by Al Benson Jr.
I've just been reading today, 10/22/18 how the so-called "immigrant caravan" heading this way from Central America has brushed past the token resistance given it by Mexico (as was the real intention) and is again headed for our southern border.
Supposedly the number of "immigrants" has swelled to somewhere between 10,000 and 15,000 and guess when they are slated to arrive? You get 3 guesses and the first two don't count. They will probably wash up against our southern border right about in time for the mid-term elections--the wildest of coincidences I'm sure. It I had a suspicious mind, I'd think this was timed to make Trump look bad. But, seeing that I am such a trusting soul, I wouldn't dream of accusing the George Soros-funded groups that have organized this of such a devious and low-down agenda. After all, everyone knows that the radical, socialist Demoncrats and other Soros appendages are all pure as the driven snow.
It's interesting how the radical Left and its media prostitutes have characterized all these people as "immigrants" and there are probably some genuine would-be immigrants among them. However, over all, they are not immigrants; they are invaders.
An article on the American Thinker website for July 10th of this year, by Shari Goodman, takes the trouble to spell out the difference between the two groups. Ms. Goodman noted, quite accurately, that "The Democratic Party with its shills in the mainstream media, has misleadingly blurred the lines between the definition of 'immigrant' and 'invader.' An immigrant is an alien who has been granted the right to permanently reside in the United States by U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. An 'invader,' as defined by Merriam Webster, is one who 'trespasses, encroaches, and infringes upon another's property."
These people who are on their way up here, should they manage to get across the border, will be trespassing and encroaching. THEY ARE INVADERS--NOT IMMIGRANTS!
President Trump is supposed to be calling up the Army to deal with this. I hope he does that and does not back down because these people mean to get in here and take whatever they can get away with and if they manage to infringe upon our liberties, well then, that's part of the plan.
This is all part of the Democratic plan to destabilize the country. Ms. Goodman comments on the Democratic Party leadership. She labels Tom Perez a Marxist and Keith Ellison a Muslim Brotherhood operative. Both have been campaigning for open borders along with the rest of the Democratic horde. These people want a foreign invasion to obliterate our culture and its high time we woke up to what these people are doing to us. They are thieves of our culture and heritage and we better learn that and start to resist. Our grandchildren won't thank us for sitting idly by and doing nothing.
Update: According to a Fox News report noted on InfoWars.com about 80% of those in the "Migrant" caravan Are men under the age of 35. Despite the main stream media narrative that the caravan is comprised of "hundreds of mostly women and children" local reporting from exican newspaper El Universal found that report grossly misleading. In fact 80% of the caravan are military age men, Fox News reported. So folks, we are being invaded and we are being lied to about it. Does that really surprise anyone. Let's face it--the mainstream media in this country is not on the side of real Americans--it is on the side of the radical Leftists and those who fund their activities. And now they are talking about yet another caravan that is on its way to McAllen, Texas.
Get used to the idea folks--We are in the process of being invaded!!! What's done about it will determine if we still have a country when it is all over!
Showing posts with label Political Correctness. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Political Correctness. Show all posts
Monday, October 22, 2018
Friday, August 04, 2017
A Bottle of Gasoline!
A Bottle of Gasoline!
(with a "wick")
Guess What?
Democrats
are SERVING Trump a "Meuller-Toff-Cocktail."
You mean
you don't believe it! ? ! ? ! Well, it
fits the Russian collusion FACTor.
Or, is it more of a F_ _ _ -Him?
With all
of the Russian "Cow Dung" being throw around in the SWAMP, what else
could you "fairly" call it?
Believe
me, folks, the number of individuals having met their demise via trails traced
back to the Clinton "cartel" machine, do you have any reason to think
"The Donald" isn't intended for the same route?
…seems
clear to me!
With all
the "crap" that the Clintons have done "to destroy"
civility, and THEY (i.e. their vile democratic machine) have
indicted our duly-elected and legitimate
U.S. President. And, undoubtedly, The Republican
Party, as a whole, is "a party to" the whole issue,
allowing it to go on, as far as it has, already.
Where are the opponents of this charade? Sitting on their hands? Or, are they just as
much in collusion, in the SWAMP?
It seems
the latter is a fact - purposely ignored by the whole damn bunch of
"sit-on-their-hands, weak-kneed" and "ball-less
bastards"…just like the former president.
NO MORE EXCUSES! ALL Republicans are
allowing this "un-called-for" & REAL Collusion to take place!!
Sammy Schwartz, esq.
Friday, June 10, 2016
Southern Baptist Convention To Vote Next Week On Resolution To Condemn Confederate Battle Flag
by Al Benson Jr.
That was the headline on the article that a friend sent me just this morning (June 10th). The Southern Baptist Convention is the second largest denomination in the country, right behind the Roman Catholics.
My friend, who is Baptist, is urging all those that are Southern Baptists to contact their ministers and tell them to oppose this resolution. My friend stated that this resolution is: "straight from the NAACP handbook." I don't doubt him for a minute. He has had past experience dealing with the NAACP and realizes that trying to talk reasonably with them is an exercise in futility. They have a cultural Marxist agenda and being reasonable with those whose culture they are trying to destroy is not part of that agenda.
This resolution to have the Southern Baptists condemn the Confederate battle flag has been couched in terminology that is supposed to promote "inclusiveness and healing." Anyone who has read any of these "resolutions" before knows what a farce that is and that racial healing is the absolute last thing all of this promotes--and it was never intended to. That's basically cultural Marxist language for the church to cave in and give into the desires of a small minority of dedicated leftists. This has nothing whatever to do with the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and with what the church is supposed to be doing.
This sort of thing has been done before in other smaller denominations where leftist radicals try to get churches to condemn a part of their heritage and to completely omit the use of words like "Confederation" because they are deemed too "hurtful" to offended parties. Once the flags or offending terms are done away with the "offended" parties move on to other churches to promote the same cultural Marxist shell game somewhere else. Sadly, most Christians never seem to get it!
So I pray that our Baptist brethren will make a point of contacting their ministers now and tell them to oppose this--as the meeting where this is to be done will be held on June 14-15. Let's hope that enough people will do this that it will make a difference.
That was the headline on the article that a friend sent me just this morning (June 10th). The Southern Baptist Convention is the second largest denomination in the country, right behind the Roman Catholics.
My friend, who is Baptist, is urging all those that are Southern Baptists to contact their ministers and tell them to oppose this resolution. My friend stated that this resolution is: "straight from the NAACP handbook." I don't doubt him for a minute. He has had past experience dealing with the NAACP and realizes that trying to talk reasonably with them is an exercise in futility. They have a cultural Marxist agenda and being reasonable with those whose culture they are trying to destroy is not part of that agenda.
This resolution to have the Southern Baptists condemn the Confederate battle flag has been couched in terminology that is supposed to promote "inclusiveness and healing." Anyone who has read any of these "resolutions" before knows what a farce that is and that racial healing is the absolute last thing all of this promotes--and it was never intended to. That's basically cultural Marxist language for the church to cave in and give into the desires of a small minority of dedicated leftists. This has nothing whatever to do with the teachings of the Lord Jesus Christ and with what the church is supposed to be doing.
This sort of thing has been done before in other smaller denominations where leftist radicals try to get churches to condemn a part of their heritage and to completely omit the use of words like "Confederation" because they are deemed too "hurtful" to offended parties. Once the flags or offending terms are done away with the "offended" parties move on to other churches to promote the same cultural Marxist shell game somewhere else. Sadly, most Christians never seem to get it!
So I pray that our Baptist brethren will make a point of contacting their ministers now and tell them to oppose this--as the meeting where this is to be done will be held on June 14-15. Let's hope that enough people will do this that it will make a difference.
Tuesday, August 11, 2015
Murdering Babies
by Al Benson Jr.
They call it "pro-choice," at least those over on the political and theological left do. In plain English, "pro-choice" means that they want you to have the "freedom" to decide whether to murder your unborn baby or not. The people that push this don't want you to have any other freedoms, definitely no First or Second or Tenth Amendment freedoms, but they do want you to feel free to kill your unborn baby if he or she happens to be inconvenient.
They don't want you to have the freedom to choose your own health care program, or to decide where your kids will attend school, or to decide to fly a flag in your yard if it "offends" some minority group. Those are freedoms you must be denied for the good of "society" but they do want to make sure you are free to kill your unborn child--and they have organizations out there that are more than happy to assist you in baby murder--particularly if they get to keep the baby parts for profitable resale. I know this is blunt but that's probably the best way to say it. It ain't pretty.
So maybe, in light of this vaunted "freedom" the leftists in Washington and elsewhere want you to be able to exercise we ought to ask a few blunt questions about the "freedom" to kill your unborn kids.
Pastor Steve Wilkins of Auburn Ave. Presbyterian Church in Monroe, Louisiana has asked, and answered, a few very direct questions about unborn children and whether parents have the "right" to do away with them if they are an inconvenience.
He asks, "When does life begin?" And he answers "At conception (Job 3:3; Psalm 139:13)...Even when David was 'unformed' he existed as an individual in relation to God (Psalm 139:15-16). Children are gifts of God in the fullest sense of the word."
He then askes "Is abortion murder?" and answers "Yes. The only legitimate reasons for the intentional taking of human life are capital punishment and self-defense (either personal or in legitimate warfare). All other taking of human life is murder. Thus the intentional killing of the unborn is murder." And he askes "Aren't there some circumstances in which abortion is justified?" He answers "No." He then askes "What if the mother's life is endangered?" His answer "In these situations the doctor's job is to seek to preserve the lives of both mother and child and not to decide who should die." Pastor Wilkins admits this is not always easy, but the doctor should try.
And then comes the question I have seen presented on numerous occassions. "What if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest?" He answers "The innocent parties in the case of rape or incest are the mother and the baby. Only the rapist has done something that is worthy of death. Conception is never an accident (Psalm 127:3).
Pastor Wilkins notes that we must always be ready to reply to the "gainsayers" who will continually raise questions with the hope of making a true biblical perspective on murdering babies seem foolish. These people will often say "You are being judgmental to condemn women who feel they ought to choose abortion." And his reply: "No. God is the one who says it is murder, not us. God alone is the Judge."
Then they will say "Don't you think a woman has a right to control her own body?" Again, he answers "No. Her body is not her own but given to her by God and she has a responsibility to govern it according to God's Word. And besides, the body of the baby is a separate body." There's that "R" word--responsibility--that thing most folks want to run from.
Then someone will pipe up and say "Aren't you concerned about the problem of unwanted children?" To which Pastor Wilkins answers "Yes. But if a woman is not married and doesn't want children, she should abstain from sexual intercourse..." Now there's a blockbuster for this day and age, when we are faced with a culture that has been conditioned to want the fun and games but no responsibility for playing. This so-called "free" culture doesn't want to hear all that. Easier to believe the politicians from the "District of Corruption."
And then there is that hackneyed old leftist cliche "Aren't you concerned about over-population?" How many times have I heard that one tossed out there in the past three decades? I can't count them. But Pastor Wilkins has an answer for that one, too. He says, again, "No God says that a growing population is a great blessing to a people. The world is not over-populated but under-populated. Our calling is not to prevent births but to be fruitful and multiply." The "over-population" bugaboo has been around for a long time. Back in 1969 R. J. Rushdoony wrote a little book called The Myth of Over Population. Even back then astute clergymen like him realized that over-population was a myth.
And in a final note, Pastor Wilkins says: "We must repent of being part of a nation that has sanctioned the murder of unborn children. We have become a nation of self-righteous, hypocritical barbarians. God will not allow such hypocrisy to go unpunished. But more than all else, we must repent of being part of a Church that has stood by in guilty silence..." And I must admit, I often wonder how much the 501 C3 status of churches has to do with that situation. Maybe that's something else we need to repent of.
They call it "pro-choice," at least those over on the political and theological left do. In plain English, "pro-choice" means that they want you to have the "freedom" to decide whether to murder your unborn baby or not. The people that push this don't want you to have any other freedoms, definitely no First or Second or Tenth Amendment freedoms, but they do want you to feel free to kill your unborn baby if he or she happens to be inconvenient.
They don't want you to have the freedom to choose your own health care program, or to decide where your kids will attend school, or to decide to fly a flag in your yard if it "offends" some minority group. Those are freedoms you must be denied for the good of "society" but they do want to make sure you are free to kill your unborn child--and they have organizations out there that are more than happy to assist you in baby murder--particularly if they get to keep the baby parts for profitable resale. I know this is blunt but that's probably the best way to say it. It ain't pretty.
So maybe, in light of this vaunted "freedom" the leftists in Washington and elsewhere want you to be able to exercise we ought to ask a few blunt questions about the "freedom" to kill your unborn kids.
Pastor Steve Wilkins of Auburn Ave. Presbyterian Church in Monroe, Louisiana has asked, and answered, a few very direct questions about unborn children and whether parents have the "right" to do away with them if they are an inconvenience.
He asks, "When does life begin?" And he answers "At conception (Job 3:3; Psalm 139:13)...Even when David was 'unformed' he existed as an individual in relation to God (Psalm 139:15-16). Children are gifts of God in the fullest sense of the word."
He then askes "Is abortion murder?" and answers "Yes. The only legitimate reasons for the intentional taking of human life are capital punishment and self-defense (either personal or in legitimate warfare). All other taking of human life is murder. Thus the intentional killing of the unborn is murder." And he askes "Aren't there some circumstances in which abortion is justified?" He answers "No." He then askes "What if the mother's life is endangered?" His answer "In these situations the doctor's job is to seek to preserve the lives of both mother and child and not to decide who should die." Pastor Wilkins admits this is not always easy, but the doctor should try.
And then comes the question I have seen presented on numerous occassions. "What if the pregnancy is the result of rape or incest?" He answers "The innocent parties in the case of rape or incest are the mother and the baby. Only the rapist has done something that is worthy of death. Conception is never an accident (Psalm 127:3).
Pastor Wilkins notes that we must always be ready to reply to the "gainsayers" who will continually raise questions with the hope of making a true biblical perspective on murdering babies seem foolish. These people will often say "You are being judgmental to condemn women who feel they ought to choose abortion." And his reply: "No. God is the one who says it is murder, not us. God alone is the Judge."
