Daily Archives: August 7, 2020

August 7 Another Chance

 

Then came Peter to him and said, Lord, how oft shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? till seven times? Jesus saith unto him, … seventy times seven.
(Matthew 18:21–22)

Always allow others room to turn around. Everybody deserves a chance to change, so allow them to do so. When the pressure’s on, things come to the surface in all of us, and it’s so easy to say the wrong thing, arrive at the wrong conclusion, and make the wrong decision. Slow down—ask God for patience and mercy. Don’t force others to live by their past, while you expect yours to be forgiven and forgotten. Whatever you sow will come back to you a hundred times.

When it comes to relationships, everybody makes mistakes. Give them a chance to come back into the relationship with dignity. Jesus said, “Blessed are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy” (Matthew 5:7). How long has it taken you to correct some of the mistakes in your life? Give people time. Give them an opportunity to explain themselves. They may not even know the right words at first. Be willing to listen a little longer. Jesus put up with Peter’s weakness because He knew what Peter would become. While you’re looking in anger at them today, they may be looking in hope at tomorrow. Don’t extinguish that light. Allow them space to correct their mistake, and always give them room to turn around.

 

That’s what Jesus would do![1]

 

[1] Gass, B. (1998). A Fresh Word For Today : 365 Insights For Daily Living (p. 219). Alachua, FL: Bridge-Logos Publishers.

August 7 Eternal Protection

 

Romans 5:9

Having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him.

The story is told of a man who had been condemned by a Spanish court to be shot. Because he was an American citizen and of English birth, the consuls of the United States and England decided to intervene. They declared that the Spanish authorities had no power to put him to death. Their protest went unheeded, and the Spaniards proceeded to prepare the firing squad.

At the time the execution was scheduled to take place, the consuls boldly approached the accused man, already tied and blindfolded, and wrapped him up in their flags—the Stars and Stripes and the Union Jack. Then they shouted, “Fire a shot if you dare! If you do so, you will bring the powers of our two great empires upon you.” There stood the prisoner, unharmed. One bullet could have ended his life, but protected by those flags and the governments they represented, he was invulnerable.

The Lord Jesus takes the soul of the sinner who believes in Him and covers the guilty one with His blood. Thus wrapped and sheltered by the Savior, he is safe.[1]

 

[1] Jeremiah, D. (2002). Sanctuary: finding moments of refuge in the presence of God (p. 230). Nashville, TN: Integrity Publishers.

What Is a Biblical Church? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

What constitutes a biblical church? From one of our Ask Ligonier events, Derek Thomas sets forth several classic marks of a true church that are derived from principles in God’s Word.

Do you have a biblical or theological question? We invite you to ask Ligonier.

via What Is a Biblical Church? — Ligonier Ministries Blog

August 7, 2020 Evening Verse Of The Day

A Single Treasure

Do not lay up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust destroys, and where thieves do not break in or steal; for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. (6:19–21)

Layup (thēsaurizō) and treasures (thēsauros) come from the same basic Greek term, which is also the source of our English thesaurus, a treasury of words. A literal translation of this phrase would therefore be, “do not treasure up treasures for yourselves.”

The Greek also carries the connotation of stacking or laying out horizontally, as one stacks coins. In the context of this passage the idea is that of stockpiling or hoarding, and therefore pictures wealth that is not being used. The money or other wealth is simply stored for safekeeping; it is kept for the keeping’s sake to make a show of wealth or to create an environment of lazy overindulgence (cf. Luke 12:16–21).

It is clear from this passage, as well as from many others in Scripture, that Jesus is not advocating poverty as a means to spirituality. In all of His many different instructions, He only once told a person to “sell your possessions and give to the poor” (Matt. 19:21). In that particular case, the young man’s wealth was his idol, and therefore a special barrier between him and the lordship of Jesus Christ. It provided an excellent opportunity to test whether or not that man was fully committed to turning over the control of his life to Christ. His response proved that he was not. The problem was not in the wealth itself, but the man’s unwillingness to part with it. The Lord did not specifically require His disciples to give up all their money and other possessions to follow Him, although it may be that some of them voluntarily did so. He did require obedience to His commands no matter what that cost. The price was too high for the wealthy young ruler, to whom possessions were the first priority.

Both testaments recognize the right to material possessions, including money, land, animals, houses, clothing, and every other thing that is honestly acquired. God has made many promises of material blessing to those who belong to and are faithful to Him. The foundational truth that underlies the commandments not to steal or covet is the right of personal property. Stealing and coveting are wrong because what is stolen or coveted rightfully belongs to someone else. Ananias and Sapphira did not forfeit their lives because they kept back some of the proceeds from the sale of their property, but because they lied to the Holy Spirit (Acts 5:3). Holding back some of the money was selfish, especially if they had other assets on which to live, but they had a right to keep it, as Peter makes plain: “While it remained unsold, did it not remain your own? And after it was sold, was it not under your control?” (v. 4).

God expects, in fact commands, His people to be generous. But He also expects, and even commands, them not only to be thankful for but to enjoy the blessings He gives—including the material blessings. The Lord “richly supplies us with all things to enjoy” (1 Tim. 6:17). That verse is specifically directed to “those who are rich in this present world,” and yet it does not command, or even suggest, that they divest themselves of their wealth, but rather warns them not to be conceited about it or to trust in it.

Abraham was extremely rich for his day, a person who vied in wealth, influence, and military power with many of the kings in Canaan. When we first meet Job he is vastly wealthy, and when we leave him—after the testing that cost him everything he possessed outside of his own life—God has made him wealthier still, in flocks and herds, in sons and daughters, and in a healthy long life. “And the Lord blessed the latter days of Job more than his beginning” (Job 42:12–17).

The Bible gives considerable counsel for working hard and following good business practices (cf. Matt. 25:27). The ant is shown as a model of the good worker, who “prepares her food in the summer, and gathers her provision in the harvest” (Prov. 6:6–8). We are told that “in all labor there is profit, but mere talk leads only to poverty” (14:23) and “by wisdom a house is built, and by understanding it is established; and by knowledge the rooms are filled with all precious and pleasant riches” (24:3–4). “He who tills his land will have plenty of food, but he who follows empty pursuits will have poverty in plenty” (28:19).

Paul tells us that parents are responsible for saving up for their children (2 Cor. 12:14), that “if anyone will not work, neither let him eat” (2 Thess. 3:10), and that “if anyone does not provide for his own, and especially for those of his household, he has denied the faith, and is worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim. 5:8).

During his exceptionally long ministry, which spanned most of the eighteenth century, John Wesley earned a considerable amount of money from his published sermons and other works. Yet he left only 28 pounds when he died, because he continually gave what he earned to the Lord’s work.

It is right to provide for our families, to make reasonable plans for the future, to make wise investments, and to have money to carry on a business, give to the poor, and support the Lord’s work. It is being dishonest, greedy, covetous, stingy, and miserly about possessions that is wrong. To honestly earn, save, and give is wise and good; to hoard and spend only on ourselves not only is unwise but sinful.

Some years ago, I happened to have contact with two quite wealthy men during the same week. One was a former professor at a major university who, through a long series of good investments in real estate, had accumulated a fortune of possibly a hundred million dollars. But in the process he lost his family, his happiness, his peace of mind, and had aged far beyond his years. The other man, a pastor, also acquired his wealth through investments, but they were investments to which he paid little attention. Because of his financial independence, he gave to his church over the years considerably more than he was paid for being its pastor. He is one of the godliest, happiest, most fruitful, and contented persons I have ever met.

The key to Jesus’ warning here is yourselves. When we accumulate possessions simply for our own sakes—whether to hoard or to spend selfishly and extravagantly—those possessions become idols.

It is possible that both our treasures upon earth and our treasures in heaven can involve money and other material things. Possessions that are wisely, lovingly, willingly, and generously used for kingdom purposes can be a means of accumulating heavenly possessions. When they are hoarded and stored, however, they not only become a spiritual hindrance but are subject to loss through moth, rust, and thieves.

In ancient times, wealth was frequently measured in part by clothing. Compared to our day of mass-produced clothes, garments represented a considerable investment. Rich people sometimes had golden threads woven into their clothing, both to display and to store their wealth. But the best clothes were made of wool, which the moth loves to eat; and even the richest persons had difficulty protecting their clothes from the insects.

Wealth was also often held in grain, as we see from the parable of the rich farmer who said, “I will tear down my barns and build larger ones, and there I will store all my grain and my goods” (Luke 12:18). Brōsis (rust) literally means “an eating,” and is translated with that meaning everywhere in the New Testament but here (see Rom. 14:17; 1 Cor. 8:4, “eating”; 2 Cor. 9:10, “food”; and Heb. 12:16, “meal”). It seems best to take the same meaning here, in reference to grain that is eaten by rats, mice, worms, and insects.

Almost any kind of wealth, of course, is subject to thieves, which is why many people buried their nonperishable valuables in the ground away from the house, often in a field (see Matt. 13:44). Break in is literally “dig through,” and could refer to digging through the mud walls of a house or digging up the dirt in a field.

Nothing we own is completely safe from destruction or theft. And even if we keep our possessions perfectly secure during our entire lives, we are certainly separated from them at death. Many millionaires will be heavenly paupers, and many paupers will be heavenly millionaires.

But when our time, energy, and possessions are used to serve others and to further the Lord’s work, they build up heavenly resources that are completely free from destruction or theft. There neither moth nor rust destroys, and … thieves do not break in or steal. Heavenly security is the only absolute security.

Jesus goes on to point out that a person’s most cherished possessions and his deepest motives and desires are inseparable, for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. They will either both be earthly or both be heavenly. It is impossible to have one on earth and the other in heaven (cf. James 4:4).

As always, the heart must be right first. In fact, if the heart is right, everything else in life falls into its proper place. The person who is right with the Lord will be generous and happy in his giving to the Lord’s work. By the same token, a person who is covetous, self-indulgent, and stingy has good reason to question his relationship with the Lord.

Jesus is not saying that if we put our treasure in the right place our heart will then be in the right place, but that the location of our treasure indicates where our heart already is. Spiritual problems are always heart problems. Sinful acts come from a sinful heart, just as righteous acts come from a righteous heart.

When the exiles who came back to Jerusalem from Babylon began turning to God’s Word, a revival also began. “Ezra opened the book in the sight of all the people” and various leaders took turns reading “from the law of God” (Neh. 8:5–8). Through hearing God’s Word the people became convicted of their sin, began to praise God, and determined to begin obeying Him and to faithfully support the work of the Temple (chaps. 9–10).

Revival that does not affect the use of money and possessions is a questionable revival. As the Tabernacle was being built, “everyone whose heart stirred him and everyone whose spirit moved him came and brought the Lord’s contribution for the work of the tent of meeting and for all its service and for the holy garments” (Ex. 35:21). As plans were being made to build the Temple, David himself gave generously to the work, and “the rulers of the fathers’ households, and the princes of the tribes of Israel, and the commanders of thousands and of hundreds, with the overseers over the king’s work, offered willingly.… Then the people rejoiced because they had offered so willingly, for they made their offering to the Lord with a whole heart, and King David also rejoiced greatly” (1 Chron. 29:2–6, 9).

G. Campbell Morgan wrote:

You are to remember with the passion burning within you that you are not the child of to-day. You are not of the earth, you are more than dust; you are the child of tomorrow, you are of the eternities, you are the offspring of Deity. The measurements of your lives cannot be circumscribed by the point where blue sky kisses green earth. All the fact of your life cannot be encompassed in the one small sphere upon which you live. You belong to the infinite. If you make your fortune on the earth—poor, sorry, silly soul—you have made a fortune, and stored it in a place where you cannot hold it. Make your fortune, but store it where it will greet you in the dawning of the new morning. (The Gospel According to Matthew [New York: Revell, 1929], pp. 64–65)

When thousands of people, mostly Jews, were won to Christ during and soon after Pentecost, the Jerusalem church was flooded with many converts who had come from distant lands and who decided to stay on in the city. Many of them no doubt were poor, and many others probably left most of their wealth and possessions in their homelands. To meet the great financial burden suddenly placed on the church, local believers “began selling their property and possessions, and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need” (Acts 2:45).

Many years later, during one of the many Roman persecutions, soldiers broke into a certain church to confiscate its presumed treasures. An elder is said to have pointed to a group of widows and orphans who were being fed and said, “There are the treasures of the church.”

God’s principle for His people has always been, “Honor the Lord from your wealth, and from the first of all your produce; so your barns will be filled with plenty, and your vats will overflow with new wine” (Prov. 3:9–10). Jesus said, “Give, and it will be given to you; good measure, pressed down, shaken together, running over, they will pour into your lap. For by your standard of measure it will be measured to you in return” (Luke 6:38). Paul assures us that “he who sows sparingly shall also reap sparingly; and he who sows bountifully shall also reap bountifully” (2 Cor. 9:6). That is God’s formula for earning dividends that are both guaranteed and permanent.

At the end of His parable about the dishonest but shrewd steward, Jesus said, “I say to you, make friends for yourselves by means of the mammon of unrighteousness; that when it fails, they may receive you into the eternal dwellings” (Luke 16:9). Our material possessions are “unrighteous” in the sense of not having any spiritual value in themselves. But if we invest them in the welfare of human souls, the people who are saved or otherwise blessed because of them will someday greet us in heaven with thanksgiving.[1]


19 The present tense prohibition mē thēsaurizete (GK 2564) conceives of the “storing up” as a process, a practice that must be stopped (similarly at v. 25).

The love of wealth is a great evil (1 Ti 6:10), calling forth frequent warnings. For heirs of the kingdom to hoard riches in the last days (Jas 5:2–3) is particularly shortsighted. Yet, as with many of Jesus’ prohibitions in this sermon, it would be foolhardy so to absolutize this one that wealth itself becomes an evil (see Lk 14:12; Jn 4:21; 1 Pe 3:3–4 for other statements that cannot properly be absolutized). Elsewhere the Scriptures require a man to provide for his relatives (1 Ti 5:8), commend work and provision for the future (Pr 6:6–8), and encourage us to enjoy the good things the Creator has given us (1 Ti 4:3–4; 6:17). Jesus is concerned about selfishness in misplaced values. His disciples must not lay up treasure for themselves; they must honestly ask where their heart is (vv. 20–21).

This verse does not prohibit “being provident (making sensible provision for the future) but being covetous (like misers who hoard and materialists who always want more)” (Stott, Message of the Sermon on the Mount, 155). But it is folly to put oneself in the former category while acting and thinking in the latter (cf. France, “God and Mammon”).

The “treasures on earth” might be clothing that could be attacked by moths. Fashions changed little, and garments could be passed on. They could also deteriorate. “Rust” (brōsis, GK 1111) refers not only to the corrosion of metals but to the destruction effected by rats, mildew, and the like. Older commentaries often picture a farm being devoured by mice and other vermin. Less corruptible treasures could be stolen. Thieves could “break in [dioryssousin, “dig through,” referring to the mud brick walls of most first-century Palestinian homes] and steal.”[2]


Earthly treasures (6:19)

‘Do not store up [Mē thēsaurizete] for yourselves [hymin] treasures [thēsaurous] on earth,’ says Jesus. The verse opens with a present imperative of prohibition. The tense here denotes customary or habitual practice, which is accentuated by the cognate accusative thēsaurous. Jesus commands disciples to avoid or to discontinue the practice. The dative plural pronoun hymin here has a reflexive force. Jesus is obviously not denigrating the earth itself or its produce, nor telling his disciples to stop providing for their and their families’ material needs: see the comments on Matthew 6:11.

Beyond verses 19–20, thēsaurizō occurs only once in the gospels (Luke 12:21), a text that is doubly instructive. In the first place, not only is this rich man in the habit of storing up goods on earth. As they increase, his desire to hoard them intensifies (Matt. 6:16–19); that is, the greater one’s earthly treasures, the graver the danger of being enslaved and consumed by them. Secondly, this is a man ‘who lays up treasures [ho thēsaurizōn] for himself [heautō] and is not rich toward God [eis theon]’ (6:21). As in Matthew 6:19, the pronoun is reflexive: ‘for himself.’ Jesus indicts the man, not because he farms (and works with the soil, i.e. ‘the earth’) or because he is wealthy but because he is selfish. Had he acknowledged his plenty to be a gift from God and therefore employed it in the service of God—for example, by helping the needy—he would have been ‘rich toward God,’ that is, a person who stored up treasures in heaven, and who received rewards from God (one of which may have been a longer life). Storing up treasures ‘on earth’ (epi tēs gēs; Matt. 6:19) is incompatible with doing God’s will ‘on earth’ (epi gēs; 6:10).

God called the rich man of that parable a ‘fool’ because he failed to take account of his own mortality. It is the vulnerability of the treasures themselves that Jesus highlights here in Matthew. Earth is a place ‘where moth [sēs] and corrosion [brōsis] destroy, and where thieves [kleptai] dig through [dioryssousin] and steal [kleptousin]’ (6:19b). (These cognate forms, the noun kleptai and the verb kleptousin, mirror those of 6:19a, the verb thēsaurizete and the noun thēsaurous.) The term brōsis basically means ‘eating,’ and here probably includes assaults of rust on metals and of pests besides moths (such as worms and rats) on garments, food and other goods; the translation ‘corrosion’ seeks to capture this dual sense. As a moth chews through a coat, or a rat through a bag, so a thief might literally dig through the sun-dried brick wall of a Palestinian dwelling. As one’s earthly treasures increase in quality and quantity, there is ever graver threat from corrosive forces and from thieves, and thus ever greater cause for owners’ fear and anxiety.[3]


6:19–21 / The natural human tendency is to store up material possessions here on earth. Jesus advises laying up treasures in heaven, where the uncertainties of life cannot affect them. Where people put their treasure reveals where their hearts really are. Unless “moth and eating” (the niv follows Tyndale’s translation of brōsis as rust, which lacks support from the lxx) is a grammatical expression meaning “eaten by moths,” we have three ways in which earthly possessions are destroyed. In the ancient East elaborate clothing was viewed as part of a person’s treasure. Such material was easily devastated by moths. “Eating” could refer to the gnawing of mice and other vermin (McNeile, p. 84) or in a more general sense to what Weymouth calls “wear-and-tear.” Since houses were normally made of mud brick or baked clay, it was relatively easy for a thief to dig through (dioryssō; niv, break in) and steal possessions. Very little protection existed in the ancient world; this highly contrasts the security of treasures laid up in heaven.[4]


6:19 Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth. This verse provides the headline for Jesus’ teaching on allegiances, a theme that flows directly from the first three petitions of the Lord’s Prayer. The fervent prayer for God’s kingdom to arrive leads naturally into a teaching on what one values in light of God’s imminent reign. The exhortation to “store up for yourselves treasures in heaven” (6:20) reflects an allegiance to the “kingdom of heaven,” Matthew’s favorite expression for God’s kingdom (4:17). The motif of treasure communicates specifically how material possessions and wealth can be powerful competition to allegiance to God. In fact, according to Jesus, it is not possible to live in service to both God and money (6:24).[5]


The True Treasure

Matthew 6:19–21

‘Do not lay up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust destroy them, and where thieves dig through and steal. Lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy them, and where thieves do not dig through and steal. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.’

In the ordinary, everyday management of life, it is simple wisdom to acquire for oneself only those things which will last. Whether we are buying clothes, or a car, or a carpet for the floor, or furniture, it is common sense to avoid shoddy goods and to buy the things which have solidity and permanence and craftsmanship built into them. That is exactly what Jesus is saying here; he is telling us to concentrate on the things which will last.

Jesus calls up three pictures from the three great sources of wealth in Palestine.

(1) He tells people to avoid the things that the moth can destroy.

In the middle east, part of an individual’s wealth often consisted in fine and elaborate clothes. When Gehazi, the servant of Elisha, wished to make some forbidden profit out of Naaman, after his master had cured him, he asked him for a talent of silver and changes of clothing (2 Kings 5:22). One of the things which tempted Achan to sin was a beautiful mantle from Shinar (Joshua 7:21).

But such things were foolish things to set the heart upon, for the moths might get at them, when they were stored away, and all their beauty and their value would be destroyed. There was no permanence about possessions like that.

(2) He tells people to avoid the things that rust can destroy.

The word translated as rust is brōsis. It literally means an eating away, but it is nowhere else used to mean rust. Most likely, the picture is this. In the middle east, many individuals’ wealth consisted in the corn and the grain that was stored away in great barns. But into that corn and grain there could come worms, rats and mice, until the store was polluted and destroyed. In all probability, the reference is to the way in which those and other vermin could get into a granary and eat away the grain.

There was no permanence about possessions like that.

(3) He tells people to avoid the treasures which thieves can steal by digging through.

The word which is used for to dig through—the Revised Standard Version has break in—is diorussein. In Palestine, the walls of many of the houses were made of nothing stronger than baked clay; and burglars did effect an entry by literally digging through the wall. The reference here is to someone who has hoarded in the house a little store of gold, only to find, on returning home one day, that burglars have dug through the flimsy walls and that the treasure is gone.

There is no permanence about a treasure which is at the mercy of any enterprising thief.

So Jesus warns people against three kinds of pleasures and possessions.

(1) He warns them against the pleasures which will wear out like an old suit of clothes. The finest garment in the world, moths or no moths, will in the end disintegrate. All purely physical pleasures have a way of wearing out. At each successive enjoyment of them, the thrill becomes less thrilling. It requires more of them to produce the same effect. They are like a drug which loses its initial potency and which becomes increasingly less effective. It is foolish to look for pleasure in things which are bound to offer diminishing returns.

(2) He warns against the pleasures which can be eroded away. The grain store is the inevitable prey of the marauding rats and mice which nibble and gnaw away the grain. There are certain pleasures which inevitably lose their attraction as we grow older. It may be that we become physically less able to enjoy them; it may be that as our minds mature they cease in any sense to satisfy us. In life, we should never give our hearts to the joys the years can take away; we should find our delight in the things whose thrill time is powerless to erode.

(3) He warns against the pleasures which can be stolen away. All material things are like that; not one of them is secure; and if people build their happiness on them, they are building on a most insecure basis. Suppose a person’s life is so arranged that happiness depends on the possession of money; suppose a recession and economic crash comes and that person wakes up to find the money gone; then, with the wealth, happiness has also gone.

If we are wise, we will build our happiness on things which we cannot lose, things which are independent of the chances and the changes of this life.

Robert Burns wrote in ‘Tam o’ Shanter’ of the fleeting things:

But pleasures are like poppies spread:

You seize the flower, its bloom is shed;

Or like the snow falls in the river,

A moment white—then melts for ever.

Anyone whose happiness depends on things like that is doomed to disappointment. Anyone whose treasure is in things is bound to lose that treasure, for in things there is no permanence, and no thing lasts forever.

Treasure in Heaven

Matthew 6:19–21 (contd)

The Jews were very familiar with the phrase treasure in heaven. They identified such treasure with two things in particular.

(1) They said that the deeds of kindness which people did upon earth became their treasure in heaven.

The Jews had a famous story about a certain King Monobaz of Adiabēne who became a convert to Judaism. ‘Monobaz distributed all his treasures to the poor in the year of famine. His brothers sent to him and said, “Thy fathers gathered treasures, and added to those of their fathers, but thou hast dispersed yours and theirs.” He said to them, “My fathers gathered treasures for below, I have gathered treasures for above; they stored treasures in a place over which the hand of man can rule, but I have stored treasures in a place over which the hand of man cannot rule; my fathers collected treasures which bear no interest, I have gathered treasures which bear interest; my fathers gathered treasures of money, I have gathered treasures in souls; my fathers gathered treasures for others, I have gathered treasures for myself; my fathers gathered treasures in this world, I have gathered treasures for the world to come.” ’

Both Jesus and the Jewish Rabbis were sure that what is selfishly hoarded is lost, but that what is generously given away brings treasure in heaven.

That was also the principle of the Christian Church in the days to come. The early Church always lovingly cared for the poor, the sick, the distressed, the helpless and those for whom no one else cared. In the days of the terrible Decian persecution in Rome, the Roman authorities broke into a Christian church. They were out to loot the treasures which they believed the church to possess. The Roman prefect demanded from Laurentius, the deacon: ‘Show me your treasures at once.’ Laurentius pointed at the widows and orphans who were being fed, the sick who were being nursed, the poor whose needs were being supplied. ‘These’, he said, ‘are the treasures of the Church.’

The Church has always believed that ‘what we keep, we lose, and what we spend, we have’.

(2) The Jews always connected the phrase treasure in heaven with character. When Rabbi Yose ben Kisma was asked if he would dwell in a pagan city on condition of receiving very high pay for his services, he replied that he would not dwell anywhere except in a home of the law, ‘for’, he said, ‘in the hour of a man’s departure neither silver, nor gold, nor precious stones accompany him, but only his knowledge of the law, and his good works’. As the grim Spanish proverb has it, ‘There are no pockets in a shroud.’

The only thing which we can take out of this world into the world beyond is ourselves; and the finer the self we bring, the greater our treasure in heaven will be.

(3) Jesus ends this section by stating that where a person’s treasure is, that person’s heart is there also. If everything that people value and set their hearts upon is on earth, then they will have no interest in any world beyond this world; if all through their lives their eyes are on eternity, then they will evaluate lightly the things of this world. If everything which people count valuable is on this earth, then they will leave this earth reluctantly and grudgingly; if their thoughts have been directed to the world beyond, they will leave this world with gladness, because they go at last to God. Once Dr Johnson was shown round a noble castle and its grounds; when he had seen round it, he turned to his companions and said: ‘These are the things which make it difficult to die.’

Jesus never said that this world was unimportant; but he said and implied over and over again that its importance is not in itself, but in that to which it leads. This world is not the end of life, it is a stage on the way; and therefore we should never lose our hearts to this world and to the things of this world. Our eyes ought to be forever fixed on the goal beyond.[6]


Matthew 6:19. Lay not up. This deadly plague reigns everywhere throughout the world. Men are grown mad with an insatiable desire of gain. Christ charges them with folly, in collecting wealth with great care, and then giving up their happiness to moths and to rust, or exposing it as a prey to thieves. What is more unreasonable than to place their property, where it may perish of itself, or be carried off by men? Covetous men, indeed, take no thought of this. They lock up their riches in well-secured chests, but cannot prevent them from being exposed to thieves or to moths. They are blind and destitute of sound judgment, who give themselves so much toil and uneasiness in amassing wealth, which is liable to putrefaction, or robbery, or a thousand other accidents: particularly, when God allows us a place in heaven for laying up a treasure, and kindly invites us to enjoy riches which never perish.[7]


Ver. 19. Treasures upon earth.—This does not discourage diligent endeavour for the body which is necessary; industry, which is one part of duty. We are not to over-value even these valuable possessions.

  1. Here is an exhortation to duty. 1. What are these treasures? 2. What is implied by laying up treasures in heaven? (1) By fleeing from the wrath to come, the Christian is laying up heavenly treasure. (2) By endeavouring to secure an interest in Christ. (3) By setting his affection on things above. (4) By having his conversation there.
  2. The encouragements to enforce the duty of laying up treasure in heaven. 1. No thieves deprive them of their property. 2. Are you trading for that better world? (Dr. Fisher.)

Treasures in heaven:—The love of accumulation is a principle in our nature; no man free from its fascination. The only true investment for an immortal being must be in eternity. Everything done for God’s grace and glory is like something planted out of this world into the soil of another state. It is a deposit which will appear again. Take an instance of the way in which Christians may lay up treasures in heaven. 1. By selecting for our friends and companions those who are children of God, so that each departing one is an actual increase of the holy treasure which is awaiting us in another state. To Christian man, death only sweeps the field to house the harvest. The treasures of his heart are only locked up from him for a little while, to be opened presently, in greater loveliness, where everything is real, and every reality is for ever. It will be our greatest joy to meet in heaven those to whom we have been useful in this life. 2. The motive of any action will carry it higher than its present and visible scope. Every man has his time, talents, influence, and money, as working materials. If he so use these that he is constantly considering their value for eternity, he is putting treasure in God’s bank. 3. It is the power of faith to appropriate everything it grasps. You send on your affection to occupy heaven; you have a present enjoyment of your reversion. You increase your treasure in heaven by continued acts of faith in Jesus Christ. 4. By thus throwing yourself into another world this life will appear an impoverishment thing. (J. Vaughan, M.A.)

Earthly and heavenly treasures:

  1. The treasures referred to. 1. The treasures of earth are evanescent. 2. The lawful possession of earthly treasures is no sin. 3. The text does not object to your getting rich in a righteous way.
  2. Lay up treasures in heaven. 1. Because its bank is strong in its independence. Banks and firms are much like ninepins with which children play; when one pin falls the others fall also. But as for the bank of heaven, it is strictly independent; it is the only bank of its kind in the universe. 2. Because the omniscience of the Banker is the very best security. Could men foresee financial disaster they would avoid it. 3. Because this bank can never be broken into. 4. It is the only bank that can help you at death. You cannot very well trade in France with English money. You must change it into French money. But no earthly bank can change its coin so as to ferry you across Jordan. 5. Bank not with evil any longer. (J. O. Davis.)

