“He that takes truth for his guide, and duty for his end, may safely trust to God’s providence to lead him aright.” – Blaise Pascal. "There is but one straight course, and that is to seek truth and pursue it steadily" – George Washington letter to Edmund Randolph — 1795. We live in a “post-truth” world. According to the dictionary, “post-truth” means, “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief.” Simply put, we now live in a culture that seems to value experience and emotion more than truth. Truth will never go away no matter how hard one might wish. Going beyond the MSM idealogical opinion/bias and their low information tabloid reality show news with a distractional superficial focus on entertainment, sensationalism, emotionalism and activist reporting – this blogs goal is to, in some small way, put a plug in the broken dam of truth and save as many as possible from the consequences—temporal and eternal. "The further a society drifts from truth, the more it will hate those who speak it." – George Orwell “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” ― Soren Kierkegaard
Just shy of half of evangelical Christians — 49% — are now attending worship services in person and without any COVID-related restrictions, according to a new survey.
Among the respondents who claim to “typically attend services at least once or twice a month,” a clear majority of 64% said they have gone to church in person in the past month, according to the Pew Research Center, which conducted the poll.
“Among religious attenders, evangelical Protestants, White (non-Hispanic) Americans and Republicans are considerably more inclined than others to say their congregations should be open without pandemic-related restrictions,” stated Pew’s report on the study.
Only 6% of respondents said their places of worship are still entirely shuttered, which is down from 31% in July of last year and 17% earlier this year.
While a great deal of media attention has been paid to vaccine hesitancy among evangelical Christians, an NBC News survey from July found that 59% of white evangelicals had been fully inoculated against COVID-19.
Hosted by Australian investigative journalist Sharri Markson, What Really Happened in Wuhan presents a compelling case for the ‘lab leak theory’—the hypothesis that SARS-CoV-2, the virus causing Covid-19, was leaked from a Chinese research facility.
When the outbreak began, it was believed to have originally jumped from bats to humans in Wuhan’s wet markets. But as Covid-19 enveloped the globe, so did whispers of a strange coincidence: the city at the epicentre of the pandemic was also home to China’s leading coronavirus lab, the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIV).
As Markson notes, anyone who drew attention to this coincidence was quickly written off as a conspiracy theorist by the mainstream press. But the evidence she presents for the lab leak theory is impressive.
So is the list of big names she interviews in the documentary. Among them are President Donald Trump, former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe, former head of British spy agency MI6 Sir Richard Dearlove, and Chinese defector Wei Jingsheng.
Covid-19 Was Spreading Before the World Knew
Most Australians only heard of Covid-19 in February or March of 2020 when China, Italy and the United States began to feel its impact. But, at that point, the virus had already been spreading for months.
John Ratcliffe, the ‘overlord’ of 18 different US intelligence agencies, told Markson that America’s spy networks first became aware of a problem in Wuhan in late 2019. Already, the Wuhan Institute of Virology was in view:
“People became sick at the lab in October with symptoms that became entirely consistent with what most people have experienced around the world from Covid-19.”
This was affirmed by Mike Pompeo, whose former appointments also include Director of the CIA. He had more access to Covid-19 intelligence than anyone else in the Trump administration. When Markson asked Pompeo if he understood the lab outbreak to be the first cluster of the pandemic, he responded, “Based on everything I have seen, this is the first cluster.” Pompeo even suggested the outbreak may have begun as early as July or August of 2019.
Sadly, many of these important details were only pieced together after the event. Leading the taskforce into the origins of Covid-19 was former State Department weapons inspector David Asher. He told Markson that the intel about the sick Wuhan scientists had remained classified for the better part of a year. Some intelligence is still under wraps today.
But those who have seen it are unambiguous.
During his interview with Markson, Donald Trump announced, “Some of the intelligence is classified and I can’t talk about it. But common sense tells you it most likely — and when I say most likely, like 95 per cent — came from the Wuhan lab.” Trump was careful to clarify that any lab leak was more likely due to “gross incompetence” than villainy on China’s part.
“Is there still major intelligence that goes to proving the virus came out of the Wuhan Institute of Virology that’s still not in the public domain?” Markson inquired of John Ratcliffe. He affirmed, “Yes, there’s compelling intelligence that hasn’t been declassified.” He added:
The people who had the most access to the most intelligence are telling you that the most likely origin of Covid-19 … was a lab leak at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. This is really most likely what happened and it’s more than just a possibility. It’s certainly a probability, and it’s probably a certainty.
China’s Early Cover-Up of the Outbreak
It is clear from Markson’s investigations that China covered up the initial Covid-19 outbreak. As Ratcliffe put it:
If there was really no blame here, if this was really just some naturally occurring virus because someone ate a bat from a wet market, China wouldn’t have done the things that they did. The Chinese Communist Party would not have shut down Wuhan. They would not have silenced doctors and scientists and journalists and ‘disappeared’ some of them.
One of those who mysteriously disappeared was Huang Yanling, a researcher at the Wuhan Institute of Virology. “In early 2020, she disappeared from its website,” Markson recounts. “Her social media presence also vanished. Many believe she was infected with Covid-19. She’s never been seen since.”
Another was citizen journalist and lawyer Chen Quishi. Chen became aware that China was covering up the unfolding epidemic in Wuhan. So he went to the city to record videos and post them on social media. Among his most alarming reports was that dead bodies were being laid in the hallways of hospitals. He too disappeared. (Curiously, Chen recently reappeared and is reticent to speak about what happened to him).
The principal China advisor to Mike Pompeo was Miles Yu, who told Markson, “For weeks and weeks, the Chinese government kept silent about the outbreak, not saying anything, as if nothing was happening.” This, Yu explains, is why citizen journalists felt compelled to report on the events and were later silenced by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Sharri Markson highlighted several other lines of evidence that point to a CCP lab leak cover-up. The Wuhan Institute of Virology’s virus database was taken offline on 12th September, 2019. With it vanished 22,000 coronavirus samples. “That same day, security was beefed up at the facility and a tender was issued to replace the air-conditioning system,” Markson explains. She believes this is when a leak first occurred.
A month later, in November, WIV went into an unexplained “communications blackout” in which there was no cellphone or signals activity throughout the compound for a two-week period.
Markson also points to Chinese government data that had been wiped from the internet but was recovered by cybersecurity analysts. It showed a major buy-up of PCR supplies — the equipment that is used to test for coronaviruses — in Wuhan during the second half of 2019.
Evidence that Covid-19 Was Engineered
In the documentary, Markson interviews several researchers who have uncovered strong evidence that SARS-CoV-2 did not come from bats but appears to be the product of human interference. Alarmingly, these researchers found it next to impossible to publish their findings in scientific journals.
One of these is Professor Nikolai Petrovsky, the Head of Endocrinology at Flinders University. He conducted his research on the assumption that the virus had originally spread from bats. But he soon discovered that, though it bears similarities to bat viruses, Covid-19 cannot infect bats; it is far better adapted to humans than any other species; and it did not involve any animals in the transmission chain.
