Interpretation is life or death; the blessing or the curse! Interpretation is how you understand what you see, hear, taste, touch, or smell. Without exception, humans interpret life according their bias…and every human has a bias. For this purpose, God gave us His word as plumb-line to help us see as He sees: Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path(Ps119:105).
Historically, for many white Americans (not all) it was customary to interpret life through the whiteness of their skin. Of course, the results speak for themselves: slavery, share-cropping, peonage, convict leasing, lynching, and segregation etc. Tragically, liberalism has taught some black people to interpret life through their blackness. For example, responding to a recent tidbit on racism, a white woman wrote me: “I…have been accused of being racist. Why? During a conversation with a Black man, he asked what do I see when I look at him. I told him I see a man. Wham!!! Because I didn't say I see his color first, he said I was a racist. Derrick, I wasn't raised to see someone's color first, but to see a person's heart.”
Because I see life through the Judaeo/Christian ethic(Bible), I immediately recognized the problem. Let me explain. During the days of the antebellum south, and the great divide in America over slavery, those who fought against the institution of slavery, beginning with the abolitionists, adopted a slogan to market the equality of the black man to America. It was short, and simple: “Am I not a man and a brother!”
A closer examination of the image, the slogan, and the times of its creation, helps us understand the slogan’s origin. For example, the creators of the slogan obviously believed “all men are created equal”. Yet, what was their source? Two places: 1.Genesis 1:26: “Let us make man in our image and likeness”; and 2.All men—regardless of skin color--are descendants of Adam—the first man!* Therefore, the creators of this slogan believed the image and likeness of God produced human equality, for both men and women. Therefore, they concluded that because the Black man is a man, possessing God’s image and likeness, and therefore equal to all men, Black people should not be enslaved! Hence, the creation of the slogan!
Furthermore, the creators of this slogan also believed in the ‘brotherhood’ of mankind. For example, at this same time period, preacher and abolitionist Frederick Douglas declared, "Right is of no sex; Truth is of no color; God is the Father of us all, and we are all Brethren.” The creators of the slogan obviously agreed with Mr. Douglas, but again, what was the ‘brotherhood’ ethic origin? Once again, the answer is the Bible: Romans 8:15; Hebrews 2:11;1Corinthians1:1. The point is the correct interpretation of Judaeo/Christian ethic created the light which helped America see the darkness of slavery.
Returning to our illustration, what light did the black man use to conclude the white woman was a racist for seeing him as a “man” instead of a “black” man? Using the Judaeo/Christian ethic--we immediately recognize the black man’s view does not originate in the Word of God! Why? First, God never identifies people by skin color!! There exists exactly ‘ZERO’ places; or verses; or positive examples; in the Bible, that teach God identifies men by their race, or skin color**! On the contrary, the Bible does use the word “race” to refer to a foot race(1Cor9:24)!
Let’s cut to the chase! Because the black man used his race (skin color) to see himself***, and he was so anxious to find white racism, he unwittingly pit his skin color against manhood! In other words, when he called the white woman ‘racist’ for calling him a “man”, over against a “black” man—it revealed the source of his opinion: his skin color! For this man—one term was good(black man), over against another, which was evil (man)! This mind set caused the black man to declare the white woman’s answer made her a racist because she did not use race to describe him—while he simultaneously used race to describe both himself and her!! Selah!
Let’s cut to the chase one last time. The immorality of the black man’s position originates in liberalism****, which dominates, what some have called, the Unholy Trinity: academia, media, and entertainment—which are most responsible for dispensing information (often propaganda) to our culture! Sadly, liberalism teaches whites are oppressors because of whiteness, and blacks are victims because of blackness! Both of which are false when the image and likeness of God is used as the light!
In my example of the black man and white woman, liberalism’s view that whiteness equals oppression, and blackness equals victimhood, comes through loud and clear. Because the black man sees life through his skin color, i.e. his blackness, he failed to see that he indicts himself with the very racism of which he accuses her!
Seeing life through skin color—whether white or black—fails the Judaeo-Christian ethic test! Please be warned…liberalism does not come from God! It is a doctrine of atheism!
*One could argue for the Declaration of Independence is the source, but these two points are in fact, the Declaration’s source!
**Some may object using Songs of Solomon 1:5. However, if you read verse 6, Solomon refers to having been in the sun! Like every human being, his melanin made him darker to protect him from the sun’s rays! Therefore, this passage has nothing to do with ‘racial’ identity!
***Answering the question of one’s origin is THE MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION IN LIFE! Either ‘who you are’, or ‘who you believe you are’, is the foundation for how you interpret all of life! Those who understand they are created in God’s image and likeness, will be inspired to see life through God’s word!
****Actually, this is another twist on racism, categorized under Liberal racism.
Don't just let your business or your job make something for you; let it make something of you. - Jim Rohn
This week, I have decided to turn to a Facebook response to my term “Liberal Racism”. One person who disagreed with me wrote: “This is not a case of racism”; while another declared, “You have made assumptions!”. You will need to read the article, “Santa Fe Survivors Accused Of Racism Against Black Classmate” to get the proper context.
Fact 1:The NBA invited several young girls who survived the Santa Fe school shooting to sing the National Anthem at a game.
Fact 2: A photo of the girls surfaced on the internet of seven girls with heads bowed for a moment of silence. Six were white, and all holding hands; while the seventh was black, standing next the six white girls, but not holding their hands.
Fact 3: Liberals began to tweet---RACISM!!! Accusing the six white girls of neglecting the black girl because she was black.
Fact 4: The black girl was adopted, and her parents are white. The white mother intervened and attempted to correct their liberal folly. The liberals refused to believe she was the black girl’s mother---and demanded proof! The mother then provided photos of their bi-racial family.
Fact 5: Subsequently, the young black girl produced a video informing the liberals the white woman was her mother, and the white girls were her good friends!
What I find most incredible about this incident is that the liberals interpreting this situation as racism--were not even embarrassed! They continued to push their agenda—even when they were presented with irrefutable facts! Always remember--liberalism is not only irrational—it is tyrannical!
The question is, what was the motivation here? How did these liberals conclude these white girls were racist because they were not holding the black girl’s hand? Only when you understand the liberal worldview, can that question be answered.
First, liberals do not use the Bible as a standard for determining good and evil. To confirm this, simply ask a liberal: “Do you use the Bible as your standard?” The vast majority of the time, you get silence, and a bewildered look! Or, you will get a flat-out “NO!” I have never had a liberal answer me in the affirmative to this question—even those who claim Christ! They support this position by re-interpreting the separation of church and state into a separation of God from the state. This allows them to declare things like, “The constitution teaches a separation of church and state!”*; or “I’m neutral on religion”; or “You should never bring the Bible into politics!”; or “Why do you bring God in on everything?!” Tragically, this error removes their ability to discern good from evil (Ps36:9; Lu11:34-36; Rom1:18).
Liberalism is so deceptive because they use “Christianized” terminology: Love; hate; tolerance; justice; don’t judge; be nice; “I’m a Christian!”; “Jesus is love”; God loves everybody!”; “You’re mean!”, etc. Using one of their main tactics of deception, they simply re-define these terms to mean something foreign to the Bible, enabling them to hide their true beliefs behind these Christianized masks. Tragically, the masks allow them to reject the Word of God, and before Christians realize it, they are caught in a web of theological and spiritual destruction!
Back to the girls. I ask again, how did these liberals conclude the 6 white girls were racists? Because their accusation emerges from the liberal worldview of: “White Supremacy”, which they interpret to mean, “white people are racist because of their whiteness!”. This worldview is also responsible for creating other terms like: “white privilege” and “unconscious bias”.
Therefore, from their pre-supposition that “white people are racists”, or “white people have privilege”, liberals look for “white racism” under every rock, and in any nook-n-cranny!** When the liberals saw this photo of these white girls’ behavior, they leaped to a “GOTCHA!” moment. The only problem is, in reality, they exposed their own racism---they pre-judged “NEGATIVELY” these white girls based upon the color of their skin--which is the definition of racism!
My beloved…liberalism does not come from God—it is a monstrous evil—a doctrine of the religion of atheism! If America continues down the path liberalism, the Judge of all the earth(Gen18:25) will have to judge us! However, through His great loving kindness, and tender mercies, the providential God uses events like this to expose liberalism…for all who want to see!
*This is a myth invented by liberals!
**Every incident of “white racism” they either create or find, becomes like their spinach to Pop-eye!
The lesson learned from having to admit to others that you were wrong will make her stronger. TODD S. BREWER
If you listen to Colin Kaepernick, Jesse Williams*, Tavis Smiley, Cornel West, Roland Martin, TaNehisi Coates, Joy Reid, CNN(and every other liberal news outlet); and sadly, the majority of university professors—America is the most racist nation, not only in our contemporary world--but that has ever existed!!
On the contrary, if you prefer facts, reason, and logic, to emotion—an entirely different image of America emerges. For example, researcher Dr Inan Dogan, updating the original list compiled by the Washington Post, released a new list of the 25 Most Racist Nations In The World: 25.Japan; 24.Morocco; 23.Turkey; 22.Cyprus; 21.Thailand; 20.Russia; 19.Hong Kong; 18.Yemen; 17.Pakistan; 16.Algeria;15.Ecuador; 14.Kyrgyzstan; 13.Iraq; 12.Nigeria; 11.Malaysia; 10.South Korea; 9.South Africa; 8.Palestine; 7.Kuwait; 6.Philippines; 5.Egypt; 4.Libya; 3.Bahrain; 2.Lebanon; 1.India.
In other words, the “racist” United States didn’t even make the top 25! I’m sure liberals are having an apoplectic fit...right about now! But...to further antagonize our liberal friends, this same news cite released the top 13 Least Racist Nations In The World: 13.Belgium; 12.New Zealand; 11.Australia; 10.Latvia; 9.Norway; 8.Sweden; 7.Britain; 6.Guatemala; 5.Colombia; 4.Argentina; 3.Brazil; 2.Canada; 1.United States. On the contrary, the U.S. did make this list!
Right about now, you may be wondering what criteria Dr Inan used for his conclusions. He candidly writes:
“Racism isn’t an easy concept to measure. You can’t conduct a survey and directly ask people whether they are racist or not. Most racists don’t know they are racists and the ones that know won’t admit that fact in a survey. That’s why researchers have to come up with indirect ways of measuring racism. That’s what we did in this article.
A couple of years ago Washington Post published a racism map using responses to the question, “Would you like having people from another race as neighbors?”. In this article we used an updated version of the same dataset and we included answers to another related question to produce more robust estimates of racism.”
First, Dr Inan attempted to use the ‘Scientific Method’ to make his final determinations on racism. In other words, he did not use Tim Wise’s ‘White Privilege’; nor did he use Black Lives Matter’s criteria: “Police target Blacks therefore whites are racists”! He didn’t use Dr Joy Degruy’s Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome! And finally, he didn’t even use Michael Moore’s standard, “Hate Whitey”! On the contrary, I find refreshing that he honestly attempted to use objective, unbiased criteria for his conclusions!
Second, I find incredibly interesting the superficiality of the question Dr Inan ultimately settled on: “Would you like having people from another race as neighbors?” I actually laughed as I considered that at one time, America dealt with slavery, lynching, peonage, share-cropping, segregation, etc., but now, racism is determined by whether we can endure the presence of person from another race living next door!!! This is strong evidence we’ve come a long way from past horrors in this area!!!
Third, this actually teaches that racism is NOT the problem liberals create it to be! On the contrary, this study actually unveils liberalism’s contemporary focus on racism follows Booker T Washington’s charge of race-baiting in his day:
"There is a class of race problem solvers who make a business of keeping the troubles, the wrongs and the hardships of the Negro race before the public...Some of these people do not want the Negro to lose his grievances because they do not want to lose their jobs... They don't want the patient to get well... -Booker T. Washington, Up From Slavery (1901).
Furthermore, I also find it fascinating Dr Inan did not feel the need to use the traditional plumb-line for sniffing-out racism: interracial marriage. Whereas at one time miscegenation was the law of the land, today interracial marriage and dating doesn’t even command a second look—it’s everywhere!! Of course, if you would take a moment and observe daily interactions between people of different races you will surely discover the ‘reality’ that very little animosity actually exists between blacks and whites!!!
I serve several hours a week at a Christian school, and my heart was touched yesterday as I watched a ‘freshman’ black girl walk across the library to a ‘senior’ white girl; interrupted her conversation and simply hugged her…for at least 60 seconds! And no—they were not gay! It was simply an expression of endearment common among females: “this-is-my-friend-and-everyone-GET-OUT-OF-THE-WAY-because-I-need-a-hug-NOW!! There was no shame of age, nor of color—very simply: it was beautiful!! This kind of interracial interaction is common all across America! In general, America has not been listening to liberal pundits…Thank God!
My final evidence against liberalism’s charge: “America is a racist nation”; or “America is the most racist nation in the world”, are the following facts: No other nation in the history of the world, has ever freely elected as its leader/president a member of its formerly enslaved class!!! Remember, slavery dominates the history of every nation—but only America has elected a descendant of slaves as its president…not once, but twice! Second, America is the only pre-dominantly white nation in the history of the world to ever elect a black president! Third, as far as I am aware, to this point, no black nation has ever freely elected a white president/leader. Fourth, America is the only nation in the history of the world to elect a descendant of slaves in less than 150 years of abolishing slavery. Fifth, America is the second nation in the history of the world to abolish slavery based upon its conscience!*** In other words, former slave-holders, and their descendants, came to the conclusion that slavery is wrong, i.e. sinful! Remember, prior to England(1833) and America(1865)--no other nation in the history of the world had ever considered slavery immoral!
As a side note, England and America derived their conclusions on the immorality of slavery from the Judaeo/Christian ethic, i.e. the Bible!
Conclusion: the charge, “America is a racist nation”, is preposterous!
*And most every Hollywood star.
**The emotional charge of “racism” also affords many of these people position, power, and money in modern America!
***This is only half true! The whole truth is the consciences of Republicans rejected slavery, and the consciences of Democrats were seared.
Don't wish it were easier, wish you were better. -Jim Rohn
God’s promise to regather Israel: the greatest miracle of our times!!!
“Therefore, behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that they shall no more say, The LORD liveth, which brought up the children of Israel out of the land of Egypt; But, The LORD liveth, which brought up and which led the seed of the house of Israel out of the north country, and from all countries whither I had driven them; and they shall dwell in their own land.”
The fact that America recognizes God’s everlasting covenant with Israel on this day by moving its embassy to Jerusalem can only further the cause of God’s favor upon our great nation(Gen12:1-3)!!!
May God be greatly praised!!!
Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.-Golda Meir
The idea of ‘God’ has at minimum four requirements:
i.He must create everything (Omnipotence)
ii.He must have a desire for, or a love for His creation (Love)
iii.He must possess knowledge of good and evil (Omniscience)
iv.He must possess a desire to use His power to care for His creation
In spite of this truth, history is replete with men creating gods. I have found the most common false gods fall into two categories: good and evil--good gods help people, and evil gods hurt people (from a human perspective)! On the other hand, the idea of an ‘anti-god’ is slightly different. The two defining attributes of an ‘anti-god’ are: 1.he is unwillingly chosen; 2.he is raised to deity ‘BECAUSE’ he is hated! I call this phenomenon: ‘Negative Deification’!
As for followers, whereas the authentic God has authentic worshippers, the anti-god has anti-worshippers. While the authentic God’s worshippers love Him; and the anti-god’s worshippers hate him. The authentic God is honored by His worshippers who understand He loves them enough to supply all their needs and desires; the anti-worshippers possess only demands…because they believe the anti-god owes them!
The venom and revenge spewing from the mouths of the anti-worshippers toward the anti-god, is exceeded only by the worship and adoration of the worshippers of the authentic God! Whereas love rivets the attention and affection of the authentic worshippers to the authentic God; the hatred of the anti-worshippers not only rivets their attention to the anti-god*, but lifts him to a position of deity!
While the anti-worshippers vociferously deny deifying the anti-god, their hatred drives them, deceiving them to believe they will not survive without the anti-god responding to their demands. Because the anti-god owns limited authority and wealth--the anti-worshippers believe the anti-god ought to be coerced to “supply all their needs according to his riches in glory!”** While authentic worshippers freely choose the authentic God as their God; indeed, deceived by their hatred, the anti-worshippers unknowingly, unwillingly--but unwittingly--make the anti-god…their god!
In a nutshell, anti-worshipper’s attributes of deification are:
i.a desire to possess the anti-god’s authority/power/wealth
ii.anger and hatred for the anti-god (unforgiveness).
iii.unlimited grievances of past actual and perceived ‘anti-god’
iv.demands of remuneration from the anti-god (theft & love of
Here is my point: contemporary liberalism commits ‘Negative Deification’ of white people! In other words, liberals, both white and black, create anti-gods of ‘white people’!
Let’s return to the anti-worshipper’s attributes to examine my contention!
1.Envy. Can one honestly consider the state of contemporary American politics and not see the obvious envy of liberalism?!?! The lust for power by liberals is daily news across America! For example, a year and a half after the elections—Hillary Clinton recently travelled to India to inform them why she lost the election!
2.Anger and hatred. How about Antifa?! However, to the discerning, Antifa is a prophetic image of the end of liberalism.
Or, how about the violence on college campuses against certain types of speakers? Need we ask the obvious question, “who are the perpetrators of this violence?” If you answered, “Liberals!!” You get an A+!!!
3.Grievances of past ‘anti-god’ injustice. Who is paving the way for the hatred of America? Who dominates the professorship of American college campuses, where America is daily attacked and belittled? The most recent incident is Fresno State professor Randa Jarrar, who tweeted, "Barbara Bush was a generous and smart and amazing racist who, along with her husband, raised a war criminal." "I'm happy the witch is dead. can't wait for the rest of her family to fall to their demise the way 1.5 million iraqis did." Furthermore, last year another Fresno State professor tweeted, "To save American democracy, Trump must hang. The sooner and higher the better." Do you think these professors are a just wee-bit angry with America? In all honesty, do you believe the mindset of these two university professors is unique? I mean, do you think American professors training American students actually believe in American Exceptionalism? Think again!!
Finally, under which group shall we categorize Tim Wise, and his ‘White Privilege’; or Dr Joy Degruy’s, and her Post Traumatic Slave Syndrome?
If you haven’t already figured it out—all of the above represents liberalism!
4.Demands of remuneration from the anti-god. Beginning with Affirmative Action; and reparations(Tehesi Coates), the evidence for this point spirals all the way down to its logical conclusion--the wisdom of Black Lives Matter, Louisville co-founder Chanelle Helm, who declares when White people down-size their home, they should give the old one to Black or Brown people!
Beloved…this is called the ‘Negative Deification’ of the white man!
To incessantly accuse white people of white privilege; white supremacy; black slavery; white majority; white oppression; implicit bias; police targeting blacks etc., etc., etc., both creates and inspires hatred and revenge. Tragically, to resolve these issues…liberals simply scream the white man must pay!
Furthermore, by changing the definition of words and adding ‘whiteness’ to the accusation of ‘white privilege’, now means because whites cannot change their ‘whiteness’, they are permanently the oppressor, who must forever pay the oppressed!
This ‘Tom-foolery’ exalts whites to an anti-god who is necessary to supply the needs of the “people of color”…who are his victims, his anti-worshippers! Plain and simple…this is idolatry!
Beloved…only the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ…is God! All else are idols (Ps96:5)! I choose the One, Who has already given us the victory! “But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ” (1Cor15:58)! How about you?
*One of the consequences of hatred, is the hated consumes the thinking of the hater.
**if you’re unaware, Philippines 4:19 uses this phraseology to refer to what God does for His people. In other words, only God does this!
***Three quick examples: “Kill Whitey” -Michael Moore; Trinity College’s Johnny Eric Williams-“Let them f****ng die!”; “A day without White people” Washington State College.
--UNLESS YOU CHANGE HOW YOU ARE, YOU'LL ALWAYS HAVE WHAT YOU'VE GOT —Jim Rohn
This tidbit is in answer to the Facebook question: “Given your posts on Liberalism, would you say that classical liberalism isn't the problem today, but Progressivism?”
Please listen to liberal David Rubin’s excellent 10-minute monologue for context*. Let me begin my reply to the above question with Mr Rubin’s comments,
“The Regressive, the Control, or the Liberal left, whatever you want to call it, is a group of people who place identity, usually based on immutable characteristics in a pecking order of social importance such as race, gender, and religion where victimhood is the highest virtue to be had. This ‘oppression’ Olympics allows groups to compete for who is the most oppressed, and thus the most virtuous. And, if someone isn’t as oppressed as you, you have full authority to oppress them accordingly. So Black Lives Matters can protest the gay rights march in Toronto. White Gay men can be banned from leading LGBT organizations on college campuses. Pro-life women can be kicked out of women’s marches, and so on. This backwards ideology which demands that we judge each other not on the content of our character, but on the color of our skin or some other baked-in trait, puts the collective ahead of the individual.”
At the beginning of Mr Rubin’s piece, he lists the names (faces) now used for contemporary liberals: Progressives; Liberal Left; Regressive Left; Illiberal Left; Classical Liberals, etc. Then he offers a list of contemporary progressive objectionable behaviors, from his classical liberal viewpoint!! For example, he cites things like identity politics(see quote above); labeling speakers as racists and violating their first amendment right to speak; and even perpetrating physical violence on college campuses.
Yet, according to Mr Rubin, it’s not ‘Classical Liberalism’, but ‘Progressives’ who are responsible for this departure from the ‘classical liberal’…prototypical tolerance! So…which one of the ‘faces’ of liberalism is actually responsible? Or, is liberalism really a problem at all?
During Mr Rubin’s monologue, he calls himself a card-carrying liberal who supports abortion; gay marriage; legalization of marijuana; rejects the death penalty; favors free speech for all—including White supremacists; he refers to himself as a free thinker; “and the list goes on.” Yet as a classical liberal, who supports freedom for all, he laments the behavior of his contemporary ‘liberal’ friends, “I’ve watched as my team has gone off the deep end.” In other words, according to Mr Rubin, ‘modern’ liberalism has abandoned his ‘classical’ liberalism!!!
Yet, herein lay the problem! On the contrary, Mr Rubin misunderstands; for ‘modern’ liberalism has not abandoned him at all! Liberalism is like a ladder; as one steps-down the liberal ladder, all liberalism—regardless of the title you assign it--ends in the same place!!
Here we go! If you examine the definition of ‘liberal’ as far back as in the 1828 Webster’s dictionary**, you will find the final entry as: “licentious; free to access”. ‘Licentious’ means sexual license***; and ‘free to excess’ refers to lawlessness. These definitions describe the ‘nature’ of liberalism. As a dog barks, so liberalism supports licentiousness and free to excess!
Furthermore, the Bible uses the word lasciviousness in Galatians 5:19, which is synonymous with licentious, and is called a “work of the flesh”(man’s sin nature); confirming Webster’s definition of liberalism.
Although Mr Rubin may be correct in that classical liberalism in America once held values such as: freedom of speech for all; tolerance; respect for the opinions of another without cursing, beating, or killing him; he misses 3 key points:
1.Those values are not liberal values…but Biblical values! They originate in God, Himself!
2.By changing the Biblical doctrine of ‘the separation of church and state’, into ‘the separation of God from the state’, liberalism must reject the Bible; which is both the origin, and most importantly—the sustainer of those traditional values!!
3.As the Bible is rejected, and man’s sin nature is released, God’s gift of freedom to man is perverted into “free to excess”, i.e.lawlessness.
Therefore, the rejection of God’s word, combined with man’s sin nature(flesh), perverts liberal freedom into: “every man does what is right in his own eyes” (Judg17:6); and is followed closely by sexual license, which is nothing more than a euphemism for sexual perversion.
Here is the key to this puzzle, although classical liberalism historically espouses ‘some’ great values, because the ‘nature’ of liberalism is licentious--over time---the lawlessness of licentiousness works to pervert freedom into the works of the flesh. Galatians 5:13 says, we are called to freedom, but are not to use that freedom as occasion for the flesh(sin nature)!!! In plain English, this means do not think your freedom is a freedom to sin! For, God never gave freedom to man to choose sin! Only liberalism believes it can abuse God’s freedom to choose ‘anything’ the flesh desires! On the contrary, God forbade Adam to eat of only one tree!!! Yet, He gave Adam the choice of literally millions of trees to eat!! Therefore, if freedom is used to choose evil, it enslaves, limits, and even destroys choice…and with it progress!
Therefore, when Mr Rubin says, “I’ve watched as my team has gone off the deep end”; in actuality, that is liberalism’s destiny! Once on the slippery slope down the ladder of liberalism, there is only one place to land…one can only move from light to darkness—for that is the very nature of licentiousness!
Therefore, the battle over which face (name) of liberalism is the culprit of America’s woes--is mute!! Progressives; Liberal Left; Regressive Left; Illiberal Left; Classical Liberals—all ultimately drive us to the same camp: a rejection of God, and His word...ultimately ending with God’s judgment!
My beloved friend, this is a spiritual battle—not a political one! Don’t let liberal/progressives fool you by changing their name! Their stripes are the same!
The critical question is: will the Judaeo/Christian values, which created not only America, but Western Culture, continue? Or, will the liberal/atheist values replace them?
Actually…the choice is yours!
***Is it possible even to argue the sexual perversion so present in our culture is not due to liberal--so called--freedom?!?! If there is one absolute evidence of liberalism’s evil—it is their marketing of sexual license, i.e. sexual behavior is without boundaries!
"Genius is nothing but continued attention." -Claude Adrien Helvetius
It’s always good to choose appropriate language. I offer six reasons to control; and even better to eliminate the worse kinds of words from your vocabulary.
1.Spoken words create an atmosphere. 2Timothy2:16 teaches the atmosphere created by ‘certain’ words is ungodliness and irreverence to God. Just like the atmosphere of earth facilitates life, allowing all animate things to live and thrive, what do you think thrives in profanity’s atmosphere? The answer can be determined with a simply test. Think of the times when you either experienced violence, or watched violence on television—what came out of the mouths of the people involved just before, or while in, or doing violence? In the vast number of cases--it was profanity. Profanity facilitates at atmosphere for violence.
2.Profanity also known as ‘cussing’, which is slang for ‘cursing’. Dictionary.com defines ‘curse’: to invoke evil upon; a wish of misfortune; to blaspheme; to afflict with evil. Do you want to do this to another human being—or have it done to you? Is there any wonder profanity facilitates violence?
3.Profanity is one way the flesh is released. The Bible uses the term “flesh” as another name for man’s sin nature. If you are not aware, the sin nature is a diabolical evil!! Galatians 6:8 says, “For the one who sows to his own flesh will from the flesh reap corruption…” Profanity both stirs-up, and releases the sin nature in both the user and the hearers. To couple the image and likeness of God with man’s sin nature can create a monster of epic proportions—Nimrod and the tower of Babel in Genesis 11 is one example.
4.Profanity often reveals hypocrisy. People who use profanity contend it’s natural when you’re angry. However, they find a way to control the use of their tongues--when certain people are present!!! I repeat, the same people that declare cussing is natural, will not cuss, if they are in certain places, or with certain people.
5.Profanity reveals a small vocabulary. Interestingly, I have found there are only about seven words designated as profanity (H,D,S,B,B,A,F). No human has to use profanity when they have a vocabulary sufficient to use other words to express anger.
6.Finally, profanity facilitates blasphemy. There 4 types of blasphemy mentioned in the Bible, one of those types trivializes God’s name! For example, after stubbing your toe, to use the word ‘God’; or to use the word ‘God’ with another cuss word--trivializes His great name! In other words, instead of calling on God’s Name to save (redemptive purposes), His name is used as a cuss word; or with a cuss word!
On the contrary, the names of God depict His nature…which is foundational to His covenants, His word, and His promises! To trivialize any of these is to trivializes God’s nature, i.e. God Himself---which is blasphemy!
To highlight this point, I find it most fascinating that people often use the word ‘God’ with their profanity?* Have you ever wondered why?!?! On the contrary, I have never heard a person stub their toe and shout “Muhammad!”, while jumping around holding a foot! Yet, the words ‘God’ or ‘Jesus’ are often unconsciously spoken in fits of human rage! This is obviously one of Satan’s greatest deceptions!
In ‘Jesus Name’ we: pray(Jn16:23,24); are saved(Rom10:13); live, and move, and have our being(Acts17:28)!! Every knee will bow, and every tongue confess to the Name of Jesus(Phil1:10,11)!! In fact, ‘in’ the Name of Jesus, all of God’s Names revealed in the OT are consummated! All that God has given to man, and has for man—comes through the Name of Jesus! And people have the audacity to use the greatness of His Name to cuss when they stub their toe?!?! I don’t think so!
Remember two important points:
1.God spoke the world into existence! Therefore, faith is released by words! Or said another way, your words reveal your faith! And, only faith pleases God(Heb11:6)!!!
2.And “Death and life are in the power of the tongue…” (Pro18:21)
Profanity is neither trite…nor funny!
*Or, they use the word ‘Holy’, or some other Biblical word—when they cuss!
Words are, of course, the most powerful drug used by mankind. -Rudyard Kipling
1.Martyrdom of 11 apostles. Judas committed suicide and is obviously not part of this evidence.
First, when Jesus was taken to be crucified, all His apostles scattered for fear; including Peter who denied him, and Thomas, who lost faith. The second fact is all eleven of the apostles ultimately suffered excruciating deaths at the hands of evil men. The question is what happened between these two facts that turned the apostles from fearful to fearless? Answer: After Jesus death, He appeared to every one of the 11 men! In other words, no man dies for a lie! Or, men only die for what they believe to be true. Or, the apostles changed because their truth changed!
For example, when Peter was being prepared to be crucified upside down, don’t you think the very apostle who denied Jesus three times, would have certainly denied Him again, had the resurrected Christ not physically appeared to him? Or, take Bartholomew who was skinned alive before he was beheaded, would have reneged to save himself had he known Jesus’ resurrection was a lie? If Jesus had not appeared to all eleven apostles, who left Jerusalem to minister ‘alone’ from India to Africa, would have all been able to hold to their faith—without ‘one’ exception—including excruciating deaths—if they had not actually experienced the risen Christ?!?!
2.The existence of Church. The city of Jerusalem was full of people who hated Jesus, the apostles, and Christianity. If the body of Jesus would have been produced, it would have killed Christianity in the cradle!
3.James the brother of Jesus. John 7:5 says, Jesus family rejected Him. To be candid, this is really not too hard to believe; how would you react if your brother claimed to be God? In Mark 3:20-21, the Bible declares Jesus family tried to stop Him believing He was insane. And, in John 19:26, while on the cross, Jesus committed Mary, His mother, to the apostle John rather than His family. Why? His family could not be trusted, because they rejected Him.
On the contrary, later James became a pillar of the church(Gal2:9); he took leadership at the council at Jerusalem (Acts15:13-19); it is believed he became the pastor of the church at Jerusalem! He even suffered a martyr’s death! What happened? The resurrected Christ appeared to him(1Cor15:7)!
4.Saul of Tarsus. The Bible declares Saul (Paul): 1.breathed threats and murder against the church(Acts9:1); 2.persecuted Christians to death(Acts22:4); 3.he made Christians blaspheme(Acts26:10-11). Later on however, for Christ’s sake, on five occasions, Paul endured 40 stripes minus one! He was stoned; ship-wreaked; beaten with rods; frequently thrown in prison; yet still wrote 2/3 of the New Testament; and was ultimately martyred! What happened? How did Paul move from murderer to saint? The resurrected Christ appeared to him(Acts9:3-11)!
5.Five hundred people. Over 500 people--at once--saw Jesus alive after the crucifixion (1Cor15:6)
Moving forward, what if, you may be thinking, “I reject the Bible?” Thank-you for your question!
First, to “reject the Bible” in this context, means you reject its’ accuracy as an historical document. The one who rejects the Bible like this has a major problem! Using the scientific method to determine the reliability of historical documents, the New Testament is--by a wide margin—the most reliable historical document in human history! For example, there are over 13,000 manuscript copies of portions of the NT!* As a comparison, allow me to give you just three unquestioned historical documents:
i.Caesar’s works- written in 100-44B.C.; we have 10 surviving copies.
ii.Plato’s Tetralogies- written between 427-347B.C.; we have 7 surviving copies.
iii.Tacitus Annals – written 100AD.; we have 20 surviving copies.**
In other words, if you reject the Bible’s historicity, how can you rationally accept the historicity of any historical document!
Non-Biblical documents referring to the resurrection of Jesus:
5.The Nazareth Inscription (40AD). In 40AD, just 7 years after the death and resurrection of Jesus, Roman authorities created a law, which was punishable by death stating, no one can move a body from its tomb for wicked intent. Does this not refer to grave robbing, a common crime of that day? NO! Grave robbers steal valuables from tombs—not dead bodies! Incredibly, the Nazareth Inscription was so specific, it even mentioned “sepulcher-sealing stones”.
Does this sound familiar? Of course! To the honest person, it sounds like the death of Jesus was the cause of this law! How so? Because the Christians were proclaiming the resurrection everywhere, riots began springing-up; take for example, Acts17:5,6. Therefore, in order to keep law and order, the Romans created a law specifically prohibiting “anyone from moving a body from its tomb for wicked intent.”
The reason the Romans used the term “wicked intent” is two-fold: 1.The Roman and Jewish authorities accused the apostles of stealing the body of Jesus, and declaring Him alive; 2.Jesus was called a Sorcerer(Mat12:24) by the Jews and unbelieving Romans for His miracles.
6. Flavius Josephus (37/38–97), Jewish historian.
“Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man. For he was one who wrought surprising feats.… He was [the] Christ … he appeared to them alive again the third day, as the divine prophets had foretold these and ten thousand other wonderful things concerning him.” [Antiquities 18:3]
7.The Shroud of Turin. The woven burial cloth found in Jesus tomb. Read here and here.
In conclusion, in my opinion, the resurrection of Christ Jesus from the dead is the greatest evidence:
ii.The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; the God and Father of
our Lord Jesus Christ is that God.
iii.All other Gods are false (Ps96:5)
iv.For the above reasons, the resurrected Christ said, I am the
way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father,
but by me. -Jn14:6
No better time than now to give your life to Jesus! Pray this simple prayer:
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation -Romans 10:9,10!
* This does not include thousands of references of historical figures who quote the NT in their works! The entire Bible--from Old to New Testaments--can be reproduced from quotes in the works of early Christian writers!
**Evidence that Demands a Verdict, Josh McDowell
We don’t remain good if we don’t always strive to become better. GOTTFRIED KELLER (1819–1890) Writer
“Feelings” are difficult to define. Every human was created with them, therefore, they are good…and important!
According Dictionary.com “feelings” means:
1.the function or the power of perceiving by touch.
2.physical sensation not connected with sight, hearing, taste, or smell.
7.capacity for emotion, especially compassion:
8.a sentiment; attitude; opinion: The general feeling was in favor of the proposal.
9.feelings, sensibilities; susceptibilities: to hurt one's feelings.*
Probably a better term than ‘feelings’ to fit this piece is ‘empathy’:
Again I turn to Dictionary.com, which defines empathy:
1.the psychological identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another.*
The Old Testament uses a word: “bowels”, for a similar meaning with empathy, defining it: ‘soft inward part’---referring to feelings(Jer4:19).
The New Testament uses several words, of which a two are; “compassion”(Mat9:36), and “bowels” (Col3:12); which have similar meanings: feelings, sympathy, to pity, moved with compassion; inward affection, and tender mercy.
Furthermore, the Bible declares,
-God’s mercy endures forever(Ps136)
-His mercies are great toward man(Neh9:31)
-His mercies are tender (Ps51:1)
Lastly, when examining the life of Jesus, we find compassion moved Him…but it changed others(Matt14:14)! In other words, the empathy/kindness/compassion of God, is not ‘limited’ to simply pitying one’s present difficulty; nor holding the hand of the suffering; nor shedding a tear for the less fortunate.** God’s compassion/kindness/empathy is an action term which literally changes a circumstance--to glorify God! For example Romans 2:4, declares the kindness of God leads men to repentance! Therefore, the kindness of God does not merely smile, and act nice to everyone, nor does it accept everyone’s behavior, but in the case of Romans 2:4, initiates the process of delivering mankind from sin, changing us from sinners to saints!
On the contrary, feelings/compassion/empathy is an important key to liberal deception! Along with the mask of freedom***, another liberal mask is compassion! Allow me to explain. One of liberalism’s greatest methods of deception is word manipulation; meaning while retaining the ‘face’ of a word, for example “compassion”(feelings); the ‘liberal’ application is totally different. In other words, liberalism deceives the world by retaining the beauty of the face of compassion(feelings/empathy/kindness), yet because liberalism rejects God—in actual practice—compassion’s inherent power becomes warped, mitigating its ability to bless and benefit man—and actually results in his destruction!
For example, the most popular contemporary example of liberalism’s perversion of compassion/empathy/feelings is transgenderism. Dr Paul McHugh, the former head psychiatrist at John’s Hopkins University said, “transgenderism is a ‘mental disorder’ that merits treatment, that sex change is ‘biologically impossible,’ and that people who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with and promoting a mental disorder.” This diagnosis is confirmed by the fact that 41% of transgenders have attempted suicide. These are just two reasons John Hopkins University discontinued sex-change operations!! And finally, even if a man has a sex-change operation, he can never change the genetic code at the cell level, which is xy for male, and xx for female. Therefore, it is scientifically impossible to change gender! On the contrary, gender is a sovereign decision of the immutable, eternal, Creator God(Mat19:4)!
So how have liberals responded to these scientific, irrefutable facts? They shout, curse, attack, mock, and organize protests (which are actually riots)! Up to this point, their victims have experienced loss of jobs, and even businesses****! While agitating, and creating ever increasing ruckus, liberalism callously defers attention from the transgender’s plunge into destruction!
You see, God will not be mocked, whatever a man sows, he will reap. If he sows to the flesh, he will reap destruction in the flesh(Gal6:6-9)! Sexual perversion is sin against the body(1Cor6:18), and the consequence of that sin occurs in the body! Because God’s word cannot be broken, if one chooses to commit sexual sin with his/her body, God will give him/her over to that sin, who will receive the reward of that error(Rom1:24-27).
Yet, there is great news! The authentic compassion/kindness/empathy of God, first draws mankind to Himself; then changes that one—for His glory! In God’s presence, by way of the cross of Christ, sin cannot remain—it is obliterated! As mankind repents (turns away from sin), God brings deliverance! Instead of shame, sickness, anxiety, poverty, failure, and death—the Creator God gives love, joy, peace, fulfillment, health, prosperity, success, life, abundant life, and life everlasting!! “I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing---choose life…” -Deut30:19
Contrary to liberalism, God’s word declares: we walk by faith, not by sight(feelings) -2Cor5:7
*For reason of space, I purposely left points out.
**This does not mean these things are wrong, I mean God’s compassion transcends man’s limitations.
***See last week’s tidbit
****Persecution has several stages of suffering; the last stage is murder!
The conventional definition of management is getting work done through people, but real management is developing people through work. AGHA HASAN ABEDI (1922–1995) International banking executive
The word ‘freedom’ is dynamic! It possesses incredible positivity! I call it a ‘Mega’ word—the Greek word for ‘large’, as in Megatron from the Transformers movie series.
The dictionary.com definition of freedom is:
1.the state of being free or at liberty rather than in confinement or
under physical restraint:
2.exemption from external control, interference, regulation, etc.
3.the power to determine action without restraint.
America’s Founding Fathers framed the Declaration of Independence* and the Constitution around it!
Theologically, because God is sovereign(1Tim6:15), He must be free. Therefore, when God gave man His image and likeness(Gen1:26), freedom was part of that gift(Gen2:16); which makes freedom inherent to every human!!
And finally, God is love(1Jn4:8), and love requires freedom; therefore, as God loved man, He had to gift man freedom to love Him back.
Because of freedom’s incredible power and attractiveness, liberalism has adopted it as its primary marketing strategy. Liberalism declares freedom to be:
“To each his own!”
“Live and let live!”
“Do what you will!”
However, “Houston we have a problem”! God calls it the “sin nature”!!
Going as far back as the 1828 Webster’s dictionary, liberalism is defined as:
1.Of a free heart; free to give or bestow; not close or contracted; munificent; bountiful; generous; giving largely; as a liberal donor; the liberal founders of a college or hospital. It expresses less than profuse or extravagant.
2.Generous; ample; large; as a liberal donation; a liberal allowance.
3.Not selfish, narrow on contracted; catholic; enlarged; embracing other interests than one’s own; as liberal sentiments or views; a liberal mind; liberal policy.
4.General; extensive; embracing literature and the sciences generally; as a liberal education. This phrase is often but not necessarily synonymous with collegiate; as a collegiate education.
5.Free; open; candid; as a liberal communication of thoughts.
6.Large; profuse; as a liberal discharge of matter by secretions or excretions.
7.Free; not literal or strict; as a liberal construction of law.
8.Not mean; not low in birth or mind.
9.Licentious; free to excess.
Incredible! Wonderful! Marvelous!! Who could ever fight against this great stuff?!?! Everything seems so perfect…with one exception— number 9. The Bible records the works of the flesh in Galatians 5:19-21(which are synonymous with the works of man’s sin nature). Verse 19 specifically declares,
Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these;
adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
The Greek word for lasciviousness is aselgeia and means licentiousness; filthy, lasciviousness, wantonness (Strong’s). Agreeing is Dictionary.com, which defines licentious:
1.sexually unrestrained; lascivious; libertine; lewd.
2.unrestrained by law or general morality; lawless; immoral.
3.going beyond customary or proper bounds or limits; disregarding
Liberalism’s freedom is actually defined by point 9 of Webster’s 1828 dictionary! In reality, like the first 8 points of Webster’s definition get you so excited that they literally mask the 9th; so too, the actual freedom that liberalism markets is a mask. If you remove that mask--as previously described in all the clear-cut definitions, as well as the Word of God--you will find the real face of liberalism is sexual perversion. Wherever liberalism dominates, sexual license follows!!
What is my evidence? Let me ask you an obvious question, Does liberalism dominate America? Once you’ve answered, “Duh!! Pastor Jackson”. Can you honestly deny that sexual license is overwhelming, not just this nation, but the world?
If you’re still not convinced, here you go:
-Just last week (3/9/18), the liberal news publication Huffington Post, published an article normalizing bestiality!!
-England and America are researching whether sexbots (child sex robots), can help paedophiles.
-In 2016, Canada passed laws approving ‘some’ acts of bestiality.
Bestiality is now at the place of homosexuality 10-15 years ago!
Although God has called us to freedom, because of man’s sin nature, we are warned not to use freedom as an occasion to the flesh(Gal5:13). Remember, man’s sin nature incessantly devolves, i.e. it is in a constant state of war against God and His word! The Bible records its version of liberalism in Judges 17:6: “…every man did that which was right in his own eyes.”
In conclusion, earlier in this piece, I described one of the marketing phrases of liberalism as: “Do what you will!” Although this phrase perfectly describes liberalism’s freedom**—it is also the number one key verse in Anton LeVey’s Satanic Bible—which, using the King James vernacular declares: “Do what thou wilst!”
Be warned: liberalism does not originate in the God of the Bible (1Tim 4:1)!!
*Independence means freedom
**and liberalism’s nature
TO HAVE MORE THAN YOU'VE GOT, BECOME MORE THAN YOU ARE- - Jim Rohn