Daily Archives: October 10, 2019

October 10 A Powerful Relationship

Scripture Reading: John 15:14–16

Key Verse: John 15:15

No longer do I call you servants, for a servant does not know what his master is doing; but I have called you friends, for all things that I heard from My Father I have made known to you.

The night before his wedding, Joseph Scriven’s fiancée drowned. Devastated, Scriven moved away from his home to escape the memory of her. He relocated to Canada where he met another lovely young woman named Eliza. Before they could marry, she got sick and passed away.

Joseph Scriven faced these and many other tragedies; however, Christ was his constant comfort. It was Scriven who penned the beautiful poem, “What a Friend We Have in Jesus.” He wrote, “Can we find a friend so faithful who will all our sorrows share? Jesus knows our every weakness; take it to the Lord in prayer.”

Jesus understands the depth of your suffering too. In John 15:15, Jesus said, “No longer do I call you slaves … but I have called you friends” (nasb). You may perceive Jesus in lofty terms as “Savior,” “King of kings,” and “Almighty,” but He also desires for you to know Him as “Friend.”

Jesus calls you His friend because He loves you. No one could see more deeply into your heart or is more faithful and trustworthy to care for your needs. He promises to comfort you.

Turn to Him to be your closest friend. You will find in Him a powerful relationship.

Lord, You are both my king and my friend, my creator and my ever-present companion. I bring to You every thought and care, just as You have called me to do.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2006). Pathways to his presence (p. 297). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

October 10 Praying in a Crisis

Scripture Reading: James 5:13–18

Key Verse: Philippians 4:6

Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known to God.

Have you ever noticed how squirrels react to oncoming cars? Many times they run to one side of the road only to return to the middle. They teeter back and forth in indecision and often come out on the losing end of the contest.

How do you respond to crises? Are you cool and surefooted, or do you race around, frantically searching for a solution?

God promises to meet your needs regardless of the circumstance. But in doing so, He wants you to come to Him in faith during crises. Through prayer, He brings encouragement, hope, and guidance.

When we pray, God turns His attention toward us. Even though there is never a moment when we are outside His thoughts, prayer brings us into an even closer relationship with Him. He sees our faith and responds in faithfulness.

God knows when you face a crisis, and He goes before you to bring about a solution on your behalf.

The apostle Paul told us, “Be anxious for nothing, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. And the peace of God, which surpasses all comprehension, shall guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 4:6–7 nasb).

O Lord, I often panic in crises and frantically search for my own solutions, not realizing You have gone before me to make a way. Calm my anxieties, and teach me to trust in You.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (1999). On holy ground (p. 297). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

October 10 In the Presence of God

Scripture reading: Psalm 95:1–7

Key verse: Isaiah 58:11

The Lord will guide you continually,

And satisfy your soul in drought,

And strengthen your bones;

You shall be like a watered garden,

And like a spring of water, whose waters do not fail.

You live in a fallen world. But as a believer in Christ, you do not have to operate with a fallen attitude. God’s presence in you renews your mind. However, you must make a choice to seek God’s guidance or go your own way. He has given you the Holy Spirit as His representative. And while the Spirit has many roles, one of the most energizing is His role as communicator of God’s love, forgiveness, and truth.

When you speak to Christ in prayer, the Holy Spirit motivates you and encourages you by communicating God’s mind and heart to yours. He enables you to think God’s thoughts, live a godly life, and become the person you are called to be in Christ.

Many overlook God’s will for their lives by thinking that He is not interested in them. The sad truth is that their minds and lives are too full of activity to allow entry by God. They rush from one mental dilemma to another, never realizing that God is standing by, calling to them. In the end, they wonder why God is not speaking, but He does, just as much as He did during Old and New Testament times.

Does God have your attention, or are you drawn away by other things? You can practice His presence anywhere. Know that when you commit yourself to a personal time of devotion, God will meet you there.

Dear Lord, thank You for the Holy Spirit who communicates Your love, forgiveness, and truth as I come into Your presence today.[1]

 

[1] Stanley, C. F. (2000). Into His presence (p. 297). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.

EXCLUSIVE: Despite Prior FBI Statements that Seth Rich’s DNC Computer and Emails Were Investigated, FBI Now Claims in FOIA Request that No Related Docs Exist — The Gateway Pundit

Despite Prior FBI Statements that Seth Rich’s DNC Computer and Emails Were Investigated, FBI Now Claims No Related Docs in FOIA Request.  Attorney Requesting Documents Demands Court Step In.

We last reported on September 19th ==>>

that Texas businessman Ed Butowsky filed a lawsuit where he outed reporter Ellen Ratner as his source for information on Seth Rich. The DNC operative was murdered in the summer of 2016 in Washington DC. His murder was never solved. According to the lawsuit Seth Rich provided WikiLeaks the DNC emails before the 2016 election, not Russia.

This totally destroys the FBI and Mueller’s claims that Russians hacked the DNC to obtain these emails.

Butowsky claims in his lawsuit:

Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange told her that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron, were responsible for releasing the DNC emails to Wikileaks. Ms. Rattner said Mr. Assange wanted the information relayed to Seth’s parents, as it might explain the motive for Seth’s murder.

On November 9 2016 Ellen Ratner admitted publicly that she met with Julian Assange for three hours the Saturday before the 2016 election. According to Ratner, Julian Assange told her the leaks were not from the Russians, they were from an internal source from the Hillary Campaign.

We later reported that Butowsky and his attorney, Ty Clevenger, requested and obtained documents from the FBI related to their case which we were able to analyze.

According to the duo, they obtained the transcript from former FBI Chief of Staff James Rybicki where he states that the Obama White House was the entity that was pushing the Russia conspiracy as early as October 2016 –

Rybicki was corrupt cop James Comey’s Chief of staff –

Clevenger stated in a post online that –

Newly released documents from the FBI suggest that the Obama White House pushed intelligence agencies to publicly blame the Russians for email leaks from the Democratic National Committee to Wikileaks.

This afternoon I received an undated (and heavily redacted) transcript of an interview of James Rybicki, former chief of staff to former FBI Director James Comey, that includes this excerpt: “So we understand that at some point in October of 2016, there was, I guess, a desire by the White House to make some kind of statement about Russia’s…” and then the next page is omitted.

The comment is made by an unidentified prosecutor from the U.S. Office of Special Counsel or “OSC,” not to be confused with the office of former Special Counsel Robert Mueller (the OSC is a permanent office that investigates Hatch Act violations, and Mr. Comey was under investigation for trying to influence the 2016 Presidential election).

Roger Stone’s Indictment

Trump friend Roger Stone is facing charges from the Mueller gang that are based on this key question – who provided the DNC and Podesta emails to WikiLeaks?

The corrupt FBI and Mueller team claim the emails were hacked but neither entity inspected the DNC server which was supposedly hacked. They have provided no proof of this.

The DNC instead hired a firm Crowdstrike, with connections to Mueller and former Obama Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, who provided a redacted report to the FBI and Mueller stating the emails were hacked by Russia.

Former NSA whistleblower Bill Binney claims he has evidence the DNC emails were not hacked but copied most likely on to a flashdrive or something similar.

Bill Binney, is more than an expert, he is “A Good American”. Binney developed a system for the NSA that would have identified the 9-11 terrorist attack before it occurred, but the NSA shut down his project. This is all documented in Oliver Stone’s “A Good American”. We encourage you to watch this video about Binney’s work with the NSA and their subsequent follow up after 9-11 below –

We also reported –

When Ty Clevenger requested documents from the FBI related to any investigation into the death of Seth Rich, they replied that they never investigated Seth Rich and they don’t even have any records on him –

But when documents were requested from the NSA, they replied that they won’t release their records regarding Seth Rich because it’s a matter of national security –

USC 552(b)(1) states: This section does not apply to matters that are—

(A) specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive order to be kept secret in the interest of national defense or foreign policy and (B) are in fact properly classified pursuant to such Executive order;

So the FBI never investigated the Seth Rich murder even though the NSA said the case was a matter of national security?

Attorney Ty Clevenger requested documents again from the FBI related to any communications related to the death of Seth Rich –

Clevenger claims that the FBI did not perform its search in good faith after first declaring that they did not have to perform the search. Clevenger also claims that his client, Ed Butowsky, has information that the Seth Rich’s devices were inspected and he wants the results of those investigations –

Clevenger wants the FBI to continue their search and not cover things up because their first review for documents related to Seth Rich was inadequate.

Update Today October 10, 2019 ==>>

Clevenger has requested that the US Department of Justice provide him documents he is requesting based on some new information and also is asking the court to allow him to compel the FBI
to produce Mr. Hardy (the individual at the FBI who has not provided documents requested) and the chief of CART as witnesses at an evidentiary hearing –

Clevenger is making his request based on some new information that he obtained related to actions the FBI took related to Seth Rich.  According to Deep State reported Michael Isikoff formerly with Newsweek and now with Yahoo (yes, the same individual involved in the Russia collusion hoax) the FBI had numerous activities related to Seth Rich.  On page two of Clevenger’s motion, Clevenger notes the following discussion that can be heard on Isikoff’s podcast

So according to Deep State hack Isikoff –

1 The FBI had been contacted by the DOJ about Seth Rich
2 The FBI had been examining Seth Rich’s computer
3 The FBI was looking into Seth Rich’s gmail account
4 The FBI investigated an attempt to hack into Seth Rich’s computer
5 And, finally, confirmed liar Andrew McCabe from the FBI said there was nothing to the stories regarding Seth Rich!

Hmmm, it sure sounds like the FBI is trying to hide something.

Americans demand the truth!

Hat tip D. Manny

via EXCLUSIVE: Despite Prior FBI Statements that Seth Rich’s DNC Computer and Emails Were Investigated, FBI Now Claims in FOIA Request that No Related Docs Exist — The Gateway Pundit

Who Are the Kurds and Why Should America Care? — Istoria Ministries Blog

The Kurdish people are under attack by the erratic President Erdogan of Turkey, the modern-day equivalent of Adolph Hitler.

For the sake of Kurdistan and the lives of the Kurds, I can not understand why President Trump is siding with President Erdogan.

Who are the Kurdish people?

They are the Medes in the Bible. They are the descendants of Madai, one of the sixteen grandsons of Noah (see Genesis 10:2).

The Medes settled in Amida, a city that carried their name (a-madai). Amida was renamed Diyarbakur by the conquering Muslim Arabs during the 7th century AD Muslim conquests of Persia.  The Arabs began calling the ethnic Medes who lived in the Zagros Mountains by the Arabic name Kurds. The Arabs had found the land of the highly intelligent and industrial Medes dotted with cities surrounded by beautiful black asphalt walls and copper resources. Divarbakir is an Arabic name which means “land of bakr (Kurd) people.” The ethnic Medes (Kurds) fell under Arab Muslim domination.

Today Divarbakir (or ancient Amida) is the largest city in southeastern Turkey and it has an overwhelming majority of ethnic Medes (Kurds) that populate the city and region.  Ancient Amida (or Divarbakir) is the unofficial capital of Kurdistan, the name for the region that encompasses portions of four countries (Syria, Turkey, Iraq, and Iran) where the Kurdish people live. The ethnic Kurds number 35 million strong and compose the world’s largest stateless nation. Kurdistan is only a geographical region; but according to an October 9, 2019 statement from Ayelet Shaked, the former Israel Justice Minister, Kurdistan should be its own nation.

The Muslim Arabs (Sunnis and Shias) of Syria, Turkey, Iran, and Iraq have always struggled with what to do with the Kurds. Why?

The Medes (Kurds) of southeast Turkey, northern Syria, northwestern Iran, and northern Iraq are different ethnically, culturally, and historically from the conquering Sunni Muslim Arabs in Turkey and Iraq and from the conquering Shia Muslim Arabs in Syria and Iran.

A Kurdish (Mede) woman, her baby, and son fleeing the Turks

The Kurds are the descendants of the ancient Medes and are not ethnically and culturally Arabic.

What we have going on during this October 2019 Turkish invasion of Kurdistan is an ethnic cleansing. It’s a holocaust. President Trump should know better than to allow it to happen.

Close family members to the Medes (or modern Kurds) are the Persians in Iran. The descendants of Medai began to multiply and move east from the Zagros Mountains, the mountain range where Noah’s ark settled. As the Medes moved south and east, they eventually built cities in modern day Iran where they became known as the Persian people.

The Medes and the Persians come from the same ancestral stock. If you look at the language of today’s Medes (Kurds) in Turkey and Syria (a language called Kurmanj or sometimes Kurdish) and compare it to the language of today’s Persians in Iran (a language called Farsi), you will see how similar they are when you count from one (yak) to ten (da).

The Medes and the Persians have had their own separate culture, religion, and history from that of the Arabs. When the Arab Muslims moved north from the Arabian Peninsula and conquered the Medes and the Persians during the early Arab Muslim invasions, the Arabs forced Islam on the Medes and Persians. But there has always been hostility between the native ethnic Kurds and Persians and their conquering leaders.

The Arab Muslim fundamentalist Shia government in Iran no more likes the ethnic Persians in their country than the Arab Muslim fundamentalist Sunni government of Turkey likes the ethnic Medes (Kurds) who form the majority of the population in the southeastern portion of their country (Turkey) as well as northern Syria and northern Iraq.

The Mede prophet Balaam prophesying the Messiah’s coming

Let me give you some insight into a few people you might know from your readings of the Bible who are of Mede and Persian descent. It’s interesting to note that the Bible speaks of the Medes and Persians as one people.

The Medes/Persians gave us the prophet Balaam who in 1500 B.C. announced:

“I see Him… I behold Him… “A star shall come out of Jacob, and a scepter shall rise out Israel…One out of Jacob shall rule.” (Numbers 24:17)

The oracle from this ancient Mede is considered the first Messianic prophecy of Jesus to come from a foreigner, or one not a Hebrew. Balaam was what people today call a Kurd.

During the 10th century BC, the Hebrews who lived in the northern Kingdom of Israel were captured by an Assyrian king and taken “to the towns of the Medes”  (II Kings 18:11), towns and locations that are today in northern Syria, northern Iraq, and southeastern Turkey. The 10 northern tribes of Israel settled in this region of the Zagros mountains called Kurdistan (see map at the top of this blog).

Over time, the Hebrews of the 10 northern tribes of Israel in the Bible INTERMARRIED with the Medes.

Map from Christopher Crossan’s book Children of the Magi. 

In 2001, The American Journal of Human Genetics issued a report entitled “The Y Chromosome Pool of Jews as Part of the Genetic Landscape of the Middle East.” The article states:

“Jews are more closely related to groups in the north of the Fertile Crescent (i.e. Kurds) than to their Arab neighbors.

In other words, the Kurds are more Jewish than Arab. For more information on this migration of Jews to Kurdistan, see Christopher Crossan’s superb book entitled Children of the Magi.

The Medes/Persians gave us King Cyrus, whom the prophet Isaiah calls “The Messiah of the Jews” (see Isaiah chapters 44 and 45). King Cyrus freed the Jews of Judea from Babylonian captivity in 539 BC. Even Jews living  today revere the ancient Mede/Persian King Cyrus.

The prophet Daniel settled among the Medes and the Persians in 605 BC. He founded a “School of the Magi,” where he trained the Medes and the Persians in the art of knowing the One true God. Daniel is buried in modern Iran.

The Medes/Persians gave us the Wise Men from the East who came looking for the newborn “King of the Jews” (Matthew 2:1-12).  They’d read Daniel’s scroll and had been trained in the Mede/Persian School of the Magi (founded by Daniel). These Wise Men are what we’d call modern Kurds. They knew Daniel understood that a great Messiah, the star from Jacob mentioned by the Mede prophet Balaam, would be born at a specific time (see Daniel 11).

The gospel of Jesus Christ spread rapidly among the areas of the Medes and the Persians during the days of the Parthian Empire (until AD 224) and the Sasinian Empire (until 651 AD). The Medes and Persians (Kurds) came to faith in Jesus Christ because their ancient religion, Zoroastrianism, shared a few similar teachings to the Christian faith, including a Supreme God, a final judgment, and doing good for your fellow man.

But then came the Arab Muslim conquest.  Soon, the Medes (e.g. Kurds) and the Persians were forced to submit to Islam (Islam means “submission”).

Yet, the Medes and the Persians (now called “the Kurds” by the Arabs),  would often rebel against their Arab masters and side with western countries during times of world conflict.

For example, the Sunni Arabs in Turkey founded the Ottoman Empire  during the 14th century and attempted to rule the world. World War I broke up the Ottoman Empire, and because of the help the Medes (Kurds) gave to the west during World War I, the Kurds were promised a land of their own (Kurdistan) by their western allies. The west broke their promise to the Kurds. Kurdistan was never formed, but Turkey, modern Iraq, Syria, and Iran were given their current borders by western powers.

Fast forward to World War II.  Turkey signed a Non-Aggression Pact with Nazi Germany in 1941. Turkey didn’t declare war on the Reich until 1945. Meanwhile,  the ancient Medes (the Kurdish people) were largely living under Allied Forces due to the French mandate in Syria and the British mandate in Iraq. The Kurds assisted the Allies in the fight against the Nazis. President Trump recently confused Turkey’s unwillingness to fight the Nazis with the Kurds. Somebody needs to give our President a history lesson.

Because of their assistance, the Kurds (Medes) were again promised a country of their own by western powers. But once again, the United States and western allies turned its back on the descendants of Medai (the Kurds), and refused to give them Kurdistan. The decision to not create Kurdistan and back out on our promise probably had to do with not wanting to offend the post-World War II Arabic governments of Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and Syria.

During the Gulf War, President Bush promised a country to the Kurds if they helped the United States throw off the government of Saddam Hussein. The Kurds delivered. The United States once again backed out on its promise.

The Battle Against ISIS

Medes (Kurds) in Syria fleeing from the invading Turks

The Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) is a radical Sunni Muslim group responsible for terror around the world, including the World Trade Center bombings.

Guess who has helped us fight ISIS?

The Medes of Kurdistan. They’ve lost 11,000 men fighting side by side with United States soldiers against ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

Now the United States is abandoning our allies.

But don’t count the Kurds out. The Kurdistan Democratic Party of Syria is called a terrorist organization by President Erdogan of Turkey. Come on President Trump. Get your facts straight. Don’t believe a dictator who has jailed more journalists than any other world leader during each of the last three years, and whose bodyguards savagely beat protesters at the door of your own White House. Why would you side with a radical Muslim dictator (Erdogan) and abandon a Democratic Christian ally?

Like the ancient Jews, Turkey may find out that the people they call terrorists (Kurds) are actually smart, civilized, and battle-hardened. They are in an existential war for their survival.

And like their cousin the Jews, when it is an existential battle, woe be to the army that invades.

Pray for the modern Medes as they fight against an erratic Muslim leader named Erdogan.

Please, President Trump, do not abandon the Syrian Christians that need our help more than ever.

Kurdish Democratic Christian soldiers in Syria (source: Christianity Today)

via Who Are the Kurds and Why Should America Care? — Istoria Ministries Blog

Doug Collins: “Impeachment Inquiry Will Backfire”…. — The Last Refuge

If House Speaker Nancy Pelosi didn’t have the media pushing her narrative the impeachment effort would have already failed.    In this interview Judiciary committee ranking member Doug Collins states the un-American inquiry is likely to backfire.

via Doug Collins: “Impeachment Inquiry Will Backfire”…. — The Last Refuge

Have Democrats Forgotten Who Rudy Giuliani Is? | LifeZette

One of the first things you do in a political fight is your homework.

The Democrats seem to have neglected this basic rule of thumb in taking stock of Republican Rudy Giuliani, the former New York City mayor and a former federal prosecutor.

Today, along with former Rep.Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), Giuliani is running the president’s legal defense against baseless charges of a Ukrainian quid pro quo, which the Dems hope will lead to the president’s removal from office.

You would think it would be an easy defense — as the charges against President Donald Trump are patently absurd.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said essentially the same thing, as reported by the Fox News Channel, at a media event in Kiev on Thursday.

But Dems like House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.) are hoping the very absurdity of the claims make them immune from successful counter-attack, as it is difficult to fight hysterical hyperbole with facts.

However, Rudy Giuliani is used to tough fights.

We all came to respect and look to him for leadership as mayor of New York City in the perilous days immediately after the 9/11 attacks on our country.

Related: On 9/11 Anniversary, Giuliani Reveals What He Said to George W. Bush

Before that, Giuliani was also a tough-as-nails federal prosecutor responsible for breaking the back of organized crime in New York.

As a result of his tenure as U.S. attorney, the magic Teflon around much of the five crime families of New York was scraped clean. What was left due to his office was a rancid coating of underworld thugs all too willing to cut deals to save their own skins.

The Dems are up against the man who broke the Mafia.

Interestingly enough, two of his associates now have been arrested at Dulles Airport outside of D.C. on campaign finance charges.

Lev Parnas and Igor Fruman are represented by Giuliani on a separate civil matter, though they also aided him on his Ukrainian investigations.

These arrests, allegedly related to donations in U.S. elections, are fishy.

Given the timing, this is likely another attempt, as we’ve seen in the past, to muddy the waters when Dems sense bad news is coming their way. They well know what the primary edict of crisis management is: to change the subject.

So we’ll see a lot of press play on this for the obvious goal of stacking up spurious charges until the perception, by the very volume of allegations, is that the president and/or Giuliani had to have done something wrong — or why all the bad reports?

But the former mayor has had tougher challenges than this guilt-by-association set-up job run by the media, the Dems, and the lawyers out for headlines.

As hard as they will try, it won’t stick to Giuliani.

The man is also a keen political analyst. I found this out in person as I was entering Holt’s Cigars on Walnut Street in Philadelphia during the 2016 Democratic convention.

A friend and I were taking in the wacky political circus, as one would review the reptile house at a zoo. I lived in the city at the time, so that made it easy.

As we were coming into Holt’s to smoke cigars in a first-floor lounge, I noticed there was someone else coming in right behind us — three people, actually. As I chose my cigar and went to the counter to pay, standing next to me was Giuliani and two associates. I was dumbstruck.

I have been in and around pols of all stripes and levels of office since I worked my first election as a volunteer when I was nine years old in 1970. (Yes, I’m that much of a political geek.) I pride myself on a properly cynical and blasé attitude when it comes to pols.

I see them, at least those who were my clients when I was a political consultant, as products, nothing more.

But Rudy had me acting like a fan of Tiger Beat magazine.

He put out his hand, introduced himself, and asked me what kind of cigar I was smoking. I croaked out a response and introduced myself. That started a short conversation, probably not more than five minutes, about the upcoming general election. He nailed it.

Months before anybody, including me, thought Donald Trump could pull it off, he told me, “Watch the Upper Midwest. Watch Wisconsin. And Pennsylvania? It’s ours.”

He then graciously took a picture with us and left with his group.

The not-so-brilliant legal minds of Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) are up against this guy.

This is reminiscent of actor Jason Isaacs’ hilarious portrayal of Marshall Zhukov — playing him like a British gangster — in the brilliant 2017 film “The Death of Stalin.”

When asked by Khrushchev, played by Steve Buscemi, if he and his Red Army can take on the Soviet secret police chief, Isaacs-as-Zhukov responds, “I took Germany. I think I can take a flesh lump in a waistcoat.”

When Giuliani gets to testify on the Hill — and much more so during cross examination in a Senate trial if it comes to that — we’re going to see Dem “flesh lumps” have their game turned full around on them.

Serves them right for not doing their homework.

This article has been updated.

Source: Have Democrats Forgotten Who Rudy Giuliani Is?

State Dept Witness Testifies Hillary Clinton Was Fully Informed of Federal Records Management, Including Email Records on Six Occasions — The Gateway Pundit

Graphic via Judicial Watch

Judicial Watch is fighting in court to depose Hillary Clinton.

Hillary Clinton’s lawyers pushed back on Judicial Watch last month and argued that Hillary has already answered all the questions about her private server and Benghazi.

Judicial Watch rejected their argument and said Hillary’s answers about the use of her private server actually raised more questions.

Judicial Watch should be permitted to directly question Secretary Clinton about her motives, thoughts, and efforts regarding the “convenience” she relies upon in justifying her use of a secret, private server and email address in direct violation of federal records laws and State Department policies.

A State Department witness testified that Hillary Clinton was fully informed of federal records management on at least six occasions.

Clinton also suggests that her emails would have been captured by State Department records systems, which is contradicted by Tasha Thian, a retired senior State records official, recently questioned by Judicial Watch:

According to Ms. Thian’s testimony, there are at least six occasions Secretary Clinton was or should have been fully informed of federal records management, including email records, and compliance responsibilities. Yet Secretary Clinton’s actual understanding of her obligations with respect to official State Department records is completely absent from the record.

Thian implied that it was inconceivable that Clinton was not aware of her obligations regarding federal records and email management:

I don’t understand why she would come up with this statements that she was allowed – or how she would save record email by emailing another employee’s account. She had resources there aplenty. So it just doesn’t make sense to me.

[Even before taking office, Secretary Clinton] knew we had a process.

Recall, it was Judicial Watch in 2015 who blew the story wide open about Hillary Clinton’s use of a private server while she was the head of the Department of State.

Hillary Clinton panicked and used BleachBit to destroy 33,000 emails and her aides took hammers to her BlackBerrys (all under congressional subpoena) in order to hide her Clinton Foundation pay-to-play scheme.

Judicial Watch has been fighting to get Hillary Clinton’s ‘missing’ emails ever since. Through FOIA lawsuits, Judicial Watch has obtained thousands of Hillary Clinton’s emails which proved she transmitted classified information over her private server and even outed the name of clandestine CIA officer.

Hillary Clinton is still freely walking around — meanwhile two of Rudy Giuliani’s associates were arrested Thursday for ‘campaign finance violations.’

“Hillary Clinton is now joking about her emails even as she seeks to avoid being questioned on this serious scandal,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “The court has found that this email use and cover-up are no joking matter.”

You can support Tom Fitton and Judicial Watch by clicking here.

via State Dept Witness Testifies Hillary Clinton Was Fully Informed of Federal Records Management, Including Email Records on Six Occasions — The Gateway Pundit

Why Fox’s ‘51% want impeachment’ poll is probably wrong | WND

Nancy Pelosi

Remember the 2016 presidential election polls just before the vote?

The American Association for Public Opinion Research concluded Hillary Clinton’s “likelihood of winning the presidency was about 90 percent, with estimates ranging from 71 to over 99 percent.”

Now, President Trump is recalling that failed forecast in his response to a Fox News poll that finds a new high of 51 percent wants Trump impeached and removed from office.

“From the day I announced I was running for President, I have NEVER had a good @FoxNews Poll,” he wrote Thursday on Twitter. “Whoever their Pollster is, they suck. But @FoxNews is also much different than it used to be in the good old days.”

Fox News said that “since July, support for impeachment increased among voters of all stripes: up 11 points among Democrats, 5 points among Republicans and 3 among independents.”

“Support also went up among some of Trump’s key constituencies, including white evangelical Christians (+5 points), white men without a college degree (+8), and rural whites (+10).”

The report, which was the top headline on the popular Drudge Report, said that “among voters in swing counties (where Hillary Clinton and Trump were within 10 points in 2016), support for impeachment increased to 52 percent, up from 42 percent in July.”

Fox pointed out that “a lot has happened” on impeachment, with House Democrats ramping up their “impeachment inquiry.”

But just a day earlier, a Zogby poll found that in most of the nation’s demographic groups, a plurality expects President Trump to be re-elected in 2020.

“Nearly half of voters (47%) think President Trump will win re-election in 2020, while 41% say no, and it’s not just his base!” the report said.

Men by a 55% to 29% percent margin say so. So do young Millennials by 43% to 38%. And Gen X by 49% to 30%. And older voters 47% to 32%. Independents by 36% to 29%. Suburban voters, 42% to 34%. Large city voters, 51% to 32%. Union voters, 58% to 23%. Middle income, 56% to 32%. Upper income voters, 59% to 26%.

“Even in the demographic groups in which he’s not winning — women, Hispanics and moderates — the differential was no more than a single percentage point,” the report said.

“The public’s sentiment toward Trump is a mixed bag. Although, a plurality might support impeachment of Trump, his approval numbers are still very high. We currently have Trump’s job approval at 50% approve and 48% disapprove-October 3, 2019,” the report said.

The analysts at FiveThirtyEight suggested Trump might have some grounds for complaint, arguing the media focus on the impeachment drive itself could throw off polls.

“The impeachment story is blowing up. It’s a high-stakes moment — for President Trump, for Democrats and for pollsters. It’s also a scary moment for polling. Yes, people who follow politics are now intensely interested in whether the latest developments might shift public opinion about Trump and impeachment. But when news is exceptionally big, a growing body of evidence suggests it can throw off the accuracy of polling itself,” FiveThirtyEight said.

“The problem comes from what pollsters call ‘differential nonresponse bias.’ The idea behind this complex-sounding term is fairly straightforward: If partisans on one side of a political question respond to a survey more readily than partisans on the other side, you can get a polling error. The results in your poll won’t match the real-world opinion you’re trying to measure — instead, the poll will be skewed by how willing some people are to respond to a survey.”

The site pointed out that pollsters try to correct for such issues but aren’t always successful.

Especially, when it comes to “the highest of high-profile news events.”

“We have evidence of several brief episodes of nonresponse error, and all three came in the wake of big news stories near the conclusion of an election — in 2012, 2016 and 2018.”

In 2012, what appeared to be challenger Mitt Romney “chipping away” at President Barack Obama’s poll lead was “caused by a change in what kinds of people were responding to surveys,” it said.

Then in 2016, it was discovered Trump’s supporters “were less likely than Hillary Clinton supporters to participate in panel reinterviews conducted just after the release of the ‘Access Hollywood’ tape,” the report said.

In 2018, following the nationally televised congressional hearing in which Christine Blasey Ford leveled accusations of sexual assault against Brett Kavanaugh, “the survey completion rate jumped 3 percentage points among those who expressed approval of Trump while remaining essentially flat among those who expressed disapproval,” the report said.

The composition of the sampled groups changed, even after demographic weighting.

“What do these phantom trends have in common? Each came about a month before a national election, which may speak to the power of election campaigns in heightening awareness of political news. But more importantly, each involved the kind of story that FiveThirtyEight editor-in-chief Nate Silver recently described, in the context of handling ‘outlier’ polls, as ‘spectacular, blockbuster news events that dominate the news cycle for a week or more,’ the sort of story that happens only once or twice in an election cycle,” FiveThirtyEight said.

When polls suddenly show significant shifts on an issue such as impeachment, FiveThirtyEight asked, “will it be because Americans are genuinely warming to the idea or simply because Democrats are becoming more likely to take surveys than Republicans?”

The AAPOR defending its work in 2016, claiming that “national polls were generally correct by historical standards.”

They showed Clinton with a 3 percentage point lead, and she won the “popular vote by 2 percentage points.” However, the nation doesn’t elect by popular vote, but by the Electoral College, where Trump was a huge winner.

The pollsters blamed “state-level polls” that “showed a competitive, uncertain contest.”

The state polls showed Trump was one state away from winning the election.

In Pennsylvania, Michigan and Wisconsin, however, the polls forecast a seventh consecutive win for the Democratic candidate.

The pollsters said 13% of voters in those states decided in the last week. And pollsters failed to adjust for an overrepresentation in of voters with “higher education levels” who were “more likely to support Clinton.”

And there simply were many voters who “did not reveal themselves as Trump voters until after the election and they outnumbered late-revealing Clinton voters.”

The reported explained: “About those predictions that Clinton was 90 percent likely to win. … However well-intentioned these predictions may have been, they helped crystalize the belief that Clinton was a shoo-in for president, with unknown consequences for turnout. While a similar criticism can be leveled against polls – i.e., they can indicate an election is uncompetitive, perhaps reducing some people’s motivation to vote – polls and forecasting models are not one and the same. As the late pollster Andrew Kohut once noted (2006), ‘I’m not a handicapper, I’m a measurer. There’s a difference.’ Pollsters and astute poll reporters are often careful to describe their findings as a snapshot in time, measuring public opinion when they are fielded … Forecasting models do something different – they attempt to predict a future event. As the 2016 election proved, that can be a fraught exercise, and the net benefit to the country is unclear.”

Source: Why Fox’s ‘51% want impeachment’ poll is probably wrong

The Media Bends Over Backward to Protect Elizabeth Warren from the Washington Free Beacon’s Damaging Scoop — National Review

Caught in another apparent lie about her personal history, Elizabeth Warren offered another vague response. Her allies in the press dutifully bought it.

via The Media Bends Over Backward to Protect Elizabeth Warren from the Washington Free Beacon’s Damaging Scoop — National Review

Constitution Slowly Disappearing Like In ‘Back To The Future’ — The Babylon Bee

WASHINGTON, D.C.—According to stunned officials working at the National Archives, the text of the United States Constitution has slowly begun disappearing from existence, much like Marty McFly and his family in the classic 1985 sci-fi/adventure film Back to the Future.

Experts stated the text began to mysteriously disappear sometime during the Bush administration and rapidly accelerated under both Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

“It’s exactly like in Spielberg’s classic adventure film, when the time-loop paradox began to corrupt the timeline and the McFlys slowly started to disappear from existence,” Dr. Emmett Christopher, an expert in American history said. “If something isn’t done immediately, the entire Constitution will be erased from history forever.”

“Great Scott!” he added.

At publishing time, witnesses in New York claimed the Statue of Liberty was also beginning to fade from view.

via Constitution Slowly Disappearing Like In ‘Back To The Future’ — The Babylon Bee

Sarah Sanders Disputes Impeachment Poll During Fox News Interview | LifeZette

Sarah Sanders, the former White House press secretary, is a great friend and supporter of President Donald Trump.

Related: Sarah Sanders: ‘Women Attack Me Relentlessly’

And even though she’s no longer in the White House, she’s still a master at sidestepping a trap.

That’s precisely what she did, in my opinion, during an appearance on the Fox News network on Thursday morning as a contributor to Fox.

She was asked what she thought about the “shocking” Fox News poll that shows a majority of Americans want President Trump impeached and removed from the White House.

Hogwash, in my view.

First off, I feel the poll is rigged.

It’s garbage and should not be taken seriously.

Secondly, President Trump also addressed the absurd poll on Thursday morning in a tweet.

Sanders handled the question about the (phony) poll like a pro.

She stood by President Trump — as she always has done.

But what Sanders did best is that she gave no credibility to the ridiculous poll results.

Not one iota. 

“Former White House press secretary Sarah Sanders appeared on Fox News and openly panned Thursday a poll published by the network that showed a majority of respondents wanted President Donald Trump impeached and removed from office,” as The Daily Caller pointed out.

“The latest Fox News polling showing this as far as where respondents stand on the president being impeached and removed from office. It shows 51 percent say that should happen. I want to get your response to that before I let you go,” Fox News host Sandra Smith said to her, the outlet also noted.

“If anybody can handle a lot of different things on their plate, it is certainly Donald Trump,” Sanders replied.

“He has proven that time and time again whether it’s focusing on trade, the defeat of ISIS, rebuilding our military. He is very capable of doing a number of things at one time. I think that impeachment is very bad for our country,” she also said.

“But frankly, it has not been bad so far for Republican fundraising or candidate recruitment. I think those two things mean infinitely more than a poll a year out.”

She also predicted, as the Caller noted, that “at the end of the day [he] will be fully vindicated on the fake Ukraine scandal like he was on the fake Russia scandal.”

Watch the video below to see for yourself:

A version of this piece originally appeared in WayneDupree.com; this article is used by permission.

Source: Sarah Sanders Disputes Impeachment Poll During Fox News Interview

Christianity Is Teaming With Creepy Con-artists, Soothsayers, Heavenly Tourism Peddlers & Partakers In ‘Faith-based’ Yoga — Christian Research Network

(Marsha West – Christian Research Network)  “It’s not easy being green,” crooned Kermit the Frog. “People tend to pass you over…because you’re not standing out like flashy sparkles in the water, or stars in the sky.”

It’s not easy being a “Christian Discerner” either. But, as Kermit sang, “I think it’s what I want to be.” Like the little green frog, I’m not standing out like flashy sparkles.  But I’m okay with that….because I think a discerner is what God wants me to be.

For the time being, anyway.

Over the years I’ve spent a great deal of time investigating the cults, occult, and all sorts of aberrant religious movements that have crept into evangelicalism like a thief in the night. Whenever I come across something that violates biblical principles, I don’t keep it to myself.  I share it on my blog, Christian Research Network and on my Facebook page.

It probably won’t come as a surprise to learn that Christian Discerners can become discouraged. Speaking for myself, I’ve discovered a lot of “bad stuff” about Christian luminaries over the years, even those I admired at the time. For one thing, I’ve discovered that men and women I thought were trustworthy are up to their earlobes in false teaching. Even our leaders can and have failed the Berean test (Acts 11:17). Which is the reason so many of them have wandered off the straight and narrow path onto Wolf Lane. It’s distressing that Christ’s beloved sheep fill their minds with unbiblical teaching from popular Bible teachers without adhering to John’s warning: Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world. (1 John 4:1)

The facts bear out that a growing number of evangelicals have little or no grasp of sound doctrine.  Simply stated, they don’t understand the basics of what they believe. If asked, they’re unable to defend their faith. And yet, 1 Peter 3:15 admonishes, “but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.” The main reason Christians cannot defend the faith is because they’re not reading/studying the Bible. Moreover, many of those who consider themselves Christians are under the influence of wolves in sheep’s clothing. So naturally they parrot the error they’ve been exposed to.

As a result, a growing number of Christ’s sheep have no clue that some ministers, Bible teachers, writers, event speakers, entertainers, film makers and so on aren’t feeding them a healthy diet. On the contrary. Even highly regarded Church leaders and pastors dispense arsenic to the flock without them knowing it!

Make no mistake. Many Christian celebs are creepy con-artists. Moreover, a lot people who teach the Bible, even in churches, are simply ill-equipped. Instead of teaching sound doctrine, as the Bible instructs us to do, they’re teaching is weak, highly unorthodox and, in many cases, out right heretical. Even after being exposed to the truth, many Christ followers choose to embrace false teaching. (Stay tuned for a few examples.)

The sad fact is that students of the Bible are not learning authentic, biblical Christianity. Malleable minds are being filled with the worst kind of occult teaching imaginable. It’s the sort of thing worldly Christians gravitate to.

It pains me to say this, but I know professing believers who have zero interest in growing in wisdom and knowledge, nor do they desire to draw closer to their Savior. If they wanted to grow spiritually, they’d take the time to read the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God. It is in the pages of Holy Writ that God reveals Himself and His ways to those who seek Him.

So, with all this in mind, following are three examples of close friends of mine that plugged their ears when I pointed out some of their unbiblical beliefs and pleaded with them to guard against error. As you will see, my friends chose to ignore sound biblical advice. My hope is that others who are in error will read this, repent of their sin, and flee from false teachers and their destructive heresies.

Christian Mysticism

A growing number of evangelicals practice what is often called contemplative, centering or listening prayer (more on this here) that comes straight from Roman Catholic mystical monks. Participating in contemplative prayer (CP) will not get anyone one millimeter closer to God. In fact, the goal of this meditative state is to empty one’s mind, which results in an “altered state of consciousness.” This sort of meditation is not biblical, brethren. What is biblical meditation, you ask? Simply reading what God says in His Word and keeping our minds active while we soak up His wisdom.  Point of fact: CP meditation isn’t Christian, it’s Eastern (Hindu, Buddhist) in origin. Anyone who chooses to practice CP is wading into the world of the occult. Those who read the Bible know that God makes it clear that his children are not to involve themselves in any sort of pagan practice —  He expressly forbids it!

Now to my dear Christian sister, I’ll call her Carol. A few years ago Carol was having issues with a family member and she and her husband were unsure how to handle the situation. A friend of Carol’s, who attends Bethel Church in Redding CA, suggested that she find a quiet place where she could go to “listen to God” on the matter.  She was instructed to write down what she heard God saying to her in her mind. So Carol complied, feeling certain that the voice she heard was God speaking to her. As the words flowed into her thoughts, she’d write them in a journal. After a few weeks Carol shared with me what she believed God was telling her. She wanted to know what I thought of the process. I took a deep breath and responded as calmly as I could under the circumstances that what she had described to me was a New Age practice called automatic writing (AW). I explained that so-called psychics practice AW and that the object was to channel information through the “spirit” that flows through the person’s hands. The channeled information includes predictions and prophecy. Moreover, modern day prophets believe that it’s possible to receive direct, divine revelation from God apart from Scripture. I also informed her that this practice was not from God. At the end of our conversation I urged her to toss the journal in the trash. She revealed that her husband had told her that he wasn’t comfortable with what she was into and also urged her to stop doing it. A few weeks later Carol informed me that she had tossed the journal in the trash.

There’s more. My dear sister mentioned that some of her “Christian” friends have the spiritual gift of “dream interpretation.” Carol believes the women have this so-called gift, so she has them interpret some of her dreams. She shared with me what one woman claimed God was conveying through Carol’s dreams. Not one to pull punches, I told her that the woman was practicing witchcraft. I also reminded her that it was possible that the “Christian” dream interpreters were not hearing from God; they were channeling deceptive spirits. In other words, demons. what if the teacher happens to be a disgraced angel who “masquerades as an angel of light” the scriptures warn us about? The next time you decide to call on an angel for help and guidance keep in mind that the Bible makes it abundantly clear that Satan and his minions are characterized as ferocious wolves that hide beneath sheep’s skin to deceive their prey!

People who wish to see what their future holds fail to understand that God expressly forbids fortune-telling…the use of spells…incantations…speaking to or channeling spirits…divination of any kind.  King Manasseh is condemned for his many evil practices, including sorcery: “And he burned his sons as an offering in the Valley of the Son of Hinnom, and used fortune-telling and omens and sorcery, and dealt with mediums and with necromancers. He did much evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking him to anger.” (2 Chronicles 33:6)  The Apostle Paul gives us fair warning that anyone who’s involved in occult practices will not inherit the kingdom of God. (Galatians 5:19-21)

Sadly, most often during desperate times, Carol continues listening to and taking advice from “Christians” who have led her to believe that the Holy Spirit has given them a prophetic gift.

Heaven Tourism

Some of the conversations I have with friends don’t always end well. A while back I was talking to a Christian sister, I’ll call her Susan, who mentioned seeing the movie Heaven Is For Real: A Little Boy’s Astounding Story of His Trip to Heaven and Back. Heaven Is For Real is the most popular of the many Heaven Tourism books. Susan asked if I’d seen the movie. No, said I. She thought it was a wonderful film and asked me why I hadn’t seen it. I replied that the book the movie was based on had an unbiblical depiction of heaven. In other words, all the things that 4-year-old Colton Burpo told his parents he saw when he visited heaven wasn’t even close to what we’re told heaven is like in the Bible. The fact that the boy’s story was unbiblical didn’t phase Susan at all; she let it roll off and said, “You have to see the movie. You’ll love it.” I replied, “Sorry to be blunt, but what people learn from Colton’s experience in heaven is a lie from the pit of hell.” I then explained that I’d researched the book and although I believed that the child experienced something, he didn’t go to heaven. Susan wasn’t having it. She snapped “Why would a little boy make up a story about going to heaven?” I have all sorts of information on heaven tourism at my fingertips, so rather than debate her, I thought it would be best to email a few articles. One article was written by blogger and book reviewer Tim Challies. Challies concluded his piece with,

If you struggle believing what the Bible says, but learn to find security in the testimony of a toddler, well, I feel sorry for you. And I do not mean this in a condescending way. If God’s Word is not sufficient for you, if the testimony of his Spirit, given to believers, is not enough for you, you will not find any true hope in the unproven tales of a child. This hope may last for a moment, but it will not sustain you, it will not bless you, in those times when hope is waning and times are hard.

He also reminds his readers that “It is for man to die once and then the resurrection. To allow a man (or a boy) to experience heaven and then to bring him back would not be grace but cruelty.”

After reading the articles I sent, including Tim Challies’ review, Susan had this surprising response: “I read the articles and I remain convinced that the boy went to heaven.” Again, she urged me to see the movie so that I’ll understand why she believes a 4-year-old’s story.  And once I see the movie I’ll believe Colton Burpo, too. I made it perfectly clear to her that Colton’s experience doesn’t pass the smell test. The fact that there is no gospel presentation in the movie didn’t trouble her in the least. She’s convinced that people who see the movie will be saved. What does the Bible say about salvation?  “Faith comes from hearing and hearing through the word of Christ.” (Romans 10:17)

Christians who believe that the Bible is God’s inspired Word must not get taken in by a 4-year-old’s story about…anything. God’s people are to test everything; hold fast what is good.” (1 Thessalonians 5:21)

Our discussion ended with Susan having the last word: “You can believe what you want and I’ll believe what I want…and I believe the little boy.” Another way of putting it is, “You can believe the Bible’s teaching on heaven. I’ll go with my feelings.” Sadly, what the Bible reveals about heaven isn’t enough for Susan. Thus, she has chosen to reject the teaching of the Holy Spirit inspired Word of God and adopt a highly unbiblical view.

As an aside, Colton Burpo’s book has sold well over 10 million copies, and that’s just in English. “A lot of money is to be made in going to heaven,” reminds Christian apologist and speaker Justin Peters. “And that doesn’t even touch the movie….we’re talking about millions upon millions upon millions of dollars.” (Source)

John 1:18: No one has ever seen God; the only God, who is at the Father’s side, he has made him known.

Christians And Yoga?

For over a decade I’ve gone around and around with Kate, a professing Christian friend, who takes yoga classes – not so-called “Christian” yoga; she’s into traditional Hatha Yoga. I’ve given her all the reasons God’s people are to have nothing to do with pagan practices. I’ve explained the basic premise of yoga, which is the fundamental unity of all existence:

We are all aware that yoga means “union” and that the practice of yoga unites body, breath, and mind, lower and higher energy centers and, ultimately, self and God, or higher Self. But more broadly, yoga directs our attention to the unity or oneness that underlies our fragmented experiences and equally fragmented word. Family, friends, the Druze guerrilla in Lebanon, the great whale migrating north – all share the same essential [divine] nature (594:4).  (Source)

Kate says she doesn’t get involved in the spiritual aspect of yoga, she only does the stretches. What readers must understand is that simply because people think they’re just doing gentle stretches doesn’t necessarily make it so. Yoga has its roots in Hinduism.  Yoga poses are meant to be worshipful postures that mimic Hindu gods.

As I always do in these circumstances, I offered all sorts of reading material that will help my friend understand why Christians shouldn’t practice yoga. (I’ve prayed that she’ll quit the class, but she hasn’t.) As of this writing, Kate remains heavily involved in Hatha Yoga.

Since this article is already long, I’m not going to spend the same amount of time with Kate as I have with Carol and Susan. You’ll find out all you need to know about yoga in my Research Paper.

I’ll close with a quote by Dr. Harry Ironside:

Exposing error is most unpopular work. But from every true standpoint it is worthwhile work. To our Savior, it means that He receives from us, His blood-bought ones, the loyalty that is His due. To ourselves, if we consider “the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures of Egypt,” it ensures future reward, a thousand-fold. And to souls “caught in the snare of the fowler” – how many of them God only knows – it may mean light and life, abundant and everlasting.

Helpful:

Justin Peters: Heavenly Tourism

via Christianity Is Teaming With Creepy Con-artists, Soothsayers, Heavenly Tourism Peddlers & Partakers In ‘Faith-based’ Yoga — Christian Research Network

House Democrats Break with Lawless Pelosi and Her Secret Impeachment Process – Want to Hold a House Vote (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

Lawless Speaker Nancy Pelosi is facing pressure from fellow Democrats to vote for a resolution for impeachment.

Brave Democrats are speaking out against their lawless House leader.

Pelosi wants to impeach President Trump based on the lie that the US president threatened the Ukrainian president to investigate the Biden Crime family.
Democrats want to rush an impeachment through the US House.

Via FOX News:

via House Democrats Break with Lawless Pelosi and Her Secret Impeachment Process – Want to Hold a House Vote (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

STUNNING. FOX News Plays Trick on Viewers – Oversamples Democrats by 14 POINTS in Junk Impeachment Poll — The Gateway Pundit

FOX News Plays Trick on Viewers – Oversamples Democrats by 14 POINTS in Junk Impeachment Poll

Some people are blaming new board member Paul Ryan but is that really fair?

Rush Limbaugh warned about FOX News Channel’s turn against President Trump just last week.

FOX News posted a stunning poll on Thursday that shows that 51% of Americans want President Trump impeached on the media’s fraudulent Ukrainian accusations.

But FOX News used a poll that was weighted by 14 points in favor of Democrats.

via STUNNING. FOX News Plays Trick on Viewers – Oversamples Democrats by 14 POINTS in Junk Impeachment Poll — The Gateway Pundit

October 10, 2019 Afternoon Verse Of The Day

Its Perfidy to Compromise

With it we bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way. Does a fountain send out from the same opening both fresh and bitter water? Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs? Nor can salt water produce fresh. (3:9–12)

Finally, the tongue is characterized by what might be called its perfidy to compromise. Perfidy refers to deliberate breech of trust, or treachery, and the unbridled tongue is frequently guilty of such evil. The tongue is not just wild and raging like an animal, but clever, plotting, and subtly deceptive. It is hypocritical and duplicitous, eagerly willing to deceive in order to achieve its own advantage.

Every believer should use his tongue to bless our Lord and Father, just as God desires and expects of those who belong to Him. The Jews to whom James wrote were accustomed to pronouncing blessings on God at the end of each of the eighteen eulogies, or benedictions, they prayed three times a day, saying, “Blessed be Thou, O God.”

After collecting the generous gifts and offerings from the people for building the temple, “David blessed the Lord in the sight of all the assembly; and David said, ‘Blessed are You, O Lord God of Israel our father, forever and ever’ ” (1 Chron. 29:10). At the end of the prayer he “said to all the assembly, ‘Now bless the Lord your God.’ And all the assembly blessed the Lord, the God of their fathers, and bowed low and did homage to the Lord and to the king” (v. 20).

But with the same tongue with which we bless God, James continues, we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God. That is its perfidy, its treachery. Even unredeemed mankind retains the likeness of God, which, though utterly marred by the Fall, nevertheless is indestructible. Men continue to be like God in many ways—in intelligence, self-consciousness, reasoning, moral nature, emotions, and will.

How tragically inconsistent and hypocritical, therefore, that from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. Yet every believer has been guilty of that hypocrisy to some extent. It was not only the wicked scribes and Pharisees who claimed to bless God and yet demanded the crucifixion of His Son, accusing Him of blasphemy. Peter confessed that Jesus was “the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16); but while his Lord was on trial before the high priest, “he began to curse and swear, ‘I do not know the man!’ And immediately a rooster crowed. And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, ‘Before a rooster crows, you will deny Me three times.’ And he went out and wept bitterly” (Matt. 26:74–75). On one occasion, even the apostle Paul’s tongue slipped and he called the high priest a “whitewashed wall” (Acts 23:3). Even though he did not realize he was speaking to the high priest (v. 5), he uttered words that are not fitting in the mouth of a servant of God.

My brethren, James implores, these things ought not to be this way. Ou chrē (ought not) is a strong negative, used only here in the New Testament. The idea is that there should be no place in a Christian’s life for duplicitous speech. It is an unacceptable and intolerable compromise of righteous, holy living. When God transformed us, He gave us the capacity for new, redeemed, holy speech, and He expects us, as His children, to speak only that which is holy and right. Our “yes” and “no” should be honest (Matt. 5:37).

James explains this truth using three illustrations. First, he asks rhetorically, Does a fountain send out from the same opening both fresh and bitter water? The obvious answer is no. The same spring, or fountain, does not issue two vastly different kinds of water.

Doubtless alluding to the Lord’s words—“Grapes are not gathered from thorn bushes nor figs from thistles, are they?” (Matt. 7:16)—James asks, Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs? Again, the obvious and expected answer is no. Such a thing is utterly contrary to nature and cannot happen. He then states emphatically, Nor can salt water produce fresh. This also is clearly impossible, and no rational person would think twice about believing anything to the contrary.

A hateful heart cannot produce loving words or works. An unrighteous heart cannot produce righteous words or works. “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit,” Jesus explained, “nor can a bad tree produce good fruit.… So then, you will know them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:18, 20).

As mentioned above, there is an almost constant tension in the book of James between what is and what ought to be. At one point he says, “This is how it will be if you are a true believer,” and at another point he says, “That is also how it ought to be if you are a true believer.” Because we have been made righteous by Jesus Christ, we ought to live righteously and speak righteously, according to His will and by His power.[1]


The Inconsistency of the Tongue and the Consistency of God (3:9–12)

The tongue is hopelessly inconsistent. It blesses God one minute and curses mankind the next, as James 3:9–12 says:

With the tongue we praise our Lord and Father, and with it we curse men, who have been made in God’s likeness. Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers, this should not be. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring? My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.

One minute we use the tongue to bless the Lord, the next we use it to curse our fellow man, even though God fashioned mankind in his likeness. Such behavior is absurd, as absurd as a spring that pours out both fresh and salty water, as absurd as a single tree that bears both olives and figs (3:11–12).

Springs are consistent. They pour out the same clear water, often at nearly the same temperature, all year. Olive trees keep putting out olives. Yet the tongue is like a spring that vacillates between salty and clear water, or like a tree that bears peaches one day and papayas the next. James says simply, “My brothers, this should not be” (3:10).

Notice that James chides our inconsistency, even though he knows no one can consistently control the tongue. He rebukes us because the duty of watching our words remains. Since a small statement can cause great harm, we must guard our speech. We must strive to bless God and mankind with our tongues.

We must, yet we cannot. No human can tame the tongue. We must admit that James does not solve this riddle in this passage. For the moment, he leaves us in tension, which he relieves some time later, in 4:6–10. In this, James follows the pattern of Jesus, who was also willing to let his teaching dangle without the kind of resolution we like. For example, the Sermon on the Mount ends with this threat: those who build on a foundation other than Christ will see their house fall “with a great crash” (Matt. 7:26–27). In 4:10, James resolves his riddle when he promises that God will exalt all who humble themselves before him. That is, if we humbly admit our inability, he will graciously forgive us.

Even before we reach that moment, other Scriptures teach us this about our inability: We cannot control the tongue, but God can. Even with the Spirit’s help, the taming is only partial. Yet it is real and more potent than our efforts at self-mastery.

Once we realize that God can control what we cannot, we can properly face the failures of speech that reflect the failures of the heart. For example, the proud use the tongue to deny sin and a need for God’s redemption.

  • We deny our sins. Our spouse says, “You’re so grouchy today. What’s the matter?” and we reply, “I’m only grouchy when you hector me with your petty criticisms.”
  • We claim we are no worse than anyone else. We say, “I admit I’m grouchy occasionally, but I’m Mr. Congeniality compared to some.”
  • We claim our good deeds outweigh our bad deeds. We say, “Yes, I get grumpy when I’m exhausted, but I’m usually very agreeable.”
  • We offer no self-defense, but rather condemn ourselves and give in to despair.

There is a better way. First, let heart and tongue admit that God is holy and that we should aspire to his holiness. Second, since God is not satisfied by mere aspirations, we should ask God to forgive our failings and meager achievements. Third, let us believe in him and receive the loving mercy of God. He loves us as a father loves his children, flaws and all.

Or, to change the metaphor, God loves us as a husband loves his wife, flaws and all. A good husband loves his wife even as the beauty of youth fades. His wife may lament that her skin is getting loose and blotchy, but the good husband says, “I don’t love your skin; I love you.” Physical beauty is attractive, but a beloved wife does not fear the fading of beauty because she knows her beauty is not the final cause of her husband’s love. Since God’s love is purer than that of any husband, we should hope in him. His love also gives us direction for our relationships. Jesus said, “As I have loved you, so you must love one another” (John 13:35).

Good works and holiness please God, even as the traits of an excellent wife please her husband. But God, as a faithful husband, loves his bride, flaws and all. In this supremely important way, our moral achievements count for nothing. They neither earn God’s love nor guarantee it. There is no deed, no accomplishment, that makes God suddenly notice us or favor us. He loves us for his own reasons, not for our own merits. Yet, if we love the Lord, we do aspire to holiness. As Moses prepared Israel to enter Canaan, he said it this way:

The Lord did not set his affection on you and choose you because you were more numerous than other peoples, for you were the fewest of all peoples. But it was because the Lord loved you and kept the oath he swore to your forefathers that he brought you out with a mighty hand and redeemed you from the land of slavery.… Know therefore that the Lord your God is God; he is the faithful God, keeping his covenant of love to a thousand generations of those who love him and keep his commands.… Therefore, take care to follow the commands, decrees and laws I give you today. (Deut. 7:7–11)

We all stumble and utter words we quickly rue (James 3:1). Yet we strive to please God, whom we love. We do this even if our failures do not jeopardize that love. When we fail, we petition God for grace to renew and purify us, as we appropriate his grace. We live without fear, knowing God will not disown his children for their lapses. Even in failure we remain confident that if we believe in God, he has given us life by the gospel (1:18). The gospel word, implanted in us, saves us (1:21). Our tongue may be inconsistent, but our status is not. Our “performance” does not affect God’s love for us.

By faith, God delivered us, in principle, from bondage to a misguided tongue. Our speech only fitfully adorns our profession of faith. We are not totally new, but we are genuinely new. By God’s grace, let us use our tongues to bless the Lord and to bless mankind, whom he made in his image.[2]


11 “Palestinians are very good water-tasters,” says E. F. F. Bishop. Here bitter may mean “brackish,” “sulphurous,” or more probably denotes a case where above the outlet good water has suffered contamination from a salty source. Of a river flowing into the Dead Sea T. K. Cheyne wrote: “The salt water and the fresh intermingle some way above the mouth of the river, and fish that are carried down are thrown up dead on the beach.” We observe the use of the article with fountain, as twice in John 4:6, and once in v. 14, while another word is used in v. 11, except that in v. 11—as in Rev. 9:2f., where it means “pit” from which comes smoke as of a fiery furnace—the “picture” is of a deep cavity containing water, not springing water. It is of springing water that James is here thinking and writing, and we suggest it is relevant to remember that among country folk “the spring” or “the well” has a prominent individuality (see the latter half of Eccl. 12:6). Here James is speaking of springing water, and of its being drunk or unfit to drink: “Does a spring from the same fountainhead gush with both salt and fresh?” Outlet is, as often, a hole in the ground, or, it may be, in the rock.42[3]


3:11 The first question, “does a spring pour forth from the same opening both fresh and brackish water?” begins with mēti, a word that invites a negative response. In fact, the term is a little more emphatic than (2:14; 3:12), and the question could be rendered, “Surely, no spring produces both fresh and brackish water, does it?” James assumes that the teachers will answer his questions accurately, and if they do they will connect the images to the incongruity of being a God-blesser and a human-curser.

The concrete language of a spring or a crack in a rock where water bubbles forth, which was often enough to establish a village, and both fresh and brackish water finds its focal point in “the same opening.”131 Davids is confident that James is referring to a natural phenomenon in the Jordan valley and observes that the sometimes absence of fresh water is a “sad fact of life in Palestine.” Similarity of language leads us back to 3:10: “from the same mouth.” Here the focus is on the source or perhaps on the connection of source and what is produced. Again, the analogy is to the tongue of a teacher whose responsibility it is to love others and speak in a way that emerges from that love. That sort of source should produce God-blessing language but not human-cursing language.[4]


The remarkably inconsistent nature of the tongue (vv. 9–12)

The tongue is the little hypocrite in our mouths that can make big hypocrites out of us.

Here is the hypocrisy of the tongue: one minute it is blessing God, and the very next minute it is cursing men who have been made in the image of God (v. 9).

James considered this to be quite remarkable. A spring of water cannot produce both fresh and bitter water (v. 11). And a fig tree cannot produce both figs and olives. A grapevine cannot produce both grapes and figs (v. 12). But the tongue can produce both blessing and cursing! And, faced with this grand inconsistency, James can only say, ‘My brethren, these things ought not to be so’ (v. 10).

And we know James is right! We know that our irresponsible and inconsistent talking is not right. And yet we go on and on and on because of the unruly, untameable nature of the tongue.

Left to ourselves, we cannot tame the tongue, but, thank God, we who know the Lord are not left to ourselves. The Lord has given us his Word to guide us and his Spirit to indwell us. And what do the guiding Word and indwelling Spirit tell us to do about our tongues?

Repent

First, they tell us to repent of all our wrong talking. We all have much of which to repent, for, as James says, ‘we all stumble in many things’ (v. 2).

But let us know that, while sinful talking is serious, repentance brings God’s forgiveness and removes our sins as far from us as the east is from the west.

Count the cost

We must also make it our daily business to think long and hard on the terrible cost attached to sinful talking and determine that we shall set a seal on our lips (Ps. 39:1) so that nothing that is unwholesome will pass through. And we must ask the Lord to help us keep that resolve, knowing that we will certainly never be able to keep it apart from him.

Speak good

We must also make it our business to fill our mouths with good things. The more our mouths are filled with praise to God and good, kind and encouraging words regarding others, the less space there will be for fiery, poisonous talk.