“We thought the scientific journals, particularly the leading ones, would actually jump on this paper because they like to have papers that are very topical, that are going to get a lot of media attention,” Petrovsky explains. “So we were quite stunned when we just got rejection after rejection after rejection without even the paper being looked at.” Finally, the paper was published by Scientific Reports.
Another researcher interviewed by Markson was Yuri Deigin, a genetic engineer from Moscow. In April 2020, he wrote an essay arguing that the animal to human theory didn’t stack up. Deigin was particularly interested in work that was being conducted at the Wuhan Institute of Virology which sought to make coronaviruses more transmissible to humans for research purposes.
Markson also spoke with Sir Richard Dearlove, the former head of British spy agency MI6. Though he is not a researcher himself, Dearlove was one of the first to come out internationally and claim that the virus could be the result of a lab leak. Two scientists had approached him for help in publishing a paper that couldn’t get traction:
We approached Nature, we approached Science, we approached the American Journal of Virology, we approached various publications in the UK. It was clear to me that there was a sort of united front not to put anything in the public domain which questioned the Chinese narrative.
The paper, which was eventually published by QRB Discovery, identified unique inserts present in the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein that seemed to be the result of human manipulation.
Risky Research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology
Shi Zhengli, now famously known as ‘Bat Woman’, is China’s top virologist. She directs the Center for Emerging Infectious Diseases at the Wuhan Institute of Virology and is a specialist in bat viruses.
Covid-19 is not the first scandal in which Shi has been implicated, explains Markson. In 2012, six of Shi’s workers fell ill after clearing bat manure from a disused mine in south-west China. After three of them died, the Chinese government covered it up. Shi’s team has returned to the mine at least five times and has visited many other bat caves throughout China to collect virus samples for their research at WIV.
Among Shi’s most important work is Gain of Function (GoF) research: slicing, manipulating and combining genetic sequences from different viruses in order to make them more transmissible to humans. The ostensible purpose of this work is to preempt a pandemic in order to better prepare for it.
A major advocate for GoF research is none other than White House chief medical advisor Dr Anthony Fauci. Markson highlights a paper Fauci wrote in 2012 which argued that the benefits of GoF research outweighed any risk it posed in sparking a possible pandemic.
Though he strenuously denied it before Congress, in his role as Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, Fauci was funnelling American taxpayer dollars to the Wuhan Institute of Virology for GoF research.
Shockingly, Markson notes that American agencies have funded some 65 research projects at WIV.
That Fauci was acting duplicitously is now clear. At the same time that he was assuring the American public that Covid-19 arose naturally, Fauci was privately emailing contacts like Peter Daszak to query whether the virus might have been genetically manipulated through the research his institute was funding.
The greatest irony of the Covid-19 saga may be that the efforts to avoid such a catastrophe were the very events that created it.
The West’s Censorship of the Lab Leak Theory
Another bizarre fact highlighted in Markson’s documentary is how Donald Trump’s support of the Wuhan lab hypothesis made it so unpalatable to the elite voices in the media. In the years to come, the lab leak theory will likely become the major, if not sole, explanation for the origins of Covid-19. And only petulance from the so-called “adults in the room” will have stopped this crucial discovery from being recognised sooner. According to Sir Richard Dearlove,
Unfortunately, you could say that the Trump factor contaminated the argument quite seriously and I think there were a significant number of prominent scientists who did not want publicly to appear to be supporting Trump.
There were, of course, other factors. In February 2020, The Lancet published a letter from 27 scientists which denounced the lab leak theory as “rumours”, “misinformation” and “conspiracy theories”. This letter was fodder for an anti-Trump global media. It was so potent, in fact, that it took over a year for the establishment to finally soften on this issue.
The man behind the letter, Markson reveals, was Fauci associate Peter Daszak. Daszak is the president of EcoHealth Alliance, one of the major recipients of American grant money for — you guessed it — bat research with the Wuhan Institute of Virology. His collaborative work with WIV stretches back 15 years.
Daszak makes another shady appearance in the saga. The World Health Organisation (WHO) took over 12 months from the start of the pandemic to send a team into Wuhan to investigate the origin of the virus. The United States submitted the names of three officials as delegates. Peter Daszak was not one of the names put forward, yet he was one of the three who ended up being sent. Mike Pompeo found this turn of events absurd:
It’s crazy, absolutely crazy that Daszak was the guy. He was incredibly compromised in that sense. He should have recused himself. He should have said, “No, I can’t be part of that, I was connected to this, I was involved in the funding of things that were taking place at this laboratory.” It made no sense to put [Daszak] on that group.
Following the investigation, Daszak assured the United States that the Chinese had personally shown him proof that Covid-19 came from nature. But he was unable to provide this evidence when asked for it.
In the end, the WHO delegation found the lab leak theory “extremely unlikely”. But it only dedicated three pages of its 413-page report to the lab leak hypothesis, after having spent only three hours at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.
Was Covid-19 Intended as a Bioweapon?
The question that is least clear in Markson’s documentary is whether or not Covid-19 was intentionally developed by the Chinese military as a bioweapon. Though the ties between China’s military and WIV are clear, President Trump finds this scenario unlikely and is willing to “give the benefit of the doubt” since China also suffered from the pandemic.
High-profile Chinese defector Wei Jingsheng is more suspicious. Known as the father of China’s democracy movement, Wei spent almost two decades inside Chinese prisons after defecting from a high post in the Chinese Communist Party. He now lives in America and according to Markson “still has impeccable contacts high up in the party”.
Even before America’s spy agencies knew of the virus, Wei’s contacts told him of a sickness spreading in Wuhan in October.
The Military World Games are the ‘Olympic games’ for military athletes, held every four years. In 2019, Wuhan was the host city. The event ran in late October and was attended by Xi Jinping. Some 9,000 athletes took part in the games and then returned home to over 100 countries. In the weeks following, reports emerged of athletes becoming sick with symptoms very similar to Covid-19. None were ever tested. Says Wei,
I thought that the Chinese government would take this opportunity to spread the virus during the military games as many foreigners would show up there … I learned there was an unusual exercise by the Chinese government during the military games. And so I told Dimon [a confidant] about the possibility of the Chinese government using some strange weapons, including biological weapons, because I knew they were doing experiments of that sort.
A third possibility is somewhere in the middle: that Covid-19 was being developed as a bioweapon but that its escape from the Wuhan Institute of Virology was an accident that exposed the project.
The exact details of this we may never know. But that it came from the Wuhan lab seems increasingly certain. The implications of this are eerie. As weapons inspector David Asher has reflected,
We could have known in November of 2019 that there was a disaster occurring inside Wuhan, inside their most important biological facilities … We could have reacted to it … the whole world could have been different. It would have been like stopping 9/11 before it happened.
Joe Biden will meet with Pope Francis in Rome at the end of the month to promote a globalist socialist tax on the people.
Joe Biden and Pope Francis both endorse the COVID vaccines that were developed using aborted fetal tissue.
The Biden regime is pushing a plan to FORCE foreign countries to tax their plebes at a minimum rate. This will only increase over time. Reuters reported:
President Joe Biden will meet with Pope Francis on Oct. 29 before attending a two-day summit of G20 leaders in Rome where he hopes to reach agreement on a Global Minimum Tax of 15%, White House officials said on Thursday.
