Daily Archives: November 28, 2018

NOVEMBER 28 THE BOTTOM LINE

So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

—Genesis 3:24

Yes, worship of the loving God is man’s whole reason for existence. That is why we are born and that is why we are born again from above. That is why we were created and that is why we have been recreated. That is why there was a genesis at the beginning, and that is why there is a re-genesis, called regeneration.

That is also why there is a church. The Christian church exists to worship God first of all. Everything else must come second or third or fourth or fifth….

Sad, sad indeed, are the cries of so many today who have never discovered why they were born. It brings to mind the poet Milton’s description of the pathetic lostness and loneliness of our first parents. Driven from the garden, he says, “they took hand in hand and through the valley made their solitary way.” WHT056-057

Lord, use me today to point someone to the way out of the wilderness. Sad, sad indeed is the fact that so many of my own acquaintances may not yet know why they were born. Speak through me today. Amen. [1]


[1] Tozer, A. W., & Eggert, R. (2015). Tozer on the almighty god: a 365-day devotional. Chicago, IL: Moody Publishers.

Liberal Media Stunned by Melania Trump’s Impeccable Style Following Prior Years of Trailer Park Chic — The Gateway Pundit

Melania Trump continues to dazzle the American public with her impeccable style, grace, intellect and beauty.

Not only is Melania Trump the only First Lady to speak five languages fluently, she is also the only First Lady to hold down a major career as a top fashion model.

This week Melania Trump revealed the 2018 White House decorations.
The photos and video were stunning.

The more Americans see this First Lady the more they love her.

Which explains why she receives little attention from the far left mainstream media.


Melania supervises the White House tree planting.


Melania wears Gucci in China.

The media ripped Melania Trump for her Christmas decor this week.
They are not used to seeing such elegance in the White House.

The hula hoops and dunked basketballs are but a memory.

And grace is back in the White House.

Style and grace is back America.

via Liberal Media Stunned by Melania Trump’s Impeccable Style Following Prior Years of Trailer Park Chic — The Gateway Pundit

ISIS to launch false flag chemical attack on Syrian Kurds – and Russian military is watching closely

Islamic State terrorists are plotting to shell Kurdish-led militia with chemical-filled munitions in Deir ez-Zor, Syria, Russian military said. The terrorists want to frame Damascus for the attack to trigger new US-led airstrikes.

Source: ISIS to launch false flag chemical attack on Syrian Kurds – and Russian military is watching closely

11/28/2018 — Wretched

WR2018-1128

•Witness Wednesday at a PC(USA) Seminary.
•Will anyone witness to Todd?
•The religious world view of a gay tennis-playing stay-at-home dad.
•Getting ready for community organizing at seminary.
•We found a Presbyterian pastor. Surely he knows the gospel, right?

Download Now (right click and save)

via 11/28/2018 — Wretched

Alexander: Roberts Was Wrong

An ‘Independent Judiciary’ Reality Check

Chief Justice John Roberts’s assertion that we have an “independent judiciary” lacks credibility.

“The opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional and what not, not only for themselves, in their own sphere of action, but for the Legislature and Executive also in their spheres, would make the Judiciary a despotic branch.” —Thomas Jefferson (1804)

Let’s set the record straight…

You may have heard that President Donald Trump is adamant about defending our southern border. Most recently, that defense has been focused on the migrant mobs attempting to breach our border between Tijuana and San Diego.

In a setback to Trump’s efforts, one of Barack Obama’s appointees on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Judge Jon Tigar, blocked Trump’s order requiring that illegal alien asylum applications, the free ticket to America, be processed at legal points of entry. (There’s a reason that circuit is also known as the Ninth Circus and the Nutty Ninth.)

Trump responded to the ruling, “You go the 9th Circuit and it’s a disgrace. And I’m going to put in a major complaint because you cannot win — if you’re us — a case in the 9th Circuit and I think it’s a disgrace. This was an Obama judge.”

On that note, Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts, in an unprecedented rebuke of a U.S. president, chastised Trump for stating the obvious: that an Obama-appointed federal judge “was an Obama judge.”

Roberts declared, “We do not have Obama judges or Trump judges, Bush judges or Clinton judges. What we have is an extraordinary group of dedicated judges doing their level best to do equal right to those appearing before them. That independent judiciary is something we should all be thankful for.”

It would have been proper for Roberts to say nothing about Trump’s remark, but, ostensibly endeavoring to protect the integrity of the courts, he apparently felt compelled. Obviously, Justice Roberts knows full well how highly politicized the federal courts are — and his assertion that we now have an “independent judiciary” defies reality. The objective of impartial “blind justice” is certainly what our Founders prescribed for the judicial branch, but they knew that attaining equal justice under the law was a high bar.

The most recent skewering of then-SCOTUS nominee and now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh is an airtight case in point. So one might conclude that Roberts was projecting what he believes should be the nonpartisan nature of the courts. But as he stated it, he’s flat wrong.

Responding to Roberts, Trump said, “I have a lot of respect for [Roberts] but I think we have to use some common sense. This 9th Circuit, everybody knows it’s totally out of control and what they’re doing, what they’re saying, the opinions are very unfair to law enforcement, very unfair to our military, and they’re very unfair, most importantly, to the people of our country because I’m keeping them safe.”

Trump added: “Sorry Chief Justice John Roberts, but you do indeed have ‘Obama judges,’ and they have a much different point of view than the people who are charged with the safety of our country. It would be great if the 9th Circuit was indeed an ‘independent judiciary,’ but if it is[,] why there are so many opposing view cases filed there, and why are a vast number of those cases overturned[?] Please study the numbers, they are shocking. We need protection and security — these rulings are making our country unsafe! Very dangerous and unwise! Judges must not Legislate Security and Safety at the Border.”

Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC), a former federal prosecutor and a strong candidate for a Circuit Court nomination once he retires from the House, declared, “I wish Chief Justice Roberts were right. I wish there were not a politicization of the judiciary.”

Gowdy, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, added, “Every print article that you will go find … refers to judges based on the president that put him or her in office. And you see terms like conservative and ultra conservative and liberal and moderate, which are political terms. … So I wish Chief Justice Roberts were right. I wish that we did not refer to judges based on which president put them in office as if that is somehow going to inextricably lead us to the conclusion.”

The fact is, federal judges have proven to be partisan for generations, and there is most assuredly a very distinct division and partiality on the federal bench.

Judges nominated and appointed by Republican presidents are partial toward Rule of Law and the Liberty enshrined in our Republic’s Constitution. In the overwhelming majority of cases, they honor their oaths “to support and defend” our Constitution.

Conversely, judges nominated and appointed by Democrat presidents are clearly partial toward the so-called “living constitution” embraced by those who reject Rule of Law in deference to the rule of men, the irrevocable terminus of which is tyranny.

Of the latter, Thomas Jefferson warned they would “make the Judiciary a despotic branch.” As the venerable former Sen. Sam Ervin (D-NC) once put it, these are judges who “interpret the Constitution to mean what it would have said if [they], instead of the Founding Fathers, had written it.” Jefferson warned that such interpretation would render our Constitution “a mere thing of wax … which [judges] may twist and shape into any form they please.”

As James Madison cautioned, “There are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”

As for partiality on the Supreme Court, over the last 18 months, according to The Daily Wire, “The four left-leaning judges on the Supreme Court are far more consistent about voting together as a bloc than the conservatives on the court; Elena Kagan votes with Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg an average of 89% of the time; Breyer votes with his cohorts an average of 91% of the time; Ginsburg also votes with her pals an average of 91% of the time, and Sotomayor joins them 90.3% of the time.”

The assessment notes further, “By contrast, among the four right-leaning judges, Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, Clarence Thomas, and John Roberts, Gorsuch sided with them an average of 82.7% of the time; Thomas 86.3% of the time; Alito 85.7% of the time, and Roberts 80.7% of the time.”

As Cal Thomas concludes, “If all judges thought the same, as Roberts seems to suggest, why are there so many 5-4 rulings by the high court?”

And regarding significant immigration decisions by the lower courts since Donald Trump took office, according to a Washington Times review, “53 of the 54 Democrat appointed judges who issued or signed onto opinions in immigration cases ruled against the Trump administration’s get-tough approach.” The Times study noted further, “By contrast, among GOP-appointees to the federal bench, 15 judges have backed the administration in immigration cases and 13 have not.”

As I have noted, judicial opinions are not about “Right” versus “Left”; they’re about Liberty versus tyranny. Thus, in 2016, when I voted for Donald Trump instead of his leftist opponent, Hillary Clinton, I voted for the Supreme Court. And indeed, President Trump has consistently nominated constructionist judges to both the upper and lower courts.

And finally, what debate about the Supreme Court would be complete without Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) offering one of his mind-numbing observations. In an opinion that sounded far more satirical than senatorial, Schumer offered an affirmation of Roberts’s assessment of judicial independence, while in the same breath accusing Roberts of partisanship in his decisions: “I don’t agree very often with Chief Justice Roberts, especially his partisan decisions which seem highly political. … But I am thankful today that he … stood up to President Trump for an independent judiciary.”

Yes, you heard that correctly: Schumer sided with Trump about the Court’s partisan nature, then laughably implied that he supports “an independent judiciary.”

But no sooner had he sucked up to the chief justice than he was back to his old obfuscatory games. This week on the Senate floor, Schumer, singing the Demos’ midterm “rigged election” theme song, declared, “Justice Roberts will go down in history as one of those who worked to take away voting rights when he authored the Shelby decision and stated that he didn’t believe that … more or less, he stated that he didn’t believe that discrimination existed any longer, so we wouldn’t need Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.”

Of course, Roberts never wrote that. In fact, quite the contrary. In that decision, Roberts noted, “At the same time, voting discrimination still exists; no one doubts that.”

Never let it be said that Schumer allowed inconvenient facts to get in the way of a partisan cheap shot.

November 28 The Prophetic Word

We have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts.

2 Peter 1:19

The Philippian believers had the Old Testament books to go to, but the entire New Testament had yet to be completed at the time Paul wrote his letter to them. Since they may have had access to only a minimal amount of written revelation in the New Testament, the believers looked to the apostles as their source of truth until all the New Testament books were brought together. So the standard of Christian belief and behavior was embodied in the teaching and example of the apostles.

That’s why on the day of Pentecost three thousand believers “continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine” (Acts 2:42). That’s also why Paul said to the Corinthian believers, “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ” (1 Cor. 11:1). But you have an advantage they didn’t—you have God’s complete revelation available to you. So don’t fail to use it.[1]


[1] MacArthur, J. (2001). Truth for today : a daily touch of God’s grace (p. 357). Nashville, Tenn.: J. Countryman.

November 28, 2018 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

3 God is different from the “many” who oppose him. David addressed God confidently with an emphatic and contrastive use of the personal pronoun “you” (weʾattâ). How different he is from the rebellious masses! David was certain of God’s promises that are confirmed in the covenant (cf. 2:6–9); therefore, his confidence rested in the nature of God, described here by a metaphor (“shield”) and by one of his attributes (“glory”). He was convinced that God’s kingship is forever. And although the kingship was forcibly removed from the Lord’s anointed, he was still protected by God’s kingship. With the metaphor, “shield” (māgēn; cf. 7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; Ge 15:1), the psalmist places himself under the protection of the Great King, who has promised to protect his own (Ge 15:1; Dt 33:29; see Reflections, p. 733, Yahweh Is the Divine Warrior).

The power of the Great King is referred to by the word “glory” (kebôdî, lit., “my Glorious One,” NIV text note). The phrase signifies the Lord’s glorious rule over his kingdom. He is the Lord of hosts, with tens of thousands of angels at his command. Even as a king can be described as glorious because of his vast armies, so the Lord is glorious because he can marshal the angelic host to aid his children (34:7; 91:11). The king puts his confidence in the protection that God alone can provide, because his glory is greater than any human power. The glory of God is nothing less than the revelation of his hiddenness!

The psalmist explains further that the “Glorious One” gives him reason to lift up his head. The “lifting up of the head” is a Hebraism expressive of confidence in the Lord, who has power to raise up the humble and abase the mighty (1 Sa 2:7–8; Ps 103:7–9). He exalts whom he wills and when he wills. The psalms express confidence that the Lord will “lift up the head” of his people when he is victorious over his enemies (cf. 18:46–50; 27:4–6; 110:5–7).

Even though the king had reason for despondency, his knowledge of God gave him reason for hope. The confidence of the king was not in his knowledge of the future or in the might of his forces, but in God, who had installed him as king (2:6).[1]


3:3. In the face of such antagonism, David found comfort in God’s character. Using the metaphor of a shield, he said that God was the true Source of his protection (in spite of their taunts). The psalmists often spoke of God as a shield to depict His protection (7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7; 33:20; 59:11; 84:11; 115:9–11; 119:114; 144:2). David was confident that God would restore him to his throne. The words lifts up my head express restoration to dignity and position (see the same idiom in Gen. 40:13, 20; 2 Kings 25:27, kjv).[2]


3:3 The mood of the Psalm changes in verse 3. David gets his eyes off his enemies and on the Lord, and that changes his whole outlook. Immediately he realizes that he has in Jehovah a shield, a source of glory, and the One who lifts up his head. As his shield, the Lord gives him complete protection from enemy assaults. As his glory, the Lord gives him honor, dignity and vindication in place of the shame, reproach and slander that were being heaped upon him. As the lifter of his head, the Lord encourages and exalts him.[3]


3:3 are a shield around me His enemies’ taunts have not caused him to doubt God. The psalmist trusts Yahweh to protect him like a shield—a common metaphor for God’s protection (7:10; 18:2, 30; 28:7).

the one who lifts up my head A lifted head signaled confidence and pride (27:6), while a lowered head signaled defeat and disgrace (Judg 8:28).[4]


3:3 lifter of my head. An expression of encouragement.[5]


3:3 The line uses several metaphors—“shield” for God’s protection (Gn 15:1), “glory” for the evidence of His blessing of kingship (Ps 34:7; 91:11), and “lifts up my head” for the restoration to the throne (Gn 40:13; 1 Sm 2:7–8; Ps 110:7).[6]


3:3 The image of God as a shield is common, especially in the Psalms (18:30; 115:9; 144:2). It represents protection during a time of attack. A more unusual description is identifying God as one’s glory. The Hebrew word kavod (lit “heavy”) is often used of a person’s reputation or significance, sometimes being translated as “honor.” Its use here seems to indicate that the psalmist found his own significance and honor linked to his relationship with the Lord rather than in his own strength.[7]


[1] VanGemeren, W. A. (2008). Psalms. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Psalms (Revised Edition) (Vol. 5, pp. 102–103). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[2] Ross, A. P. (1985). Psalms. In J. F. Walvoord & R. B. Zuck (Eds.), The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Vol. 1, p. 793). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.

[3] MacDonald, W. (1995). Believer’s Bible Commentary: Old and New Testaments. (A. Farstad, Ed.) (p. 551). Nashville: Thomas Nelson.

[4] Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Ps 3:3). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

[5] Sproul, R. C. (Ed.). (2005). The Reformation Study Bible: English Standard Version (p. 740). Orlando, FL; Lake Mary, FL: Ligonier Ministries.

[6] Cabal, T., Brand, C. O., Clendenen, E. R., Copan, P., Moreland, J. P., & Powell, D. (2007). The Apologetics Study Bible: Real Questions, Straight Answers, Stronger Faith (p. 791). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

[7] Warstler, K. R. (2017). Psalms. In E. A. Blum & T. Wax (Eds.), CSB Study Bible: Notes (p. 819). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.

Trump retweets image of US deputy attorney general among others jailed ‘for treason’

President Trump has retweeted an image showing a dozen of his opponents and critics jailed for “treason.” Among them, his current Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein.

Source: Trump retweets image of US deputy attorney general among others jailed ‘for treason’

Stossel: Socialism Leads To Violence

Socialist regimes use government brutality to enforce bad laws.

Socialism is now cool in some circles. Newly elected Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez praises “Democratic Socialism” and told comedian Stephen Colbert, “in a modern, moral and wealthy society, no person in America should be too poor to live.”

Colbert ate it up. “Seems pretty simple!” he replied, to cheers from his audience.

But socialism shouldn’t be cool, Gloria Alvarez reported recently, noting that it wrecks economies. In this video she points out that it also leads to government using force against its own citizens.

Regimes that call themselves socialist have killed millions of people. Tens of millions were killed in the USSR. Same in China. Millions also died in Cambodia and North Korea, which claimed to follow socialist ideals.

Today’s socialists say that those countries didn’t practice “real” socialism. They promise that their experiment will be different, and better. “Democratic socialists” like Sen. Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez certainly promise to avoid anything like the horrors of previous self-described socialist governments.

But Alvarez says that socialism, whatever the variant, tends to turn out the same way. Right now, people die in Latin American countries that fell for socialism’s promises.

In Cuba, because government restricts private property and trade, Cubans trade on the black market to survive. Sometimes the government violently cracks down on them.

Alvarez interviews Ibis Valdes, who says: “my father was a political prisoner [in Cuba] for almost a decade … because in his 20s he sold soaps and perfumes and did not want to relinquish all of his profits to the government.”

Michel Ibarra, who escaped Cuba, says: “Socialism is the perfect excuse for someone who wants to rule an authoritarian regime.”

Political violence in the name of socialism also occurred in Nicaragua and Venezuela.

Alvarez interviews Ramón Muchacho, a former mayor of a section of Venezuela’s capital city, Caracas. He tell Alvarez that he was pressured by socialist leaders to use his police force to brutally suppress protests against the regime. Because he refused, he was threatened with jail. He fled to America.

“It seems to me we are not able to learn,” Ramón Muchacho tells Alvarez. “[Politicians] will always be dreaming about the future and never delivering. People keep falling in love with that kind of crap.”

Alvarez hopes that some will learn. Gustavo Tefel, who fled violence in Nicaragua tells her that he did.

“I don’t think [people] realize how deep socialism is involved in all [the violence]…America is a great country. People really don’t appreciate it much…they should travel a little more to poor countries to really get a feeling for what they have here in the United States. Just look around, you know, and really get some knowledge.”

Source: Stossel: Socialism Leads To Violence

HORRIBLE! WaPo Hack Hurls Disgusting Abuse at Lovely First Lady Melania Trump — The Gateway Pundit

America has the most lovely and elegant First Lady in US history.

No other First Lady can touch her style, beauty, posture, intellect and poise.

The First Lady continues to rise in popularity with the American public the more they see her. So the liberal media mostly ignores this lovely woman.

Of course, the liberal media HATES Melania Trump.
They fear her.

On Wednesday The Washington Post went after First Lady Melania Trump in a very personal way.

Here is their anti-Melania headline.
“Look, maybe this just isn’t Melania Trump’s thing. But that’s fine.”

This headline was in the WaPo “Style” section.

This leftist rag has sooo much hatred for this pro-American president that they are smearing the First Lady as having no style.
What a disgusting hit piece.

Gateway Pundit Poll: Better First Lady – Melania Or Michelle? VOTE NOW!

Via columnist Monica Hesse:

Every time Melania Trump makes another odd gaffe, I can’t help but see it as a useful thing for gender equality. It forces a conversation about how to measure Mrs. Trump’s performance, or whether we even should. It highlights the archaic expectations baked into her role.

This week, her office unveiled the White House Christmas decor, which included a roomful of blood-red trees that looked like leftover props from “The Babadook”— and let me tell you, Melania has definitely given us a useful conversation.

The trees were roundly mocked as horrifying. Obviously, she didn’t build them herself. (She didn’t even show up for the unveiling, which prompted more consternation.) But she did sign off on them, presumably. They’re technically under her purview.

So, why does that matter anyway? Should we expect Melania to be a professional host? In presidential elections, should nominees’ spouses be forced to compete as well, via portfolios of their home decor and cocktail reception hors d’oeuvres?

Family Circle has long held a first lady cookie contest. In 2016, Bill and Hillary Clinton submitted the Clinton Family’s Chocolate Chip Cookies, which dominated the reader poll. Meanwhile, Melania’s Star Cookie recipe came with “hardly any directions,” the magazine’s food director said. The result was a bland wafer — the cookie version of a shrug.

At some point Americans will start tuning out these horrible people and going elsewhere for more honest reporting.

via HORRIBLE! WaPo Hack Hurls Disgusting Abuse at Lovely First Lady Melania Trump — The Gateway Pundit