Look to the Lord

Finally, we must continually look to the Lord Jesus Christ, who is our example in all things. We know how very hard it is to control our tongues. What a marvel it is that the Lord Jesus perfectly controlled his, never speaking a wrong word! Because of his perfect obedience to the Lord God, we who have no righteousness of our own can be clothed in his. How very thankful we should be for this!

May the mind of Christ my Saviour

Live in me from day to day,

By His love and pow’r controlling

All I do and say.

(Kate B. Wilkinson)[5]


3:11–12 / James concludes his argument with more analogies from nature: Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?. This was an unfortunate truth all around the Mediterranean, whether in the Lycus valley (Rev. 3:15–16 refers to the water supply of the area), Marah in Sinai (Exod. 15:23–25), or the Jordan rift valley, where the water cascading down a cliff would be such a welcome sight until a traveler discovered it was bitter. Why should humans try to do what springs do not? The analogy between the mouth of a spring and the human mouth fits very well.

Second, My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Again the analogy fits. No tree bears two species of fruit. Each produces according to its nature. It is unnatural for a human to try to do what nature does not. Yet perhaps James means something more, for Jesus used a similar illustration (Matt. 7:16–20; Luke 6:43–45; Matt. 12:33–35), but this one dealt with good and bad fruit and judging a plant by its fruit. Is James suggesting that the bad fruit (the cursing) reveals the nature of the person?

The third analogy confirms the suspicion: Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water. James has shifted his analogy. Now the spring is clearly bad, salty, but still is trying to produce sweet water. That is impossible. The evil within the person produces an “inspiration,” which is frequently well hidden, but the “curses” (criticism, slander, negative remarks) mixed with the pious language show the real source of inspiration. The teacher or the Christian claims God’s Spirit or God’s wisdom, but is that true? It is not true if the person’s language reveals that he or she is really a salty spring trying to be sweet.

Having argued above for the danger inherent in the tongue and the need for purity in speech, James now moves behind speech to the motives inspiring it. This section looks two ways. On the one hand, it looks back to the teachers of 3:1 and the real problems underlying impure speech in general. On the other hand, it is a bridge between the theoretical discussion of 3:1–13 and the denunciation of the problems in the community of 4:1–12. Just as there were two births, two inspirations, in 1:12–18, so there are two “wisdoms,” two Spirits, here.[6]


Blessing and Cursing

James 3:9–12

With it we bless the Lord and Father and with it we curse the men who have been made in the likeness of God. From the same mouth there emerge blessing and cursing. These things should not be so, my brothers. Surely the one stream from the same cleft in the rock does not gush forth fresh and salt water? Surely, brothers, a fig tree cannot produce olives, nor a vine figs, nor can salt water produce fresh water?

We know only too well from experience that there is a split in human nature. In human beings there is something of the ape and something of the angel, something of the hero and something of the villain, something of the saint and much of the sinner. It is James’ conviction that nowhere is this contradiction more evident than in the tongue.

With it, he says, we bless God. This was especially relevant to a Jew. Whenever the name of God was mentioned, a Jew had to respond: ‘Blessed be he!’ Three times a day, devout Jews had to repeat the Shemoneh Esreh, the famous eighteen prayers called Eulogies, every one of which begins: ‘Blessed be thou, O God.’ God was indeed eulogētos, the Blessed One, the one who was continually blessed. And yet the very mouths and tongues which had frequently and piously blessed God were the very same mouths and tongues which cursed their neighbours. To James, there was something unnatural about this; it was as unnatural as for a stream to gush out both fresh and salt water or a bush to bear different kinds of fruit. Unnatural and wrong such things might be, but they were tragically common.

Peter could say: ‘Even though I must die with you, I will not deny you’ (Matthew 26:35)—and that very same tongue of his denied Jesus with oaths and curses (Matthew 26:69–75). The John who said: ‘Little children, love one another’ was the same who had once wanted to call down fire from heaven in order to destroy a Samaritan village (Luke 9:51–6). Even the tongues of the apostles could say very different things.

John Bunyan tells us of Talkative: ‘He was a saint abroad and a devil at home.’ Many people speak with perfect courtesy to strangers and may even preach love and gentleness, and yet snap with impatient irritability at their own families. It has not been unknown for someone to speak with piety on Sunday and to curse a team of workers on Monday. It has not been unknown for someone to utter the most pious sentiments one day and to repeat the most questionable stories the next. It has not been unknown for someone to speak with sweet graciousness at a religious meeting and then to go outside to destroy another person’s reputation with a malicious tongue.

These things, said James, should not be. Some drugs are both poisons and cures; they are benefits to a patient when wisely controlled by a doctor, but harmful when used unwisely. The tongue can bless or curse; it can wound or soothe; it can speak the fairest or the foulest things. It is one of life’s hardest and plainest duties to see that the tongue does not contradict itself but speaks only such words as we would want God to hear.[7]


11. Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?12. My brothers, can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs? Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.

  • Consideration

In his letter James shows an interest in God’s creation. With examples drawn from nature he seeks to illustrate his point. First he calls attention to a spring of water. “Can both fresh water and salt water flow from the same spring?” It is impossible to expect drinkable water and water that is not drinkable from the same source. Second, James approaches his readers with two familiar examples. Generally, a Jew had his own fig tree and his own grapevine (1 Kings 4:25); olive trees were common. “Can a fig tree bear olives, or a grapevine bear figs?”

The readers know that each species of fruitbearing trees produces its own kind of fruit. Fig trees bear figs, olive trees olives, and grapevines grapes. The example is reminiscent of the question Jesus asked in the Sermon on the Mount: “Do people pick grapes from thornbushes, or figs from thistles?” (Matt. 7:16). To ask the question is to answer it.

  • Conclusion

James answers by repeating some of the words of his first question. “Neither can a salt spring produce fresh water.” If, then, nature is unable to go against its created functions, ought not man’s tongue praise the name of man’s creator and redeemer?[8]


3:11–12. These verses show the consistency of nature. Both verses ask questions to which the expected answer is “no.” The illustrations from nature would have been familiar to inhabitants of Palestine. Areas around the Dead Sea contained many salty springs. Farther north of the Dead Sea travelers could find springs emitting fresh water. One spring could produce only one type of water.

The farmers of Palestine produced figs, olives, and grapes in abundance. James emphasized that a tree produced its own kind of fruit. We don’t go to grapevines to find figs. We do not pluck olives from fig trees. Nature is consistent, but our tongues have never provided models of consistency.

The applications are so pointed they do not need to be made explicit. Colossians 4:6 provides a fitting conclusion: “Let your speech always be with grace, seasoned with salt, that you may know how you ought to answer each one” (nkjv).

In January 1917, the German Foreign Secretary Arthur Zimmerman sent a secret telegram to his country’s ambassador in Mexico. The message announced the intention of the German government to begin unrestricted submarine warfare against all nations on February 1. It also urged the German ambassador to encourage both Mexico and Japan to support the German plans in order to keep America neutral and out of the war efforts.

British intelligence intercepted the message and saw that President Woodrow Wilson read the dispatch. Wilson released the telegram to the press. America had been a neutral nation in the First World War until this time. The disclosure of German intentions in the telegram led Wilson to ask for a declaration of war against Germany. The deceitful words of the German foreign secretary goaded America into war.

In the same way that printed words can inflame passions and tempers, the spoken word can arouse people to action, either good or bad. Paul called us to use our tongues positively: “Teaching and admonishing one another in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs” (Col. 3:16, nkjv). In seeking to control our tongues we must admit to God our weakness, seek his help, and place relentless guard on our tongues. God’s grace can enable us to use our tongues and our words for blessing and encouraging others.[9]


The Inconsistency of the Tongue (3:9–12)

These verses show the good use of the tongue (blessing God), the bad use of the tongue (cursing men), and the absurdity of doing both with the same tongue. But the tongue is notoriously inconsistent, a veritable Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. With it bless we God, and with it curse we men who are made after the likeness of God (verse 9). There may be an allusion to the custom among Jews to say “Blessed be he” whenever the name of God was mentioned.

“Bless” in reference to God means to praise Him with love and gratitude. It is the highest function of human speech, the great end for which the human tongue exists. To “curse” man is to pronounce damnation on him, to invoke evil on him. James may have used the word so as to include any utterance expressing an unkind feeling toward others. Calvin comments that he “who truly worships and honors God, will be afraid to speak slanderously of man” (p. 323).

Indeed, one who curses men in effect curses God himself, for men are made in “the likeness of God” (asv). The image of God within man has been sadly marred by his sin, but the language employed by James indicates·that man still bears the likeness of God. That is to say, man’s likeness to God has not been completely obliterated. Traces of it, however few and faint, still remain. “It has,” writes Calvin, “been miserably deformed, but in such a way that some of its lineaments still appear” (p. 323).

The first part of verse 10 tersely sums up the outrageous inconsistency of the tongue when it is used both to bless and to curse: Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing. James appeals to his readers to put an end to such: My brethren, these things ought not so to be. Literally, “Not right, my brothers, these things so to be.” The word for “ought,” found only here in the Greek New Testament, denotes fitness or congruity. The thought then is this: It is abnormal for a man to bless God in prayer and praise and yet speak evil of members of God’s family. It is contrary to grace; it is contrary to nature.

A little girl sat with her arms wrapped around her father’s neck. But her mother observed that over her father’s shoulder she was sticking out her tongue at her little brother. The mother responded by saying, “Take your arms from around your father’s neck. You cannot love your father and at the same time stick out your tongue at his son.” To profess love for God while reviling men made in His image is a brazen offense against God.

In verses 11, 12 James illustrates this inconsistency by two figures drawn from nature. The first is the figure of a fountain of water: “Doth the fountain send forth from the same opening sweet water and bitter?” (verse 11, asv). That is, is it possible for a fountain to pour forth from the same crevice both fresh water and brackish water? The construction in Greek is such as to indicate that the expected answer is a negative one.

The second figure concerns fruit: “Can a fig tree, my brethren, yield olives, or a vine figs?” (verse 12, asv). It is a law of nature that like produces like. Thus, fig trees do not yield olives and grape vines do not produce figs.

James’ conclusion to this part of his discussion is concise yet powerful: “No, nor can a brackish well give good water” (tcnt). (It should be observed that this translation is based upon a Greek text which differs from the text translated by the kjv.) The truth implied is that if cursing comes from the tongue, there cannot issue from it blessing as well. What appears to be good is in reality not good. It may have a saintly sound about it, but it is sound only.[10]


[1] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1998). James (pp. 159–161). Chicago: Moody Press.

[2] Doriani, D. M. (2007). James. (R. D. Phillips, P. G. Ryken, & D. M. Doriani, Eds.) (pp. 113–115). Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing.

[3] Adamson, J. B. (1976). The Epistle of James (p. 147). Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

[4] McKnight, S. (2011). The Letter of James (p. 295). Grand Rapids, MI; Cambridge, UK: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

[5] Ellsworth, R. (2009). Opening up James (pp. 112–114). Leominster: Day One Publications.

[6] Davids, P. H. (2011). James (pp. 86–87). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[7] Barclay, W. (2003). The Letters of James and Peter (3rd ed. fully rev. and updated, pp. 103–104). Louisville, KY; London: Westminster John Knox Press.

[8] Kistemaker, S. J., & Hendriksen, W. (1953–2001). Exposition of James and the Epistles of John (Vol. 14, pp. 115–116). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

[9] Lea, T. D. (1999). Hebrews, James (Vol. 10, pp. 305–306). Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers.

[10] Vaughan, C. (2003). James (pp. 72–74). Cape Coral, FL: Founders Press.

Newt: Impeachment Poll Reflects Biased Coverage | Newsmax

A

A Fox News poll finding that a majority of respondents want to see President Donald Trump be impeached and removed from office doesn’t mean the president will lose the 2020 election or that he’ll face impeachment, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Thursday.

“A lot of this is just the sheer weight of unbelievably biased coverage and the fact that the Democrats have been playing a game,” Gingrich told Fox Business’ Maria Bartiromo.  “The left hates Trump. That includes the New York Times and the Washington Post. They’re going to do everything they can to destroy him.”

Trump retweeted Gingrich’s comments about the Times and the Post, as well as another where Gingrich noted that he’s said in the past that “you can always impeach if you have a majority if you’re prepared to commit suicide.”

On the show, Gingrich also denied that the whistleblower who reported the conversation between Trump and Ukraine’s president, based on what he’d heard from other sources, was a true whistleblower at all.

“He didn’t witness anything,” said Gingrich. “The fact is, for example, you have a guy who is a leaker who we call a whistleblower because that sounds so much nicer. He didn’t blow a whistle on anything. He didn’t witness anything. It’s now turning out he’s a Democrat (who) may have worked with some of the Democratic presidential candidates.”

But the media “creates a totally biased story” that at first, the country believes, and then doesn’t, said Gingrich, and he thinks in another few weeks, Trump’s numbers will return to where they were.

Meanwhile, Trump is not facing an impeachment, but a “coup,” that began from the first days of his presidency, the former speaker said.

Source: Newt: Impeachment Poll Reflects Biased Coverage

WATCH: Tulsi Warns She’ll Boycott Debate Over DNC Attempt To ‘Rig’ Primary AGAIN | The Daily Wire

On Thursday morning, Democratic presidential hopeful Tulsi Gabbard posted a video to social media calling foul on the corporate media and the Democratic National Committee (DNC) attempting to “rig” the 2020 primary, as she says they did against Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) during the 2016 Democratic presidential primary election.

“I am seriously considering boycotting October 15 debate to bring attention to DNC/corporate media’s effort to rig 2020 primary,” Gabbard captioned her video post to Twitter.

On her campaign website, Gabbard similarly warns: “The DNC and corporate media are trying to hijack the entire election process.”

“I want to thank you all very much for your support. I need to share something with you. It is very important,” the Democrat started in the video post. “There are so many of you who I’ve met in Iowa and New Hampshire who have expressed to me how frustrated you are that the DNC and corporate media are essentially trying to usurp your role as voters in choosing who our Democratic nominee will be.”

“I share your concerns, and I’m sure that all our supporters throughout the country do as well,” she said.

The Democrat then charged that the “2016 Democratic Primary election was rigged by the DNC and their partners in the corporate media against Bernie Sanders.”

Folks on the Left have engaged in some serious infighting over the last presidential primary. As noted by The Daily Wire, “Everything from the primary and debate schedule to the excessive power of super-delegates helped Clinton secure the nomination, even though Sanders was drawing far larger crowds and had massive support from all wings of the party.”

Donna Brazile, former CNN contributor and DNC interim chairwoman, infamously delivered “the network’s prepared questions to Clinton’s campaign just before a crucial debate.”

“If the fight had been fair, one campaign would not have control of the party before the voters had decided which one they wanted to lead,” Brazile admitted in the days following the 2016 presidential election.

“This was not a criminal act, but as I saw it, it compromised the party’s integrity,” she said, noting that “it sure looked unethical.”

According to Gabbard, the DNC and their media allies are “rigging the election again.”

“In this 2020 election, the DNC and corporate media are rigging the election again, but this time against the American people in the early voting states of Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina, and Nevada,” she said.

“They are attempting to replace the roles of voters in the early states, using polling and other arbitrary methods which are not transparent or democratic, and holding so-called debates which are not debates at all but rather commercialized reality television meant to entertain, rather than to inform or enlighten,” Gabbard noted.

“In short, the DNC and corporate media are trying to hijack the entire election process,” she closed the video. “So, in order to bring attention to this serious threat to our democracy, and to ensure that your voice is heard, I’m seriously considering to boycotting the next debate on October 15th. I’m gonna announce my decision within the next few days.”

WATCH:

Visit Website

Source: WATCH: Tulsi Warns She’ll Boycott Debate Over DNC Attempt To ‘Rig’ Primary AGAIN

Pope Francis Tells Interviewer That Jesus Christ Was Born As ‘Exceptional Man’ But He Was ‘Not At All A God’ As Vatican Doesn’t Deny Or Demand Correction Of Account — Now The End Begins

Pope Francis told me: ‘They are the proven proof that Jesus of Nazareth, once having become a man, was, though a man of exceptional virtues, not at all a God.’”

The most amazing thing about this story is that neither Pope Francis nor the Vatican had denied the pope made these statements, and neither have they asked La Repubblica to correct the account or retract the statements in full. So that leads me to believe that Pope Francis did indeed make them, and that this shocking accounting is indeed true and accurate. Don’t forget that Eugenio Scalfari and Pope Francis are longtime friends. Scarfari would not misrepresent his dear friend, and the pope feels comfortable enough around him because of that friendship to let his guard down.

“And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” 1 Timothy 3:16 (KJV)

But Pope Francis has a long and proven track record of denying Jesus Christ, and making statements like it is ‘dangerous to have a personal relationship with Jesus‘. Last year with the same interviewer Scalfari and also in La Repubblica, Pope Francis said that ‘Hell is not real‘ and never denied saying that, either, and the Vatican never asked for a correction or retraction. So maybe we should ask ourselves why Pope Francis is continuing to make these outrageous statements.

“For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.” Isaiah 14:13,14 (KJV)

If you have been following our reporting on the Catholic Church and Chrislam, then you already know why the pope makes these types of statements. Because as he continues to assemble the One World Religion, he thinks of himself as a god, not unlike the passages we read in Isaiah 14 and Ezekiel 28 about Lucifer. Now you know, tell a friend.

FROM CNS NEWS: In the latest edition of La Repubblica, Pope Francis’ longtime atheist friend and interviewer, Eugenio Scalfari, claims that the Pope told him that once Jesus Christ became incarnate, he was a man, a “man of exceptional virtues” but “not at all a God.”

The teaching of the Catholic Church and most Christian churches is that Jesus Christ, the Son of God, was incarnated as fully man and fully God.

As the Catechism of the Catholic Church states, “The unique and altogether singular event of the Incarnation of the Son of God does not mean that Jesus Christ is part God and part man, nor does it imply that he is the result of a confused mixture of the divine and the human. He became truly man while remaining truly God. Jesus Christ is true God and true man. During the first centuries, the Church had to defend and clarify this truth of faith against the heresies that falsified it. (464)”

According to the highly respected Catholic blog, Rorate Caeli, and Radio Spada in Italy, Scalfari states in the Oct. 9 edition of La Repubblica (behind paywall) the following: “Those who, as it has happened many times with me, have had the luck of meeting him and speaking to him with the greatest cultural intimacy, know that Pope Francis conceives Christ as Jesus of Nazareth, man, not God incarnate.”

“Once incarnate, Jesus stops being a God and becomes a man until his death on the cross.”

Scalfari continues, “When I had the chance of discussing these sentences, Pope Francis told me: ‘They are the proven proof that Jesus of Nazareth, once having become a man, was, though a man of exceptional virtues, not at all a God.’”

In a March 2018 interview with Scalfari, Pope Francis reportedly said, “There is no Hell, there is the disappearance of sinful souls.”

That interview caused an uproar and the Vatican claimed that what the Pope reportedly said was a “reconstruction” and not “quoted.” The Vatican did not deny what Scalfari reported but said it could not “be considered as a faithful transcription of the words of the Holy Father.”

The Pope himself never denied what Scalfari reported and the article never ran a correction or removed the article from its website.

Commenting on this latest revelationRorate Caeli said, “Now, obviously, as it has often happened with Francis’ informal interviews with Eugenio Scalfari, some will try to deny the veracity of what Scalfari, a seasoned journalist, affirms.

“Let us just recall, for the record of events, that there is no reason to doubt its general accuracy. We are way past the time of doubting the general accuracy of the Scalfari quotes.

“Not now, that the papal interviews to Scalfari have been published on the Vatican website, that they have been occasionally published by the Vatican publishing house (LEV) itself – for instance, as part of the book to the right.”

In a statement issued Oct. 9, reported by Church Militant in Rome,  the Vatican said, “As has been affirmed in other occasions, the words that Dr. Eugenio Scalfari attributes between quotes to the Holy Father during his colloquies held with him cannot be considered as a faithful account of what was effectively said, but represent more a personal and free interpretation of that which he heard, as appears entirely evident from what was written today concerning the divinity of Jesus Christ.”

Church Militant’s Michael Voris commented, “That is the relevant part of the statement, and it, in itself, is now creating its own firestorm because it does not actually deny Scalfari’s characterization, merely hinting at the possibility.”

“Likewise, it does not affirm in any fashion that Pope Francis does indeed hold the divinity of Christ during Our Savior’s earthly ministry,” said Voris. READ MORE

via Pope Francis Tells Interviewer That Jesus Christ Was Born As ‘Exceptional Man’ But He Was ‘Not At All A God’ As Vatican Doesn’t Deny Or Demand Correction Of Account — Now The End Begins