On the second foreign trip of his presidency, Biden will then attend the U.N. climate conference known as COP26 in Glasgow, Scotland, from Nov. 1-2 and announce “key actions” on the conference’s top themes, including goals for fighting climate change and forest and land use, one White House official told Reuters.
Biden’s visit with the pope comes as some Roman Catholic bishops in the United States have sought to admonish Biden for his support of abortion rights. Biden is a Catholic who attends church regularly. His wife, Jill Biden, will also attend the meeting with Pope Francis.
“They will discuss working together on efforts grounded in respect for fundamental human dignity, including ending the COVID-19 pandemic, tackling the climate crisis, and caring for the poor,” White House spokesperson Jen Psaki said in a statement about the meeting.
Trust in the media is coming dangerously close to a new all-time low.
According to a recently released survey from Gallup, only 36% of U.S. adults have a “great deal” or a “fair amount” of trust in mass media, which includes newspapers, TV, and radio.
Respondents were asked: “In general, how much trust and confidence do you have in the mass media … when it comes to reporting the news fully, accurately, and fairly — a great deal, a fair amount, not very much, or none at all?”
While only 7% expressed having “a great deal” of trust, 29% said they have “a fair amount.”
The findings, released in early October, mark the second lowest in Gallup’s history. In 2016, the polling service calculated a mere 32% of American adults trusted the media. Twenty-nine percent currently say they have “not very much” trust in the medial while 34% said they have “none at all.”
Broken down along party lines, 68% of Democrats, 31% of independents, and 11% of Republicans trust the news media.
CNN’s Brian Stelter — the network’s media correspondent — went on the defensive over the weekend, using the Gallup survey to smear its biggest competitor, Fox News.
He argued the reason trust is so low is because there are, in essence, too many cooks in the kitchen: there are too many people and sites these days counted as forms of “media.” Stelter went on to suggest even Fox News should not be considered a legitimate news source due to its lack of international bureaus and its roster of commentators.
It’s worth noting that, while most would probably consider hosts like CNN’s Don Lemon and Chris Cuomo opinionated commentators, Stelter does not.
Stelter went on to declare CNN deserves public trust because the network is committed to “reporting” and “doing the work,” unlike its competitors, which he said are in the business of “repeating” talking points.
The new Gallup numbers come as veteran broadcast journalist Katie Couric admitted in her forthcoming memoir that she edited a 2016 interview with the late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, leaving out the left-leaning jurist’s criticism of the NFL players who knelt during the national anthem.
And last week, podcaster Joe Rogan called out CNN’s medical expert Sanjay Gupta over the fact that the outlet wrongly reported that he took a horse dewormer to treat his COVID-19 infection. Rogan took ivermectin, an anti-malarial drug that, while not approved to treat the novel coronavirus, is used to treat other issues within humans.
“It’s a lie,” Rogan told Gupta. “It’s a lie on a news network.”
Gupta, for his part, agreed, adding it was “not a flattering thing” for CNN to air. He added, “They shouldn’t have said it was a horse [dewormer]. If you got a human pill … it shouldn’t be called that.”
All over the country, chaos is erupting as forced COVID shots are being mandated by government agencies and by private employers. WND.com reports that 40% of TSA agents have not received the shot as the mandate deadline looms. Many pilots are protesting the requirement and saying this is only the beginning of transportation woes. State troopers and police officers in many states are saying they will not accept this forced shot and as such they are either retiring or being terminated. Just imagine how this is going to impact public safety.
The medical field is also reeling from this as medical personnel across the country are losing their jobs. They at one time were applauded, now they are despised. Western Journal reported that an anesthesiologist at UCLA was escorted out of the UCLA medical plaza and placed on unpaid administrative leave for refusing the jab. Nurses in Illinois have seen a “blanket denial” to their religious exemptions.
Less than two weeks ago Attorney Mat Staver was with us on Crosstalk indicating they Liberty Counsel was preparing a class action lawsuit against the Biden Administration on behalf of members of the armed forces, federal employees and contractors who have been unlawfully mandated to the COVID shots or who face dishonorable discharges from the military or termination of employment.
Those who know Mat Staver know he’s not a man of talk, but instead a man of action. This past Friday, October 15th, that lawsuit was filed. Mat Staver joined Crosstalk to expound upon the details of this lawsuit.
Just weeks before the first case of COVID-19 was confirmed, a group of elite government officials, business people, and scientists gathered in New York to plan various strategies for steering society through a deadly pandemic.
The scenario may sound like some sort of a conspiracy theory, but it happened two years ago.
On Oct. 18, 2019, theWorld Economic Forum, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, and Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security hosted “Event 201”—a “high-level pandemic exercise,” during which world leaders simulated various policy responses to a global disease outbreak.
When the initial diagnosis of COVID-19 was confirmed just weeks later, speculation abounded about the similarities—so many so that organizers issued a response.
While no hard evidence has been produced to substantiate the speculation, Event 201 did portend how many of the same global institutions would respond to some of the issues that arose from COVID-19 months later—including how they would push information censorship.
I shall not die, but live, and declare the works of the Lord. (Psalm 118:17)
A fair assurance this! It was no doubt based upon a promise, inwardly whispered in the psalmist’s heart, which he seized upon and enjoyed. Is my case like that of David? Am I depressed because the enemy affronts me? Are there multitudes against me and few on my side? Does unbelief bid me lie down and die in despair-a defeated, dishonored man? Do my enemies begin to dig my grave?
What then? Shall I yield to the whisper of fear, and give up the battle, and with it give up all hope? Far from it. There is life in me yet: “I shall not die.” Vigor will return and remove my weakness: “I shall live.” The Lord lives, and I shall live also. My mouth shall again be opened: “I shall declare the works of Jehovah.” Yes, and I shall speak of the present trouble as another instance of the wonder-working faithfulness and love of the Lord my God. Those who would gladly measure me for my coffin had better wait a bit, for “the Lord hath chastened me sore, but he hath not given me over unto death.” Glory be to His name forever! I am immortal till my work is done. Till the Lord wills it, no vault can close upon me.
Faithful is he that calleth you, who also will do it. (1 Thessalonians 5:24)
What will He do? He will sanctify us wholly. See the previous verse. He will carry on the work of purification till we are perfect in every part. He will preserve our “whole spirit, and soul, and body, blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.” He will not allow us to fall from grace, nor come under the dominion of sin. What great favors are these! Well may we adore the giver of such unspeakable gifts.
Who will do this? The Lord who has called us out of darkness into His marvelous light, out of death in sin into eternal life in Christ Jesus. Only He can do this: such perfection and preservation can only come from the God of all grace.
Why will He do it? Because He is “faithful”—faithful to His own promise which is pledged to save the believer; faithful to His Son, whose reward it is that His people shall he presented to Him faultless, faithful to the work which He has commenced in us by our effectual calling. It is not their own faithfulness but the Lord’s own faithfulness on which the saints rely.
Come, my soul, here is a grand feast to begin a dull month with. There may be fogs without, but there should be sunshine within.
Overconfidence is a sure way to fall into temptation and sin. To assume you’re beyond the world’s grasp, immune to its enticements, and free to do whatever you like is often the first step toward the harsh realization that you’re not.
6:51is my flesh Jesus’ physical death is the price for the world’s spiritual life. The reference to “flesh” likely points back to 1:14. See note on 3:6.
6:51living bread. The “bread” Jesus gives is his flesh (a reference to Jesus’ death on the cross). Jesus’ statement intermingles physical and spiritual truth. Jesus is not talking about literal “bread,” but he is the true “living bread” in the sense that those who believe in him have their spiritual hunger satisfied. He becomes this spiritually satisfying “bread” by sacrificing his own physical body in his death on the cross, and in that sense he can say that this spiritual bread is my flesh.
6:51 This pronouncement exactly reiterates vv. 33, 35, 47, 48. bread … is My flesh. Jesus refers here prophetically to His impending sacrifice upon the cross (cf. 2Co 5:21; 1Pe 2:24). Jesus voluntarily laid down His life for evil, sinful mankind (10:18; 1Jn 2:2).
6:51. Jesus asserts again that He is the source of eternal life: “I am the living bread which came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever.” The end of this verse is an illusion to the cross: “I shall give … My flesh … for the life of the world.” He gave His flesh (also called His soul or His life elsewhere—Matt 20:28; John 10:15) so that the world might have life. Jesus made the world savable (see comments on 1:29 and 6:53).
6:51 Jesus is the living bread. He not only lives in Himself, but is life-giving. Those who eat this bread … will live forever. But how can this be? How can the Lord give eternal life to guilty sinners? The answer is found in the latter part of this verse: “The bread that I shall give is My flesh, which I shall give for the life of the world.” Here the Lord Jesus was pointing forward to His death on the cross. He would give His life as a ransom for sinners. His body would be broken, and His blood would be poured out as a sacrifice for sins. He would die as a Substitute. He would pay the penalty that our sins demanded. And why would He do this? He did it for the life of the world. He would not die just for the Jewish nation, or even just for the elect. But His death would be of sufficient value for the whole world. This does not, of course, mean that the whole world will be saved, but rather that the work of the Lord Jesus at Calvary would be sufficient in its value to save the whole world, if all men came to Jesus.
6:51. Since Jesus is the Bread of Life, what does “eating” this Bread mean? Many commentators assume that Jesus was talking about the Lord’s Supper. This passage may well illuminate the meaning of the Lord’s Supper, in relation to Christ’s death. But since the Last Supper occurred one year later than the incidents recorded in this chapter, eating His flesh and drinking His blood should not be thought of as sacramentalism. “Eating” the living Bread is a figure of speech meaning to believe on Him, like the figures of coming to Him (v. 35), listening to Him, (v. 45), and seeing Him (v. 40). To eat of this Bread is to live forever (cf. vv. 40, 47, 50, 54, 58). Jesus’ revelation about the Bread was then advanced in that not only is the Father giving the Bread (Jesus), but also Jesus is giving Himself: This Bread is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. Salvation is by the sacrificial death of the Lamb of God (1:29). By His death, life came to the world.
6:51 “I am the living bread” This is one of the famous “I am” statements of John’s Gospel (cf. 6:35, 48, 51). It was a literary technique of Jesus to focus attention on His person. Salvation, like revelation, is ultimately a person, a friendship.
51. I am the living bread. He often repeats the same thing, because nothing is more necessary to be known; and every one feels in himself with what difficulty we are brought to believe it, and how easily and quickly it passes away and is forgotten. We all desire life, but in seeking it, we foolishly and improperly wander about in circuitous roads; and when it is offered, the greater part disdainfully reject it. For who is there that does not contrive for himself life out of Christ? And how few are there who are satisfied with Christ alone! It is not a superﬂuous repetition, therefore, when Christ asserts so frequently that he alone is sufficient to give life. For he claims for himself the designation of bread, in order to tear from our hearts all fallacious hopes of living. Having formerly called himself the bread of life, he now calls himself the living bread, but in the same sense, namely, life-giving bread.—Which have come down from heaven. He frequently mentions his coming down from heaven, because spiritual and incorruptible life will not be found in this world, the fashion of which passes away and vanishes, but only in the heavenly kingdom of God.
If any man eat of this bread. Whenever he uses the word eat, he exhorts us to faith, which alone enables us to enjoy this bread, so as to derive life from it. Nor is it without good reason that he does so, for there are few who deign to stretch out their hand to put this bread to their mouth; and even when the Lord puts it into their mouth, there are few who relish it, but some are filled with wind, and others—like Tantalus—are dying of hunger through their own folly, while the food is close beside them.
The bread which I shall give is my flesh. As this secret power to bestow life, of which he has spoken, might be referred to his Divine essence, he now comes down to the second step, and shows that this life is placed in his flesh, that it may be drawn out of it. It is, undoubtedly, a wonderful purpose of God that he has exhibited life to us in that flesh, where formerly there was nothing but the cause of death. And thus he provides for our weakness, when he does not call us above the clouds to enjoy life, but displays it on earth, in the same manner as if he were exalting us to the secrets of his kingdom. And yet, while he corrects the pride of our mind, he tries the humility and obedience of our faith, when he enjoins those who would seek life to place reliance on his flesh, which is contemptible in its appearance.
But an objection is brought, that the flesh of Christ cannot give life, because it was liable to death, and because even now it is not immortal in itself; and next, that it does not at all belong to the nature of flesh to quicken souls. I reply, though this power comes from another source than from the flesh, still this is no reason why the designation may not accurately apply to it; for as the eternal Word of God is the fountain of life, (John 1:4,) so his flesh, as a channel, conveys to us that life which dwells intrinsically, as we say, in his Divinity. And in this sense it is called life-giving, because it conveys to us that life which it borrows for us from another quarter. This will not be difficult to understand, if we consider what is the cause of life, namely, righteousness. And though righteousness flows from God alone, still we shall not attain the full manifestation of it any where else than in the flesh of Christ; for in it was accomplished the redemption of man, in it a sacrifice was offered to atone for sins, and an obedience yielded to God, to reconcile him to us; it was also filled with the sanctification of the Spirit, and at length, having vanquished death, it was received into the heavenly glory. It follows, therefore, that all the parts of life have been placed in it, that no man may have reason to complain that he is deprived of life, as if it were placed in concealment, or at a distance.
Which I shall give for the life of the world. The word give is used in various senses. The first giving, of which he has formerly spoken, is made daily, whenever Christ offers himself to us. Secondly, it denotes that singular giving which was done on the cross, when he offered himself as a sacrifice to his Father; for then he delivered himself up to death for the life of men, and now he invites us to enjoy the fruit of his death. For it would be of no avail to us that that sacrifice was once offered, if we did not now feast on that sacred banquet. It ought also to be observed, that Christ claims for himself the office of sacrificing his flesh. Hence it appears with what wicked sacrilege the Papists pollute themselves, when they take upon themselves, in the mass, what belonged exclusively to that one High Priest.
52 The Jews therefore debated among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? 53 Jesus therefore said to them, Verily, verily, I say to you, Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have not life in you. 54 He who eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. 55 For my flesh is truly food, and my blood is truly drink. 56 He who eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. 57 As the living Father hath sent me, and I live on account of my Father; and he who eateth me, even he shall live for my sake. 58 This is the bread which hath come down from heaven; not as your fathers ate manna, and are dead; he who eateth this bread shall live for ever.
Ver. 51.—I am (not only the “Bread of God,” the “Bread of life,” the life-giving Personality, but) the living Bread which came down out of heaven: if any man eat of thisBread, he will live150for ever. With this verse we see, instead of monotony, a threefold advance. (1) In place of the life-giving Bread, he declares himself to be as Bread, yet a living Person, possessing therefore in himself the essential principle and energy of life. (2) Instead of coming down, used characteristically or universally, he points to a definite concrete, historic fact—“that has come down out of heaven.” (3) Instead of saying, “he may not die,” we find the glorious assertion, “he will live for ever.” The kind of eating of which he speaks becomes clearer; the kind of food, the kind of death, the kind of life, all burst into light which points back to the first great word of this discourse, viz. “Labour for that food which endureth unto eternal life, which the Son of man will give to you, for this one the Father, even God, hath sealed.” “The miraculous feeding of yesterday was but the metaphor by which I was conveying this thought, that I was providing an inexhaustible supply for the eternal life of that humanity which I have assumed.” In the last clause of the verse he made a yet further advance: Yea, and the bread which I shall give is my flesh (which I shall give)for the life of the world. The καὶ … δὲ of the commencement of the clause show a continuation of the thought with a new departure, co-ordination, and progress, “Yea, and the bread which I shall give is my flesh.” Though the word “flesh” is often described by some of its frequent characteristics and qualities, and might be and has been regarded as the bodily and sensuous nature, and also as the seat of sin, it is, both by Paul and John, used for the nature of man as a creature—its totality regarded on its earthly side, the entire “humanity” which Christ assumed, the common antithesis to “spirit” viewed as the Divine supernatural gift to man. He was (1 Tim. 3:16) “manifest in the flesh,” in “the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3)—in a flesh free from all sin. He came “in the flesh” (1 John 2:16; 4:2). This humanity of his he gives, or rather, when he spake these words, he would give, to be eaten, to be assimilated by faith; and, having reached this point, he added (i.e. if we retain the questioned clause, which, with Meyer and Godet, we see no sufficient reason for discarding), which flesh, which humanity of his, he will further give to be slain and sacrificed for the sake of, or on behalf of, the world. This clause, which the Vatican Codex, etc., reject, proceeds clearly on the supposition that Christ advances here to the prediction and promise of his death. It is so worded as all the more to justify the emphasis he subsequently lays upon the death itself as essential to a full participation in himself. In this verse and closing utterance he prepares for further disclosures, and the flesh of Christ receives explanation from the rich and varied reference to it in the final words of the discourse, where the flesh is the great metaphor of his Divine humanity, and the blood is the expressive description of his awful sacrifice. He, the Life-giver, the Living One, the Bread of life, the living Bread, will give himself to what men call death, that they, apprehending fully, adequately accepting the greatness of the Divine gift, may, like himself, transform death (so-called death) into the portal of eternal life. These words are the new starting-point for this great disclosure. The very inner thought of Jesus seems to shape itself as we read. The Paschal sacrifice, eaten at that season as the sign that the theocratic nation had been chosen to covenant and eternal relation with Jehovah, must have been present to his mind. His own approaching death and sacrifice, by which he would bind those who receive him into an eternal covenant with himself, his relation to the whole world, the gift of the Father to him, the gift of himself to the world by the Father,—all are presented to him, and the movements of his great heart reveal themselves as he proceeds.
51 The alternation between the first person and the third person continues, as Jesus announces, “I am the living Bread that came down from heaven.” In the context, the phrase “the living Bread” echoes both “the Bread of life” (vv. 35, 47) and the notion that “the bread of God … gives life to the world” (v. 33). In the larger perspective of John’s Gospel it answers to “the living water” that Jesus promised the Samaritan woman (4:10, 11). It may in fact be modeled after the latter, because the participle “living” is appropriate to fresh water from a spring in a way in which it is not appropriate to bread.
Having shifted back to the first person, “I am the living Bread,” Jesus might have been expected to give the accompanying invitation in the first person as well: “If anyone eat of me, he will live forever,” just as he said earlier, “I am the Bread of life. The person who comes to me will never go hungry, and the person who believes in me will never ever thirst” (v. 35, my italics; see also 8:12; 11:25–26). Instead, he shifts again to the third person: “If anyone eat of this bread, he will live forever” (my italics). But the alternation between “I” and “this bread” is then resolved when he adds, “and the bread I will give him is my flesh for the life of the world.” Conventional wisdom has it that this last clause marks a major transition in the chapter from a “sapiential” or wisdom-oriented perspective, accenting belief in Jesus’ word and being “taught by God,” to a distinctly “sacramental” emphasis on the bread and wine of the Eucharist.30 Some have gone so far as to claim that while the former is authentically Johannine, the latter is not, so that vv. 51–58 must be understood as coming not from the Gospel writer but from a later hand. Yet not only is there no textual evidence of such a break, but it is widely acknowledged that the literary style of what follows is indistinguishable from that of what precedes.32
More specifically, the comment that “the bread I will give him is my flesh” explains finally why Jesus has alternated between the first and the third person, speaking of himself and of “this bread” interchangeably. It forces the reader to go back and look at verse 50 again, where Jesus seemed to distance himself from “this bread.” On the contrary, we now realize, he was speaking of it as if it were his own body, in much the same way that Paul, for example, could refer to his own body as “this mortal,” or “this corruptible” (1 Cor 15:53, 54), or as “this” (2 Cor 5:2), or “this tent” (2 Cor 5:4), or even “these hands” (Acts 20:32). The presumption all along has been that “the bread of God” (v. 33), or “this bread” (vv. 50, 51), is Jesus himself, or more specifically his “flesh.” The notice that “the bread I will give him is my flesh” only makes it explicit. Again Paul’s language (in a very different context) is illuminating: “For I know that in me, that is in my flesh, nothing good dwells” (Rom 7:18, my italics). Jesus, no less than Paul, is his “flesh” (see 1:14), so that saying “the bread … is my flesh” is no different in principle from saying “I am the Bread of life” (vv. 35, 47). But one thing is different: for the first time Jesus promises that he will “give” this bread, that is, give himself. “I will give” recalls yet again Jesus’ encounter with the Samaritan woman, and the “living water” he promised that “I will give” (4:14). There it was not immediately clear that to give her “living water” was to give himself, but here it is evident that the gift of “living bread” is at the same time a gift of himself. He is giving his own body, his very flesh, “for the life of the world.”34
At last he is responding explicitly to the crowd’s earlier request to “give us this bread always” (v. 34), but in an unexpected and shocking way. He will give “this bread” indeed (v. 34), but “this bread” turns out to be his own body, given up to death! “My flesh” comes to mean virtually “my death,” especially with “flesh” so closely linked to the verb “I will give” and the preposition “for.” Jesus’ language evokes both the notion (evident in Paul) that Jesus gave himself “for” his people,36 and the language of the words of institution of the Lord’s Supper according to Luke and Paul, “This is my body that is given for you” (Lk 22:19), or simply “that is for you” (1 Cor 11:24). It is customary in Christian tradition to speak of Christ’s “blood” as a metaphor for his death on the cross, but on occasion the words “body” and “flesh” (even without the verb “to give” or the preposition “for”) are used in a similar way in the New Testament. Here too the reader knows—even though “the Jews” do not—that Jesus’ “flesh for the life of the world” is his redemptive death. There have been intimations of this already (1:29, 36; 2:17, 19; 3:14, 16), and they will become more and more explicit, often with the same preposition “for,” or “on behalf of” (see 10:11, 15; 11:52; 15:13; 17:19). Within the present discourse, the phrase “for the life of the world” explains and personalizes the earlier promise of bread that “gives life to the world” (v. 33). Jesus will personally give “life” to the “world” by giving his own “flesh” over to death, so that (as he said earlier), “everyone who believes in him might not be lost but have eternal life” (3:16), or “so that the world might be saved through him” (3:17).
51 Once again Jesus refers to himself as bread, this time as “living bread” (cf. 1:4; 5:26). “Came down” is in the aorist, pointing to the single act of the incarnation. As in the previous verse, “eats” (aorist tense) points to the act of appropriating Christ. Anyone who takes this decisive action will live forever, the positive statement balancing the negative of the previous verse. In the manner of verse 35 this constitutes an invitation to eat. In a very startling statement Jesus defines the bread that he will give as his flesh. The future, “I will give,” is not a general statement but looks to the gift that would be made on Calvary. Those who understand the verse of the incarnation or the like usually ignore the tense, but it is difficult to understand how it can fit into their theories. “Flesh” is a striking word. In distinction from “my body” or “myself” it puts marked emphasis on the physical side of life. It is a strong word and one bound to attract attention. Its almost crude forcefulness rivets attention on the historical fact that Jesus did give himself for others. He is not speaking simply of a moving idea. Many commentators speak as though the word “flesh” self-evidently marked a reference to Holy Communion.124 It, of course, does nothing of the sort. The word is not found in the narratives of the institution, nor in 1 Corinthians 10 or 11 in connection with the sacrament. Nor is it common in the Fathers in this sense. The usual word in sacramental usage is “body.” The last words of the verse bring before us once more the truth that the mission of Jesus is universal. He did not come to minister to the Jews only. When he gave his flesh it would be “for the life of the world.”126
51 Jesus summarizes this section of his discourse by reaffirming that he is the “living bread” come down from heaven and that whoever “eats of this bread … will live forever.” But now a new element is added: “This bread is my flesh.” The language is sacrificial. A number of writers understand this as a reference to the Eucharist. That the regular use of sōma (“body,” GK 5393) in connection with the Lord’s Supper is replaced here with sarx (“flesh,” GK 4922) is explained as John’s following a different textual tradition. Responding to those who speak as though the word flesh “self-evidently marked a reference to Holy Communion,” Morris, 374, says rather bluntly, “It, of course, does nothing of the sort.” Bruce, 158, is correct in his view that “to give one’s flesh can scarcely mean anything other than death, and the wording here points to a death which is both voluntary (‘I will give’) and vicarious (‘for the life of the world’).” The “life of the world” for which Jesus will give himself refers to the eternal fellowship with God made possible by the sacrificial death of Jesus and offered to all who will respond in faith. It is the “world” that “God so loved … that he gave his one and only Son” (3:16). Here we catch the vision of a wide and expansive redemptive mission in which God freely bestows his saving grace on all who place their trust in him. The same world that so desperately needs the forgiving grace of God is the very world of people for whom eternal life is made possible through the Son.
“I am the living bread that came down out of heaven; if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever; and the bread also which I will give for the life of the world is My flesh.” (6:51)
For the fifth time in this discourse (cf. vv. 33, 35, 48, 50), Jesus claimed to be the living bread that came down out of heaven. He then added the promise that if anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. Here, as in verses 35 and 40, human responsibility to believe in Christ is in view (God’s sovereignty in salvation is taught in vv. 37, 39, 44, 65).
Ever the master teacher, Jesus used the simple, everyday routine of eating to communicate profound spiritual truth. The analogy of eating suggests five parallels to appropriating spiritual truth.
First, just as food is useless unless it is eaten, so also spiritual truth does no good if it is not internalized. Merely knowing the truth, without acting on it, both profits nothing (Heb. 4:2) and does not allow one to remain neutral (Luke 11:23). In fact, it will result in a more severe judgment (Luke 12:47–48; Heb. 10:29).
Second, eating is prompted by hunger; those who are full are not interested in food. In the same way, sinners who are satiated with their sin have no hunger for spiritual things (cf. Luke 5:31–32; 6:21). When God awakens them to their lost condition, however, the hunger for forgiveness, deliverance, peace, love, hope, and joy drives them to the Bread of Life.
Third, the food people eat becomes part of them through the operation of the body’s digestive system. So it is spiritually. People may admire Christ, be impressed with His teaching, and even bemoan His death on the cross as a great tragedy. But not until they appropriate Him by faith do they become one with Him (17:21; 1 Cor. 6:17; 2 Cor. 4:10; Gal. 2:20; Eph. 3:17).
Fourth, eating involves trust. No one knowingly eats tainted or spoiled food; the very act of eating implies faith that the food is edible (cf. Mark 7:15). Thus, the metaphor of eating the Bread of Life implies believing in Jesus.
Finally, eating is personal. No one can eat a meal for another; there is no such thing as eating by proxy. Nor is there salvation by proxy. In Psalm 49:7 the psalmist wrote, “No man can by any means redeem his brother or give to God a ransom for him.” Sinners must appropriate the Bread of Life as individuals to receive salvation and live forever (vv. 50, 58; 3:16; 8:51; 11:26; Rom. 8:13).
The Lord further defined the bread of life as that which He would voluntarily (10:18) give for the life of the world: His flesh (cf. 1:14). The concept of Jesus giving Himself sacrificially for sinners is a repeated New Testament theme (e.g., Matt. 20:28; Gal. 1:4; 2:20; Eph. 5:2, 25; 1 Tim. 2:6; Titus 2:14). The Lord referred prophetically here to His death on the cross (2 Cor. 5:21; Gal. 3:13; 1 Peter 2:24), one of many such predictions recorded in the gospels (John 2:19–22; 12:24; Matt. 12:40; 16:21; 17:22; 20:18; Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:33–34; Luke 9:22, 44; 18:31–33; 24:6–7). It is Jesus’ offering of His flesh that is the price of redemption. Had He merely come and proclaimed God’s standards, it would have left the human race in a hopeless predicament. Since no one can keep those standards, there would have been no way for sinners to have a relationship with God. But to make reconciliation between sinful man and holy God possible, “Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18; cf. 2:24; Isa. 53:4–6; Rom. 3:21–26; 2 Cor. 5:21).
Since “the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23) and “without shedding of blood there is no forgiveness” (Heb. 9:22), Christ became the final sacrifice for sin, “the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!” (John 1:29). His death, for all who believed and would believe, God accepted as the full payment for sin (Rom. 3:25–26; 4:25; Heb. 2:17; 1 John 2:2; 4:10), so that complete pardon was provided for the sins of all the penitent faithful (Acts 10:43; 13:38–39; Eph. 1:7; Col. 1:14; 2:13–14; 1 John 1:9; 2:12).
The death of Christ was a real, genuine, actual satisfaction of divine justice. It was a true payment and atonement in full—actually, not potentially, paid to God by Christ on behalf of all who would ever believe, because they were chosen and redeemed by the power of God. The death of Christ was definite, particular, specific, and actual on behalf of God’s chosen people, limited in extent by His sovereign purposes, but unlimited in effect for all for whom it was rendered.
Redemption is the work of God. Christ died to accomplish it, not merely to make it possible and then finally accomplished when the sinner believes. The Bible does not teach that Jesus died for everyone potentially, but no one actually. On the contrary, Christ procured salvation for all whom God would call and justify; He actually paid the penalty in full for all who would ever believe. Sinners do not limit the atonement by their lack of faith; God does by His sovereign design.
Christ offered His flesh as a sacrifice not merely for Israel, but for the world (cf. 1:29; 4:42; 1 John 4:14). He died for people from all races, cultures, ethnic groups, and social strata (cf. Gal. 3:28; Col. 3:11). Thus God said in Isaiah 45:22, “Turn to Me and be saved, all the ends of the earth,” and Jesus commissioned the church to “make disciples of all the nations” (Matt. 28:19). The Lord also declared, “As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up; so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life” (John 3:14–15), and “I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself” (12:32). He is the only Savior for the world of lost sinners.
 Barry, J. D., Mangum, D., Brown, D. R., Heiser, M. S., Custis, M., Ritzema, E., … Bomar, D. (2012, 2016). Faithlife Study Bible (Jn 6:51). Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
Lord, remind me to regularly bathe in your Word and allow your Spirit to cleanse me so that any aroma that lingers long after I’ve left the premises, will not only draw people to you, but will also be a “sweet scent rising” to you.
“Everywhere we go, people breathe in the exquisite fragrance. Because of Christ, we give off a sweet scent rising to God, which is recognized by those on the way of salvation—an aroma redolent with life. But those on the way to destruction treat us more like the stench from a rotting corpse.” 2 Corinthians 2:15 (The Message)
Four doors lead from our condominium building into the entryway. Our neighbors range from young singles to more mature couples. We are a good group of neighbors who greet each other pleasantly, always willing to help with the mundane fix-it problems of suburban life. We have extremely different lifestyles but respect each other and generally live in harmony. One morning after bringing in the daily paper, I remarked to my husband, “Joe just left for his office.” Since I had barely reached out our door for the paper that lay on the mat, my husband, who knew I had not talked with anyone, was justifiably surprised. “What made you think he was on his way to work?” “I smelled his aftershave lotion,” was my reply. Joe, always dressed in the most businesslike attire, always splashed on his aftershave lotion with what I considered a somewhat heavy hand. It wasn’t a particularly offensive aroma, it just lingered long after he left the premises. We who are Christ followers, if we regularly bathe in the love, mercy and grace of God will be giving off an aroma. True, that scent can be offensive to those who refuse to acknowledge the Christ we follow, but our responsibility is simply to be the bearers of fragrance.
Lord, remind me to regularly bathe in your Word and allow your Spirit to cleanse me so that any aroma that lingers long after I’ve left the premises, will not only draw people to you, but will also be a “sweet scent rising” to you.
So, how do we put off an aroma that is pleasing to God and others in our life?
“I appeal to you therefore, brothers, by the mercies of God, to present your bodies as a living sacrifice, holy and acceptable to God, which is your spiritual worship.” Romans 12:1
Nothing attracts or turns people away from someone or something more than smells. Think about how people are drawn to good smelling aromas coming from restaurants and then think about how people are reluctant to go into shops with a bad odour. All throughout the Bible, we are called to give a pleasing aroma to the LORD. This is an interesting concept, but, one we need to understand and seek after. When our lives “smell good”, it implies that we are living in a way that is attractive to God, and through this we begin to feel and embrace His presence near to us. We, likewise, draw others in with this unusual aroma not given off by the world with a chance of pointing them to Jesus. So, how do we put off an aroma that is pleasing to God and others in our life?
It means we become the living sacrifice the Bible calls us to be by submitting our time, talents, and ultimately our lives to Jesus. We become true followers of Jesus, not just church goers or Christian look alikes. We go all in and pursue Jesus with our whole hearts, minds, and bodies. We spend time in prayer, personal devotion, and serve the body of Christ to the fullest. When we do this, we naturally begin to put off love, joy, peace, forgiveness, and compassion to the world around us. This is a pleasing aroma to all people, believer or not, and something that will naturally draw people in. Even more so, this is a pleasing aroma to God. When we put off this aroma to the world around us, people will desire for their lives to “smell’ like this also and hopefully begin to crave the One whom ignites this aroma within us.
Though I am always in haste, I am never in a hurry; because I never undertake any more work than I can go through with perfect calmness of spirit.
Ritzema, E. (Ed.). (2012). 300 Quotations for Preachers. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
Christ Was with the Father and Spirit at the Beginning Genesis 1:1–2; John 1:1–2; Colossians 1:15–17
The same Christ Jesus, King and Savior, was at the beginning with the Father and the Holy Ghost, making all things of naught, both heaven and earth, and all things that are therein; working by word of His virtue, for He said, “Be it done,” and it was done, whose works never earthly man might comprehend, either make.
Ritzema, E., & Brant, R. (Eds.). (2013). 300 quotations for preachers from the Medieval church. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.
In today’s passage, James continues his discussion on sins that many overlook, the sins of our tongue. Just as the reins can guide a horse, and a rudder can turn a great ship, so the tongue has great influence in our lives and in the lives of others. As a spark can start a great forest fire so the words that come from the tongue can cause great harm.
By our own efforts, we are unable to control our tongue. Humans have the ability to tame all kinds of animals but not the tongue. Why? Because the tongue speaks from the heart which is deceitful above all things. That is why with the heart people will praise God and then curse others who are made in God’s image. James says this happens in Christians who confess Christ as well.
The only way for our mouths to be controlled is for the love of Christ to be poured into our hearts. This is why we need to grow in our understanding of God’s love for us as we have it explained to us in the Bible. As God’s Word grows in us, what comes out of our mouth will more be the love of Christ that is in us.
Suggestions for prayer
Pray that as we read God’s Word, the Holy Spirit would cause Christ’s love to touch our hearts so that what comes from our tongues will be pleasing to our God and loving to our neighbours.
Pastor Richard Bultje is a United Reformed missionary and pastor in the River of Life church plant in Niagara Falls, Ontario. Pastor Richard and his wife, Yukyung moved to Niagara Falls in November 2012 with their three children Calvin, Isaiah and Gloria. This daily devotional is also available in a print edition you can buy at Nearer to God Devotional.
4 C’s drive Biden administration’s first Naval strategic guidance The “Four C’s: China, Culture, Climate Change, and COVID” are the naval services’ “most pressing” challenges, Carlos Del Toro writes in his first strategic guidance as the Biden administration’s first Navy secretary. But just one of them is the “pacing challenge” that should be the focus of planning and spending.
BepiColombo’s first tastes of Mercury science The magnetic and particle environment around Mercury was sampled by BepiColombo for the first time during the mission’s close flyby of the planet at 199 km on 1-2 October 2021, while the huge gravitational pull of the planet was felt by its accelerometers. The magnetic and accelerometer data have been converted into sound files and presented here for the first time. They capture the ‘sound’ of the solar wind as it bombards a planet close to the Sun, the flexing of the spacecraft as it responded to the change in temperature as it flew from the night to dayside of the planet, and even the sound of a science instrument rotating to its ‘park’ position.
The VPN Empire Built By Intelligence Agents What most of the 3 million users who currently use ExpressVPN probably weren’t aware of when they signed up is that the service proves the point that hackers and government surveillance aren’t mutually exclusive. With its growing portfolio, Kape Technologies had become increasingly more visible. Its umbrella of ownership centralizing multiple VPNs was a red flag for many who placed value in cyber security. Under growing scrutiny, the concerning origins of the company’s founders came to light.
Soros Drops $1 Million on Anti-Police Effort in Austin Left-wing billionaire George Soros is throwing at least a million dollars behind an effort to stop the hiring of hundreds of new police officers in Austin, Texas, according to campaign finance documents reviewed by the Washington Free Beacon. The Hungarian-born political activist gave $500,000 through the Soros-backed Open Society Policy Center to a political action committee in opposition to a ballot initiative that forces the city to employ two police officers per 1,000 residents.
Cyberattacks one of greatest threats to Israel’s national security Last week’s ransomware attack on Hillel Yaffe hospital shows that despite Israeli efforts to prevent such strikes, hackers are still determined to do all they can to sabotage the country’s infrastructure and worryingly not deterred by Israel’s policies . But what happens if a hostile entity secretly takes over the stock market’s computers and manipulates the results? Beyond the fact that said person or group could rake in billions, what will happen after it turns out a year late that the Stock Exchange’s data was falsified?
The Powerful, Clandestine Cult Directing America’s Path What most in the public do not understand is that, in spite of denial by some Masons, theirs is a religious institution with rituals and even prophetic beliefs concerning a human-transforming final world order, founded on and maintained by dozens of doctrines that can be defined by what “Masonry’s greatest philosopher,” Manly P. Hall, in The Lost Keys of Freemasonry,[i] called “the principles of mysticism and the occult rites.” The reason lower-degree Masons would deny this is because the Masters of the Craft intentionally mislead them. Speaking of the first three degrees of Freemasonry, Albert Pike admitted in Morals & Dogma:
Miracle in Ashdod: Car bomb explodes in busy downtown area, no injuries The incident is reportedly relatedly a hit attempt between organized crime families. The explosion took place at noon on Thursday in a parking lot outside of a strip mall. The area was bustling with foot traffic making the fact that there were no injuries nothing short of miraculous.
China tests space-bound hypersonic missile, strengthening theory they are ‘Sons of Keturah’ It was recently revealed that in August, China tested a hypersonic missile that is capable of carrying a nuclear payload. in August, the Chinese military launched a Long March rocket that carried a hypersonic glide vehicle that flew through low-orbit space before cruising down towards its target. According to three people briefed on the intelligence, the test reportedly missed its target by about two-dozen miles but was considered a success nonetheless by the two other sources who stated that the test showed that China had made astounding progress on hypersonic weapons and was far more advanced than US officials realized.
Lawmaker calls to correct Israel’s Biblical mistake: Failing to drive out Arabs, as commanded in Numbers 33 Bezalel Smotrich, the leader of the right-wing Religious Zionist Party, raised hackles when he spoke from the Knesset podium last Wednesday. Smotrich spoke in defense of a bill that would revise the current immigration laws in order to maintain a Jewish majority in Israel. “Ben Gurion and his government ignored the Halachot (Torah laws) as well as the spirit of the Torah. The spirit of the Torah as seen from the beginning of the Bible to the end is that the Land of Israel is for the Jews.”
Hamas issues ultimatum to Israel: Give us $8 million by Tuesday The Hamas terror group has handed Israel an ultimatum, demanding that the Israeli government cave to several demands if it wishes to avoid another round of conflict with Gaza, Mako reported, quoting the Arabic al-Ain newspaper. One of the demands is that Israel pass eight million dollars from the Qatari funds to Hamas members, in order to pay their salaries.
Kerala floods: At least 26 killed as rescuers step up efforts At least 26 people have been killed in floods in southern India after heavy rains caused rivers to overflow, cutting off towns and villages. Five children are among the dead. There are fears the death toll could rise further as many people are missing. Several houses were washed away and people became trapped in the district of Kottayam in Kerala state.
Haiti kidnap: 400 Mawozo accused of US missionary kidnap A notorious gang is behind the kidnap of a group of North American missionaries near Haiti’s capital, Port-au-Prince, officials say. The five men, seven women and five children were returning from a visit to an orphanage when they were abducted on Saturday. Officials say they are being held by the 400 Mawozo gang – also blamed for the kidnap of Catholic clergy in April.
Israel says it expects 2,000 rockets a day in war with Hezbollah Israel does not want war with Lebanon’s Hezbollah but is prepared to face about 2,000 rockets a day from the terror group if conflict breaks out, a senior Israeli military official said late Sunday. In May this year, the Israeli army fought an 11-day war against Palestinian terror groups in the Gaza Strip, who fired around 4,400 projectiles towards the Jewish state.
Temple Mount status quo to remain unchanged, says public security chief Public Security Minister Omer Barlev said Sunday that the current status quo at the Temple Mount will not change and “will remain in place.” Barlev’s statement comes after months of media reports about Jewish worshippers openly praying at the site, with police turning a blind eye despite an agreement reached with the Muslim endowment, the Waqf, that manages the site.
Reaction to Cleveland Clinic’s new transplant COVID-19 vax policy Mike Ganim was five days away from life-saving kidney transplant surgery when his wife, Debi, got the devastating news. The surgery would not happen. Debi Ganim said they were informed on October 8 that Cleveland Clinic implemented a new safety policy that required both living donors and organ recipients to be vaccinated against COVID-19.
Did the World Economic Forum admit something very unnerving? …here is a much deeper concern that the vaccines are injecting permanent substances in the body that support a “transhumanist” agenda. The newest video from the World Economic Forum (“WEF”) isn’t going to put that last concern to rest. First, for those unfamiliar with the concept, “transhumanism” is an idea that sounds wonderful in theory: