Star San Francisco 49er quarterback sat out the National anthem on last Friday’s pre-season game. When asked the reason, “I am not going to stand-up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of colour. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder.”
This statement does not specifically reveal his intent, so he continues: “There are a lot of things that need to change. One specifically is police brutality. There are people being murdered unjustly and not being held accountable. Cops are getting paid leave for killing people. That’s not right by anyone’s standards.”
However, this final statement identifies the ‘spirit of BLM’ as the real driving ‘spiritual’ force behind Kaep’s political stand: “People of color have been targeted by police.”
Actually, Mr Kaepernick raised many issues: Can Black people honor the flag? Can Blacks honor the National anthem? Can Blacks be American patriots? Are people of color oppressed by Whites? Is there evidence of police brutality? Are police murdering Black people?
First, let’s cut to the chase, and go straight to the code language! Like BLM, Mr Kaepernick’s accusation of “police brutality” was not directed to speak in behalf of what he calls the “oppressed people”, or “the people of color”--such as Hispanics, Indians, or Asians--but for Black people! In other words, like BLM, by the term “people of color”, Kaep means Black people. Furthermore, like BLM, the words “police brutality” do not refer to police using unwarranted force against citizens. At its essence, it does not even mean police using unwarranted force against Blacks—in fact they mean Whites justifying the murder of Blacks! How can I make such an outlandish statement? Very easy! What is the conclusion of BLM’s contention that “Police kill young black men”? Liberals shout the P.C. answer: “police brutality!” to cover their real intent. Yet, the more obvious answer is: Police target Blacks because America is, and has always been a White racist nation! In other words, their intent is not to attack police brutality, but to expose America’s inherent racism!!
But, what is meant by American racism? Is it…Asians hate Whites? NO! Hispanics hate Blacks? NO! Indians hate the Chinese? NO! We know for certain it is not Blacks hating Whites, because according to liberalism, Blacks can’t be racist! On the contrary, we all know it means: 1.‘Whites hate Blacks’! and/or, 2.Whites hate all people of color! Remember, Black Lives Matters uses ‘Black’, not ‘Asians Lives Matter’; not ‘Hispanics Lives Matter’; not ‘Indian Lives Matter’…but ‘Black Lives Matter’. For this reason, their use of ‘police brutality’ cannot refer to the police brutalizing all people! As a matter of fact, BLM believes ‘All lives Matter’ is racist! So by their words, they restrict themselves to police brutalizing ‘Blacks’!! Therefore, I repeat, the motivation of Kaep and BLM (and liberalism)is: American racism ‘is’ White racism! In other words, their code is because Whiteness is racism, and America is White, America is racist! Therefore, America can discontinue racism only when it ceases to be White! This is the spirit of BLM; the spirit Mr Kaepernick is promoting!!
Come on…think about it--isn’t Mr Kaepernick protesting by sitting out the ‘NATIONAL’ anthem? The national anthem represents America! So in fact, by sitting out the National anthem, refusing to honor the flag, his own words describe his motivation: “Cops are getting paid leave for killing people.” Therefore, like BLM, he equates ‘police brutality’ with ‘White racist America’!!!
Second piece of evidence. Think of all the young men the media has shown fatally shot by police. What do they have in common? They’re all Black! In spite of the fact that in 2015, almost double the number of Whites were shot by police than Blacks* (494 to 254); and if you add-in the Hispanic fatalities (172); the number of police shootings is almost 3 times higher for Whites and Hispanics than Blacks…yet not ‘one’ of the young men shown on national t.v. shot by police is anything other than Black!! Is that an accident? Don’t be naïve! Liberals “…suppress the truth in unrighteousness” (Rom1:18)!!
Moving past Mr Kaepernick’s (and BLM’s) motivation, are his statements true?
”There are a lot of things that need to change. One specifically is police brutality.”
“People of color have been targeted by police.”
These statements are his evidence for ‘White racist America’.
Here are the facts:
1.Washington Post* records the numbers of police shootings for 2015: Whites-494; Blacks-254; Hispanics-172. Of course, these facts don’t agree with Kaep’s(and BLM): “police target Blacks” idea.
2.Harvard graduate, Roland Fryer,** who is a Black man, began his study agreeing with Kaepernick and BLM. Yet, after analyzing 1000 police shootings, he found ZERO racial bias. In Houston, he actually found just the opposite of Kaep and BLM—blacks were 24% less likely to be shot by police, even when they were armed and violent.
3.Dr. Lois James,*** Researcher at Washington State University found police were less likely to shoot unarmed black suspects than unarmed white or Hispanic suspects in simulated threat scenarios.
On the other hand, what about the common liberal/Kaepernick/BLM come back: The ‘proportion’ of blacks shot by police is much higher than Whites and Hispanics! Blacks comprise 26% of police shootings, yet make-up only 13% of population--proving America is a White racist nation!” Sorry, but the following violence statistics are common across America!!
4.The Department of Justice study examined 75 of the largest counties across the nation. Blacks were charged with 62% of robberies; 57% of murders; and 45% of assaults. In N.Y. alone, Blacks commit over 75% of shootings, while comprising 23% of population. In contrast, Whites commit 2% of shootings, but comprise 34% of population.****
5.In Chicago alone, in 2016, over 2300 people were shot from January through mid-July. In total, there are 212 days in those 7 months. This boils down to 10 shootings per day!! However, since the vast majority of the shootings occurred on the weekends, at many points, there was one shooting per hour!! By comparison, during that same period, the Chicago police shot 12 people, and every person was armed. Divide 2300 into 12, and you have .005% of the shootings in 2016 were by police. Who is being shot? AND, who is doing the shooting? Blacks and Blacks!
6.What is a further tragedy about Black on Black crime is that older people do not tend to kill other people; nor do women and the very young. Therefore, according to journalist Larry Elder, this means 3 percent of the population, black men from 15 to 44 years old, commit nearly half of the country's homicides!!*****
How can any honest person wonder why there is a higher proportion of Blacks shot by police, when Blacks are committing the greater proportion of the crime; and are therefore confronted more times by police in violent scenarios!?!?
Yet Mr Kaepernick, and the spirit of BLM, says, “I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of colour.” Are cops racist? Not according to the facts. Are cops targeting Blacks? Not according to the facts! Are Blacks oppressed by Whites? What is interesting about this last question is that liberals never define ‘White’ oppression! Yet, if they define it by ‘police brutality’, the answer is: not according to the facts! One man said, “Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.”
In conclusion, there is a concerted effort by Satan to destroy America, because of God’s call on the nation. I am not an American patriot because America is perfect, but because of a loyalty to God’s calling! On the contrary, by siding with individuals or organizations who reject God’s purpose for this nation, you are contributing to the nation’s destruction!
"The will to do springs from the knowledge that we can do." – As A Man Thinketh
Every philosophy, or belief system, has a person or a people, who have introduced it to the world--I call those people the Founding Fathers (or Mothers). Liberalism is a complex philosophy which has both Founding Fathers and Mothers. It is vital that Christians understand that liberalism does not originate with God(1Tim4:1), which is why the Holy Spirit has charged me to expose its evil(Eph5:11). Jesus said, “…when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?” (Lu18:8). Liberalism is one of the primary philosophies(Col2:8) destroying the faith of Christians!
Last week I introduced Niccolo Machiavelli (1469 -1527). My second Founding Father is Rene Descartes(1596-1650), affectionately known as the father of modern philosophy. My first recollection of Mr Descartes was in a philosophy class as a freshman at Georgetown University. My professor had a terrible foreign accent, and the class was horribly boring, for I had no interest in he, nor philosophy! But….I certainly have an interest now!!
In ‘Discourse of the Method’, Descartes writes, “I thought it necessary that I reject as absolutely false everything in which I could imagine the least doubt, so as to see whether, after this process, anything in my set of beliefs remains that is entirely indubitable.” What does all this mean? Very simply, Descartes encourages us to “doubt everything”. In other words, if you can imagine doubt about a thing, reject it!
First, the “doubt everything” philosophy serves-up a real problem for the Christian*. The Greek word for ‘faith’ is pistus, and simply means ‘belief’. Jesus said, “Have faith in God!”(Mk11:22). The same Bible also says, “Whatsoever is not of faith is sin” (Rom14:23). Therefore, doubt leads directly to the sin of unbelief—the very opposite of faith. I repeat, doubt is the opposite of faith. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. Therefore, it is not possible to follow Descartes’ philosophy, and retain the Word of God!
Second, Descartes’ philosophy not only leads to a rejection of the Biblical text, it also leads to a rejection of the laws of nature. For example, Descartes encourages a rejection of anything one can “imagine the least doubt”. Well, I certainly can “imagine” at least a ‘little’ doubt in nature’s law of gravity. Yet, to jump off a 50-story building, does not make gravity false. On the contrary, the one who doubts, and then rejects gravity, and then tries the jump, will quickly find-out the false ‘reality’ of Descartes’ philosophy!
To extrapolate Descartes’ philosophy to its logical conclusion, one becomes a god, self-determining good and evil! In other words, because ‘I’ have doubt about a thing, it must not be true! Or, because ‘I’ have a certainty about a thing, it must be true? Sounds familiar(Gen3)? At its core, Descartes’ philosophy is nothing more than relativism! Remember, relativism, along with liberalism, are both doctrines of atheism.
Finally, Descartes most famous doctrine, and what made him the father of modern philosophy, is “I think, therefore I am.” Just think about that statement for a moment. Basic knowledge of the English language informs us that “am” is the verb of being, or existence. Therefore, just the opposite of Descartes statement is true--one must exist, before one can think! Or, I am, therefore I think is more appropriate.
All kinds of things exist that do not think! For example, bacteria. There is much more bacterium on earth than people, yet they have no mind, they are not self-aware! Furthermore, is a tree alive? Yes. Does a plant exist? Yes. Do they think? No!! Probably, the greatest example of existence without thinking, and contrary to Descartes….is humans! We humans are known for acting without thinking—yet we still exist (Excuse my sarcasm)!! Roman philosopher, Cicero said, “There is nothing so absurd that it can’t be said by a philosopher.” An appropriate addition to Cicero’s statement would be “a liberal philosopher”.
Some of you familiar with Descartes will disagree with my conclusions because he created a famous proof for the existence of God! Descartes says because he can think of a being more perfect than himself—than God exists. Therefore, you argue—he is not an atheist!
Of course, Descartes’ argument for the existence of God is absurd. In reality, it is the babbling of an egotist--which is actually the doctrine of atheism, not the God of the Bible, who is the only God(Is43:10,11). How, you may ask? If Descartes can imagine God to be, than he (or another) can also imagine Him not to be—which is what atheists (and liberals) do, and the reason Descartes’ supposed proof for the existence of God is actually cloaked atheism…and not Bible! In other words, like Descartes, atheism (and liberalism) determines god according to their feelings. In even better words, God cannot be caused by our thinking, nor our will; nor can He be made non-existent by our thinking, nor our will! Simply, God is self-existent(Ex3:14), Who is only known to man because He sovereignly chooses to reveal Himself!
In conclusion, thinking occurs along two paths. First, revelation. God reveals thoughts to man about Himself (Eph1:17,18). Second, man thinks according to reality**, also known as the creation. Therefore, ‘rational’ thinking must conform to either what God says(Bible), or to what we experience in reality(creation). Thinking according to reality is used in what scientists refer to as the scientific method: observation and experimentation.
What does all this mean…for TODAY? One example of Descartes philosophy in contemporary society is the liberal invention ‘sexual orientation’. Today, a man can simply decide to be a woman by saying it. Yet, this is a clear violation of thinking according to reality! Or, it is a clear violation of thinking according to the creation! Gender is sovereignly determined…even down to the cell level: men are xy chromosomes; and woman are xx…no human can simply decide that! As a matter of fact, science can’t even change that fact through operations…much less a person by saying it! On the contrary, to believe man can simply decide to change reality, is to replace God with man…also known as idolatry and blasphemy!! Yet, these sins are exactly the intent of atheism through its doctrines of liberalism and relativism!
I urge you to stand on God’s word…it cannot fail: “For ever, O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven (Ps119:89).
*And for all human beings, for that matter---‘faith’ is foundational to humanity!
**Thinking according to reality was originally designed to exist through God’s revelation too. However, after the fall, man can also receive understanding of reality from either self or Satan.
I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat. – Sir Winston Churchill
Before we look into the Founding Fathers, we must first ascertain the origination of liberalism. Liberalism is a philosophy, and philosophies originate in theology (study of God). In other words, whatever a person believes about life (philosophy), backs-up to his/her belief about God. Therefore, all people are religious, for all people have beliefs/philosophies about life!
According to Dictionary.com the definition of religion is:
1.a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing an oral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
2.a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreedupon by a number of persons or sects:
the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs andpractices:
a world council of religions.
4.the life or state of a monk, nun, etc.:
to enter religion.
5.the practice of religious beliefs; ritual observance of faith.
6.something one believes in and follows devotedly; a point or matter ofethics or conscience:
to make a religion of fighting prejudice.
7.religions, Archaic. religious rites:
painted priests performing religions deep into the night
If you read carefully--with special emphasis on the first entry--you will notice that atheism fits perfectly with the definition of ‘a religion’. To offer a confirming witness, the US Supreme Court has declared atheism a religion. However, the greatest witness declaring atheism a religion is the Bible, God’s word. First, the Bible does not use the traditional definition of atheism: one who rejects the existence of God. For example, Ephesians 2:12 actually uses the Greek word ‘atheos’, which is translated as “without God”; yet, this passage uses ‘atheos’ to identify anyone who is without Christ! This idea of defining atheism as ‘anyone without Christ’ is also confirmed in Colossians 2:8. And finally, the spiritual origin of atheism is declared in 1Timothy 4:1. What’s my point?
1.Atheism is a religion, like any other religion
2.All religions give birth to philosophies or doctrines
3.Liberalism is a philosophy/doctrine of the religion of atheism.
As we will soon see, these three points are confirmed yet again by Liberalism’s Founding Fathers--who are ‘ALL’ atheists!!
What is important to remember about these people that I refer to as Liberalism’s Founders is that they all live according to their religious beliefs, in spite of the fact that they reject the existence of God with their tongues. In other words, like every human being, what they declare, is in fact their philosophy, which originates in their religion.
1.Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527). Dictionary.com describes Machiavellianism as: characterized by subtle or unscrupulous cunning, deception, expediency, or dishonesty. Its thesaurus uses additional words like, calculating, conniving, deceitful, contriving, underhanded.
Machiavelli was born into a period of time where ‘religious’ figures, such as cardinals and popes, were abject hypocrites. Many of the ‘religious’ leaders of that day were interested only in power, position, and money. Their actions revealed a rejection of the Word of God, while wearing all the external religious paraphernalia. Machiavelli’s life experiences with these people inspired him to reject the ‘god’ of those hypocrites, and pen ‘The Prince’, where he outlines his philosophy/doctrines:
-“by experience in our times that the princes who have done great things are those who have taken little account of faith.” Of course, his use of ‘faith’ is in the contemporary atheist mode, which is restricted to a profession of belief in God. However, he misses the fact that the word ‘faith’ simply means ‘belief’. Therefore, all people have faith, or belief—regardless of their choice of religion!
-“if all men were good, this teaching would not be good; but because they are wicked and do not observe faith with you, you also do not have to observe it with them.”
-“A prince should thus take care that nothing escape his mouth that is not full of the above-mentioned five qualities, he should appear all mercy, all faith, all honesty, all humanity, all religion. And nothing is more necessary to appear to have than this last quality.” He refers to “religion”.
-“Everyone sees how you appear, few touch how you are.”
-“For a man who wants to make a profession of good in all regards must come to ruin among so many who are not good. Hence it is necessary to a prince, if he wants to maintain himself, to learn to be able not to be good, and to use this and not use it according to necessity.”
Machiavelli is the father of the philosophy of ‘the end justifies the means’; i.e. one may do evil, to achieve good.
‘The Prince’ was one of the favorite books of Russian dictator V.I. Lenin, hence it is either a foundation, or a facilitator of Communism and Socialism (also doctrines of atheism*). Furthermore, the rapper Tupac, while imprisoned became a ‘disciple’ (another religious term) of Machiavelli, and even took on his name. This means his rap took on the spirit of his ‘lord’, which again is atheism and liberalism!
If you take a moment to ponder these truths, you will conclude that Machiavelli lives on through his disciples: liberals! If you don’t see it, allow me to explain. The philosophy of relativism (another doctrine of atheism, and thereby liberalism), rejects the absolutes of the Biblical God, declaring: “all truth is relative”. Therefore, relativism is another foundation for Machiavellian’s: the end justifies the means. This thinking is all over contemporary liberal thought like wet is on a fish!! As a real life example, just take the most recent ‘liberal’ folly allowing a man to decide to be a woman. In spite of the ‘absolute’ , incontrovertible, scientific evidence…or laws of nature**… that xy chromosomes equals a male, and xx chromosomes equals a female--through its religious belief: “all truth is relative”--liberalism foolishly declares a man can be a woman by simply saying, “I am a woman!” I repeat, this kind of irrational, liberal, religious fervor is all over, not just American society…but the world!!! It is a consequence of the rejection of the Biblical God!
I implore you by the mercies of God…reject liberalism, or it will destroy not only your personal faith in Christ Jesus, but the nation’s righteousness, ‘THE’ facilitator of God’s approval and blessing(Pro14:34)!!
*While atheism can tolerate capitalism/Free Markets, it can only do so inconsistent with its faith. As we will see in later tidbits, Communism/Socialism are atheist doctrines, whereas the philosophy of Free Markets originates in the Bible!
**The laws of nature are theologically known as the law of God written in the creation (Rom1:20; Ps19:1-3,Ps111:7).
You cannot succeed by yourself. It's hard to find a rich hermit.
There are many ‘Black Lives Matter’ (BLM) supporters who believe the term ‘All Lives Matter’ (ALM) is a distraction, and inherently racist. This cartoon is one example of the logic used to support their contention. Let’s examine its logic.
To begin, the figurine with the hose represents ALM, while the other figurine represents BLM. First, throughout this cartoon’s analogy, the figurine with the hose, who represents ALM, is made to be insensitive, cold, and heartless; while the figurine representing BLM is made to look sensitive, rational, and big-hearted. BLM supporters respond with a resounding, “THAT’S RIGHT! IT’S TRUE! However, what’s very interesting is that the cartoonist does not use logic to make these distinctions between ALM and BLM …he/she uses emotions! The use of emotions to create victims and oppressors through pejoratives has very often been the typical liberal strategy—a.k.a victimology! Although the cartoon does not expressly use pejoratives, it accomplishes the same victim/oppressor objective through its narration!
Let’s look at a few problems.
1.Square 2. The statement, “We should care exactly equally at all times about all things”, is false…on many levels. And what’s more, people who declare “All Lives Matter” don’t even believe this! Therefore, this is called a straw man argument: Building a position and then arguing against that position, not held by your opponent. In reality, the square 2 statement is actually a description of liberalism’s perversion of the word equality (See 6/20/16 tidbit), and is more applicable to BLM. The statement reflects Marxism, to which BLM possesses many connections.
2.The cartoonist allows for only the person who believes ALM to possess a hose. If the BLM figure also possessed a hose, it would resolve everything. However, if it is true that only the ALM people possess the means to put out the house fire, it must also follow that ALM people have control over the means to help Black Lives, who are represented by the burning house! Is the cartoonist then intimating that ALM people control whether Black Lives receive help? If true, who says so? The assumption necessary to support this thinking is not only terrible, but false! The assumption is that White people are oppressing Blacks, and only Whites can stop it! If this is BLM’s thinking, and in my opinion it is, then this is why the ALM figure ONLY has a hose! This would explain why BLM believes the general term “All Lives Matter” is racist! Yet, the term ‘All Lives Matter’ is not restricted to “White people”, nor does it mean “White people”!! Which is why it contains the words “ALL LIVES”! Yet, in reality, BLM does in fact secretly connect “ALL” to White people! This is yet another reason why BLM, the movement, is a racist organization!!*
Contrary to this cartoon…and BLM, Whites don’t control Black help or Black Lives! Blacks don’t need Whites to succeed! Said another way, Whites don’t determine Black success! Success is individual, not corporate! Therefore, Blacks cannot...and will never…succeed as a group!! I repeat, all success is individual!! Please listen…this is not only a BLM deception, but a liberal deception!!
3.The BLM figure is made to seem like he cares for the burning house, which represents Black lives. Yet, if BLM really cared about Black Lives, the cartoon would have hundreds of thousands of burning homes all over the place, because hundreds of thousands of Black lives are lost to: HIV, homicides, diabetes, accidents, cancer, heart disease, and abortion(See July 25, 2016 tidbit)!! But, if the cartoonist had depicted this irrefutable, undeniable truth, everything would reverse! The cartoon would now depict BLM ignoring hundreds of thousands of burning homes, to focus only on those homes of its choice, i.e. the deaths of Blacks at the hands of police! Does BLM focus only on Blacks shot by police? You answer that one!!!
Had the cartoonist in fact used the real truth…the actual truth…the literal truth, he would instead depict BLM as insensitive, cold, and heartless for ignoring hundreds of thousands of burning homes to coerce ALM, who is now the sensitive, rational, and big-hearted one, into focusing all its efforts only on a single burning home!
In conclusion, God created mankind in His image, not just Black people; not just White people—but all people(Gen1:28, Jms3:9)!! Therefore, it must logically follow that ‘Black Lives Matter’ only because ‘All Lives Matter’—not vice versa!** In other words, like a child cannot exist without his/her parent, so ‘Black Lives Matter’ cannot exist without ‘All Lives Matter’! Therefore, human lives matter, not because of their race, creed, color, religion, slave or free--but because of the image and likeness of God! Martin Luther King did not appeal to “Black rights” as the source for the Civil Rights movement---but to human rights! Because Black people are humans, all humans have the same rights under God! For this reason alone, the Civil Rights movement was moral! Therefore, as God-given human rights were the origin for the 60’s black Civil rights movement, so the God-given inherent value in ‘All’ lives, must be the origin for the value in ‘Black’ lives!!
* And this does not even include BLM’s other agenda---homosexuality. Alicia Garza, one of the founders of BLM writes, “Black Lives Matter affirms the lives of Black queer and trans folks, disabled folks, Black-undocumented folks, folks with records, women and all Black lives along the gender spectrum. It centers those that have been marginalized within Black liberation movements.”
**In reality, only the deception of racism, can pit the truths of ‘All Lives Matter’ and ‘Black Lives Matter’ against one another!!
Self-trust is the first secret of success – Ralph Waldo Emerson