Then they will say "Don't you think a woman has a right to control her own body?" Again, he answers "No. Her body is not her own but given to her by God and she has a responsibility to govern it according to God's Word. And besides, the body of the baby is a separate body." There's that "R" word--responsibility--that thing most folks want to run from.
Then someone will pipe up and say "Aren't you concerned about the problem of unwanted children?" To which Pastor Wilkins answers "Yes. But if a woman is not married and doesn't want children, she should abstain from sexual intercourse..." Now there's a blockbuster for this day and age, when we are faced with a culture that has been conditioned to want the fun and games but no responsibility for playing. This so-called "free" culture doesn't want to hear all that. Easier to believe the politicians from the "District of Corruption."
And then there is that hackneyed old leftist cliche "Aren't you concerned about over-population?" How many times have I heard that one tossed out there in the past three decades? I can't count them. But Pastor Wilkins has an answer for that one, too. He says, again, "No God says that a growing population is a great blessing to a people. The world is not over-populated but under-populated. Our calling is not to prevent births but to be fruitful and multiply." The "over-population" bugaboo has been around for a long time. Back in 1969 R. J. Rushdoony wrote a little book called The Myth of Over Population. Even back then astute clergymen like him realized that over-population was a myth.
And in a final note, Pastor Wilkins says: "We must repent of being part of a nation that has sanctioned the murder of unborn children. We have become a nation of self-righteous, hypocritical barbarians. God will not allow such hypocrisy to go unpunished. But more than all else, we must repent of being part of a Church that has stood by in guilty silence..." And I must admit, I often wonder how much the 501 C3 status of churches has to do with that situation. Maybe that's something else we need to repent of.
Friday, April 10, 2015
"Freedom" in the U.S.? Don't Make Me Laugh!
by Al Benson Jr.
After the 9/11 debacle, (whoever was responsible for that) President Bush got on tv and said that the terrorists that did it hated us because of our freedoms. At that point my first thought was "what hogwash." And as the Bush administration went along after 9/11 they made more than sure that American citizens would never again be burdened with too much freedom and to do that they gave us the Patriot Act. It has gone downhill from there.
By the time our current commissar came along to inhabit the White (Red) House he had promised us that he would fundamentally "transform" the United States and would have the most "transparent" administration in history. This line didn't even deserve to be rated as hogwash--it was even below hogwash. I probably couldn't come up with a term for it that wouldn't get me shut down so I will leave it to your imaginations. Suffice it to say that I, long ago, had given up believing the political fertilizer slingers that assured us we were living in a "free country." I knew they were lying and so did they--but they did it with such a straight face that most folks, less suspicious than me, bought into it. The "land of the free and the home of the brave" has been transformed into the "land of the freeloader and the home of the brain-dead." And it hasn't been accidental. It's part of the agenda.
I've been waiting for the Christian Church to wake up and realize what has happened. Mostly, it ain't happening. Most Christians I've come across don't know and they don't want to know. After all, if you can't trust your government then who can you trust? That's their rationale. Anyone who tries to tell them, for their own good, what's going on is automatically a "conspiracy theorist" or a "right wing nut." They haven't got time to be bothered trying to defend their liberties so they can pass them along to their children and grandchildren. That's not important. Half of them, or more, feel that they will be "raptured" out of here before it gets real sticky and so they don't have to be bothered doing anything about our problems. The rest feel so strongly that the Lord is in control (which He is) that they don't have to be bothered doing anything to combat evil in the world--the Lord will take care of all that. They are just along for the spiritual ride. The Church has been lulled to sleep in the last 150 years, due to apostasy and planned neutralization. It once stood for something--now it falls for everything.
Just today I read an article by John Whitehead, from his web site entitled Kick Open the Doorway to Liberty: What Are We Waiting For? It's in the commentary section of the Rutherford Institute web site.
Mr. Whitehead seems to feel the same frustration that I do about where the country is going and about the almost total lack of concern of most people.
Mr. Whitehead noted that: "Everything this nation once stood for is being turned on its head. Free speech, religious expression, privacy, due process, bodily integrity, the sanctity of human life, the sovereignty of the family...the right to self defense, protection against police abuses...private property, human rights--the very ideals that once made this nation great--have become casualties of a politically correct, misguided, materialistic, amoral, militaristic culture." Again, this is NOT by accident. It's not just "happening." And he also says: "Why should we Americans have to put up with the government listening in on our phone calls, spying on our emails, subjecting us to roadside strip searches, and generally holding our freedoms hostage in exchange for some phantom promises of security?" Good question. But let's be realistic here. The promises of "security" (prisons are secure, too) are nothing more than a way to get Americans to surrender their God-given liberties without a fight. It's a lot less bloody if the government can convince people that it is "protecting" them instead of taking over their lives to fulfill the socialist agenda of the One World Government crowd in Washington and New York.
