Why Would You Impeach President Trump?

accomplishmentsWhy would you impeach President Trump? For doing the very things that he promised he would do as a candidate? For reducing the number of regulations that our industries have had to contend with under Obama resulting in one of the strongest economies we’ve had in a long time? For recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital?

He’s effective and the Dems can’t stand it. And the fact that he won the election fair and square can’t be admitted because that means their platform is no longer in sync with public opinion let alone what’s consistent with what’s best for America.

The impeachment process will be a theatrical production. There is no substance to their accusations just like there was no collusion with Russia. But it’s the only card they can play because they don’t have the majority and they don’t have any plan or theme apart from regaining power.

Think about it. What would the Dems promise? A strong economy? We have it. A solid foreign policy? We have it. A group of Supreme Court justices that interpret the Constitution rather than try to rewrite it? Perhaps not all Dems want that, but we have it.

The Dems don’t have anything they can present to our country save a Socialist agenda disguised as social justice and compassionate. But even that is wearing thin as their true colors become more apparent every day.

Impeachment is their last, desperate attempt to regain the momentum they had with Obama. He has a great gift for communicating something vile, yet making it sound patriotic. Trump is not a politician. He’s one of country’s most successful businessmen who gauges success by action and not intention. And the Dems can’t fight that with anything other than accusations, law suits, innuendos and…

…impeachment proceedings.

Religion is Bad…

Screen Shot 2019-06-01 at 9.52.10 AMThere’s an article that was recently brought to my attention via Facebook entitled, “Study Discovers Children Raised Without Religion Are Kinder And More Empathetic.” It’s coming from a site called, “Awareness Act,” and while its credibility is questionable, the article does its job as far as asserting a subtle yet compelling reason for removing Christ from the marketplace.

Right?

I mean why would you support or even subscribe to something that seemingly contributes to a self-absorbed condition among children?

The article is reinforced and summarized by another site and it condenses the overall findings this way:

Across all countries, parents in religious households reported that their children expressed more empathy and sensitivity for justice in everyday life than non-religious parents. However, religiousness was inversely predictive of children’s altruism and positively correlated with their punitive tendencies. Together these results reveal the similarity across countries in how religion negatively influences children’s altruism, challenging the view that religiosity facilitates prosocial behavior.

Here’s the thing: Christ’s sacrifice on the cross represents one of the most selfless acts of unconditional love ever recorded in the history of mankind. Combine His Identity with the suffering that He endured for the sake of the very ones that were driving the spikes through His hands and you have the Ultimate example of altruism.

For those who don’t typically use the word, “altruism” in casual conversation, “altruism” (ALL-true-izem) means, “the belief in or practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others.”

That’s Jesus to a “T.”

There’s three things that I would submit in response to this article that makes it profoundly bogus.

#1…

Friedrich Nietzsche  said that when people find out that God is dead in the nineteenth century, two things are going to happen in the twentieth century: First of all, the twentieth century will be the bloodiest century in the history of mankind and a universal madness will break out.

He was right.

We killed more people in the twentieth century than the previous nineteen put together and the “madness” that he predicted he experienced himself in that he spent the last 13 years of his life insane.

Why is this significant?

Because part of the way the above study evaluated altruism was though a game where kids where shown a collection of thirty stickers. They were told they could select 10 of their favorite to keep, but not everyone would be able to play the game. It was called the “Dictator Game” and this is the way in which the child’s “selfless” tendencies were being evaluated.

I’m not sure how that resonates with you, but I’m more inclined to look at the way in which the absence of a moral Absolute affects the lives of individuals and nations in the context of warfare and socio-economic anomalies and let that be the gauge I use to evaluate the Christian faith rather than how a child responds to a game.

#2…

Just because you say you’re a Christian doesn’t mean you subscribe to God as He’s revealed in Scripture. In other words, saying you’re “religious” could mean just about anything. Does Christ command us to be selfless? Absolutely (Phil 2:3-4)! Do self proclaimed “Christians” take that seriously? Given the fact that 25% of Christians don’t subscribe to a “biblical” God, it’s hard to tell.

#3…

Finally, the fact that you’re a child coming from a “Christian” household doesn’t mean that you’re being taught to revere Scripture let alone what it is that constitutes its content. This goes back to what was mentioned under #2. If you don’t know what you believe and why, or if you base your creed on a collection of experiential preferences rather than the Word of God, what can you realistically expect as far as child’s conduct when this is the “classroom” they’re being taught in?

In conclusion…

The Progressive mindset is founded on a godless paradigm. Everything from Socialism where government is god to the doctrine of entitlement where the individual is god. Either way, it’s a situation where moral absolutes don’t exist, one’s origin and destiny is purely happenstance and an individual’s sense of purpose is entirely subjective. Some see that as liberating because there’s no accountability and any kind of adversity or criticism can be categorized as fundamentally “wrong.”

But in the absence of a Standard, you have chaos, hopelessness and death. That’s not being overly philosophical, that’s just looking at the utility of Scripture, the testimony of history and the common sense evaluation of any situation that exists in the absence of a transcendent reason to “be.”

What ails society is not problematic because of Christ…

…what ails society is present because of a refusal to honor Him.

Dear Jim…

ten-commandments-list-where-in-the-bible-does-it-talk-about-the-ten-commandmentsHere’s the thing:

I can’t prove that Jesus died and came back to life.

I can point to all of the evidence that exists in terms of archaeology, architecture, music, literature, art and 2,000 years worth of dramatically changed lives, but I don’t have a selfie featuring the Son of God and me mugging for the camera as He’s existing the empty tomb.

That’s the thing about Scripture that makes it difficult to “prove.” We can’t go back in time and validate things as an eyewitness. We’re limited to what’s been written and then go from there.

Thing is, atheists are in a similar predicament in that they can’t prove that Jesus never existed. Again, going back to the aforementioned evidence, while I can process it as credible, someone else can come along and logically question just how “credible” it is in light of possible corruption or anything else that could possibly have been done in centuries past that makes the whole thing imaginary and thus irrelevant. But, again, you can’t “prove” that by providing raw footage of said corruption. We both have to contend with the same limitations and thus the same lack of absolute certainty.

There’s no need to go back 2,000 years to evaluate whether or not the way the Bible instructs a person to live and think is authentic. Morality, emotional health, professional ambition, ethics, politics, physical fitness, mortality – all of these things are covered in the Bible and I would submit to you while there may always be some question marks about the authenticity of the Christian faith (as far as being able to observe things like the Resurrection first hand), the practical substance of the Christian doctrine is more than enough to justify faith in Christ.

There is, however, something else to consider and that’s the “utility” of the Bible.

However subjective the historical reality of Christ may be, the philosophical paradigm that’s advocated in Scripture is a purely objective entity which can be read and applied in real time. In this context, we’re not looking at whether or not what we’re evaluating was crafted 2,000 years ago. You’re simply looking at the way in which Scripture instructs people to live and think and then observing what results from applying those Truths. And it’s in the context of applying those Truths – using the methodology that’s also taught in Scripture – that you discover perhaps the most compelling evidence for the Christian doctrine.

Let me show you…

Let’s go with the Ten Commandments for starters. Remember, we’re not trying to authenticate the identity of Moses or whether or not the Red Sea was parted, thus allowing the Israelites to pass through on dry land. We’re looking at the practical application of Exodus 20 and considering how it impacts the life and perspective of someone who’s applying it in the way the approach themselves and the world around them.

You shall have no other gods before me. (Ex 20:3)

You can’t be greedy, prideful or depressed unless you’re thinking of yourself first and foremost. I’m not saying you have to be “selfish” to be sad. What I’m saying is that in order to be perpetually cynical or to exist in a state of chronic despair, you have to be focused on:

  • what’s happened to you
  • why it happened to you
  • how it makes you feel
  • how you can’t think of anything else
  • how you will never be the same
  • and how everyone should make an exception for you because of the situation you are in

In a similar way, a consistently prideful disposition is possible only if you’re focused on…

  • what you can do
  • what you have accomplished
  • why you are so special
  • what you are planning
  • and why you need to be the center of attention regardless of whatever else may be going on

When you make a point of subordinating what would otherwise be a situation where everything is processed through the filter of your ability and your preferences, you open yourself up to a perspective that is founded on Perfect Strength, Knowledge and Love. Consequently, you are a pleasure to work with, you have an optimistic disposition, your priorities are in order and should someone ask what it is that makes you tick, you are quick to point to the True Source of both your mindset and your ability.

4 You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below. 5 You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, 6 but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. (Ex 20:4-6)

I can put premium fuel into my gas tank or I can fill it up with water. The gauge may say my tank is full, but the moment I go to start my car, the true composition of my fuel is going to be revealed as either real or fake.

If I’m going to benefit from all that Christ brings to the table, I’ve got to be focused on the Person of Jesus Christ as He’s defined in Scripture and not an image of Christ as he’s represented by a collection of cultural opinions. And not only for my own sake, but also for those who are within the sphere of my influence. Otherwise, not only am I going to be sitting on the side of the road, so will everyone else who’s followed my example.

You shall not misuse the name of the Lord your God, for the Lord will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name. (Ex 20:7)

Even if I do have premium fuel in my gas tank, I’m still behind the wheel. I can choose where to go, regardless of the map that God’s given me that leads to a destination I can be certain is well worth my time and energy.

It’s one thing when I make it clear that I’m headed off in a different direction simply because I think I know better. It’s quite another when I profess to be following the Instructions on the box when in fact I’m not. At that point, I’m forging His Signature and giving the world the impression that I’m obeying my Heavenly Father when, the truth of the matter is, my Heavenly Father may have told me to do the exact opposite.

In that moment, not only am I squandering all the potential represented by Jeremiah 29:11, I’m also a potentially toxic distraction to those on the outside looking in who believe, based on my phraseology, that I’m a good example of what God can do in and through a person who’s serving Someone and Something greater than themselves.

8 Remember the Sabbath day by keeping it holy. 9 Six days you shall labor and do all your work, 10 but the seventh day is a sabbath to the Lord your God. On it you shall not do any work, neither you, nor your son or daughter, nor your male or female servant, nor your animals, nor any foreigner residing in your towns. 11 For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, but he rested on the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.

Going to church on Sunday and being engaged rather than simply being present is much like going outside and looking at the stars on a clear night. You’re not just observing the constellations, you’re holding yourself and your circumstances up the Light of God’s Reality and Ability (Psalm 8). In that moment, you’re reminded of how it’s not what’s “happening” in your life as much as it’s what God is “doing” in your life. And with that reminder comes the philosophical foundation that needs to be dusted off from time to time and that’s the fact that He is God and He is aware and that He is able.

Honor your father and your mother, so that you may live long in the land the Lord your God is giving you. (Ex 20:12)

One of the primary jobs that your parents have is to teach you all about God, His Word, and why it’s as advantageous as it is to seek His Counsel in everything you say, think and do. If you’re honoring them, you’re opening yourself up to what they have to say and all the benefits that go along with it.

Now, while that command is for children, parents have got a line to toe as well (Prov 22:6; Eph 6:4). There’s more to “training” your child than just insisting that they go to church every Sunday and refrain from immoral behavior simply because “they should.” When you pop the hood on Proverbs 22:6, the verbiage is telling the parent to know their child well enough to understand how they are wired so that the advantages of obeying Scripture are understood as legitimate benefits and not intrusive limitations.  To teach someone means to cause them to learn. If they’re learning nothing more than just a code of ethics that they’re adhering to simply to avoid disciplinary action from the Mom and Dad, they’re not learning anything other than just how to avoid being grounded.

On the other hand, if Mom and Dad are diligent students of Scripture and can not only explain what they believe and why, but also back their creed up with their character, then they’re in a good position to truly teach their kids Who God is and what He’s bringing to the table. It’s at that point that Exodus 20:12 is especially practical because you now have the Authority of God Himself behind a parent’s efforts to teach and train their child.

If every parent was resolved to lead by example and teach their kids everything that goes along with 1 Corinthians 12:31, then the world would be a better place. But not every parent thinks like that and some end up abusing their kids rather than raising them. Still, this command is helpful because you want to honor the office even if you don’t honor the man or the woman. Reason being is that an abusive parent leaves emotional and psychological wounds that are deep and dark. If you don’t forgive them, you wind up fastening a ball and chain to your psyche that makes it difficult to function. By obeying this command, you release the poison in your system that, while it may be there through no fault of your own, it is still something you want to rid yourself of if for no other reason than to ensure the apple falls as far away from the tree as possible when the time comes to raise your own children.

You shall not murder. (Ex 20:13)

“Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not do any thing hurtful or injurious to the health, ease, and life, of thy own body, or any other person’s unjustly.’’
This is one of the laws of nature, and was strongly enforced by the precepts given to Noah and his sons, Gen. 9:5, Gen. 9:6 . It does not forbid killing in lawful war, or in our own necessary defence, nor the magistrate’s putting offenders to death, for those things tend to the preserving of life; but it forbids all malice and hatred to the person of any (for he that hateth his brother is a murderer ), and all personal revenge arising therefrom; also all rash anger upon sudden provocations, and hurt said or done, or aimed to be done, in passion: of this our Saviour expounds this commandment, Mt. 5:22 . And, as that which is worst of all, it forbids persecution, laying wait for the blood of the innocent and excellent ones of the earth.

This isn’t just a command to not kill someone. When you consider the fact that man is made in the image of God, you’re not just taking a life, you’re assaulting that which is precious and valuable to your King.

Dr. Ravi Zacharias sums it up this way…

At its core life is sacred and of inestimable value, whether it is the life of a darling child in the fresh blossom of childhood, or the life of an elderly, weak, and frail recluse. We are each made in God’s sacred image. Think of this truth! That is why murder is described in Scripture for what it is: an attack upon God’s image. That is also why we are told, “Everyone who hates his brother is a murderer” (1 John 3:15). Murder and even hateful words are attempts to destroy God’s image in another and to deny one’s value and spiritual essence. It is that essence which gives us our dignity and our worth. It is that essence which is our glory and true home.

When you make a point of seeing others as those who bear the image of God, it changes the way you look at people in general. Regardless of their race, color, creed or whether or not they just cut you off in traffic, theirs is an identity founded on something Divine and thus rates a consideration that goes beyond what might otherwise be the case if your perspective was founded solely on your personal passions and preferences.

It’s the fact that your neighbor (see Lk 10:25-37) bears the image of their King and therefore is more than a random face in the crowd that serves as the philosophical foundation for the remaining commandments.

You shall not commit adultery. (Ex 20:14)

It’s not just a violation of one’s chastity, it’s a violation of the marriage covenant which, by definition, is a contract made with God.

You shall not steal. (Ex 20:15)

You’re not just taking something that doesn’t belong to you, you’re taking something that was given to someone else by God.

You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor. (Ex 20:16)

You’re not just attacking the integrity of your neighbor, you’re attacking the integrity of God. That’s not to suggest that your neighbor is the embodiment of truth, but, again, because he’s made in the image of God, there’s a bigger picture to consider than just the individual you’re maligning.

You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor. (Ex 20:17)

Some of you have probably heard me mention the simple conversation between Jesus and the one who was questioning him, trying to pit him against Caesar. And he looked at Jesus and he said, “Is it alright to pay taxes to Caesar?” (Mark 12:14-17) That is one question I wish so desperately Jesus had answered differently—then on April 15 you could be godly and rebellious at the same time!

Jesus, so brilliant in his response, he says, “Give me a coin.” And he took the coin and he says, “Whose image do you see on this?” The man says, “Caesar.” Jesus says, “Give to Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and give to God that which is God’s.”

The disingenuousness of the questioner is noticed in the fact that he did not come back with a second question. He should have said, “What belongs to God?” And Jesus would have said, “Whose image is on you?”

Give to Caesar that which belongs to Caesar; give to God that which belongs to God. God’s image is on you. (Ravi Zacharias)

To covet something goes beyond simply admiring it. It means that you’re intent upon seizing it illegitimately. Whereas stealing is the external act of thievery, coveting is the internal machinations that lead to stealing.

Again, because your neighbor is made in the image of God, any sort of malice or wrongdoing directed towards your neighbor is ultimately an assault on God Himself.

So, to summarize what we’re looking at here:

This is more than just a code of ethics to be adhered to for the sake of being courteous and moral. It’s a perspective that’s founded on the vertical relationship that exists between all of humanity and God. And what makes all this incredibly amazing and distinctive when compared to all other religions is that God doesn’t simply say, “Get it done or else!” He provides both the strength (Is 41:10; 1 Cor 10:13) and the will (Ps 119:32; Jer 31:33; Rom 6:18; Phil 2:13) to make it happen.

And there’s so much more…

But the bottom line is: It works.

In 1976, a gentleman by the name of Francis Schaeffer published a book entitled, “How Then Shall We Live.” It’s a phenomenal book that traces the way in which society thinks based on its collective worldview and how this collective mindset can be seen in its art and architecture as well as in its religious orthodoxy. His point is that when you build your society / individual life on Divine Absolutes, the result is something substantial and liberating.

It works…

On the other hand, when you build your society / individual life on a humanistic paradigm, the result is a chaotic and fragmented existence.

It’s an overview of that book that I would submit as my conclusion.

According to Schaeffer, How Should We Then Live traces Western history from Ancient Rome until the time of writing (1976) along three lines: the philosophic, scientific, and religious. He also makes extensive references to art and architecture as a means of showing how these movements reflected changing patterns of thought through time. Schaeffer’s central premise is: when we base society on the Bible, on the infinite-personal God who is there and has spoken, this provides an absolute by which we can conduct our lives and by which we can judge society. This leads to what Schaeffer calls “Freedom without chaos.” When we base society on humanism, which he defines as “a value system rooted in the belief that man is his own measure, that man is autonomous, totally independent”, all values are relative and we have no way to distinguish right from wrong except for “synthesis, pragmatism, and utilitarianism.” Because we disagree on what is best for which group, this leads to fragmentation of thought, which has led us to the despair and alienation so prevalent in society today. This fragmentation is expressed in the visual arts in works such as Les Demoiselles d’Avignon by Pablo Picasso. This work is considered to mark the beginning of Modern Art. Another premise is that modern relative values are based on Personal Peace (the desire to be personally unaffected by the world’s problems) and Affluence (an increasing personal income.) He warns that when we live by these values we will be tempted to sacrifice our freedoms in exchange for an authoritarian government who will provide the relative values. He further warns that this government will not be obvious like the fascist regimes of the 20th century but will be based on manipulation and subtle forms of information control, psychology, and genetics. (“How Then Shall We Live“)

 

When someone asks me, “What do you believe and why do you believe it?” I respond by saying that, “I believe that Jesus died and came back to life.” And when they ask, “Why do you believe that?” I answer, “…because of the credibility and the utility of Scripture.” And while I can’t provide raw footage of any of the apostles or the prophets writing said text, I can look at the content and see a way of life that justifies my confidence in my creed.

There you have it!

Why?

imagesHere’s a quote from Representative Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez:

“I’m not saying that Bill Gates or Warren Buffett are immoral, but a system that allows billionaires to exist when there are parts of Alabama where people are still getting ringworm because they don’t have access to public health is wrong,” Ocasio-Cortez said during an event honoring the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. on Monday.

Here’s my question…

Why?

Why are the people she’s referring to not employed? Why do they not have health care?

Why?

Of those who she’s addressing…

  • How many graduated High School?
  • How many when to college and secured a marketable degree?
  • How many handled their money well?
  • How many struggled with alcohol or drugs?

Some who are homeless served in the military. Of those who served…

  • How many were discharged honorably?
  • How many had a realistic plan for life after the military? Did they have a marketable skill when they got out? Did they have plans to attend college? How many just got out because they didn’t want to stay in?
  • How many took advantage of the college benefits that were available to them while they served?

There are people who are truly destitute and you don’t want to be indifferent to their situation. That’s charity.

But there are people who are homeless because of a host of truly bad decisions and they are now reaping what they have sown. And while they still may merit some assistance, to put them in the same category as those who are genuinely struggling because of some tragic circumstance, is neither wise nor practical. That’s a subsidy.

The mantra being proclaimed by Ortez is typical of the mindset that seeks to demonize anyone who’s even remotely successful as corrupt and apathetic to the needs of those who are poverty stricken. They are the Progressive Left and the Socialists who ignorantly insist that Capitalism is “immoral.”

Winston Churchill once said:

Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.

Socialism isn’t the redistribution of wealth. Rather, it’s the redistribution of authority.

Prager University has a great piece on this entitled “Capitalism vs Socialism.” While they approach it from a different angle, it’s the same message in that the individual no longer has the freedom to determine the degree of their own success. They now answer to a governmental throttle that dictates who does what and to what extent.

Gone are the days when you can dream and accomplish whatever you like. Now, you surrender all of those options and possibilities to a legislature that defines your needs and your wants. You no longer have the authority to choose, that choice is now being made for you all in the name of ensuring that no one gets ahead and thereby making someone else feel like they’re getting left behind.

For some, this is good news. They’ve squandered the opportunities they’ve been given and want to blame a “system” for the situation they’re in. What better way to advance themselves without having to take responsibility for their actions?

But it’s a toxic fume they’re inhaling because it’s capitalism that provides the best way to elevate one’s self beyond the restrictions of poverty and this is demonstrated, not only in our own society but throughout the world. And not only do you see this evidenced in India and China, but you also see it in the way mere financial aid has accomplished virtually nothing. Poverty is best eliminated in the context of sustained economic growth as opposed to perpetual contributions that rarely translate to anything beyond a temporary respite as opposed to a permanent fix.

Still, AOC, and those who think like her, continue to preach the doctrine of socialism. Even the idea of a Universal Basic Income is being entertained by some as way to “address” the problem of economic disparity and those who seem forever destined to remain in the grip of poverty and want.

Again…

“Why…?

Why are these people in the situation they’re in? Rather than limit one’s assessment of their situation to their bank account and the contents of their refrigerator, should a sensible analysis of their predicament not include the decisions they’ve made and let that determine the extent to which they’re assisted?

If capitalism has been the single most effective way to eliminate poverty in our country and throughout the world, then should it not be a philosophical starting point for the way we address the poor in this country.

I would say, “Yes.”

And I would say that you begin the whole process of determining a person’s need for assistance by asking them why they aren’t employed, why were they fired, why they didn’t take advantage of the programs they had access to?

Why?

Bruce Gust is nine year veteran of the USMC. Upon graduation from High School, his father was incarcerated for tax evasion. There was no money for college. However, he was able to earn a Bachelor’s Degree in Business Administration by attending night school, taking one or two courses at a time during his enlistment. After his discharge, he made his living as a professional musician with his career culminating in a record deal that gave him the opportunity to hear his efforts played on the radio across the country. After coming off the road, however, he was compelled to reinvent himself in a way that would allow him the means to support his new bride and growing family. He did so by teaching himself how to build web applications. 

His story is not especially glamorous, but it’s evidence that this country is not antagonistic to those who lack the means to afford a college education or to successfully evolve from a professional standpoint when circumstances make it necessary to do so. It’s because of his own experiences combined with his knowledge of American history that he’s determined to believe that you don’t evaluate a system according to the way it’s abused, anymore than you assume a person is a victim of circumstances without first considering the path that has forged by their own decisions. 

Flaming Arrows of Death

4F_flaming_arrowsJoy Behar, Bill Maher and Kathy Griffin are some of the comics that come to mind that will say and / or do some truly heinous things when it comes to the topic of President Trump and those who support him. What makes it reprehensible is the way they will sometimes assert the idea that, “…they’re only joking.”

It’s a cheap way to avoid having to take any responsibility for the things that you say. Still, it can be very effective when your audience tends to be like minded.

Even at the Tony awards when Robert Dinero got on the mike and said, “F… Trump.” He got a standing ovation…

In the end, they’re performers, right? To what extent should we take them seriously? Or, how should we respond when they do step over the line and then defend themselves by suggesting they were “only joking?”

I came across this yesterday:

Like a maniac shooting flaming arrows of death is one who deceives their neighbor and says, “I was only joking!” (Prov 26:18-19)

That’s their response, but…

They’re not joking. They’re using their platform to advance a godless agenda that seeks to redefine our country according to a paradigm where the only Absolute they’re willing to acknowledge is the absolute of one’s self.

They use the mantra of “Everyone has the right to be happy” to suggest that everyone has the authority to define what is right and what is wrong.

They spit on the very thing that gives they the “freedom of speech” they’re so quick to assert when they’re being called out for saying something inflamatory by simultaneously saying the Constitution was written by a bunch of racists.

They make a point of evaluating a system by the way it’s abused, they condemn a man for exhibiting character flaws that are somehow completely excused and even applauded when they’re evident in their champions and while members of their political team are selling uranium to the Russians, they have the gall to be indignant when the very ones they are equipping with nuclear resources are supposedly tampering with political Facebook content.

Their rhetoric is a tangled ball of belligerent hypocricy, intentional immorality and a godless lack of personal responsibility.

They are maniacs shooting flaming arrows of death…

And they’re not fooling anybody except the ones that are standing up and applauding.

Unity at the Expense of Truth?

shamgarHere’s the quote:

“Beware of those who point out what everyone else is doing wrong rather than point people to Christ. We will never come into the unity of doctrine. We are called to the unity of the Faith. If they believe Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ, the Holy Son of the Most High God, then they are with us, not against us.”

This is coming from Lisa Bevere, who seems pretty solid and what she’s saying here is definitely on point in that she’s repeating what it says in Mark 9:40 and Titus 3:9  But there are some who might want to take her words  and twist them into an admonishment to never speak up in the face of something that is fundamentally wrong.

On The View there was a segment where the guest, Ann Coulter” was talking about illegal immigration. Raven, one of the regulars on the The View, responded by saying that she was taught that if you can’t say something nice, you shouldn’t say anything at all.” The problem with Raven’s rhetoric is that it prioritizes a person’s emotions over what is true and just. Your innocence is defined by your actions and not by your emotions. While the manner in which justice is administered can be debated, your guilt is not something that is adjusted according to your passion.

Here’s what I’m thinking…

Can you imagine what a guy’s life would be like if he attended a Bible study lead by Theodore Roosevelt, King David, Shamgar and Jackie Robinson?

There’s a lot of guys I could potentially choose from, but I went with these guys because of the way their lives leave no room for doubt as far as what it means to have convictions as opposed to opinions, number one. Number two, because they were all very familiar with the Truth of God and not just some edited facts about God. And finally, because they lived out the biblical definition of what it means to be a man.

You could debate all three of those reasons, I suppose, but it’s the last one that really resonates with me because I think the reason a lot of disputes and debates have the momentum and influence that they do is because the Substance of God’s Word has been replaced with one’s “perspective” on God’s Word.

That’s not the way a godly man thinks.

If you took Lisa’s quote and asked King David’s opinion, he would look at you like you’ve got monkeys flying out of your nose. Nathan would never have gotten in David’s grill if he was interested in unity at the expense of Truth (2 Sam 12). That’s not being judgmental or even divisive. That’s being wise.

If you took it to Teddy, consider the way he stood up to the political machinations of his day, the way in which be broke up the trusts and the monopolies. Combine that with the way in which evinced Scripture in his writings and even in the philosophical foundations upon which he based policy and you have yet another epic human being looking at you as though you’re out of your mind.

There’s not much about Shamgar in the book of Judges, but anyone who saved Israel in the context of a single round of combat that pitted him against 600 Philistines with an oxgoad would be all too familiar with the lame and bogus results of a lackadaisical approach to doctrine / discipline. Shamgar’s exploits are to be processed not only in the context of what it must’ve looked like to defeat 600 combatants (Jud 3:31) with a stick but also because there weren’t any swords in Israel at the time (Jud 5:8). That’s what happens when you insist that there are no enemies and no need to identify false doctrine.

And Jackie Robinson…He’s someone I’m just now becoming familiar with. There’s more to his story than what the movie “42” documents. His ability to maintain a calm demeanor in the face of outrageous racial slurs and even death threats was based on his faith and not just his desire to see the color barrier broken in Major League Baseball. A lot of those racial slurs were coming from people in the South who could quote the Scripture that describes how Christ died for humanity out of one corner of their mouth, while simultaneously insisting that certain ethnic groups didn’t qualify as human.

All of these guys reeked of excellence. They were physical, they were spiritual, they were professional – they were everything that you would aspire to in the context of authentic masculinity. And much of what drove them was an enthusiastic willingness to submit and subordinate themselves to the Absolute of God’s Wisdom, Power and Grace as documented in His Word. They didn’t look for loopholes that catered to the lesser version of themselves or compromises that maintained a “comfortable” environment at the expense of a healthy community.

And that’s the difference between reading God’s Word and studying it… It’s the difference between being a male and being a man…

And that’s the difference between living and existing.

Trash can ending…extended thirty second note combo between the toms and the kick…dramatic round of quarter note triplets on snare and… BAM!

Thank you! Good night!

Most of America…

IMG_2879WASHINGTON – You might assume a government shutdown that is about to set an unwelcome record and is being battled over funding for a border wall most Americans oppose just might leave President Donald Trump itching to make a deal.

You would be wrong.

That is the opening line of the front page article in USA Today on the 11th of January. The verbiage that got my attention was, “a border wall that most Americans oppose.” It’s a total of seven words, but in its own subtle way, it sets the tone for the rest of the article and, depending on your perspective, the debate as a whole.

Is the wall something that “most Americans oppose?”

No doubt, there are polls out there that reinforce USA Today’s statement, but…

In a recent CBS poll, 51% of Americans believe that the wall is a good idea.

Moreover, Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi recently took to the airwaves and accused Trump of misinformation, withholding the “critical services” that serve and protect the American people and withhold the paychecks of “800,000 innocent workers – many of them, veterans.”

At one point, Nancy Pelosi states that, “the women and children at the border are not a security threat, they are a humanitarian challenge.”  She goes on to say that this challenge has only been made worse by Trump’s, “cruel and counterproductive policies,” and that Trump is “holding the American people hostage.”

Schumer then jumps in and, more or less, accuses the President of lying by saying that Mexico would pay for his, “ineffective, unnecessary border wall.” He continues by saying that, “unable to convince the Congress or the American people to foot the bill, has shut down the government.” He stated that no President should govern my “temper tantrum,” and that throughout his administration, President Trump has “appealed to fear and not facts.”

The Senate Minority Leader elaborated by saying that people are about to miss a paycheck, families can’t get a mortgage to buy a new home, farmers and small businesses won’t get the loans they desperately need. “Most Presidents,” he said, “use the Oval Office for noble purposes. This President just used the backdrop of the Oval Office to manufacture a crisis, stoke fear and divert attention from the turmoil in his administration.”

Is he manufacturing a crisis?

In Trump’s address, he says:

“Everyday, we are encountering thousands of illegal immigrants trying to enter our country.”

Is that true?

Many of Trump’s critics will rush to criticize Trump by saying his numbers are inflated. For example, factcheck.org says, “In October and November, Border Patrol made 102,857 apprehensions at the Southwest border, according to data from Customs and Border Protection. That works out to roughly 1,700 apprehensions each day.” 

OK. That’s 51,001 in October and 51,856 in November. I guess that’s supposed to be encouraging…?

And those stats are referring to those who are being apprehended. They don’t include the mobs that are rushing the Mexico – California border every day.

Trump is not lying.

Here are a couple of things to keep in mind:

  • Number #1: If you ask the wrong questions, you inevitably arrive at all the wrong conclusions.
  • Number #2: Citing a fact is not the same thing as telling the truth

The question isn’t: “Why are families being separated at the border?” The question is, “Why did you choose to put your family at risk by coming here illegally?”

The question isn’t: “Why is Trump willing to shutdown the government over the border wall?” The question is, “Why are the Dems that supported the wall five years ago suddenly opposed to it?”

The fact that children of illegal immigrants are still not considered citizens as a result of their “green card” status doesn’t change the truth that they’re still allowed to vote.

The fact that illegal immigrants do pay some taxes doesn’t change the truth that they receive more benefits than what their tax dollars pay for to the point where illegals cost the US over 54 billion dollars a year.

It’s a problem, it’s a risk, Trump is not lying and the media is not helping.

“Most of America” is not opposed to the wall and while you might be able to find loaded polls and surveys that contradict that statement, again it goes back to asking the right questions and refusing to settle for judiciously selected facts that are intended to silence the truth.

Build the wall!

Post Script

You have to do a lot of digging in order to verify whether or not Mexico is going to pay for the wall as President Trump has repeatedly stated. Given the way in which the majority of the media outlets are determined to undermine and demonize the Command in Chief at every turn, you have to sift through pages of negative press in order to find something that even attempts to explain what the President meant.

Mexico is paying for the wall, but not in the context of them writing a check to the US Treasury. The bottom line is that they’re paying indirectly through the new Trade Deal that Canada, Mexico and the US recently signed (USMCA) as well as some other fees and fines that are outlined in an August of 2015 memo the Trump campaign crafted during his candidacy..

  • impound all remittance payments derived from illegal wages (money that is being sent home by illegal immigrants);
  • increase fees on all temporary visas issued to Mexican CEOs and diplomats (and if necessary cancel them);
  • increase fees on all border crossing cards – of which we issue about 1 million to Mexican nationals each year (a major source of visa overstays);
  • increase fees on all NAFTA worker visas from Mexico (another major source of overstays);
  • increase fees at ports of entry to the United States from Mexico (Tariffs and foreign aid cuts are also options)

These are all very do-able and while the naysayers are incessant in their criticisms and insults, the bottom line is that Trump is going forward and he will do what he said he will do and the more his detractors yell, cuss and scream, the easier they make it for the voters to choose substance over sensation in 2020.

Build the wall!

Fools, Fiends and Hypocrites

maxresdefaultA couple of quick observations about the current government shutdown and the dispute over the wall that Trump is insisting on in order to alleviate the inherent problems of illegal immigration.

  • Unlike a recent USA Today article that stated that stated that most Americans are against the wall, the fact is, the majority of America is in favor of a wall and that comes from a recent CBS poll . USA Today is lying. Either that, or they’re being very calculated in the way they structure their polls.
  • The wall is something that Trump promised as part of his campaign to become President. It represents .0998% of the total federal budget.
  • Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Shumer have asserted themselves in ways that are inconsistent with they way they’ve voted and communicated in the past as far as their SUPPORT for a wall. It’s ironic that Pelosi would refer to wall as immoral when only five years ago, she was praising it as “every piece of this legislation has had bipartisan support.”
  • Some have criticized Trump’s claim that Mexico would pay for the wall, implying that he’s either lying or ignorant. Fact is, Mexico will pay for the wall. They’re not going to be cutting us a check, but through different trade agreements and various penalties exacted according to the illegality of Mexican Visas and other such criteria. Click here to read more. Bear in mind, that should you google any information about this particular topic, you will have to sort through at least two pages of results that are damning the President as a liar. You have to dig in order to see anything that even remotely reveals a more comprehensive perspective.
  • 1 in 5 Federal Prisoners are illegal aliens, and illegals are rushing the fence that separates California and Mexico every day. According to Senator Barack Obama, “We simply cannot allow people to pour into the United States undetected, undocumented, unchecked and circumventing the line of people who are waiting patiently, diligently and lawfully to become immigrants into this country.” It it is a problem. Legally, ethically, financially and from a security standpoint, the fact that you’re here illegally demonstrates a willingness flaunt the law which, by definition, categorizes you as a criminal. And as far as families being separated, that’s not the doing of the Trump or a cruel side affect of a system that needs to be fixed, that’s a predicament that you have put yourself in because you chose to come here illegally.
  • Finally, Pelosi demonstrates a bizarre perspective on her station and her platform by attempting to reschedule his State of the Union address. Citing previous presidents and political paradigms, she uses that to suggest that, “…we work together to determine another suitable date after government has re-opened for this address or for you to consider delivering your State of the Union address in writing to the Congress on January 29th.”

Note, she says, “in writing.” She’s basically saying that he will not be allowed to address Congress in person. Rather, he will submit his speech as a piece of paper to be read by someone else.

Madame Speaker…just who do you think you are, anyway?

She blames the President completely for the shutdown. He’s attempted to negotiate, but she has refused – most likely because she knows that he’s not going to budge. Her “suggesting” that he submit his speech in writing and that it’s postponed until the shutdown that she holds him responsible for is resolved, is belligerent, disrespectful and completely nonsensical given the fact that she’s the one who stands in the way of what most America has voiced their support for.

Pause for a moment and consider the hypocrisy of Pelosi’s stance. While she bemoans the people who are without a paycheck because of the shutdown, she’s taking off to Europe for a “public relations” tour instead of remaining in Washington to work towards a solution.

I’m convinced the history will look back on this time and see Pelosi as toxic, Trump as strong and the American populace as a group of people that are slowly yet surely seeing the champions of the Democrat party for who and what they are: Fools, Fiends and Hypocrites that can be subtle in the way their true identity is perceived only because of the media that works in concert with their agenda.

2018 Midterm Election Summary in a Little Over 300 Words

MIDTERM+ELECTIONS+MGNIt’s disappointing that the Dems were able to gain control over the House. Their resolve to destroy President Trump will no doubt surface in the way they oppose border security, tax cuts and anything else he would do in an effort to live up to his campaign promises.

However…

There’s only been five times in the last 105 years that an incumbent President has won seats in the Senate. For President Trump, that is incredibly significant given the way the Democrat party was certain they would be able to overwhelm his agenda with their “blue wave.”

The Senate controls Supreme Court nominations and despite the fact that the Democrat-controlled House will most likely introduce articles of impeachment for Trump, it would have to be approved by the Senate and the chances of that happening are slim.

It’s significant, too, that, with the exception of West Virginia, every Democrat incumbent in battleground states that opposed Kavanaugh, lost to their Republican opponent. Recently, an FBI report was published that found Kavanaugh innocent of the accusations made by Ford. The thing about that is, it doesn’t make a real difference, does it? The only thing that matters is the accusation. That fact that it’s “out there,” is a permanent stain on the man’s character. The fact that the FBI found him innocent isn’t relevant. From the standpoint of the Dems who were determined to resist Trump – mission accomplished. But, it would appear, that some paid for their participation in this despicable smear campaign by having to give up their seat in the Senate.

Frankly, I find that encouraging.

We live in interesting times. Make a point of maintaining your best “Issachar” on and continue to pray intelligently (1 Chron 12:32; Psalm 2:1)! Trump did well, given the opposition of the Democrat party and the incessant demonizing at the hands of the media. Yes, the hill got a little steeper last night, but we’re still moving forward and that’s a good thing!

Practical Politics for Believers

bible_flagNot all Republicans are born again nor are all Democrats atheists.

But 69% of atheists identify themselves as Democrats. 44% see church as being detrimental to the nation.

The reason for this goes beyond the way policies and elections appear on the surface. Topics are used as tactics to slowly move the US to a place where the only Absolute that is acknowledged is the absolute of one’s self.

Believers are commanded to pray for those in positions of authority so that we can be godly and holy (1 Tim 2:2). But how do you pray effectively if you don’t know who to pray for or what decisions are being made? You have to become like those who are described like the men of Issachar described in 1 Chronicles 12:32 as guys who understood the times and knew what Israel should do.

It’s not uncommon for Christian commentators to advocate a political stance that’s more or less neutral – justifying the lack of any real political savvy on the idea that party affiliations represent a potential compromise in one’s faith. This resonates as both spiritual and logical given the way many of the characters in politics are revealed as vulgar and even immoral. This is where you have to be discerning.

The quality of the Constitution isn’t gauged according to the character of the men that wrote it, rather it is evaluated according to the substance of the document itself. In a similar vein, the candidate that you vote for is determined by the policies they champion as well as the moral example that they set. Character is crucial if for no other reason than it influences one’s perspective on the issues being addressed. But you have to look at both and move forward from there (Ecc 7:16-18).

Today’s political landscape is an overwhelming din of negative voices coming from a journalistic community that are primarily Liberal in the way it thinks and votes. Thankfully, they are not the ones who define the Electoral College. It is the citizens of this country that determine both the legislative and, to some extent, the spiritual direction of this country in light or the way some legislators use their authority to undercut the freedom of religion in the way it applies to Christians.

Prayer is both imperative and mandatory. But to be truly obedient, it must be an informed prayer and it has to be accompanied by action. Anything less is neither appropriate nor healthy. Know what you believe and why. Not just in the context of your relationship with Christ, but also in the way you cast your vote and voice your opinion.