Toys must not be counted treasures:—A lady once asked two little boys who were amusing themselves with some beautiful playthings, “Well, boys, these are your treasures, I suppose-your greatest treasures.” “No, ma’am,” said the elder boy, “these are not our treasures, they are our playthings; our treasures are in heaven.” A noble answer from a child. Oh, my congregation, let us treat gold and silver and precious stones as toys, and let us treat moral goodness, spiritual beauty, righteousness of heart, Christlikeness, Godlikeness, as our only treasures worthy the name! (Ibid.)

Treasures in heaven:—Have a deposit on earth, if you must or can; but let your chief banking be in heaven. (H. W. Beecher.)

Heavenly mindedness:

  1. The conduct prohibited. 1. The heart of man is the governing principle of his actions. 2. This too high estimation of the things of the world leads to an undue degree of solicitude for their acquisition, which the precept under consideration is designed to repress.
  2. The opposite duty which we are required to discharge. 1. The objects exhibited to our attention—“Treasures in heaven.” 2. The exhortation to secure an interest in this felicity.

III. The satisfactory reasons on which these directions are founded. 1. The uncertainty of earthly good. 2. The reality of that which is Divine. 3. And the powerful influence which our possessions have over our affections. Learn: 1. The folly of the worldly-minded man. 2. The wisdom of true piety. (J. E. Good.)

Our treasures to be raised higher:—The Rev. Ashton Oxenden quotes from an old writer an illustration of this precept. He says, “We need not lose our riches, but change their place. Suppose a friend should enter thy house, and should find that thou hadst lodged thy fruits on a damp floor; and suppose he knew the likelihood of those fruits to spoil, and should therefore give thee some such advice as this—‘Brother, thou art likely to lose the things which thou hast gathered with great labour. Thou hast placed them on a damp floor. In a few days they will corrupt.’ You would inquire, ‘What shall I do?’ And he would answer, ‘Raise them to a higher room.’ If wise, you would instantly act upon this advice. So Christ advises us to raise our riches from earth to heaven.”

No man ever went to heaven whose heart was not there before:—These words.

  1. As an entire proposition in themselves. 1. Every man has something which he accounts his treasure or chief good. This is apparent—(1) From the activity of man’s mind; (2) From the method of his acting. 2. Whatsoever a man places his treasure in, upon that he places his heart also. (1) A restless and laborious endeavour to possess himself of it. (2) He places his whole delight in it. (3) He supports his mind from it in all his troubles. (4) For the preservation of that he will part with all else besides.
  2. As an argument. Two rivals for the affections; man cannot fix on both. 1. Consider how far inferior the world is to man’s heart. Its enjoyments are (1) Indefectible; (2) Endless; (3) Not to be taken away. (Dr. South.)[8]

6:19 “do not store up” This is literally “stop treasuring up treasures.” This same word play is also found in v. 20. This is a PRESENT IMPERATIVE with a NEGATIVE PARTICLE, which means to stop an act that is already in progress. The desire of fallen humanity is to try to provide, by means of their own resources, all that is needed for a happy life. The grammatical construction here shows that it is also a temptation for redeemed man. True happiness and success are found only in dependence on God and contentment in what He has provided (cf. Eccl. 1–2; 2:24–25; 3:12, 22; 5:18; 8:15; 9:7–9; Phil. 4:11–12).

“treasures” In the ancient world wealth emanated from three sources: (1) clothing, (2) food stuffs and (3) precious metals or jewels. Each of these items may either be destroyed or stolen. Moths will attack clothing. Rust is from the root “to eat” or metaphorically “eat away” or “corrode” and was used of vermin eating food. Stealing referred to robbery of precious metals, jewels or the other two items. Basically this means that all of our worldly possessions are vulnerable. If one’s happiness depends on possessions, one could lose them at any moment. The false concept that security and happiness are found in physical things is stated in Luke 12:15.

“destroy” The term meant “to cause to disappear.”

“thieves break in and steal them” The term “break in” literally was “dig through.” Many homes of this period had mud walls. In the Greek language, the word for “robber” was from the compound term “mud digger.”[9]


19, 20. Do not gather for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust consume, and where thieves dig through and steal. But gather for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust consume, and where thieves do not dig through and steal. First the negative command is issued, then the positive (cf. verses 5, 6; 7–9; 16, 17; 19, 20; 25, 26, 28; 31, 33; and 7:1, 5). How absurd (see d above), Jesus is saying, to “treasure up” for oneself perishable earthly “treasures,” and while doing this to lose the imperishable heavenly riches! Earthly treasures are vulnerable because of deterioration and defalcation.

As to the first, deterioration, the moth consumes them. Moths, skippers, and butterflies belong to the large order of insects called Lepidoptera, that is, insects with scale-covered wings. In distinction from butterflies, moths a. constitute the largest division of this order, b. are largely nocturnal, and c. have antennae that are not club-shaped. The reference here in 6:19–21 is to the tiny insect that deposits its eggs in woolens. It is in the larval stage that it feeds on the cloth until the garment, etc., becomes moth-eaten and is destroyed (Isa. 51:8; Luke 12:33; James 5:2). Rust probably indicates the corrosion of metals, their being gradually gnawed into by the action of chemicals.

In all probability, however, the terms “moth” and “rust” represent all those agencies and processes that cause earthly treasures to diminish in value and finally to cease completely to serve their purpose. Thus, bread becomes moldy (Josh. 9:5), garments wear out (Ps. 102:26), fields (particularly neglected ones) become weed-infested (Prov. 24:30), walls and fences break down (Prov. 24:31), roofs cave in so that houses begin to leak (Eccl. 10:18), and gold and silver become tarnished and perish (1 Peter 1:7, 18). Add the havoc brought about by termites, hurricanes, typhoons, tornadoes, earthquakes, plant diseases, soil erosion, etc. The list is almost endless.

As to the second, defalcation, thieves break through and steal. Through the clay wall of the houses of which Jesus was thinking the thief rather easily digs an entrance and steals the ill-guarded treasures. Inflation, oppressive taxation which may amount to confiscation, bank failures, stock market slumps and crashes, expenses in connection with prolonged illnesses, these and many similar woes have the same effect. Besides, man’s body, including that of the strongest, gradually wears away (Ps. 32:3; 39:4–7; 90:10; 103:15, 16; Eccl. 12:1–8). When he dies, all the earthly treasures on which he had pinned his hopes vanish with him.

Completely different are “the treasures in heaven” (cf. 19:21), that is, those blessings that are reserved for us in heaven (1 Peter 1:4), that are heavenly in character, but of which we experience a foretaste even now. Beginning, as is proper, with the enumeration of some of these as Jesus himself describes them, one thinks of our standing with God as being fully pardoned (Matt. 6:14), answered prayer (7:7), the enrolment of our names in heaven (Luke 10:20), the Father’s love (John 16:27), a welcome not only to the “mansions” of heaven but to the Savior’s own heart (John 14:2, 3), a full share in Christ’s own peace (John 14:27), his own joy (John 15:11), and his own victory (John 16:33), and the Holy Spirit’s permanent indwelling (John 14:16, 26; 15:26). See also all the spiritual blessings mentioned in the beatitudes (Matt. 5:1–12). Paul is thinking of these same treasures, and describes them sometimes in the same, sometimes in his own terms: our “being justified by faith” (Rom. 5:1), “answered prayer” (2 Cor. 12:8, 9), “the love of God shed abroad in our hearts” (Rom. 5:5), “the crown of righteousness” with which the Savior will welcome us (2 Tim. 4:8), “the peace of God that passes all understanding (Phil. 4:7), “rejoicing in God through our Lord Jesus Christ” (Rom. 5:11), “the victory” (1 Cor. 15:57), and “his Spirit in the inner man” (Eph. 3:16; cf. Rom. 8:14, 16, 26, 27). The enumerations are merely illustrative, not exhaustive.

There is a degree of difference with which spiritual (as over against material) blessings are emphasized in the New Testament as compared with the Old. With the coming of Christ heaven as it were touches the earth. See N.T.C. on Ephesians, p. 73.

That the heavenly treasures are moth-proof, rust-proof, and burglar-proof (verse 20), in other words, that they endure forever in all their sparkling luster, as the irremovable possession of the children of the heavenly Father, is the teaching of Scripture throughout, for it tells us about:

a faithfulness that will never be removed (Ps. 89:33; 138:8),

a life that will never end (John 3:16),

a spring of water that will never cease to bubble up within the one who drinks of it (John 4:14),

a gift that will never be lost (John 6:37, 39),

a hand out of which the Good Shepherd’s sheep will never be snatched (John 10:28),

a chain that will never be broken (Rom. 8:29, 30),

a love from which we shall never be separated (Rom. 8:39),

a calling that will never be revoked (Rom. 11:29),

a foundation that will never be destroyed (2 Tim. 2:19),

and an inheritance that will never fade out (1 Peter 1:4, 5).

The following questions may well be asked, however, “But if it is wrong to gather treasures on earth, does this mean, then, that making provision for future physical needs is always and absolutely wrong?” “Must all trade, commerce, and industry, carried on for the purpose, at least in part, of making a profit, be condemned?” “Are all rich people to be considered reprobates?” To all three questions the answer is, “No.” God did not condemn Joseph for advising Pharaoh to store up grain for future use (Gen. 41:33–36). Nor were Solomon and Agur wrong in pointing to the ant as an example of the common sense revealed in providing during the summer for the needs of the winter (Prov. 6:6; 30:25). Nor did Paul make a mistake when he wrote 2 Cor. 12:14b and 1 Tim. 5:8. Business and banking are encouraged, by implication, in Christ’s parables (Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 19:11–23). The rich man Abraham (Gen. 13:2) was a friend of God (Isa. 41:8; 2 Chron. 20:7; James 2:23). Rich Zachaeus (Luke 19:2) was accounted worthy to be called “a son of Abraham” (Luke 19:9); and wealthy Joseph of Arimathea was a follower of the Lord (Matt. 27:57).