And if you think this isn't really happening, that it's not really that bad, take a look at a National Review article, (www.nationalreview.com) by Alec Torres for January 1, 2014. Mr. Torres wrote: "When President Obama took office in 2009, the U.S. was ranked the sixth freest economy. It is the only country in the world to have recorded a loss of economic freedom each of the past seven years. Since 2006, the U.S. has 'suffered a dramatic decline of almost six points, with particularly large losses in property rights, freedom from corruption, and control of government spending,' according to the report. 'Substantial expansion in the size and scope of government, including through new and costly regulations in areas like finance and health care, has contributed significantly to the erosion of U.S. economic freedom. The growth of government has been accompanied by increasing cronyism that has undermined the rule of law and perceptions of fairness."
Now I don't always agree with all the National Review says, but in this case, Mr. Torres has nailed it pretty accurately. Your freedom and liberty and economic status had seriously deteriorated since the advent of the current Marxist regime with its promises of "transparency."
Although there are lots of folks who don't like what they see happening and are concerned by what has more and more become a rogue administration, their main response has been to gripe a little and that's it. Christians, in the main, don't have anymore of a clue than anyone else, and sad to say, lots of them don't want one. For them to realize what's going on would mean that they would have to, as Christians, take some responsibility to take a stand against the evil they see around them--and that's just too much trouble nowadays. Lots easier to tune in the upcoming "Reality" show and forget about the rest. Just "let George (or Barack) take care of it--which is just what they've done and now they don't like the results.
Mr. Whitehead, at the conclusion of his article asks: "Where are the Sons of Liberty, the Committees of Correspondence and the insistently courageous city councils now, when they are crucially needed to bring back the Bill of Rights that protect every American against government tyranny worse than King George III's? Where are the citizens demanding that these doorways to liberty be opened? What are we waiting for?"
Well, Mr. Whitehead, what they are waiting for is the "rapture" to take them out of all this so they won't have to do any of the things you mention here, or else they are waiting for the Lord to do it all so they don't have to get involved and get their hands dirty. Either way, what we've mostly got here, not totally, but mostly, is a do nothing church that just can't be bothered and that doesn't want to believe it's as bad as some have told them. This country will probably be judged for their attitude, and that's not a pleasant thought.
After the 9/11 debacle, (whoever was responsible for that) President Bush got on tv and said that the terrorists that did it hated us because of our freedoms. At that point my first thought was "what hogwash." And as the Bush administration went along after 9/11 they made more than sure that American citizens would never again be burdened with too much freedom and to do that they gave us the Patriot Act. It has gone downhill from there.
By the time our current commissar came along to inhabit the White (Red) House he had promised us that he would fundamentally "transform" the United States and would have the most "transparent" administration in history. This line didn't even deserve to be rated as hogwash--it was even below hogwash. I probably couldn't come up with a term for it that wouldn't get me shut down so I will leave it to your imaginations. Suffice it to say that I, long ago, had given up believing the political fertilizer slingers that assured us we were living in a "free country." I knew they were lying and so did they--but they did it with such a straight face that most folks, less suspicious than me, bought into it. The "land of the free and the home of the brave" has been transformed into the "land of the freeloader and the home of the brain-dead." And it hasn't been accidental. It's part of the agenda.
I've been waiting for the Christian Church to wake up and realize what has happened. Mostly, it ain't happening. Most Christians I've come across don't know and they don't want to know. After all, if you can't trust your government then who can you trust? That's their rationale. Anyone who tries to tell them, for their own good, what's going on is automatically a "conspiracy theorist" or a "right wing nut." They haven't got time to be bothered trying to defend their liberties so they can pass them along to their children and grandchildren. That's not important. Half of them, or more, feel that they will be "raptured" out of here before it gets real sticky and so they don't have to be bothered doing anything about our problems. The rest feel so strongly that the Lord is in control (which He is) that they don't have to be bothered doing anything to combat evil in the world--the Lord will take care of all that. They are just along for the spiritual ride. The Church has been lulled to sleep in the last 150 years, due to apostasy and planned neutralization. It once stood for something--now it falls for everything.
Just today I read an article by John Whitehead, from his web site entitled Kick Open the Doorway to Liberty: What Are We Waiting For? It's in the commentary section of the Rutherford Institute web site.
Mr. Whitehead seems to feel the same frustration that I do about where the country is going and about the almost total lack of concern of most people.
Mr. Whitehead noted that: "Everything this nation once stood for is being turned on its head. Free speech, religious expression, privacy, due process, bodily integrity, the sanctity of human life, the sovereignty of the family...the right to self defense, protection against police abuses...private property, human rights--the very ideals that once made this nation great--have become casualties of a politically correct, misguided, materialistic, amoral, militaristic culture." Again, this is NOT by accident. It's not just "happening." And he also says: "Why should we Americans have to put up with the government listening in on our phone calls, spying on our emails, subjecting us to roadside strip searches, and generally holding our freedoms hostage in exchange for some phantom promises of security?" Good question. But let's be realistic here. The promises of "security" (prisons are secure, too) are nothing more than a way to get Americans to surrender their God-given liberties without a fight. It's a lot less bloody if the government can convince people that it is "protecting" them instead of taking over their lives to fulfill the socialist agenda of the One World Government crowd in Washington and New York.
And if you think this isn't really happening, that it's not really that bad, take a look at a National Review article, (www.nationalreview.com) by Alec Torres for January 1, 2014. Mr. Torres wrote: "When President Obama took office in 2009, the U.S. was ranked the sixth freest economy. It is the only country in the world to have recorded a loss of economic freedom each of the past seven years. Since 2006, the U.S. has 'suffered a dramatic decline of almost six points, with particularly large losses in property rights, freedom from corruption, and control of government spending,' according to the report. 'Substantial expansion in the size and scope of government, including through new and costly regulations in areas like finance and health care, has contributed significantly to the erosion of U.S. economic freedom. The growth of government has been accompanied by increasing cronyism that has undermined the rule of law and perceptions of fairness."
Now I don't always agree with all the National Review says, but in this case, Mr. Torres has nailed it pretty accurately. Your freedom and liberty and economic status had seriously deteriorated since the advent of the current Marxist regime with its promises of "transparency."
Although there are lots of folks who don't like what they see happening and are concerned by what has more and more become a rogue administration, their main response has been to gripe a little and that's it. Christians, in the main, don't have anymore of a clue than anyone else, and sad to say, lots of them don't want one. For them to realize what's going on would mean that they would have to, as Christians, take some responsibility to take a stand against the evil they see around them--and that's just too much trouble nowadays. Lots easier to tune in the upcoming "Reality" show and forget about the rest. Just "let George (or Barack) take care of it--which is just what they've done and now they don't like the results.
Mr. Whitehead, at the conclusion of his article asks: "Where are the Sons of Liberty, the Committees of Correspondence and the insistently courageous city councils now, when they are crucially needed to bring back the Bill of Rights that protect every American against government tyranny worse than King George III's? Where are the citizens demanding that these doorways to liberty be opened? What are we waiting for?"
Well, Mr. Whitehead, what they are waiting for is the "rapture" to take them out of all this so they won't have to do any of the things you mention here, or else they are waiting for the Lord to do it all so they don't have to get involved and get their hands dirty. Either way, what we've mostly got here, not totally, but mostly, is a do nothing church that just can't be bothered and that doesn't want to believe it's as bad as some have told them. This country will probably be judged for their attitude, and that's not a pleasant thought.
Saturday, April 04, 2015
Where Is the Church Headed Now—And should we resist the trip?
By Al
Benson Jr.
Earlier
this week someone sent me an article from Relevant Magazine entitled: The Presbyterian Church Votes to Recognize
Same-Sex Marriage. The headline is slightly misleading because all
Presbyterians have not voted to endorse or accept same-sex (sodomite) marriage.
No doubt the “progressive Presbyterians” have accepted it, but us Neanderthals
in many Presbyterian churches have not, and will not, in accordance with God’s
Word, accept this.
Actually
the article is referring to the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) or PCUSA as most
of us call it. This denomination has
been drifting leftward by degrees for decades now and so such a move was not
totally unexpected. According to the Relevant article: “While the office of the
General Assembly is still awaiting official tallies, it appears that a majority
of the 171 presbyteries of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) have approved a
change to the current description of marriage in the PC (USA)’s Constitution.”
Unfortunately,
the liberal Presbyterians are not the only ones in the church that are pushing
this perversion. In another article on www.relevantmagazine.com the headline reads: Rob Bell: The Church Is ‘Moments Away’ From Accepting Gay Marriage. The
article went on to say: “He (Bell) went on to say the church was risking
irrelevance by holding off on an embrace of gay marriage. ‘I think the culture
is already there,’ he said. ‘And the church will continue to be even more
irrelevant when it quotes letters from 2,000 years ago as their best
defense…’.” Look at his last statement. Do you realize what he’s saying here?
He’s calling into doubt what the New Testament has to say about marriage because
it doesn’t seem “relevant” to him. Where does that put him in regard to the
authority of Scripture? If he can dismiss the truth of Scripture that easily
because it doesn’t conform to what the world believes, I would suggest that, in
the long run, maybe he is irrelevant.
In
another article on www.standupfortruth.com Rob Bell is noted as part of the Emergent
Church movement, which the article describes this way: “The Emergent Church
movement is a progressive Christian movement that attempts to reduce or
eliminate Christian doctrine in favor of experience and feelings. Most do not
believe man can know what is absolute truth, and believe God must be
experienced outside of traditional biblical doctrines.” This is just another
version of “if it feels good do it.” No doctrine, no absolute truth, just
experience and feeling. These people are the Transcendentalists of the 21st
century. Emerson and Thoreau would have loved them! The article notes some of
the leaders of this movement—among whom are Rob Bell and Rick Warren (“whom
many of these leaders point to as their inspiration for the Emergent
Movement.”) Does this help you to understand why Warren’s name was linked with
Obama’s during the 2008 presidential farce?
It would
seem that the arrogance and egotism of some of these apostates (and that’s what
they are) knows no ends. In a brief article on www.beginningandend.com the following was noted: “In a stunning sign
of the growing apostasy—the rise of the false church in Christianity that no
longer treats the Bible as its final authority, Reverend Oliver White of Grace
Community United Church, came on the
radio show of Fox News Host Sean Hannity to proclaim that Jesus Christ was
‘wrong’ on the issue of homosexuality
and gay marriage. White, speaking for Jesus Christ, said, with respect to the
issue of gay marriage no longer being a sin: ‘If Jesus were alive today, I
think he would be more inclined to say: you
know, I didn’t know it all’…” There’s a photo of Rev. White at the top of
this article holding what appears to be a big Bible—but then, with Rev. White’s
attitude toward Jesus, maybe it’s really an enlarged version of The Humanist Manifesto. Here’s a man who
thinks he knows more than Jesus Christ. Another 21st century
Transcendentalist! Who says Unitarianism, Transcendentalism, and all the other
unholy “isms” died in the 19th century? Some of them may have taken
a little breather, but they are back, alive and well today and their
practitioners are back, fooling another generation of “useful idiots” who have
never read their church history anymore than they have their American history
and so they continue to make grandiose pronouncement while not knowing upside
down from inside out.
You
have to wonder why more preachers don’t stand up and expose this stuff. Too
many have been bemused into a “all I’m called to do is to preach the gospel and
I don’t want to get involved in politics” stance. This absolves them, so they
think, from having to do anything about the abysmal spiritual condition of the
church in our day. If they don’t know anything about any of it then they can’t
deal with it, and so they continue on with a truncated version of John 3:16 and
never, and I mean never, get beyond that. Nothing against John 3:16—it’s
foundational, but if you never get past
the foundation then the house isn’t going to get built and you’ll live
in the cellar forever. That’s one problem I have with the Scofield Bible Notes.
They teach Christians to stay in the cellar because that’s all they will ever
be.
Another
problem for the cellar dwellers is the501c3 syndrome, which says that if any
church, anywhere, makes even the remotest political statement about anything,
then they will lose their tax exemption. Churches today are hide-bound by this
and scared stiff to say anything that might “offend” the ruling elite and cost
them their exemption. An article on www.hushmoney.org noted that “Churches were only
added to section 501c3 of the tax code in 1954. We can thank Senator Lyndon B.
Johnson for that. Johnson was no ally of
the church. As part of his political agenda,
Johnson had it in mind to silence the church and eliminate the significant
influence the church had always had on shaping ‘public policy’…For a 501c3
church to openly speak out, or organize in opposition to, anything the
government declares ‘legal’ even if it is immoral (e.g. abortion,
homosexuality, etc.) that church will jeopardize its tax exempt status. The
501c3 has had a ‘chilling effect’ upon the free speech rights of the church.”
The article noted that LBJ was a “shrewd and cunning politician who seemed to
well-appreciate how easily many of the clergy would sell out.”
Now
the IRS routinely warns churches during election years not to deal with where
candidates stand on any issues and so the threat is always there.
So
this seems to be where the church is headed—intimidated by the IRS, scared
stiff of losing their tax exemptions, inundated with false preachers who tell
us that sodomy and other related sins are okay and that we wont be “relevant”
unless we dump biblical teaching and embrace all the latest perversions. Thank
the Lord there are some churches that don’t buy into this bovine fertilizer,
but there are too many that do. The pastors that promote this rank apostasy are
leading their congregations astray and there doesn’t seem, in many cases, to be
enough spiritual discernment among the congregants to grasp this.
At the
risk of offending the current seekers of “relevance” I would go back and
advocate what the Scripture says in 2nd Corinthians 6:14-18 to
Christians in our day. If you are in a church where this kind of thing is
permitted or encouraged then separate yourself from that church and find one
that believes in and trusts the Holy Scriptures. Staying in apostate
congregations will do nothing more than make you “two-fold more the child of hell”
than you were before. I can understand wanting to help and love sinners, but
accepting their perversions as normal does not help them, in fact it may well
do them eternal harm.
Saturday, January 19, 2013
Political Correctness Gone Crazy
by Al Benson Jr.
I debated about what I should use for a title for this brief article, but then I thought, after all, I am talking about the public school system so the title fits.
Recently I read an article on http://politicaloutcast.com which talked about 6-year olds playing cops and robbers with each other during recess at school. These kids are in the first grade, yet the school has suspended them for playing cops and robbers! Can you believe it? Well, again, it's a public school so, yes, you can. The article noted: "In the assistant principal's letter to the student's parents, she wrote that their son 'threatened to shoot another student." Come on folks, this is two 6-year olds playing cops and robbers. Of course they pretend to shoot one another. I shudder to think what could have happened if they had been playing cowboys and Indians. That would have been a racial problem of international importance. They might have had to call a representative from the United Nations in to counsel the white kid for perceived hostility toward someone of an indigenous race.
However, the parents of the youngster were not amused. They ended up getting a lawyer to appeal the decision of the school. The decision was appealed and the school ended up overturning the student's suspension, which was so idiotic it never should have happened in the first place. I can remember, as a kid, we often played cops and robbers or cowboys and Indians at school--sometimes whole bunches of us on one side or the other. Just think, had I grown up in more politically correct days, half my school could have been suspended for the unconscionable "sin" of pointing our fingers at each other and pretending they were guns. And for all the pretend shooting we did of one another, to my knowledge none of the kids I went to school with turned out to be cold-blooded killers. We were, for the most part, pretty normal kids who, when we grew up, got on with out lives and the pretend carnage we committed as 6-year olds or 9-year olds never really affected us all that much.
But in this enlightened day and age the sin of pointing your finger and someone and saying "bang" is second only to the sin of "white racism" which according to some government educrats, white kids can display by eating peanut butter sandwiches in front of kids from Somalia.
Some of this foolishness is part of the reason we never sent our kids to public schools anyplace we ever lived and why we encourage others to eschew those supposed institutions of "learning."
Public schooling has a very suspicious and checkered history going right back to its Unitarian/socialist inspired origins and things have only gotten worse since those dubious beginnings. Kids don't learn to read; they don't learn accurate history, and the literature they are given is horrendous and the older they get the worse it all gets. Public schools don't educate--they brainwash--which is their real reason for existence. They act as a buffer against Christian education, which they were founded to combat. The textbook protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia in the mid-1970s proved that.
The Internet abounds with sites you can do research about the public schools on, so sometime when you have an extra six or seven hours check it out. I can guarantee, if you use discernment, you will not like most of what you will find.
by Al Benson Jr.
I debated about what I should use for a title for this brief article, but then I thought, after all, I am talking about the public school system so the title fits.
Recently I read an article on http://politicaloutcast.com which talked about 6-year olds playing cops and robbers with each other during recess at school. These kids are in the first grade, yet the school has suspended them for playing cops and robbers! Can you believe it? Well, again, it's a public school so, yes, you can. The article noted: "In the assistant principal's letter to the student's parents, she wrote that their son 'threatened to shoot another student." Come on folks, this is two 6-year olds playing cops and robbers. Of course they pretend to shoot one another. I shudder to think what could have happened if they had been playing cowboys and Indians. That would have been a racial problem of international importance. They might have had to call a representative from the United Nations in to counsel the white kid for perceived hostility toward someone of an indigenous race.
However, the parents of the youngster were not amused. They ended up getting a lawyer to appeal the decision of the school. The decision was appealed and the school ended up overturning the student's suspension, which was so idiotic it never should have happened in the first place. I can remember, as a kid, we often played cops and robbers or cowboys and Indians at school--sometimes whole bunches of us on one side or the other. Just think, had I grown up in more politically correct days, half my school could have been suspended for the unconscionable "sin" of pointing our fingers at each other and pretending they were guns. And for all the pretend shooting we did of one another, to my knowledge none of the kids I went to school with turned out to be cold-blooded killers. We were, for the most part, pretty normal kids who, when we grew up, got on with out lives and the pretend carnage we committed as 6-year olds or 9-year olds never really affected us all that much.
But in this enlightened day and age the sin of pointing your finger and someone and saying "bang" is second only to the sin of "white racism" which according to some government educrats, white kids can display by eating peanut butter sandwiches in front of kids from Somalia.
Some of this foolishness is part of the reason we never sent our kids to public schools anyplace we ever lived and why we encourage others to eschew those supposed institutions of "learning."
Public schooling has a very suspicious and checkered history going right back to its Unitarian/socialist inspired origins and things have only gotten worse since those dubious beginnings. Kids don't learn to read; they don't learn accurate history, and the literature they are given is horrendous and the older they get the worse it all gets. Public schools don't educate--they brainwash--which is their real reason for existence. They act as a buffer against Christian education, which they were founded to combat. The textbook protest in Kanawha County, West Virginia in the mid-1970s proved that.
The Internet abounds with sites you can do research about the public schools on, so sometime when you have an extra six or seven hours check it out. I can guarantee, if you use discernment, you will not like most of what you will find.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)