and in thine hand is power and might; and in thine hand it is to make great, and to give strength unto all” (1 Chronicles 29:11-12, emphasis mine). Clearly, David recognized God’s sovereignty over all earthly matters. The Apostle Paul applies this concept as to how we should relate to those in power over us. “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God” (Romans 13:1, emphasis mine). In Paul’s day, Rome resembled a republic somewhat like ours, except that citizens did not elect their leaders. The Senate was composed of the aristocracy, who obtained their position though inheritance, appointment or through bribe. The point is that citizens had no say in their government. Under these circumstances, Paul exhorts Christians to submit to their leaders because “the powers that be are ordained of God.” The Greek word translated “ordained” is tassō and it means “to arrange in an orderly manner.” When we consider some of the tyrants that ruled Rome and their persecution of the saints, we might wonder what kind of “orderly manner” God arranged, but Paul clearly affirms that God controls who sits in power. Nero, Diocletian, Muhamad, Napoleon, Hitler, Lennon, Stalin, Putin, Obama, Ayatollah Khomeini and many more could be listed – all had Divine appointments. No leader or ruler on earth exists or has ever existed that God did not put in place.

That said, if we truly believe God’s Word, can we honestly say we have any real influence on who will be our next President? Can we realistically assume the responsibility for who will lead us? The Bible says that God makes those decisions.

So, what is the use in Christians voting?

The United States of America is unique among all the nations of the world and among all the nations throughout history. In no other nation has God vested power in the governed, i.e. the people, rather than in governors. At the conclusion of the Constitutional Convention in 1788, it is said that a lady asked Benjamin Franklin what kind of government they had given us to which he replied, “A republic, Madam, if you can keep it.” We stand at the precipice of losing our republic. By many standards, one may say we have already lost it; but we can still vote for our leaders – for all the good that does. The problem is that most of the leaders we elect are unprincipled liars seeking their own gain, personal privilege, and power. They hear the people’s cries and promise to fulfill their wishes (like “repeal every word of Obama Care”), and once they are elected they become deaf to the voice of the people.

What are we to do? We must do what is right before God. That is what we do! “Blessed are they that keep judgment, and he that doeth righteousness at all times” (Psalm 106:3).  “Little children, let no man deceive you: he that doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous” (1 John 3:7). At the conclusion of his exposé on the vanity of life seeking pleasure and possessions, Solomon sums up, “Let us hear the conclusion of the whole matter: Fear God, and keep his commandments: for this is the whole duty of man. For God shall bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (Ecclesiastes 12:13-14, emphasis mine).

What is the right thing to do? Chief Justice John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, said, “Providence [meaning “God”] has given our people the choice of their rulers, and it is the duty, as well as privilege and interest, of a Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers” (emphasis mine). For Christians, then, the right thing means preferring Christians as our rulers. Of course, someone will undoubtedly retort, “We are not electing a pastor, we’re electing a President.” Perhaps, at this point, it behooves us to elect a pastor in the truest sense of that word. A pastor, i.e. a “shepherd,” looks out for the welfare of his sheep even to the point of giving his life for them. Jesus said, “I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep” (John 10:11). Wouldn’t that be a great attribute in a President! – or any of our elected representatives for that matter!

Voting for a pastor as President might not be such a bad thing; however, there is not one running for the office. Many of my Christian brothers and sisters fear a Hillary Clinton presidency so much that they are willing to vote for the reprobate Donald Trump as the “lesser of two evils.” By what standard they make that judgment I cannot discern. Joel Rosenberg offered 32 reasons a Trump presidency would be a catastrophe for America.[1] I also wrote about this and provided links to other articles giving reasons why Christians should not support Donald Trump.[2]

Donald Trump is no pastor. Judging from his “fruits,” he is not even a Christian. He may be a Presbyterian, but he is not a Christian, I don’t care how he labels himself. If Christians are to prefer Christians as their leaders, then, my friends, we have no choice. That is why, unless God raises up a principled, Christian man (or woman) that cares about this nation more than he/she cares about him/herself, the only right thing I see to do is write in someone I, in good conscience, believe is worthy of the office. To me, at least for now, that is Ted Cruz. My conscience is clear, and I trust in the sovereignty of God for the outcome, even if it is Hillary Clinton.

Friends, our nation rejected God a long time ago. God’s judgment is not coming upon our nation; it’s already on us, like it or not. What we see these days – the violence, perversion, disregard for law and order, etc. – is the judgment of God. Read Romans 1:18 ff. Even if Trump is elected, do not deceive yourself into thinking that he will be any better than what we have already. Remember that choosing the lesser of two evils is still evil. For that reason, I cannot vote for Donald Trump. I feel I have no choice.

Notes:


[1] Joel C. Rosenberg’s Blog: https://flashtrafficblog.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/32-reasons-a-trump-presidency-would-be-a-catastrophe-for-america/

[2] “The Trump Sounds,” https://erniecarrasco.com/2016/02/28/the-trump-sounds/

12 Comments

Filed under Christianity, Current Events, End Times, Politics, Theology