Nevertheless, the accumulation of wealth is fraught with spiritual danger (Matt. 19:24; Luke 12:16–21; 1 Tim. 6:10). To be sure, money can be a great blessing, if it is not an end in itself but a means to an end, namely, a. to prevent one’s own family from becoming a burden to others (1 Tim. 5:8), b. to help those who are in need (Prov. 14:21; 19:17; Acts 4:36, 37; 11:27–30; 24:17; Rom. 15:25; 2 Cor. 8:4, 9; Gal. 2:10; 6:10; Eph. 4:28), and c. to encourage the work of the gospel both at home and abroad (Mark 15:41; Luke 8:2, 3; Acts 16:15, 40; 1 Cor. 9:9; Phil. 4:15–17; 1 Tim. 5:17, 18), all to the glory of God (1 Cor. 10:31). However, money can also be a snare (Mark 14:11; Luke 22:5; Acts 8:18, 20).

Naturally, if a person’s real treasure, his ultimate aim in all his striving, is something pertaining to this earth—the acquisition of money, fame, popularity, prestige, power—, then his heart, the very center of his life (Prov. 4:23), will be completely absorbed in that mundane object. All of his activities, including even the so-called religious, will be subservient to this one goal. On the other hand, if, out of sincere and humble gratitude to God, he has made God’s kingdom, that is, the joyful recognition of God’s sovereignty in his own life and in every sphere, his treasure, then there is also where his heart will be. Money, in that case, will be a help, not a hindrance. Something of this nature Jesus must have had in mind when he said, 21. For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also. The “heart” cannot be in both of these places at the same time. It is an either-or proposition! See verse 24.[10]


[1] MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985). Matthew (Vol. 1, pp. 409–413). Chicago: Moody Press.

[2] Carson, D. A. (2010). Matthew. In T. Longman III & D. E. Garland (Eds.), The Expositor’s Bible Commentary: Matthew–Mark (Revised Edition) (Vol. 9, pp. 211–212). Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan.

[3] Chamblin, J. K. (2010). Matthew: A Mentor Commentary (pp. 434–436). Ross-shire, Great Britain: Mentor.

[4] Mounce, R. H. (2011). Matthew (p. 59). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[5] Brown, J. K. (2015). Matthew. (M. L. Strauss & J. H. Walton, Eds.) (p. 70). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books.

[6] Barclay, W. (2001). The Gospel of Matthew (Third Ed., pp. 275–280). Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press.

[7] Calvin, J., & Pringle, W. (2010). Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke (Vol. 1, p. 332). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

[8] Exell, J. S. (1952). The Biblical Illustrator: Matthew (pp. 105–106). Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House.

[9] Utley, R. J. (2000). The First Christian Primer: Matthew (Vol. Volume 9, p. 56). Marshall, TX: Bible Lessons International.

[10] Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953–2001). Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Vol. 9, pp. 343–346). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.

Are Moral Truths a Matter of Personal Opinion? (Video) — Cold Case Christianity

 

 

Are moral truths determined by individuals or groups? Are these kinds of claims dependent on culture? If not, how can we “ground” such truths? In this video from J. Warner’s “Quick Shots: Fast Answers to Hard Questions” series on RightNow Media, J. Warner answers this common question related to the claims of Christianity.

To see more training videos with J. Warner Wallace, visit the YouTube playlist.

via Are Moral Truths a Matter of Personal Opinion? (Video) — Cold Case Christianity

August—7 The Poor Man’s Evening Portion

 

But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels, for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour.—Hebrews 2:9.

Mark, my soul, the very sweet and peculiar manner in which God the Holy Ghost here speaks of Jesus. He was “made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death.” Yes! A body, such as our’s, was given him, for the express purpose of suffering. Our nature, by reason of sin, required a sacrifice for sin. It behoved him, therefore, to be in all things like unto his brethren. But when he had made his soul an offering for sin, he for ever sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high. To none of the angels was it ever said, “Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.” Now ponder these blessed things, and then say, whether thou hast so seen Jesus? If so, thou hast seen thy nature in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ, not only exalted above all principality and power, and might, and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, but thou hast seen him “crowned with glory and honour,” as the head of his body the Church. I charge it upon thee, my soul, that in all thy views of the Lord Jesus, as a risen and exalted Saviour, thou for ever connect with it, and never lose sight of it, that it is Jesus, as Jesus in his human nature, that is so exalted, so honoured and glorified. It would be no honour, but rather a degradation of the Son of God, as God, to say such things of him, as being made or receiving a throne, or having glory given to him. All power, sovereignty, and might, are his before. But when we behold Jesus as “made a little lower than the angels,” and becoming Mediator, he stands forth the servant of Jehovah, redeeming his Church and people, and, as such, “for the suffering of death, is crowned with glory and honour.” And oh! how blessed the view! For if he was thus crowned in our nature, then surely he will have respect to our nature in all the wants of his people. If he be exalted in our nature, surely he is exalted in that nature “as a Prince and a Saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins.” And if it be the same Lord Jesus, whose head is now crowned with glory, that was once crowned with thorns, oh! with what humble confidence may a poor sinner, such as I am, look up and tell him of the glories of his cross, now shining with tenfold lustre in the glories of his crown! Shall I not hope, dear Lord! by the sweet influences of thy blessed Spirit, to make every day a coronation day, when by faith I crown thee my true and lawful Sovereign, desiring to bring every thought and affection of my poor heart into obedience to thee, to bow the knee of my heart before thee, and with holy joy “confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father?” Amen.[1]

 

[1] Hawker, R. (1845). The Poor Man’s Evening Portion (A New Edition, pp. 235–236). Philadelphia: Thomas Wardle.

Those that have never heard? And a COVID Update — Cross Examined.org | Christian Apologetics Organization | Dr. Frank Turek

Frank shares a passionate reaction to the death of Mike Adams and then tackles the COVID situation, including the idea that churches and schools should reopen. If you can only school remotely, Frank recommends the online classes at CrossExamined.org he’s teaching this Fall.

Frank also gives robust answers to the following listener questions:

  • Why did God allow Adam and Eve to be tempted when He knew what would happen?
  • What about those that have never heard about Jesus?
  • What about those who think they are good people and don’t need forgiveness?

via Those that have never heard? And a COVID Update — Cross Examined.org | Christian Apologetics Organization | Dr. Frank Turek

August 7th The D. L. Moody Year Book

 

Many will say to Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Thy name? and in Thy name have cast out devils? and in Thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity.—Matthew 7:22, 23.

IT has been said that there will be three things which will surprise us when we get to heaven—one, to find many whom we did not expect to find there; another, to find some not there whom we had expected; a third, and perhaps the greatest wonder, to find ourselves there![1]

 

[1] Moody, D. L. (1900). The D. L. Moody Year Book: A Living Daily Message from the Words of D. L. Moody. (E. M. Fitt, Ed.) (p. 135). East Northfield, MA: The Bookstore.

Todd White

Michelle Lesley

Why am I seeing this? Click here.


If you are considering commenting or sending me an e-mail objecting to the fact that I warn against certain teachers, please click here and read this article first. Your objection is most likely answered here. I won’t be publishing comments or answering emails that are answered by this article.

This article is what I call a “clearinghouse article”. It is a collection of articles written by others on the teacher, ministry, or unbiblical trend named below. Either I have not had the time to write a full blown article on it myself, or I felt that the articles listed did a fine job of explaining the biblical issues and there was no need to reinvent the wheel.

Disclaimer: I did not write the articles below, and I am not thoroughly familiar with all of the websites used in my clearinghouse articles. I…

View original post 764 more words

Ann Voskamp

Michelle Lesley

Why am I seeing this? Click here.


If you are considering commenting or sending me an e-mail objecting to the fact that I warn against certain teachers, please click here and read this article first. Your objection is most likely answered here. I won’t be publishing comments or answering emails that are answered by this article.

This article is what I call a “clearinghouse article”. It is a collection of articles written by others on the teacher, ministry, or unbiblical trend named below. Either I have not had the time to write a full blown article on it myself, or I felt that the articles listed did a fine job of explaining the biblical issues and there was no need to reinvent the wheel.

Disclaimer: I did not write the articles below, and I am not thoroughly familiar with all of the websites used in my clearinghouse articles. I…

View original post 884 more words

Mourning the lost- Catholics

The End Time

By Elizabeth Prata*

catholic Milan’s Duomo, AKA Catholic Cahedral. EPrata photo

Over a billion Catholics are in spiritual bondage to their heinous religious system. There are many things they lack spiritually but I can think of three to address that we can point them to. First, we can point to Christ and the Bible to help them overcome what it is they lack: knowledge of grace, assurance in their salvation, and trust in Jesus to fulfill all He has said.

~~~~~~GRACE~~~~~~

The simple truth at the center of a born again believer’s faith is surrounded by Grace- that Jesus descended from heaven, lived as fully man and fully God for 33 years, died on the cross as the lamb sacrifice for our sins (taking upon His shoulders the wrath of God), was buried and three days later rose again. This is the Gospel.

Any person who believes these facts, and confesses…

View original post 1,206 more words

Sally Yates’ Testimony Showed She’s Either Ignorant Or Lying About Russiagate

Over the three hours she testified, Sally Yates proved herself ignorant of basic facts and ready to dissemble rather than admit that the Obama administration spied on the Trump campaign.

Source: Sally Yates’ Testimony Showed She’s Either Ignorant Or Lying About Russiagate

Real Russia collusion! Steele source met with Russians during dossier saga | WND

Christopher Steele

Chuck Ross

Daily Caller News Foundation

In June 2016, a month that is key to the origin story of the Steele dossier, the primary source for that salacious document met with an official in the Russian ministry of energy and a journalist friend in Russia, The Daily Caller News Foundation has learned.

Igor Danchenko, a Russia analyst who worked for Christopher Steele, met with Sergey Abyshev, who was then a deputy director in the energy ministry, and Ivan Vorontsov, the editor-in-chief of a Russian finance website, according to a Facebook post by Vorontsov and confirmation from Abyshev.

It is not entirely clear what relevance the rendezvous might have to the dossier, but it helps fill in the timeline of Danchenko’s interactions and movements at a critical stage in the development of the provocative report.

At the time of the meeting, Danchenko was well at work for Steele collecting information about Donald Trump’s possible ties to Russia.

Danchenko, a Russian national who lives in Washington, D.C., told the FBI in January 2017 that Steele, a former MI6 officer, tasked him in June 2016 to dig up dirt on Trump. Steele was hired in May 2016 by Fusion GPS, an opposition research firm working for the Clinton campaign and DNC.

Vorontsov posted a photo on June 16, 2016 from the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), an annual business conclave, saying he had met the prior evening with Danchenko and Abyshev.

“The night before was so nice with Sergey Abyshev and Igor Danchenko,” Vorontsov wrote.

Four days later, on June 20, 2016, Steele penned the first of 17 memos that make up what is colloquially known as the dossier. Steele has said that most of the information was collected by a single source who worked as an independent contractor for his firm, Orbis Business Intelligence.

Danchenko was identified as the contractor last month by an anonymous Twitter user after the Senate Judiciary Committee released a memo of his interviews with the FBI from Jan. 24-26, 2017.

The first Steele memo contains the dossier’s most eye-catching allegation: that the Kremlin was blackmailing Donald Trump with video of him watching prostitutes urinate on each other in a room at the Moscow Ritz Carlton in 2013.

Danchenko told the FBI that the information came from two sources who are referred to as Source 1 and Source 2 in the FBI memo of the interviews.

It is unclear if Danchenko passed any information from either Vorontsov or Abyshev to Steele, though a group of Twitter sleuths who helped identify Danchenko as Steele’s source have pointed to clues about Vorontsov that match up with descriptions about Source 2.

The DCNF reached both Vorontsov and Abyshev for comment about their interactions with Danchenko and about the dossier.

Abyshev confirmed meeting with Danchenko and Vorontsov after being shown the photo Vorontsov posted on Facebook, though he said that the encounter occurred in Moscow rather than St. Petersburg.

He described the encounter as “an almost accidental meeting in the center of Moscow with three ‘cheerful’ guys.”

“As a result, I had to listen to a lecture on investment opportunities for about 20 minutes,” he said in a message translated from Russian.

The FBI memo describes many of Danchenko’s meetings, but locations and participants are all redacted.

Vorontsov told the DCNF when asked about Danchenko, Abyshev, and the dossier that he was “ready to talk.”

He called Danchenko a “good man” with whom he has a long relationship. Vorontsov later decided against discussing Danchenko, saying that he did not feel comfortable talking about his friend without his consent.

Vorontsov and Danchenko appear to have a close friendship stretching back several years. Vorontsov has posted photos of Danchenko dating as far back as 2014 and as recently as November 2019.

Vorontsov, the editor-in-chief of BANKIFIN, also referred to Danchenko in a post on Nov. 26, 2018 as a “special correspondent” for his media outlet at the 4th annual Russian-British Business Forum, which was held in London.

Danchenko displayed a badge that said he was with Sidar Global Ventures, a Washington, D.C. firm where he worked as a Eurasia analyst.

Cenk Sidar, the president of Sidar Global, said he knows nothing about the dossier, and has never met Danchenko.

“Igor worked for Sidar Global as a political risk and commercial due diligence analyst. He did periodic Russia political reports for my Wall Street and corporate clients, and did a good job,” Sidar told the DCNF.

“I don’t know him personally or don’t have anything to say about his work quality as there were other people who managed him but in general, he is a smart guy and knows well about Russia.”

But Sidar said that Danchenko did not attend the forum in London on behalf of Sidar Global.

“I have no idea about that conference and we did not send him to this event,” he said when showed a photo of Danchenko’s badge.

Danchneko told the FBI about his work for Steele and his sub-sources for the dossier during his interviews. He undercut several aspects of the dossier, telling investigators that he provided Steele with unverified rumors he picked up from friends.

There is no indication of wrongdoing on Danchenko’s part. He agreed to meet with the FBI in exchange for immunity, according to the FBI memo of his interviews. A Justice Department inspector general report released on Dec. 9 said that the FBI described Danchenko as “truthful and cooperative” in applications for surveillance warrants against Carter Page, a former Trump campaign aide.

The IG report did raise the prospect that Danchenko was not entirely forthcoming with investigators. According to the report, the FBI intelligence analyst who took part in the Danchenko interview believed Danchenko might have been “minimizing” his contacts with some of his sub-sources.

A source close to Danchenko told the DCNF that he stands by the information he presented to Steele, but has no comment on how Steele wrote it in the dossier. Steele provided the dossier to the FBI and briefed numerous reporters about it in 2016.

The FBI relied heavily on Steele’s information to obtain warrants to surveil Carter Page.

The revelation last month that Danchenko was Steele’s source has drawn even more scrutiny to the dossier.

That’s because the narrative initially spun by Democrats and Steele-friendly journalists was that the retired spy used a deep network of Russian sources with insight into the Kremlin’s links to Trumpworld and its interference in the U.S. election. Rep. Adam Schiff, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, cited Steele’s use of Russian sources during a March 20, 2017 hearing in which he touted the allegations in the dossier.

But according to what Danchenko told the FBI, he appears to be far removed from Kremlin power centers. He told investigators that he derived most of his information from friends he had in Russia who he believed had some loose affiliations with Russian government officials.

Danchenko, who worked for the Brookings Institution years before partnering with Steele, told the FBI of six people he said were sources for the information he gave Steele, according to the FBI memo.

One of the purported sources has been identified as Sergei Millian, a Belarusian-American businessman long reported to be a major but unwitting source for the dossier. ABC News and The Wall Street Journal reported on Jan. 24, 2017, the same day that Danchenko met with the FBI, that Millian was a key source for the dossier.

Danchenko undercut the claim that Millian played a prominent role in the dossier in the FBI interview, according to the memo. He told the FBI that he believes he may have talked to Millian by phone once in late July 2016, but that the person on the other end of the line did not identify himself.

His statements conflict with reports that popped up after the dossier was published in January 2017 that said that Millian was the source for the story about Trump with prostitutes in Moscow.

Millian, who is referred to as Source 6 in the FBI’s Danchenko interview memo, attended the SPIEF event that Danchenko may also have attended. He posted photos on his Facebook account speaking with Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch who once hired Steele, and Alexander Novak, Russia’s minister of energy.

Danchenko told the FBI that Source 2, who he said was a friend, provided the information to him about the alleged Trump sex tape.

According to Danchenko, the source told him in June 2016 that there was a “well known story” about Trump’s activities at the Ritz Carlton in Moscow. The source said that people knew about the allegation but that “it only becomes fact if people come forward.”

Danchenko told the FBI he investigated the allegation himself, but was unable to verify it after speaking with staff at the Ritz Carlton.

Trump has vehemently denied the so-called “pee tape” allegation. People with him on his trip to Moscow have said Trump spent only a few hours in his hotel room, making it unlikely he would have had the time to take part in a sex romp.

Danchenko also said he met with another source, Source 1, in June 2016 at a cafe in an unidentified location and discussed the purported Trump blackmail.

According to the FBI memo, the source passed along information from a conversation he had with a former Russian intelligence official. Danchenko said that the former spy said the Kremlin had “embarrassing stuff — sexual/pornographic material” on many people, including Trump.

The former Russian spy is not identified in the FBI memo, but Steele indicated in a meeting with State Department officials in October 2016 that Vyacheslav Trubnikov, the former chief of Russia’s FSB, was somehow a source for the dossier.

The Justice Department’s inspector general, which released a scathing report of the FBI’s handling of the dossier, raised the prospect that the Trump sex tape story could have been the product of Russian disinformation.

According to the report, a U.S. intelligence community report dated Feb. 27, 2017 said that a person with possible ties to Trump and Russia claimed that the sex tape allegation was planted by Russian intelligence operatives. The IG report said that allegations in the dossier regarding former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen — which Danchenko said came from a source called Source 3 — may have been Russian disinformation.

Adding more potential significance to Danchenko’s relationship with Vorontsov is speculation that he is Source 2 described in the FBI memo.

Danchenko told the FBI that Source 2 was a collector of some sort, and that he gave the source Scottish currency that he took out of an ATM. Vorontsov’s Facebook account shows that he is an avid collector of foreign currency. In several posts he thanked Danchenko for gifting him paper money and coins.

“I thought Danchenko brought me my salary!” Vorontsov wrote in a March 13, 2015 post. He thanked Danchenko in a post on June 21, 2017 for a bill issued by the United Cigar Stores of America. He referred to Danchenko as Santa Claus in a post on Nov. 9, 2014 thanking him for a coin set from the U.K. Vorontsov thanked Danchenko “for remembering and caring for us” in another post with a five-pound bank note.

Danchenko has not responded to repeated phone calls and messages seeking comment. The DCNF reached his attorney, Mark E. Schamel, with questions about Vorontsov, Abyshev and the dossier, but he was unable to provide comment on the record.

Abyshev, who left the Russian ministry of energy in August 2016, is the highest ranking Russian official identified to date who Danchenko is known to have met.

Abyshev has served in various local and federal government positions, according to his LinkedIn profile. Before joining the ministry of energy in 2011, Abyshev worked for Russia’s Federal Antimonopoly Service. He served as vice mayor and head of the city duma for Nizhny Novgorod in the early 2000s.

Radio Free Europe, the news outlet, reported in October 2002 that Abyshev was impeached as speaker of the Duma on allegations of embezzlement and improper actions related to budget issues.

Abyshev confirmed to The Daily Caller News Foundation through Facebook chat that he met with Danchenko and Voronovich, though he suggested that they met in Moscow a day before SPIEF.

Whether Danchenko used any information from Abyshev in the dossier is unclear. Danchenko indicated that some of his sources were unaware that he was working for Steele on an investigation of Trump’s possible contacts with Russia. He also said that his sources provided rumor and speculation over drinks about Trump and Kremlin activities, and that it was unverified information.

Abyshev did not answer a follow-up question about whether he might have been a dossier source, either witting or unwitting. But he did volunteer some information that matches up with details about Danchenko in the FBI memo.

Abyshev told the DCNF that he recalls that Danchenko worked as a translator for a Russian delegation who visited the Library of Congress in 2002.

“Igor was a translator for the Open World program at the Library of Congress in 2002 for the organizers,” Abyshev said.

According to the FBI memo, Danchenko said that he was a “facilitator” for an event held at the Library of Congress. Details of the event are heavily redacted, as are many other pieces of information in the FBI document.

“I don’t remember the details, a lot of time has passed, I don’t even remember the place, but I remember about the congress, because it is not easy for the citizens of the country to get to it,” Abyshev said.

Abyshev said he has not seen Voronovich since their 2016 rendezvous. He did not say whether he has met with Danchenko, saying that “Igor also never came to Moscow, in any case, I don’t know about it.”

Voronovich did not address questions about whether he provided Danchenko with information found in the dossier. He shut down access to his Facebook account during the reporting for this story.

This story originally was published by the Daily Caller News Foundation.

Source: Real Russia collusion! Steele source met with Russians during dossier saga

In Rare Rebuke, Top GOP Senators Accuse Schiff, Pelosi, Warner and Schumer of Spreading Disinformation on Foreign Intel — The Gateway Pundit

In a rare rebuke, Senators Ron Johnson (R-WI) and Chuck Grassley (R-IA) this week sent a letter to top Democrats accusing them of spreading disinformation on foreign intel.

The letter was sent to House Intel Chairman Adam Schiff, Speaker Pelosi, Vice Chair of the Senate Intel Panel Mark Warner and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

Claiming that for the past four years they have “promoted and amplified the false narrative that the Trump campaign ‘colluded’ with Russia,” Johnson and Grassley wrote, claiming that the Democrats have “pushed this false narrative even though, behind closed doors, [they] repeatedly saw and heard evidence to the contrary.”

Grassley and Johnson accused the Democrat lawmakers of recklessly promoting false narratives for political gain.

“It is certainly our goal to eradicate foreign influence from our elections,” the Senators wrote. “But your use of this issue to knowingly and recklessly promote false narratives for political purposes is completely contrary to that goal.”

Last month top Democrats in both the House and Senate wrote a letter to the FBI asking the bureau to provide Congress with a counterintelligence briefing on a so-called ‘concerted foreign interference’ campaign targeting Congress and the 2020 election.

Johnson and Grassley pushed back and said the Democrats are purposely leaking information and spreading disinformation to muddy the election.

Schiff has repeatedly claimed he has concrete evidence Trump colluded with the Russians, however he has never produced any evidence to back up his outrageous claims.

via In Rare Rebuke, Top GOP Senators Accuse Schiff, Pelosi, Warner and Schumer of Spreading Disinformation on Foreign Intel — The Gateway Pundit

Experts Say COVID-19 Cases Are Surging, But How Reliable Is The Testing Data? — The Federalist

Experts Say COVID-19 Cases Are Surging, But How Reliable Is The Testing Data?

A second wave of the Wuhan virus in the U.S. raises questions about how positive cases are being determined, the validity of the case data, and what might be behind a potential padding of the numbers.

As Americans entered summer with a glimmer of hope that COVID-19 might recede, those hopes were quickly dashed after a rapid resurgence of the virus in Sun Belt states. Now approaching midsummer, the numbers continue to surge across the South and Western regions of the United States.

Florida and Texas, two of the hardest-hit states besides California and New York, have broken record numbers of cases in the last several weeks. Florida recorded an all-time high of about 15,200 cases in a single day July 11.

The question remains unanswered, however, about how cases are increasing at such an accelerated speed. Since the World Health Organization (WHO) declared COVID-19 a pandemic in March, state-by-state coronavirus data tracking maps were readily available online, so the public could monitor daily numbers.

Now several months into combating the Wuhan virus, more testing is available, and further information has come to light about how health officials determine some positive cases. These factors contribute to a greater need for more detailed classification and reporting of case numbers.

The limited data presented amid a surge in positive cases raises questions about the credibility of the figures. The absence of these details from some data sources hinders the ability of officials and average citizens to make informed decisions for collective safety and well-being.

Constant Mixed Messaging

Since the emergence of COVID-19 in the United States in late winter, government and medical officials have provided a series of inconsistent and disparate messages on the dangers of coronavirus, its transmissibility, and the efficacy of masks. These inconsistencies persist in the scramble to quell the spike in positive cases.

Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida was quick to cite increased testing for the swell in cases, later adding that the “25 to 44 age group” is now leading with the most positive cases. At the same press conference in Florida, Dr. Jason Foland affirmed that a younger demographic, without showing symptoms, can stealthily infect an older and more at-risk population. The WHO, however, recently announced that asymptomatic transmission is “rare.”

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the infectious disease expert on the White House coronavirus task force, early on told the public that masks do not appreciably protect a person from contracting the virus. He said the masks could prove to be more problematic, increasing peoples’ likelihood of touching the mask and their face, resulting in potentially easier viral transmission.

Now, however, both Fauci and state and local officials are urging all Americans to wear masks with religious fervency. Some local governments are even threatening to issue fines upwards of $1,000 if people refuse to comply. The media and politicians have consistently provided incongruous information like this, expecting the public to blindly accept all advisement, mandates, and frightening statistical numbers without care for distinction or qualification of case testing figures.

Counting Sore Throats as a COVID Positive

Widespread inconsistencies and convolution among data and laboratory tracking appears to be significantly contributing to possible misinformation provided to the public. From nearly the outset of the virus, the Council of State and Territorial Epidemiologists gave massive latitude to public health officials in the criteria for identifying COVID-19 cases.

The guidelines gave extensive license in qualifying people as “probable” positive for SARS-CoV-2, without them being required to undergo laboratory testing for the virus. Patients could meet COVID-19 criteria by displaying several symptoms such as “headache” or “sore throat,” having suspected or known exposure to someone with the virus, or belonging to a “risk cohort.”

This wouldn’t be problematic if all states uniformly separated those “probable” or “suspected” COVID-19 cases from those that were laboratory-confirmed. States are not universally making these distinctions, however, with some qualifying the variances and others failing to do so. An investigation by The Epoch Times confirmed that states “such as Arizona, Ohio, Michigan, and Virginia, include probable cases and deaths in their totals.” However, “Arkansas, New Jersey, and Washington, only include probable deaths, but not probable infections.”

A Fox affiliate in Orlando similarly broke a story that some Florida laboratories were failing to report negative COVID-19 test results, culminating in a fallacious 100 percent positivity rate emerging from those labs. This lack of a standardized reporting methodology across the United States hinders data reliability and trust.

Two Types of Testing

At the outset of the virus, limited testing was available. Testing capacity has greatly improved in only a few months, and there are now tests for both viral cases of COVID-19 and antibodies.

Differentiating between the results of these two crucial tests is important. A positive viral test implies an active case of the virus, with a positive antibody test indicating someone was previously infected and has since recovered. While it is still largely contested whether antibodies indicate potential immunity to future infection, they do denote a recovery from the virus.

If a significant number of antibody tests are included in the current aggregate of “positive” cases, this might convey a very different picture of the pandemic’s severity. For this reason, the data from these two tests should be differentiated, but until recently, this was still not being widely done.

A May expose by The Atlantic revealed that the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention confirmed a consistent differentiation was not being made between these two independent tests, with the “positive” results being aggregated and reported back to state officials as homogenous totals. It appears that now most states have begun to differentiate, with the CDC regularly adding to its list of states making this distinction. The lack of uniformity in consolidating this data calls into question the uptick in “positive” tests and its potential effects in skewing the numbers and misinforming the public.

Consequences of Bad Data

Inconsistently combining testing data could lead the government to impose unwarranted restrictions and mandates, potentially leading to irreparable and long-term damage to small businesses across the nation. This could create undue economic and psychological stress to families, and influence civic engagement in a politically volatile election year.

None of this is to deny the actuality of the coronavirus, nor to dismiss the multitude of lives it has claimed globally. In a crucial decision year, however, one must consider the political advantages of invoking public fear and uncertainty, while simultaneously pushing for compliance in the name of public safety.

To retain a nation of free citizenry, its people must remain vigilant and engaged, always assessing, questioning, and objectively considering information — never delegating critical analysis solely to the media or officials, and never ceding to groupthink.

via Experts Say COVID-19 Cases Are Surging, But How Reliable Is The Testing Data? — The Federalist

Conservative Southern Baptists voice support for MacArthur; Liberals silent — Capstone Report

Conservative Southern Baptists are taking sides in the dispute between conservative Pastor John MacArthur and the Leftist Tyrants in California. Ronnie Floyd, Barrett Duke and Robert Jeffress were among conservative voices supporting MacArthur’s stand for liberty.

SBC Executive Committee President and CEO Ronnie Floyd said: “I’m praying for and thankful for Dr. John MacArthur @johnmacarthur & other pastors across the country who are facing government encroachment on the fundamental rights to free exercise of religion and freedom of assembly. May the Lord give pastors wisdom.”

Barrett Duke, executive director of the Montana Southern Baptist Convention said, “I believe California has applied a more burdensome restriction to churches than to other groups. In addition, the church must follow what they believe is the Lord’s will for them. The least we can do is pray for them to prevail.”

Dr. Robert Jeffress, pastor of the First Baptist Church of Dallas, Texas, said California’s actions against churches are “an abomination” during an interview on the Todd Starnes Radio Show.

Jeffress said of MacArthur, “I think he is doing the exactly right thing. These shutdown laws in many states and including California have certainly been inequitable.” Jeffress cited the insanity of public protests with shouting while banning singing.

“There is no constitutional right to allow a person to go to a movie, a mall, a restaurant or to a casino in Reno, Nev.—there’s no constitutional guarantee to that…but there is a constitutional guarantee for the ability to go to church. It is called the First Amendment. And by the way, it is the same first amendment that lets people to protest in the streets. You can’t allow one activity and disallow the other activity.” Jeffress said. “John MacArthur is showing courage in standing up for that constitutional right, but even more foundational it is a biblical mandate.”

Ryan Helfenbein, executive director of the Falkirk Center, penned an Op-Ed in support of MacArthur. He said, “In the face of this wildly unconstitutional oppression, however, Christians must not cower and quake as the Israelite army did. Persecution is a refining fire to the Church, and MacArthur now stands as a David of religious liberty before the government’s unscientific, unconstitutional Goliath where weaker shepherds would break.”

Ronnie W. Rogers, pastor of Trinity Baptist Church of Norman, OK, posted a letter in support of John MacArthur.

“Many of us around the country are praying for you and speaking in support of your desire to follow God and reopen for worship despite the state threats. You are also not alone in fighting for Grace Community Church because what is happening with you has similarly happened across our country of late to other churches, and unless you, along with the rest of us, stand firm on the Scripture, we will all find ourselves in similar positions. We know history. We know the depravity of man. And we know the ungodly desires of some political leaders.”

Rogers is a non-Calvinist Southern Baptist pastor. This is an important point that should not be missed. Christians must work together in this critical time—putting aside internal debates over soteriology to focus on the Devil’s attacks on the Church. We can all profit from Pastor Rogers’ example.

Former SBC President and seminary leader Paige Patterson also voiced support for John MacArthur. He wrote,

While I have not agreed with John MacArthur on everything, he has a sheaf of letters from me commending him for a plethora of prophetic books and bold statements of faith across the years.  MacArthur’s approach is simple.  If the Word of God says it, then repeat it.  If the Word of God is silent, one may have an opinion, but he must not speak such personal observation authoritatively. MacArthur told no one that he had to attend church.  But with hundreds of believers desiring to hear a Word from God and/or seek the face of God in corporate prayer, John invited the populace to gather around the Word of God and hear a message from the Lord.  California Governor Newsom has issued an order outlawing churches from gathering in their houses of worship to hear from God.  Now he is threatening to cut off water to MacArthur’s church (that will certainly aid the health of the congregants) and to stop the flow of electricity, to fine MacArthur $1,000 a day, and potentially to arrest him for his protest against government intrusion despite his exercise of religious liberty as guaranteed to all Americans by the First Amendment.  Antifa and others plot protests all over the USA with no threats from Governor Newsom.  Only Bible-believing Christians receive such a threat from the governor.

The hour has come for Christians—anyone who is part of the Free Church Movement—to stand and be counted.  I am personally disappointed in the silence of Southern Baptist leaders, who seem to hover in fear.

Paige Patterson

Also, now is a good time to take note of those celebrity Southern Baptist and evangelical leaders who are not voicing support for MacArthur. Even if a leader feels the Pandemic is too dangerous to meet–the outrageous actions of California illustrate this is not about a disease. This is about Tyranny.

This is the battle for the Church in our generation. Pay attention to who joins the fight and who cowers at home.

via Conservative Southern Baptists voice support for MacArthur; Liberals silent — Capstone Report

How Long Can The Media Cover For Biden’s Racial Gaffes? — The Federalist

How Long Can The Media Cover For Biden’s Racial Gaffes?

Joe Biden is playing from a very old playbook of racial politics. How long can the media protect him from himself?

Joe Biden has stepped on another racial landmine. As the country is torn apart by ethnic strife, the former Vice President continues to frustrate his campaign and his loyal supporters in the corporate media by saying goofy things about black people that at least border on abject racism.

Thursday it was a statement, introduced by his classic, “Come on, man!” in which he suggested that unlike Latinos, black Americans do not have diversity of thought and ideas, with “notable exceptions.”

Put once again in the unenviable position of having to defend the Democratic nominee, CNN and MSNBC chose for the most part to ignore the troubling remarks. Others like the New York Times’ Jonathan Martin took a different approach, sidestepping the actual remarks to make a broader point about Biden’s propensity to gaffes.

You really have to hand it to Washington Post “Fact Checker” Glenn Kessler who just pretended that Biden didn’t say what Biden literally said. In a just world, Kessler would give himself four Pinocchios for this obvious gaslighting, but don’t hold your breath.

Despite these desperate deflections, the Biden camp itself decided it needed to address the comments. In a series of tweets, Biden said that he was not treating black Americans as a monolith, even though he clearly was. Later in the day he launched into some bizarre remarks about how Latinos come from all over the world “unlike African-American communities,” as if there are not black Americans from Africa, the Caribbean and Europe. These defensive statements were likely a result of President Trump highlighting the gaffe throughout the day.

This is becoming a real problem for Biden who recently insisted in an interview that if a black person, presumably one of those notable exceptions doesn’t vote for him than they “ain’t black.” In 2020, these kinds of comments not only sound tinny to younger Democrats, they come off often as down right racist.

In part, the issue for Biden is that he came of political age at a time when ethnic politics had a more playful and less corrosive feeling about it. This was a time when Bill Clinton was lovingly called the first black president. Even earlier in the 1970s and 1980s, politics was often played in ethnic clubs like the Ancient Order of Hibernians.

Ethnic jokes were more commonplace and acceptable, this first started catching up to Biden in 2008 when he joked that you had to have a slight Indian accent to go to 7-11. Nobody laughed. Another very common aspect late of 20th century racial politics was code switching, using different words or accents when speaking to different groups. We still see Biden do this with his use of “man” and “ain’t” to shall we say “urbanize” his delivery to black voters.

Biden’s antiquated ways of dealing with race may not be racist so to speak, but they are certainly outside the accepted parlance of the current Democratic Party. They say you can’t teach an old dog new tricks, and Biden, who spent most of his life getting laughs at such remarks, is not likely to be an exception to this rule.

The best Biden’s handlers can do in this situation is try to keep Old Joe in the basement with as few chances to foul up as possible. But with several of the latest polls showing a sharply tightening race, that may not be sustainable in the long run. Meanwhile the best the media can do is try to ignore the gaffes. But here they also have a problem, namely those notable exceptions.

There is no shortage of prominent black conservatives in today’s political landscape. From Harris Faulker, to Sen. Tim Scott, to Deroy Murdock and many others, there are black voices that resent and object to being told they are part of some Democratic monolith. The still mainly white mainstream media cannot ignore these voices; even though they desperately wish to do so.

Do not expect this to be the last time Biden makes a gaffe involving race. But do expect the corporate media to use all their power to protect him when he does. The question is, will that power be enough?

via How Long Can The Media Cover For Biden’s Racial Gaffes? — The Federalist

“Joe Biden is a Racist – Has the Mind-Set of a Plantation Owner” – Civil Rights Attorney Leo Terrell UNLOADS on Racist Joe Biden (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

 

This was just brutal!
Earlier today Joe Biden asserted that “unlike Latinos” the black community is basically a monolith who all thinks the same.

Joe thinks Latinos have diversity of thought unlike Black Americans.

Team Trump asked, “Uhh… did Joe Biden just say that Black people are all the same?”

Last night on Hannity former Democrat operative and civil rights attorney Leo Terrell responded to Joe Biden’s remarks.

Leo Terrell did not hold Back!

Leo Terrell: Joe Biden is unfit to be president and Joe Biden is a racist. Joe Biden has the mindset of a plantation owner. He thinks he knows how every black person thinks, how we walk, should eat. Joe Biden does not understand that Condoleezza Rice and Al Sharpton are different individuals… Joe Biden insulted every person of color today!

 

via “Joe Biden is a Racist – Has the Mind-Set of a Plantation Owner” – Civil Rights Attorney Leo Terrell UNLOADS on Racist Joe Biden (VIDEO) — The Gateway Pundit

August 7 Life-Changing Moments With God

 

The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name.

If the woman knew the gift of God, and who it was who said to her, “Give Me a drink,” she would have asked Jesus, and He would have given her living water. If I, being evil, know how to give good gifts to my children, how much more will You, my heavenly Father, give the Holy Spirit to those who ask You! Most assuredly, Jesus says to me, whatever I ask You, Father God, in His name You will give me. Until now I have asked nothing in Jesus’ name. If I ask, I will receive, that my joy may be full. I do not have because I do not ask.

Lord God, Your Spirit of truth has come, and He guides me into all truth; for He does not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He tells me things to come. He glorifies Jesus, for He takes of what is His and declares it to me.

When I rebel I grieve Your Holy Spirit; so You, Lord God, turn Yourself against me as an enemy, and You fight against me.

Lord God, teach me to live in Your truth and not to grieve Your Spirit.

John 14:26; John 4:10; Luke 11:13; John 16:23–24; James 4:2; John 16:13–14; Isaiah 63:10[1]

 

[1] Jeremiah, D. (2007). Life-Changing Moments With God (p. 238). Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers.