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. "…truth is true even if nobody believes it, and falsehood is false even if everybody believes it. That is why truth does not yield to opinion, fashion, numbers, office, or sincerity–it is simply true and that is the end of it" – Os Guinness, Time for Truth, pg.39. “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
Want To Witness Effectively? Here’s What You’re Missing | WRETCHED TV episode 2352
It’s Witness Wednesday!
Todd Friel takes on the challenge of witnessing to Nick, a 16-year-old Goth with a rebellious look. While many might be hesitant to approach someone like Nick, Todd dives in, asking questions about his beliefs, revealing a young man struggling with deeper issues than just appearance. Todd explores topics of atheism, reincarnation, and the existence of God, skillfully guiding Nick to consider the logic of creation and the possibility of a Creator.
The conversation takes a serious turn when Nick opens up about darker thoughts, including contemplating suicide. Todd not only shares the Gospel but also demonstrates how much God cares for Nick, urging him to reconsider his beliefs and embrace the hope found in Christ.
In this video, Credo Fellow Gavin Ortlund gives commentary on every word of the Apostles’ Creed. Truth Unites (www.truthunites.org) exists to promote gospel assurance through theological depth.
Isaiah 33:15 — More of the “disciplines of a godly man” – walking right, speaking right, spurning dishonest gain, controlling his hands, ears, and eyes. Self-control is the marks of a man following the Lord!
Isaiah 33:22 — America was born with a split of governing authority. The King of England, on the other hand, could dismiss judges if he didn’t like what they did. The LORD in His theocracy exercises the role of all three branches of government: the judicial (judge), the legislative (lawgiver), and the executive (king). Social critics say that power corrupts, so we in America try to have a “balance of power,” but when the Lord rules, no one can (or needs to) check the power of the King!
Isaiah 34:8 — This is the last reference to the “Day of the LORD” in Isaiah, and the first mention in the Old Testament that ties the Day of the LORD to vengeance. Job and the Psalmist often cry for God to right the wrongs in this world. He will!
Isaiah 34:11 — What’s a cormorant? It’s derived from the Latin for “sea raven.” The bitterns are a subgroup of herons.
Isaiah 34:12-13 — The nobles and princes will be gone, the palaces and fortresses will be abandoned. The powers of today will not stand in the Day of the LORD.
Isaiah 35:4 — Isaiah gives the signs of what will happen when God comes. The blind will see. The deaf will hear. The lame will leap. The mute will sing. Roughly six hundred years after this prophecy, another prophet sat in a prison cell discouraged. He sent some of the few people who would listen to his words to seek an answer to a question he had: “Art thou he that should come?” Jesus told these messengers that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, and the deaf hear (Matthew 11:5). Yes, Jesus, the one whose name means “Jehovah is Salvation” is the God who came to save. He’s the One that Isaiah prophesied about. The vengeance will be coming soon, but we’re in a narrow gap of mercy. Peter declared that the gap between Isaiah 35:6a and 35:6b is not millennia, but just a couple of days (2 Peter 3:8). God is just waiting for some sinners to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9)! It’s not until the last sinner comes to repentance that the vengeance will fall (2 Peter 3:10), and the world will be restored (Isaiah 35:6b).
Isaiah 36:1 — This is the third time we’ve read about this incredible miracle. Mat Staver recently talked about this at a VCY rally in Milwaukee. Sennacherib was 46-0 when it came to tallying battles against the fenced cities of Judah. We know this from the Taylor Prism in the British Museum.
Isaiah 36:10 — God doesn’t take kindly to false prophets. Be careful when you say, “God told me.” Deuteronomy 18:20-22 prescribes the death penalty for any who presume to speak for the LORD.
Isaiah 36:18 — The LORD is not the god of Hamath (a town in Syria, just north of modern Lebanon). He is not a god made with hands. He is the Creator of heaven and earth!
Galatians 5:14 — The 613 laws of the Torah are fulfilled in the Second Greatest Commandment. Paul doesn’t say that we’re excused from it. Now, as heirs of Christ, we must by love serve. By love we must reject the lust of the flesh.
Galatians 5:24 — There is no middle ground. Have we crucified the flesh with its lusts (Galatians 5:19-21), and are we displaying the fruit of the Spirit (Galatians 5:22-23)? The challenge is that Christians today are mixing the works of the flesh with the fruit of the Spirit. A 1994 study on college students, religion, and drinking found that 1 out of every 8 college students who came from a total abstinence Protestant denomination were self-described regular drunks.
Psalm 64:9 — Declare God’s works! Share the testimonies of what He has done in your life!
Proverbs 23:23 — Charles Spurgeon preached on this verse Sunday night, June 26th, 1870.
John Bunyan pictures the pilgrims as passing at one time through Vanity Fair, and in Vanity Fair there were to be found all kinds of merchandise, consisting of the pomps and vanities, the lusts and pleasures of this present life and of the flesh. Now all the dealers, when they saw these strange pilgrims come into the fair began to cry, as shopmen will do, “Buy, buy, buy—buy this, and buy that.” There were the priests in the Italian row with their crucifixes and their beads. There were those in the German row with their philosophies and their metaphysics. There were those in the French row with their fashions and with their prettinesses. But the one answer that the pilgrims gave to all the dealers was this—they looked up and they said, “We buy the truth; we buy the truth,” and they would have gone on their way if the men of the Fair had not laid them by the heels in the cage, and kept them there, one to go to heaven in a chariot of fire, and the other afterwards to pursue his journey alone. This is very much the description of the genuine Christian at all times. He is surrounded by vendors of all sorts of things, beautifully got up and looking exceedingly like the true article, and the only way in which he will be able to pass through Vanity Fair safely is to keep to this, that he buys the truth, and if he adds to that the second advice of the text, and never sells it, he will, under divine guidance, find his way rightly to the skies. “Buy the truth and sell it not.”
For the Lord will not cast off his people, neither will he forsake his inheritance. (Psalm 94:14)
No, nor will He cast even so much as one of them. Man has his castoffs, but God has none; for His choice is unchangeable, and His love is everlasting. None can find out a single person whom God has forsaken after having revealed Himself savingly to him.
This grand truth is mentioned in the psalm to cheer the heart of the afflicted. The Lord chastens His own; but He never forsakes them. The result of the double work of the law and the rod is our instruction, and the fruit of that instruction is a quieting of spirit, a sobriety of mind, out of which comes rest. The ungodly are let alone till the pit is digged into which they will fall and be taken; but the godly are sent to school to be prepared for their glorious destiny hereafter. Judgment will return and finish its work upon the rebels, but it will equally return to vindicate the sincere and godly. Hence we may bear the rod of chastisement with calm submission; it means not anger, but love.
For I the LORD do not change; therefore you, O children of Jacob, are not consumed.Read More
I the LORD do not change implies that God’s character and eternal purposes do not change, which gives a solid foundation for his people’s faith and hope. However, unchangeableness in character does not mean that the Lord is unchanging in his actions, for the very next verse, “Return to me and I will return to you” (Mal. 3:7), shows that God acts differently in response to different situations. Therefore implies that God’s purpose to bring blessing to the world through Abraham’s descendants and through a Davidic Messiah will not be defeated, and thus the children of Jacob are not consumed: their existence as the restored community is evidence of God’s faithfulness.
2. James 1:17
Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, coming down from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or shadow due to change.Read More
James moves from evil temptations (which God never gives) to the observation that every good gift and every perfect gift comes from God (cf. Matt. 7:11). As in James 1:5, James reminds the readers of God’s goodness. In their trials, God is not tempting them to sin, but the difficulties in life are intended to strengthen and perfect them and make them more like God. God’s intentions for them are always for good (cf. Rom. 8:28). There is nothing in this world that is truly good that has any other origin than from above, namely heaven, descending from the Father of lights, which refers to God as creator of the heavenly “lights” (Ps. 74:16; 136:7–9)—a prime example of his good gifts. God is unchanging in his character and therefore in his giving of good, unlike the variation of the night changing to day or the shifting shadow caused by the sun or moon.
3. Psalm 102:25–27
Of old you laid the foundation of the earth,
and the heavens are the work of your hands.
They will perish, but you will remain;
they will all wear out like a garment.
You will change them like a robe, and they will pass away,
but you are the same, and your years have no end.Read More
The Lord Is Eternal, and His Faithfulness Outlasts the World. The psalm finishes with words addressed to God, meditating on God’s everlasting being and purpose. The average person experiences the physical world as a long-established operation (cf. the English saying, “as old as the hills”); and yet God is older still. Of old God laid the foundation of the earth; he was there before the world was created (cf. Ps. 90:1–2). And though the earth and heavens will perish and will all wear out like a garment, God will remain. In fact, the years will not change him; you are the same. This means that his purposes will not change either, and, even if it takes (what seems to us) a long time to bring those purposes about, he will never grow weary or give up. Thus the psalm closes with confidence that goes well beyond the individual worshipers’ lifetime, expecting God to keep his promises to many faithful generations descended from today’s faithful (Ps.102:28).
4. Numbers 23:19
God is not man, that he should lie,
or a son of man, that he should change his mind.
Has he said, and will he not do it?
Or has he spoken, and will he not fulfill it?Read More
God is not man, that he should lie. Balaam, even against his selfish intentions, must speak God’s truth (cf. Num. 23:26). Here he is affirming that God’s truthfulness in general (cf. Titus 1:2; Heb. 6:18; God does not lie, and he cannot lie, for this would be contrary to his character) implies that his promises to Israel will also come to pass.
5. Hebrews 13:8
Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.Read More
Jesus the Messiah (Christ) is eternally trustworthy in his position as high priest and as Son of God—yesterday active in creation (e.g., Heb. 1:2–4), today offering salvation (e.g., Heb. 4:7–10), and forever reigning in heaven (e.g., Heb. 10:12). This verse may be a transition from Heb. 13:7 (their leaders trusted in this Christ, and Jesus remains trustworthy) to Heb. 13:9 (strange teachings are departures from the Jesus who is always the same).
6. 1 Samuel 15:29
And also the Glory of Israel will not lie or have regret, for he is not a man, that he should have regret.Read More
The term “regret” poses a difficulty, since 1 Sam. 15:11 and 1 Sam. 15:35 say that God did regret making Saul king, while here Samuel denies that God will ever lie or have regret (cf. Num. 23:19). The term for “have regret” (Hb. nakham) can be translated “relent” or “change one’s mind” (e.g., Ex. 32:12, 14; Num. 23:19; 1 Sam. 24:16 [1 Chron. 21:15]; Ps. 106:45; Jer. 15:6; Jer. 18:8, Jer. 18:10; Jer. 26:3, Jer. 26:13, Jer. 26:19; Jer. 42:10; Ezek. 24:14; Joel 2:13–14; Amos 7:3, Amos 7:6; Jonah 3:9–10; Jonah 4:2) or “have pity or compassion” (Deut. 32:36; Judg. 2:18; Ps. 90:13; 135:14) as well as “be sorry” or “have regret” (cf. Gen. 6:6–7). Thus the term as used in 1 Sam. 15:11, 35 describes God’s own feeling of sorrow or regret that Saul had turned out as he did (and does not even address the question whether God knew of it beforehand), while in 1 Sam. 15:29 God will not regret or change his mind concerning a decision once he has made it.
7. Hebrews 6:17–20
So when God desired to show more convincingly to the heirs of the promise the unchangeable character of his purpose, he guaranteed it with an oath, so that by two unchangeable things, in which it is impossible for God to lie, we who have fled for refuge might have strong encouragement to hold fast to the hope set before us. We have this as a sure and steadfast anchor of the soul, a hope that enters into the inner place behind the curtain, where Jesus has gone as a forerunner on our behalf, having become a high priest forever after the order of Melchizedek.Read More
The two unchangeable things are God’s promise/purpose and his path. The character of God is holy, and he does not lie. Thus his announcement of his promise is sure, and doubly sure when combined with his oath. This encourages one to hold fast (see Heb. 4:14) to the hope (Heb. 3:6; Heb. 6:11; Heb. 7:19; Heb. 10:23) of God’s promises.
8. Psalm 90:1–2
Lord, you have been our dwelling place
in all generations.
Before the mountains were brought forth,
or ever you had formed the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.Read More
The Lord Is Eternal. The Lord is the dwelling place, i.e., the home and refuge, for his people in all generations because he himself is eternal. He has been God since before the creation. That God is the Creator is assumed, and that the Lord has always been God indicates that he always will be, i.e., that he will not change.
9. Isaiah 40:27–28
Why do you say, O Jacob,
and speak, O Israel,
“My way is hidden from the LORD,
and my right is disregarded by my God”?
Have you not known? Have you not heard?
The LORD is the everlasting God,
the Creator of the ends of the earth.
He does not faint or grow weary;
his understanding is unsearchable.Read More
Jacob . . . Israel. God is true to his covenant, despite his people’s unbelief (cf. Gen. 35:9–15). My way is hidden from the LORD. While the despondent exiles could feel abandoned by God, it is the sovereign Creator (Isa. 40:21–26) who is the source of their strength (Isa. 40:28–31). my right. The justice expected of God. God never suffers setbacks, and he helps those who do.
10. 2 Timothy 2:13
if we are faithless, he remains faithful—
for he cannot deny himself.Read More
The trustworthy statement moves from comfort to challenge and back to comfort: 2 Tim. 2:11b is a reminder of life even in the face of death; 2 Tim. 2:12 calls for perseverance; 2 Tim. 2:13 is a reminder of God’s preserving power and faithfulness. In this context, to deny him must entail a more serious offense than being faithless. Denying Christ envisions final apostasy, in contrast with a temporary lapse in trusting Christ (“if we are faithless”). Those who deny Jesus will be judged forever; but all believers sin, and God is faithful and will pardon, restore, and keep those who are truly his.
Jesus laid down His life according to His Father’s sovereign appointment to redeem the elect. In this message, Steven Lawson points to the doctrines of sovereign election and definite atonement in the teaching of Christ.
Shallow M5.1 earthquake hits near Ackerly, Texas A shallow M5.1 earthquake struck near Ackerly, Texas, at 00:49 UTC on September 17, 2024 (19:49 CDT on September 16), shaking the Midland-Odessa region and prompting over 1 700 reports of tremors. The USGS is reporting a depth of 8.2 km (5.1 miles) and epicenter approximately 34 km (21 miles) west-southwest of Ackerly.
Operation Lockstep: Is Phase Three Being Put In Motion? A document published by the Rockefeller Foundation in 2010, titled “Scenarios for the Future of Technology and International Development,” described the possible ramifications of a Pandemic. The “Lock Step” scenario imagined a world where national governments imposed strict top-down control and authority in response to a global pandemic, with citizens complying with government restrictions.
Is Vaccination a synonym for Genocide? The US vaccination schedule for infants has increased from 5 injections in 1986 to around 32 today. So why are today’s children and young people sicker than any other generation?
CJ Hopkins: Meet the Head of the Berlin Central Hate Crime Office CJ Hopkins takes us through his experience of the “New Normal” Germany’s legal system. His experience involves the alleged “hate crime,” which wasn’t a “hate crime” but perhaps now is a “hate crime” again, which involves two tweets criticising covid mask mandates.
“The States can best govern our home concerns and the general government our foreign ones. I wish, therefore … never to see all offices transferred to Washington, where, further withdrawn from the eyes of the people, they may more secretly be bought and sold at market.” —Thomas Jefferson (1823)
Douglas Andrews, Thomas Gallatin, & Jordan Candler
Security
Cops “find explosives” in car near Trump rally on Long Island after second assassination attempt (More)
Why is the Biden-Harris regime in charge of these assassination investigations? At a press conference yesterday, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis said what so many frustrated Americans are no doubt thinking. “In my judgment,” he said, “it’s not in the best interest of our state or our nation to have the same federal agencies that are seeking to prosecute Donald Trump leading this investigation, especially when the most serious straightforward offense constitutes a violation of state law but not federal law.” This makes perfect sense when we consider the conflict of interest at work here. Remember: The Biden-Harris administration is hell-bent on putting Trump in prison, not protecting him. DeSantis has thus tasked Florida’s Office of Statewide Prosecution with conducting its own investigation. And what DeSantis says about the most serious charge that can be leveled against would-be assassin Ryan Routh is also important, noting that the federal government “does not have jurisdiction to bring an attempted murder charge.”
China has deployed hundreds of new satellites: The Democrats keep saying that Donald Trump is an “existential threat” to “our democracy,” but they seem to have fallen asleep regarding the real threat to our way of life — which is clearly and unequivocally China. A case in point is Red China’s buildup of its space program, including the recent deployment of more than 970 satellites that a new Space Force intelligence report says could be used to support “attacks on U.S. aircraft carriers, expeditionary forces and air wings during a conflict.” As The Washington Times reports, “The intelligence report also reveals that Russia is building a nuclear space weapon capable of triggering large-scale blasts that could destroy U.S. and other satellites.” On Monday, Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall sounded the alarm: “I am not saying war in the Pacific is imminent or inevitable. It is not. But I am saying that the likelihood is increasing and will continue to do so.”
Air Force recruiting bounces back with broadened path to enlistment (More)
Instagram revamps safety features for teens as congressional pressure mounts (More)
Government & Politics
Hillary laments how easy the media is on Trump: Like a herpetic lesion, Hillary Clinton keeps coming back. On Monday, fresh off the Left’s second assassination attempt on Donald Trump, Clinton took our nation’s supposed Trump-loving media to the woodshed. “The press is still not able to cover Trump the way that they should,” the worst major-party presidential candidate in American history — except for Joe Biden — told MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow. “They careen from one outrage to the next. … I don’t understand why it’s so difficult for the press to have a consistent narrative about how dangerous Trump is.” Think about that: Trump just survived the second attempt on his life in two months, and he’s the dangerous one. Clinton is thus resorting to the same victim-blaming that Maddow and the rest of her Leftmedia colleagues are engaged in. Perhaps Hillary really believes this, or perhaps she’s just trying to peddle her latest memoir. Or perhaps both are true. “Americans need to understand that they have to take Trump both seriously and literally,” she added. “And I believe that more Americans have to be, you know, willing to endure what frankly is discomforting and to some extent kind of painful, to take him at his word and to be outraged by what he represents.”
28% of Democrats think America better off if Trump had been assassinated (More)
Chris Cuomo apologizes to Trump: Former CNN host and current NewsNation anchor Chris Cuomo is neither conservative nor a fan of Donald Trump, but at least he has the humanity to recognize that political differences don’t justify dehumanizing Trump. On Tuesday, Cuomo said that he was “ashamed of how we are responding … to the threats on him.” Cuomo went on to criticize the “dangerous” narrative that Trump is a threat to democracy. “He is not a despot in waiting. Okay, I don’t buy it,” Cuomo stated. “You gotta care when somebody tries to kill somebody … or you’ll never really care about anyone getting hurt.” He then said, “That’s why I reached out to Trump. I wanted to just say, ‘Listen, I’m really sorry that this is going on and it’s being dealt with this way.’” Cuomo also blasted people for mocking Melania Trump’s worry about assassination plots against her husband. “How could she not? People mock her, and then her husband has a guy point[ing] with an AK 47 — where are those people apologizing? That’s what it’s time for.” While Cuomo is no model journalist, on this, we wholeheartedly agree.
House passes partial spending bill: On Tuesday, the House passed the Veterans Benefits Continuity and Accountability Supplemental Appropriations Act. The bill, introduced by Mike Garcia (R-CA), provides $3 billion to the VA that will help make up some of the budget gaps within the agency. Two months ago, the VA warned that it was on track to outspend its fiscal year budget by some $2.88 billion, and if funding were not provided, it would leave seven million veterans without their benefits and pensions. Garcia argued, “We can’t afford to leave our vets high and dry without the medical care and the GI benefits that they’ve earned, but we can’t also afford to just give the VA a blank check without figuring out the root cause of this issue to be solved.” The bill passed under a procedure that didn’t require a full House vote. Still, Speaker Mike Johnson blasted the agency, stating, “This egregious miscalculation by the Administration and Department of Veterans Affairs has not only raised serious questions but exposed a grave failure. Preventing any potential lapse in our veterans’ benefits remains a top priority for Congress.”
Dem prosecutors are criminalizing self-defense: Not only is it becoming more dangerous to live in Democrat-run cities due to the rising crime, but citizens who dare to defend themselves against violent criminals are finding a legal system condemning them for doing so. The latest example of prosecuting the victim rather than the criminal comes out of Newtown, Massachusetts, where a pro-Israel protester was arrested after he used a firearm to defend himself as he was being attacked by a pro-Hamas goon. Middlesex Democrat District Attorney Marian Ryan is using her office to prosecute the victim. Earlier this year, Ryan also prosecuted a homeless woman who used a stun gun to protect herself against an abusive ex-boyfriend. Another example is Daniel Penny in New York City, where Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is prosecuting him for daring to protect people on a subway by holding down a violent man who ended up dying. Bragg also went after a bodega worker for daring to defend himself against a violent man who was assaulting him. For these Democrat prosecutors, the message to residents couldn’t be clearer: If you defend yourself against violent criminals, you will be prosecuted.
Culture
Marvel’s gayest show: Fresh off of canceling a second season of its lowest-rated Star Wars show to date (“The Acolyte”), Disney is poised to double down on that woke blunder within its Marvel universe this time. The show in question, “Agatha All Along,” is a spinoff of the Disney+ Marvel show “WandaVision.” One of the actors, Sasheer Zamata, was asked if “Agatha is the gayest project Marvel has ever done.” Zamata eagerly responded, “I would agree with that.” When asked to explain, she said, “Witches are queer inherently, just because we are outcasts and set aside for many reasons.” So, like a rerun of “The Acolyte,” this is another show touting lesbian witches. Stan Lee must be rolling in his grave. The real question is whether “Agatha” or “Acolyte” will be the worst-rated Disney+ show ever.
A gender-confused person was nominated for “Outstanding Supporting Actress in a Limited Series” at this year’s Emmys (More)
$1 million offered to LGBTQ advocacy groups to host Pride parade in Gaza, West Bank (More)
Yale, Princeton, Duke threatened with lawsuit over “not complying” with Supreme Court ruling on racial preferences in admissions (More)
Misc.
The Fed is set to cut interest rates for the first time in four years (More)
Trump vows to restore SALT deduction in major fiscal reversal (More)
Arizona admits that nearly 100,000 noncitizen “voters” wrongly listed on voter rolls amid lawsuit (More)
ABC’s David Muir sees newscast ratings tank after his controversial debate moderating (More)
New blow for Canada’s Trudeau after his party loses long-held seat (More)
Israel rarely fesses up to its targeted strikes against its enemies, but yesterday’s mass pager explosions certainly bore the signature capability of Israel’s spy agency, Mossad. According to Lebanon’s government, more than 2,700 people were injured and 12 killed when several hundred pagers simultaneously exploded. A second wave of explosions today targeted radios and other devices.
Always take casualty numbers like those with a grain of salt. Arab countries are often as bad as Hamas when it comes to lying about Israel. Doing so plays on the sympathies of Western anti-Semites and hinders Israel’s ability to defend itself.
The target was Hezbollah, which, like Hamas, is an Iranian-backed terrorist militia at war with Israel. In fact, one of the wounded people was Iran’s ambassador to Lebanon. These jihadis are enemy combatants, and the “civilians” who sometimes die in Israeli counteroffensives are often working with or for those terrorist groups. Reports are that two children were among those killed. If true and they were innocent, that is tragic collateral damage, but remember that the jihadis who intentionally target Israeli civilians are not above using women and children as either human shields or suicide bombers. Again, neither are they above lying about casualties.
Hamas attacked Israel on October 7, brutally and indiscriminately murdering 1,200 people. Soon after that attack, Hezbollah began firing thousands of rockets into civilian areas in northern Israel, forcing tens of thousands of Israelis from their homes and opening another front in the same war. Iran would rather attack Israel with such proxies than wage open war itself.
But when Israel targets Hezbollah fighters with compromised pagers, Western leftists lose their minds.
How did it happen? Earlier this year, Hezbollah instructed its fighters to stop carrying smartphones because of Israel’s capability to use geolocation to target enemy fighters. Somehow, Israel intercepted the thousands of pagers Hezbollah ordered and distributed to these fighters and planted a small explosive charge in each one, which was then triggered by a master code sent to the pagers about 3:30 p.m. local time yesterday.
“Shalom!”
Boom!
Again, Israel’s government, military, or spy agency isn’t commenting at all. But the message to Israel’s Iran-backed enemies: We are capable of striking targets in creative and effective ways.
That’s a message Israel has sent before. “Israel has shown a remarkable ability to use intelligence and technology to strike behind enemy lines,” notes The Wall Street Journal editorial board. “In July it killed a Hezbollah leader in Beirut, and it was almost certainly behind the assassination of Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh in a military guest house in Tehran. It reportedly used a remotely controlled machine gun to kill Iran’s leading nuclear scientist in 2020.”
Looking forward is also important. “No doubt, the simultaneous, coordinated detonation of the unsuspecting bombs in Hezbollah fighters’ pockets is a coup,” writes Noah Rothman. “The degree to which Israeli intelligence has penetrated Iran’s security services and those of its terrorist proxies is astounding, and it may have a deterrent effect on the Iranian regime. But Hezbollah will not be deterred into voluntary submission. The pager strikes are only the opening salvos of a more dangerous conflict, which now seems all but inevitable.”
Douglas Andrews: The Butler Whistleblowers — Josh Hawley reveals damning whistleblower testimony about the spectacular failures of the Secret Service in the first assassination attempt on Donald Trump.
Thomas Gallatin: The Ukraine/Russia Missile Conundrum — A diplomatic solution to ending the war in Ukraine is preferable, but all the talk seems to be toward escalation.
Scarlen Valderaz: Do Celebrity Endorsements Matter? — We will continue to see endorsements from public figures up until election day, but should we care? It may depend on the artist.
Linda Moss Mines: It’s Franklin Pierce, President — Pierce was not a strong leader, and he doomed the nation to eventually settle the slavery issue with arms.
Armed Forces Tribute: Air Force Birthday — Honoring the airmen serving now, and generations past, defending freedom.
In Brief: Why Men Hate Kamala — Kamala acts like she’s running to be America’s best friend, not the person tasked with fixing its problems.
Journalists Pounce on Trump — The mainstream media sought to downplay the second assassination attempt against Donald Trump while seizing the opportunity to blame him for inciting violence against himself.
The Mainstream Media Is Too Friendly to Trump! — How else can the Left explain The Donald’s enormous and increasing popularity, especially among voters who have historically not been strong Republican backers?
Dear Deep State… — Here is a special message for the deep state.
SHORT CUTS
Tone-Deaf
“I don’t understand why it’s so difficult for the press to have a consistent narrative about how dangerous Trump is.” —Hillary Clinton one day after the second assassination attempt on Trump
“We can’t go back and give this very dangerous man another chance to do harm to our country and the world.” —Hillary Clinton
The BIG Lies
“[Ryan Wesley Routh] obviously had some anti-Trump posts. But that has nothing to do with Kamala Harris and Joe Biden.” —CNN’s Dana Bash
“We don’t know that no one has tried to kill Kamala Harris in the last couple of months. … JD Vance is also the person who started the false rumors more than a week ago about Springfield, Ohio … that has led to bomb threats, school evacuations, city hall evacuations, and a feeling of terror. … There’s a complete double standard here.” —The Washington Post’s Leigh Ann Caldwell
“What is rhetoric, and what is fact? It is fine for you to say, ‘Donald Trump’s plan is not a conceptual plan. It’s Project 2025.’ That is not rhetoric. If you say something like, ‘Donald Trump started an insurrection,’ that is not rhetoric. That is just a fact.” —”The View’s” Sunny Hostin
“The difference: The upsetting things said by Trump and Vance are not true. The upsetting things said about Trump and Vance are true.” —The Atlantic’s David Frum
For the Record
“Routh wanted to be a man of action and was ready to kill for a cause. But if the cause of democracy in Ukraine was worth killing for, what about the safety of democracy right here in America? Routh took both literally and seriously Democrats and progressives who say Trump is a threat to America’s institutions and the rule of law itself.” —Daniel McCarthy
“What the Democratic Party and the mainstream media — but I repeat myself — are actually doing here is nothing other than mob-like emotional extortion. They are essentially holding the nation hostage by ratcheting up the temperature with one hand — framing Donald Trump and anyone who dares to vote for him as a threat to their democracy, their freedoms and their very lives — while victim-blaming Donald Trump when people predictably act on such hyperbolic propaganda.” —Ian Haworth
“Let me make one thing absolutely clear: You are never obligated to seek unity with those who call you Adolf Hitler, especially after surviving more assassination attempts than Kamala Harris has held press conferences.” —Ian Haworth
Political Futures
“Harris’ proposals and stances are so extreme that Democrats’ best defense is to deny they exist.” —Victor Joecks
“The Democrats oppose voter ID because they want there to be illegal votes. There’s no other reason.” —Florida Governor Ron DeSantis
Elon Musk is being investigated after a post made in the wake of the second assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump.
In the now-deleted post, made shortly after Sunday’s would-be assassin scare, Musk appeared to question the lack of attempts on the lives of President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris.
“And no one is even trying to assassinate Biden/Kamala,” Musk wrote on X, adding a thinking emoji at the end.
“Well,” he later added in a reply to his own comment before ultimately deleting the post, “one lesson I’ve learned is that just because I say something to a group and they laugh doesn’t mean it’s going to be all that hilarious as a post on X.”
The post, while obviously not a threat, is still attracting the attention of the government.
A response from the White House was swift, slamming the billionaire for the post.
“As President Biden and Vice President Harris said after yesterday’s disturbing news,” White House spokesperson Andrew Bates said, according to Axios, “there is no place for political violence or for any violence ever in our country,’ and ‘we all must do our part to ensure that this incident does not lead to more violence.’”
Bates said violence should “only be condemned, never encouraged or joked about,” calling the actions “irresponsible.”
The Biden-Harris administration is not the only government force turning its focus on Musk. The presidential guard itself confirmed personnel are already involved in the situation.
According to the U.K.’s Independent, the Secret Service said it is aware of and is investigating Musk’s posts.
“The US Secret Service is aware of the social media post made by Elon Musk and as a matter of practice,” an agency spokesperson said in an email to the Independent,” we do not comment on matters involving protective intelligence.”
The statement affirmed that the Secret Service “investigates all threats related to our protectees.”
The government wasn’t the only organization jumping into the dogpile.
Like clockwork, the media kicked into high gear at the merest criticism or questioning of the nation’s venerable executives.
Wired, in a bit of shameless hand-wringing, said the billionaire’s innocuous posts “could be interpreted as a call to murder President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris,” and outright called Musk “a national security risk” in the headline.
According to the New York Post, Silicon Valley investor Roger McNamee appeared on MSNBC and said Musk should face charges.
“You have somebody who runs a really strategic defense and aerospace projects for the federal government who’s actively undermining the government that’s paying him,” McNamee argued.
“And somewhere in that is a legal case that needs to be prosecuted.”
While the Secret Service should look into every threat, it’s clear that the men responsible for defending our nation’s current and former leaders have bigger fish to fry than a South African billionaire.
Fox News contributor Byron York defines what he believes is a ‘threat to democracy’ and how the media’s criticism of former President Trump has been present for years on ‘The Evening Edit.’
Research shows that we react more strongly to negative than to positive information, which explains why there’s more bad news than good news in the news. Let’s test this theory. Note your visceral response to these stories:
New technology can produce drinking water from seawater using solar power.
Rescuers freed an eleven-year-old boy who was trapped between two boulders for more than nine hours.
China freed an American pastor after nearly twenty years in prison.
Research shows that people like us more than we think.
By contrast, what’s your emotional response to these stories?
AI pioneers are calling for protections against “catastrophic risks.”
A recent report warns that the US is facing the “most serious and most challenging” threats since 1945, including the real risk of “near-term major war.”
Infections that are resistant to medications could kill nearly forty million people in the coming years.
Our “fight or flight” instincts may attune us to threats in the news, but new research shows that being “hopeful and forward-looking” is especially effective in combating stress and anxiety.
Philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin observed: “The future belongs to those who give the next generation reason for hope.” Similarly, the present belongs to those who give the present generation the same.
How can we be people of hope in a hurting world?
Bridging the “moral empathy gap”
In a fascinating recent experiment, researchers from Stanford and the University of Toronto studied ways we try to persuade others to change their minds. They found that the vast majority of us employ arguments evoking values we favor rather than those favored by the people we seek to influence.
For example, political liberals typically argue for same-sex marriage by pointing to fairness and equality rather than appealing to conservative values such as loyalty and unity. The vast majority of conservatives make the same mistake, appealing to their values while ignoring or denigrating those of their opponents. A better approach is to speak to the values that matter most to those we seek to persuade, thus bridging the “moral empathy gap.”
Here’s the good news: Our Lord faces no such gap in dealing with us. He understands us better than anyone else can. In fact, he understands us better than we understand ourselves:
“Before I formed you in the womb I knew you” (Jeremiah 1:5).
“Even before a word is on my tongue, behold, O Lᴏʀᴅ, you know it altogether” (Psalm 139:4).
“God is greater than our heart, and he knows everything” (1 John 3:20).
This is not only because our Lord is fully omniscient, but also because his Spirit lives in every believer (1 Corinthians 3:16), feeling all that we feel and knowing all that we know. As a result, he can empathize with us as no one else can.
When you are feeling pain or stress, know that your Father is feeling it as well. Tell him what is burdening your heart and mind. You might consider using the “psalms of lament” (cf. Psalms 6, 10, 38, 42–43, and 130) to make their words your own.
Trust the empathy of God and you will experience its life-giving hope for yourself.
Why “love cures people”
One of the best ways to experience the hope of Christ is to share that hope with others. The famed psychologist Karl Menninger observed:
“Love cures people, both the ones who give it and the ones who receive it.”
Here again, the good news is that God can do through us what we cannot do by ourselves.
If Jesus is your Lord, he is living in you today. As Oswald Chambers noted, “By regeneration the Son of God is formed in us, and in our physical life he has the same setting that he had on earth.” You are literally part of the “body of Christ” (1 Corinthians 12:27) as Jesus continues his earthly ministry through you.
Consequently, if we yield our minds and hearts to the Spirit each day (Ephesians 5:18), he will give us God’s mind and heart for those we seek to influence. We will sense insights that are not our own and hear ourselves say words we did not plan to say. We will be led to meet needs we did not know existed and to love with God’s unconditional grace.
Some of us will serve as foreign missionaries. Others will serve as “secret missionaries” in places where Christians are not wanted or welcome. And all of us will serve as cultural missionaries who meet felt needs to meet spiritual needs, earning the right to demonstrate God’s empathy in our compassion.
But note: Our ministry is only transforming if we share the transforming message of the gospel. Otherwise, we meet the needs of the moment while neglecting the needs of eternal souls. Paul asked, “How are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching?” (Romans 10:14).
In a world of bad news, we have the best news of all. But good news is only good if it is news.
ABC News is apparently pressing the panic button in the wake of fierce criticism of its Sept. 10 presidential debate between former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris.
A sworn statement by an ABC News whistleblower exposing network bias favoring Harris continues to be in focus regarding “assurances” to the Democrat’s campaign days before the event.
Now David Muir, anchor of ABC’s “World News Tonight” and co-moderator of the debate, is defending his performance during the matchup, as ratings for his evening news broadcast have plunged some 12% in the aftermath.
Note the date of the tweet below, almost a week before the debate. ABC gave Kamala Harris assurances that she would be favored in the debate on Sept 10. The ABC whistleblower confirmed this in a sworn affidavit the day before the debate. The ABC presidential debate was rigged in… https://t.co/7v9ffkfPJH
“ABC News has offered assurances to the Harris campaign that if there is significant cross talk between Harris and Trump, the network may choose to turn on the mics so that the public can understand what is happening, the moderator would discourage either candidate from interrupting constantly and the moderator would also work to explain to viewers what is being said, according to the source familiar,” CNN reported before the event.
ABC News insists it did not break debate rules, initially stating: “ABC News followed the debate rules that both campaigns agreed on and which clearly state: No topics or questions will be shared in advance with campaigns or candidates.”
A network spokesperson later told the Daily Beast: “Absolutely not. Harris was not given any questions before the date.”
Kamala Harris debates President Donald Trump in Philadelphia on Tuesday, Sept. 10, 2024
The X account that posted the purported affidavit, @DocNetyoutube, reacted to ABC’s denial, stating:
Yesterday, ABC made a statement regarding the whistleblower affidavit. The only thing ABC said was that they did not give the questions or the topics to the Harris campaign. Well, nobody accused ABC of doing that. ABC has been accused of the following:
1.) Giving the Harris campaign sample questions, similar to the actual questions that would be used for the debate. 2.) Agreeing to give Harris a smaller podium and other arrangements to minimize the size differential between Harris and Trump. 3.) Fact Checking would be done for Donald Trump and NOT Kamala Harris 4.) Harris campaign gave questions to ABC that were not to be included in the debate. Including questions regarding her time as DA in SF and her time as California Attorney General.
Out of all these accusations, the fact checking of Trump has been admitted to. The podium and split screen appearance to keep the height differential have already been proven, ABC did NOT deny communications with the Harris campaign without the Trump campaign being present and they will never deny that because they cannot. According to the whistleblower, ABC executives made numerous phone calls with the Harris campaign without including the Trump campaign on the call. Everything the whistleblower has submitted has been proven except for sample questions. There will be another tweet later today announcing action to be taken against ABC and the affiliates of ABC.
As WND reported Sunday, Sept. 15, an ABC News whistleblower released an affidavit punishable by perjury specifying allegations that the network made numerous assurances to the Harris campaign to favor the Democratic nominee for president.
ABC whistleblower affidavit has been released by @DocNetyoutube this morning. It alleges as a sworn statement under penalty of perjury that ABC coordinated with the Harris campaign to give her sample questions, assurances that Trump would be fact checked and Kamala would not, and… pic.twitter.com/DNyI2clpvS
The sworn statement indicated: “It was agreed that Donald Trump would be subjected to fact-checking during the debate, while Kamala Harris would not comparable scrutiny. This was widely known throughout the company that Donald Trump would be fact-checked. In fact, various people were assigned to fact check observations it was perceived candidate Trump would make during the debate.
“In fact, [the] Harris campaign required assurances that Donald Trump would be fact checked. This was done via multiple communications with the Harris campaign whereas the Trump campaign was not included in the negotiations. To my understanding, any rules negotiations and conversations pertaining to the debate should have had both the Trump and Harris campaign involved, the Harris campaign had numerous more calls regarding the debate rules without the Trump campaign aware or on the call.”
The statement also says: “The Harris campaign was provided with sample questions that, while not the exact questions, covered similar topics that would appear during the debate.”
“Furthermore, the Harris campaign imposed serious restrictions on the scope of questioning, including:
No questions regarding the perceived health of President Joe Biden.
No inquires regarding her tenure as attorney general in San Francisco.
No questions concerning her brother-in-law, Tony West, who faces allegations of embezzling billions of dollars in taxpayer funds and who may be involved in her administration if elected.
The whistleblower claims to have “observed a pronounced bias against Donald Trump within ABC News. Employees expressing favorable views towards him experience significant concerns about potential retribution.”
On Tuesday, Muir called the controversy over ABC’s performance “just noise.”
“All of the noise that you hear afterward about you know, ‘Which candidate won the debate, did the moderators win or lose?’” Muir told the audience on ABC’s “Live With Kelly and Mark.”
“That’s just noise. You all know that. The most important thing to remember is you all have the power.”
ABC Presidential Debate co-moderators David Muir and Linsey Davis
He said it was the “duty” of him and co-moderator Linsey Davis to discuss issues of importance to Americans, mentioning their inquiries about the border crisis, economy, reproductive rights, Afghanistan and the peaceful transfer of power.
“These are all really important issues, the issues of our time, really, and I always say as a moderator, what the candidates decide to do with that time – you can ask the questions, but they’ll answer with whatever they choose to answer with, and you have to be ready for whatever might come your way, even the most unexpected of moments,” Muir said.
ABC's David Muir says that the controversy surrounding his historically awful moderation of the presidential debate is "just noise."
Well his ratings are DOWN 12% following the debate. Less people are listening to his nightly noise now. Good! pic.twitter.com/XBH6KPLxni
Muir’s appearance on Tuesday’s talk show was perhaps prompted by a 12% drop in ratings for his nightly news broadcast since the debate.
Fox News reports: “Muir’s ‘World News Tonight’ averaged 6.7 million viewers on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday, the three episodes following the debate, after averaging 7.6 million in 2024 leading up to the debate.
“The 12% drop in viewers for ‘World News Tonight’ is more significant than slight declines ‘CBS Evening News’ and ‘NBC Nightly News’ saw when comparing the three episodes following ABC’s debate to the year-to-date totals, although Muir’s newscast remained the No. 1 broadcast evening newscast.”
ABC News fact-checked Trump at least five times during the Sept 10 debate, but preferred not a single fact-check for Harris.
Davis told the Los Angeles Times last week that her intense fact-checking of Trump was influenced by the June 27 debate on CNN that prompted President Joe Biden to exit the 2024 race.
“People were concerned that statements were allowed to just hang and not [be] disputed by the candidate Biden, at the time, or the moderators,” Davis told the paper.
On Sunday, five days after the debate, Martha Raddatz of ABC News finally admitted Harris was wrong when she said during the debate there is “not one member of the United States military who is in active duty in a combat zone in any war zone around the world.”
“Our fact-checkers found that to be false,” Raddatz said.
“There are currently 900 U.S. military personnel in Syria, 2,500 U.S. troops in Iraq. All have been under regular threat from drones and missiles for months. We also have action in the Red Sea,” Raddatz added. “Also, every single day, the Navy SEALs, Delta Forces special operators can be part of any sort of deadly raid.”
Neither Muir nor Davis alerted their 70 million debate viewers to the egregious falsehood by Harris.
An ability to win hearts and minds has long been seen by America’s leadership as essential to domestic and international politics and security. For much of the Pax Americana, our government and intelligentsia have poured time, effort, and money into studying how to persuade everyone from allies to enemies and, conversely, how to counter an opponent’s influence campaigns.
But something essential has changed since the rise of President Donald Trump as a political force.
During the Cold War, President Dwight Eisenhower spoke up against censorship and for lay readers in the wake of an attempt by Senator Joseph McCarthy’s henchmen to eradicate communist books from libraries:
Don’t join the book burners. Don’t think you are going to conceal faults by concealing evidence that they ever existed. Don’t be afraid to go in your library and read every book . . . .
How will we defeat communism unless we know what it is, and what it teaches, and why does it have such an appeal for men, why are so many people swearing allegiance to it? . . .
And we have got to fight it with something better, not try to conceal the thinking of our own people. They are part of America. And even if they think ideas that are contrary to ours, their right to say them, their right to record them, and their right to have them at places where they are accessible to others is unquestioned, or it isn’t America.
These days, America’s most educated have grown distrustful of non-experts and their ability to process dangerous ideas.
Our elites have launched a campaign to protect the undereducated from themselves.
The credentialed class pressures book retailers to stop selling “uncritical” translations of sinister foreign texts, meaning those lacking an accepted authority’s “soberly critical framing, complete with detailed footnotes, contextual commentary, or other forms of annotation.”
Journalists writing about controversial topics do not link directly to primary sources but instead filter such news “through multiple layers of condemnation by a shrinking pool of academics trusted to read raw material.”
But repeated failures did not cause self-doubt to creep into the minds of credentialed militarists of any stripe. Most continued to insist that the next war would go our way. Some have even been trying to expand their territory, such as the counterinsurgency specialists who tout their experience in (wildly unsuccessful) campaigns against international extremism and propaganda when marketing themselves as would-be, should-be leaders of the war against domestic extremism and disinformation.
The crisis afflicting much of America’s expert class is less that the internet has made it easier for the public to push back, and more that the elite’s preferred modelsjust don’t work. For instance, many disinformation experts justify censorship with a model positing that malevolent information drives malevolent acts. Similarly, some domestic terrorism experts justify increased surveillance with a model positing that terrorists broadcast their “terrorist intent” before engaging in acts of terrorism.
But, even if most people who commit violent acts were exposed to disinformation or made some announcement of terrorist intent, notably lacking is substantial evidence that a significant percentage of the people exposed to disinformation or of the individuals articulating terrorist intent go on to commit violent acts. In other words, many of our leading domestic security experts seem unwilling or unable to differentiate between a hypothesis and a theory. This is suboptimal.
The collected academic expertise of the anti-disinformation movement proved itself worthless in the real world because disinformation specialists were incapable of preventing the Biden Administration’s Disinformation Governance Board from falling victim to—of all things—a disinformation campaign. Given the anti-disinformation crowd’s admitted inability to effectively contest disinformation with speech and counter-speech in open competition, the public has every right to question whether the Biden Administration’s “Ministry of Truth” was meant to institute a de facto censorship regime where progressive- or establishment-led media and social media companies would collude with like-minded state actors to suppress populist voices.
The disinformation that touched off the anti-disinformation crusade—propaganda propounded by the Russian government during the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections—either appearsfar tooham-handed to be persuasive or seemsallbutindistinguishablefromargumentsandassertions made by America’s most highly esteemedprogressive identitarians. Given the anti-disinformation cult’s penchant for announcing causation rather than proving it, the public has every right to question whether disinformation specialists operate in a fantasy world of just-so stories where fancy academic degrees and enviable job titles can magically transform an “and” (the Russian government tried to interfere with the 2016 presidential election, and Donald Trump won) into a “so” (the Russian government tried to interfere with the 2016 presidential election, so Donald Trump won).
Although the stage has been set for a complete collapse of expert rule, it will be difficult for the current crop of experts to save themselves from—of all things—themselves. The traditional authority system is almost uniquely unfit to deal with the very public failure of conventional models.
Freedom from open competition allows diplomas and job titles to trump the substance of arguments and the abilities of individuals in the cloistered world of experts. Authorities can take the ostrich defense or declare victory when faced with a threat to their position, so experts often decry dissent while studiously avoiding anything resembling critical engagement with critiques of their work advanced by deplorables or members of the great unwashed.
The need to appeal to recognized authorities stifles innovation. Up-and-comers are best advised to avoid heterodox approaches, which are liable to offend a patron, and to adopt whatever orthodox approach happens to be favored by their most powerful backer, regardless of the merit of that approach. Established experts can use the failed experiment that is peer review to prop up their favorite disproved theory, to advance a fashionable narrative, or to snuff out groundbreaking work capable of challenging the orthodoxies upon which their reputations rest.
The authority system even incents experts to exaggerate. To draw attention in crowded fields or obtain grant money from activist sources, specialists commonly conflate advocacy with analysis, make overly dire predictions, then demand radical measures to avert the impending crises. And very rarely are experts punished for getting things wrong. It is therefore reasonable for specialists to stake out the most aggressive position possible, rather than the most accurate or defensible one.
The expert system has broken down and requires structural reform. For example, it is as if academia—the crown jewel of the authority system—were designed to be as unfair and inefficient as possible.
Despite our knowledge that the “Next Big Thing” tends to be hit upon by someone who is young or new to a discipline and often languishes until the then-dominant cohort of scholars loses control over the field, the tenure system concentrates power and authority in exactly the wrong hands—those of established professors.
The deference afforded to tenured faculty within the American academy not only makes our colleges and universities incredibly hostile environments for truly innovative ideas, but also creates ideal conditions for alpha-sycophants valiant enough to kowtow their way to the top.
BLAMING THE VICTIM?: Sen. Rand Paul joins “Rob Schmitt Tonight” to weigh in on political aftermath of the second attempt on Donald Trump’s life: “They’re encouraging emotionally unstable people to commit violence — and they need to stop.”
Say what you want about Protestants being helter-skelter, disjointed, and factious. An often-used diatribe against Popeless Christianity is that schism is as common as crack in government housing, with the figure of “45 thousand different sects” being used (and abused) to explain the superiority of the Catholic faith. Whether that’s only partly true or entirely true (the figure is nowhere near correct), one thing is for sure.
At least the head of our religion isn’t a gay Communist.
Ok, we jest. There is no evidence that Pope Francis is gay, just that he largely approves of gayness and pronounces homosexuals saved from hell-fire by nothing but the surety of his post-modern scepter. The current Pope passes out pronouncements of salvation like Oprah once gave away cars to her studio audience; and you get salvation, and you get salvation, and you all get salvation! Similar to Oprah’s giveaway, in which there was the small catch of 7k dollars in tax they had to pay to take the car home, the Pope’s salvific giveaways probably have the small-print of a few hundred years in purgatory or some hefty indulgences.
Still, it must sting the #TradCath just a bit that no matter how much they paint Protestants as a little bit crazy and a whole lot of schismatic, the current Pope is hardly Catholic. There was once a time when if someone asks, “Is the Pope Catholic?” it was meant as an obvious yes, just as did the question “Does a bear poop in the woods?” Today, questioning the Pope’s Catholicism could be met with serious conversations and solemn questions about who they claim is Peter’s replacement, the Vicar of Christ, and the Supreme Pontiff of the Universal Church.
Still, there are many Romanists who hold to traditional papist values, like that of the Sanctity of Life dealing more with not killing babies and less about giving Obama phones to welfare recipients. There are many Romanists who reject non-Christian idols who must go crazy to see the Pope allow Pachamama worship on the Vatican lawn. There are many traditional Catholics who view the Crusades as a more Biblical way to deal with the Muslim invasion of Europe than giving them first-class plane tickets to Paris and free burkas made from French flags. We can only hope that sooner or later, these Catholics will find a reason to free themselves from the burden of the Papacy and start to protest the usurper of Christ (we can think of at least 95 reasons).
However, if traditional Catholics really want a reason to leave Rome’s apostasy for good, we’ve found the 96th reason.
On his way back from a 12-day trip visiting Indonesia, Pope Francis told reporters over the weekend, “Sending migrants away, not giving migrants [the] ability to work, not giving migrants [a] welcome is a sin, it’s serious.”
In other words, the Pope wants you to know that not giving up your stuff to help the super-special, uber-protected, endangered species worthy of all praise and honor, “migrants” is a serious sin. Francis did not clarify if this was a mortal or venial sin, but it’s serious.
How serious is the sin of not giving free stuff to people who want your property, jobs, and homes? It’s so serious that it’s indistinguishable in severity from ripping babies from their mothers wombs and carving them up like a Christmas goose. And that’s pretty serious.
Francis went on, “both the one who throws out migrants and the one who kills babies. Both are against life.”
NEW🚨:
🇺🇸Pope Francis says both U.S. presidential candidates are “anti-life” and tells people to vote for the “lesser of two evils”
"Both are against life, be it the one who kicks out migrants, or be it the one who k*lls babies." pic.twitter.com/BY4WONf4fV
Ah, yes. We suppose by “throwing out migrants” Francis refers to Americans like Trump who generally want immigration laws to be enforced lest the United States becomes like the nations the Pope just visited for 12 days. But Francis continued…
“In political morality, it is generally said that not voting is bad, not good: one must vote. And one has to choose the lesser evil. Who is the lesser evil, that lady or that gentleman? I don’t know, everyone in conscience thinks and does this.”
Many people on the pro-human side of the aisle, largely called “conservatives,” are genuinely seeking for the origins of their own worldview beliefs. From Shia LeBeouf to Steve Bannon to Russell Brand, many celebrities and influencers are seeking out a supernatural answer for why everyone with common sense seems to believe the same way on sociopolitical issues (hint: it’s the skeletal remnants of a Christian worldview that forged our civilization), and the first stop along their journey of discovery is the Roman Catholic Church. That road, of course, will not lead them to Christ. It will only lead them close enough for them to find a few weird icons carved of his mother.
Roman Catholic dogma teaches that the Pope quite literally is the head of the Christian church. There are no shortage of Popes for Protestants to use as cases-in-point for why that’s as sad as it is fantastical. There were gay popes, transvestite popes, murderous popes, thieving popes, and several times, more popes than one who all claimed to be the ultimate earthly authority over the church. However, we live in a beautiful time when all we have to do is point to the current pope and ask them with a straight face, “Are you serious? This is the guy who’s in charge of the church?”
When a man can’t differentiate between the awfulness of baby-murder and the appropriateness of immigration law, does he really speak for Jesus Christ?
In our experience, when evangelizing Catholics with the authentic gospel of Christ, they appeal to the unity of the Romanist cult. We would only ask them to please confirm their unity with Pope Francis on the most important issues facing the world today. Seldom will they make the attempt, knowing that they have little in common with the Marxist currently in charge of their religion. What they will begin to express is their own independence of faith, separate from whoever the current Pope might be, unwavering in their attempted relationship with Christ outside and irrespective of the explicit or implicit authority of the Papacy.
And that, dear friend, is the first step to becoming Protestant. Join the party.
The way that people are responding to the latest attempt to assassinate Donald Trump says a lot about where we are as a nation. There was a time when something like this would have been considered an attack on all of us. But today things are completely different. Many on the left are doing their best to downplay what just happened because it might help Trump get more votes. And just like last time, there are some that truly wish that he had been killed. They have worked themselves up into such a frenzy of hatred that they are actually hoping for the death of their political opponents.
Of course the same thing is true for some people on the right as well. There was so much hate for Joe Biden when he was the Democratic nominee, and now there seems to be even more hate for Kamala Harris. This is not the way to achieve anything.
We will never win by hating our enemies.
We win by loving our enemies and using the truth to persuade them to come over to our side.
If people perceive that you hate them, they will be extremely unlikely to listen to what you have to say.
But if people perceive that you love them, they will be much more likely to listen to what you have to say.
To love someone does not mean that you agree with them. Personally, I fundamentally disagree with almost everything that our politicians do, and I express my opinions very strongly.
But I am not against anyone. Ultimately, I want the best for everyone and for our society as a whole.
If we do not learn how to love one another, we simply aren’t going to make it as a society. Today, there are millions upon millions of Americans that deeply hate entire groups of people for one reason or another. I have never seen so much hatred, and this is the most divided that our nation has been in my entire lifetime.
Where do you think that all of this hatred is going to get us?
Everyone can see that this election is going to end very badly.
If we stay on the path that we are on, it is just a matter of time before we see uncontrolled chaos in our streets.
Is that what you want?
I sure don’t.
One of the reasons why I write the way that I do is so that people will wake up and choose to change direction before it is too late.
Because right now America is on a road that only leads to disaster.
We are being fed a constant diet of hatred, and just look at what this has done to our society.
According to one recent survey, 41 percent of Americans are currently experiencing “peak stress”…
In a year marked by financial worries and political tension, a new survey has uncovered the staggering impact of stress on everyday Americans. The average person feels their head “spinning” from stress a whopping 156 times per year, translating to about three times a week.
This alarming statistic is just one of many eye-opening findings from a recent study conducted by Talker Research for Traditional Medicinals. The survey, which polled 2,000 adults, also found that 41% of respondents are currently experiencing their peak stress levels for the year.
That is almost half the country!
Another recent survey discovered that the percentage of Americans that have been clinically diagnosed with depression at some point in their lives is at the highest level ever…
According to survey data, three in ten people in the United States had been clinically diagnosed with depression at a point in their lives in 2023.
As Statista’s Anna Fleck points out in the chart below, this is the highest rate since the question started being asked, up 10.6 percentage points from 2015. The rate of increase was particularly steep in the first year of the pandemic, jumping up from 22.9 percent in 2020 to 28.6 percent in 2021.
Sadly, levels of depression are especially high among women and among young people…
According to the survey, 36.7 percent of women report having been diagnosed with depression in their lifetimes versus 20.4 percent of men. For young people aged 18-29, 34.3 percent had been diagnosed with depression, while for 30-44 year olds it was 34.9 percent.
If we keep going down this path, our mental health is only going to get worse.
A recent study from the University of Michigan Health C.S. Mott Children’s Hospital has uncovered an often-overlooked aspect of childhood development, finding a surprising number of children struggle to make friends. In fact, the poll finds one in five parents fear their children currently have no friends at all.
Imagine being a kid without a buddy to share your favorite video game with or someone to sit next to on the school bus. It’s a reality for more children than we might think. The poll of 1,031 parents with kids between six and 12 years-old reveals that 20% of kids potentially feel lonely or isolated during crucial years of social development.
I could go on and on about what a giant mess our society has become.
Needless to say, hating people is not the way out of this mess.
There are a lot of people out there that seem to believe that if they are going to be truly radical for a cause they must have someone to hate.
No.
If you want to be truly radical, become a person of great love.
Of course a person of great love tells the truth, and when you share the truth with others you will often be hated for it.
But if you respond with hate when others hate you, you will never win.
It is so easy to get pulled into all of the negativity that we see online and in the mainstream media these days.
Often, those that are the most filled with hate are the ones that get the most attention.
We must resist that temptation.
If we keep going the same direction that we have been going, there is no future for our country.
Love is the answer, but right now hatred just continues to grow all around us.
WEST PALM BEACH, FL — As the investigation into the second assassination attempt on former President Donald Trump continued, the Federal Bureau of Investigation said we may never know the motivation of the would-be assassin who was a Biden-Harris supporter and donated to Democrats 20 times.
Sources within the FBI said the mystery had thus far proved to be too complex to unravel, as agents scoured the shooter’s extensive social media post history condemning Trump and his long track record of giving money to Democratic political causes in search of any sign of what may have motivated his attack.
“We’re just as puzzled as everyone else,” said Special Agent Dirk Burbon at a press briefing on the investigation. “Though there has been widespread speculation that this attempted assassination was politically motivated, the suspect and his well-documented history of hating Mr. Trump and supporting Democrat causes have thus far given no indication of that being the case.”
Investigators urged caution, telling the American people not to rush to judgment. “Let us do our work here,” Special Agent Burbon continued. “This is not the time for rash action or jumping to conclusions. Sometimes a suspect’s motive to commit a crime is obvious. Other times, despite an abundance of clues that give a clear-cut explanation for their actions, you’re left never knowing the truth. Some cases just aren’t ever meant to be solved, ya know?”
At publishing time, FBI insiders revealed agents were hard at work trying to determine if the large neon sign flashing “I’M GOING TO KILL DONALD TRUMP” the shooter installed outside his home had any meaning.
BIG NEWS: We made a movie, and you can watch the trailer NOW:
I’ve been fascinated by Marxism since my parents first told me about the Cold War we were living in when I was almost 10-years-old (1983). I remember asking them why the Soviet Union had nuclear weapons aimed at us. After my parents reassured me that we had just as many nuclear missiles aimed back at them — ensuring that they will not use these weapons against us (peace through strength) — they explained it to me like I was 10-years-old (because I was). While not using these exact words, my parents basically told me that the Soviet Union was based upon a philosophy called Marxism which is logically incompatible with America’s theological and philosophical foundations. This sparked a desire to learn more about our fundamental disagreements.
I wanted to know about America’s philosophical foundations. I wanted to know more about Marxism. So, over the past four decades I have studied Marxism off and on as a hobby. While I make no claims to be a Marxist scholar, as a philosophically inclined analytic theologian — who has applied the tools of my trade to this hobby — I do think it’s fair to say that I know enough about Marxism to have an informed conversation on the matter. So, since my parents provided me with a nice introduction to Marxism four decades ago, allow me to pay it forward and provide an introduction here.
Marxism 101
In a nutshell, Marxism is a socio-political and economic ideology developed by Karl Marx (hence the name “Marxism”) and Friedrich Engels in the 19th century. As Marx wrote in the Communist Manifesto, his philosophy emphasizes the role of struggle between the oppressed and the oppressor in societal development. Marx advocated for a classless, stateless society where the means of production are owned collectively.
That might look good on paper, but Marxism has a rich history of utter failure, poverty, tyranny, death, and destruction. Indeed, if we are comparing death counts, Marxism makes Hitler’s Nazi Party seem tame. While Hitler’s Holocaust of evil murdered six million Jews, those putting Marx’s philosophy into action have killed well-over 100 million people! Yet, while we do not hear that we’ve got to keep trying Naziism again and again, Marxists demand that despite repeated failures, along with more and more death and destruction, we must keep trying to implement Marxism again, and again, and over again.
Insanity Is Doing the Same Thing Over and Over Again and Expecting Different Results
The preceding words are attributed to Albert Einstein, but whoever originally said it, these words ring true. Yet, Karl Marx’s philosophy — which promises a better tomorrow — always leads to the same outcome, with the “useful idiots” who helped to usher Marxists into power, now trying to escape their new “utopia.” (The term “useful idiots” is not a pejorative term, but a Marxist term for a naive or credulous person who can be manipulated or exploited to advance a cause or political agenda.)
Konstan Kisin was fortunate enough to escape Marxism and puts it this way:
Lenin promised a better tomorrow in Russia, before imposing tyranny, poverty, and terror. Mao promised a better tomorrow in China, before imposing tyranny, poverty, and terror. Castro promised a better tomorrow in Cuba, before imposing tyranny, poverty, and terror. Chavez promised a better tomorrow in Venezuela, before imposing tyranny, poverty, and terror.
Surprisingly, many useful idiots living within the borders of America — while enjoying a protection of their unalienable God-given rights — seem to think that they should use their freedom to destroy their freedom by making progress toward a Marxist utopia. The historical death count alone should prevent any sane person from advancing the cause of Marxism today, yet key tenets of Marx’s philosophy are alive and well.
Marxism’s Key Tenets
Here’s a short list of key ingredients included in Marx’s philosophy:
1. Class Struggle: Marxism is basically a worldview that posits a necessary conflict that only Marxism can solve. Marx said that the history of class struggles were between the bourgeoisie (owners of the means of production) and the proletariat (working class). Today, the language typically used (and that most of us will recognize) is the struggle between the “oppressed” and the “oppressor.” The ultimate goal is for the proletariat (or “the oppressed”) to overthrow the bourgeoisie (“the oppressor”), leading to a classless society.
Marx utilized the oppressor/oppressed narrative in the 1840s when he co-authored the Communist Manifesto. Today, you will hear the exact same language used by those at the top of the Black Lives Matter organization. This makes sense since the leaders of the movement have proudly admitted that they are “trained Marxists.”
2. Abolition of Private Property: Marxists advocate for the abolition of private ownership of the means of production (factories, land, etc.) and propose that these should be owned collectively by the community or ruling government.
3. Collectivism and State Control: Marxism starts with Socialism and emphasizes the central role of the government in controlling and distributing resources until the state itself “withers away” and transforms into full-blown Communism.
4. Critique of Capitalism: Marxism views capitalism as an exploitative system where the bourgeoisie (or the oppressor) extracts surplus value from the labor of the proletariat (or the oppressed), leading to inequality and social injustice. Thus, the Marxist advances what they refer to as “social justice,” which seeks equity (equal outcomes) as opposed to equal rights and opportunity.
Kamala Harris points out the difference between equality (equal rights and opportunity) as opposed to equity — “all ending up in the same place” (equal outcomes) in this short video.
5. Revolutionary Change: Marxism advocates for a revolutionary overthrow of the capitalist system, rather than reforming it through gradual or democratic means. We have seen this throughout history. “Political power grows out of a barrel of a gun” are infamous words uttered by Chinese Marxist named Mao Zedong. This has happened multiple times in world history, but most of us are old enough to remember that Black Lives Matter led a summer full of “mostly peaceful” protests combined with extremely violent riots in 2020 (that made January 6th look like a guided tour of the Capitol building). We saw a snapshot of what trained Marxists are willing to do in order to destroy “the system” in hopes to “Build Back Better.”
Karl Marx died in 1883, but his ideas have evolved and advanced at the Frankfurt School in Germany which exists for the purpose of advancing Marxism. This provided the foundation for the idea known as Critical Theory, and what has been advanced recently as Critical Race Theory (CRT). It’s vital to recognize this “theory” has deep roots in Marxism.
*Click here to read a copy of a speech I gave to the Kearney Public Schools Board of Education in 2022 about the dangers of CRT.
America’s Philosophical Foundations
The key tenets of Marxism are in opposition to America’s theological foundations stated in the Declaration of Independence and enemies of the United States Constitution. That is to say, the foundational documents of the United States are based upon principles that are incompatible with Marxism:
1. Individual Equal Rights and Private Property: The Declaration of Independence emphasizes God-given equal and “unalienable rights” including “Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness,” which are closely tied to the protection of individual rights and private property (starting with the private property of your own body). The Constitution enshrines these rights through various amendments, particularly the Bill of Rights. Marxism, in contrast, seeks to abolish private property and emphasizes collective rights and property over individual rights and property.
2. Limited Government: The U.S. Constitution establishes a system of limited government, with checks and balances designed to prevent any one branch from gaining too much power. When the government is smaller, We the People have more freedom. Marxism, on the other hand, advocates for a powerful state — ultimately a dictator — to control resources and enforce equity (equal outcomes) upon all people, regardless of their personal choices.
3. Democratic Processes: The United States of America is a Constitutional Republic and the U.S. Constitution is based on democratic principles where change is achieved through We the People in an electoral processes and the rule of law. As noted above, however, Marxism often advocates for revolutionary change, which can involve the use of horrible violence and the overthrow of existing governmental structures.
This is one reason why the Second Amendment (2A) of the U.S. Constitution is so important. America’s Founders realized that the human right of self-defense — and the defense of loved ones — serves as an insurance of all of our other rights and is “necessary to the security of a free state.” This makes it clear that the 2A is not about “hunting rights,” it’s about security and the ability to oppose enemies of the Constitution; foreign or domestic (this might explain why progressives, who are willing to use violence to overthrow the freedoms of American citizens, often seem frustrated by the 2A).
4. Capitalism: The American system is built on a capitalist economic model, which Marxism fundamentally opposes. The protection of free markets and private enterprise is central to the U.S. economy, whereas Marxism seeks to dismantle capitalism entirely.
These fundamental differences lead to an inherent opposition between Marxist ideology and the principles enshrined in America’s theological and philosophical foundational documents. These two views are logically incompatible. The American system prioritizes individual human freedom (my favorite topic), private ownership of property, and a government that serves and protects objective and unalienable human rights, whereas Marxism seeks to replace these structures with a collectivist system focused on equity and the forced communal ownership (ultimately through the barrel of a gun) of all resources and everything else.
I believe that America’s philosophical foundations are objectively true (i.e., they correspond to reality). Thus, in order to avoid painful collisions with reality, we ought to strive to correspond to reality. In a nutshell, I affirm Jefferson’s words in the Declaration of Independence:
“We hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights…”
Accordingly, objectively good governments will not violate a human’s God-given rights. Indeed, an objectively good government will use its power to protect and fight for the God-given rights of humanity.
Since I possess knowledge that Christianity is true (given a cumulative case of evidence), I also know that Jefferson was right. Humanity was created on purpose and for specific purposes. This places us in an epistemic position to know exactly what our God-given rights are. This is also why it’s vital to study the entirety of God’s inspired Word (read your Bible)! Ultimately, Bible-believing Christians know that humans have God-given rights that ought not be violated by anyone – including governments.
In addition to the four philosophical principles of American philosophy, listed above, House Speaker Mike Johnson provides seven key essentials (some overlap with the above list) that American Conservatives — those seeking to conserve America’s philosophical and theological foundations — uphold:
Individual Freedom
Limited Government
The Rule of Law
Peace through Strength
Fiscal Responsibility
Free Markets
Human Dignity
Progressives, as opposed to conservatives, have different goals. Whenever one refers to themselves as a “progressive,” I always ask them to clarify and be specific about what they are “progressing away from” and what they are progressing toward. I’ve had these conversations on many college campuses around the country and it seems that those who refer to themselves as “progressive” tend to make progress away from America’s philosophical foundations and often find themselves on a journey toward what they have been promised: a Marxist utopia.
This utopia can only exist if America’s foundation can be destroyed. Or in the words of Kamala Harris:
“To see what can be, unburdened by what has been.”
Make no mistake, Marxists have a religious devotion to being “unburdened by what has been” (America’s philosophical foundations). Despite horrendous failures over and over again, a Marxist utopia is what they believe “can be,” if they just try it one more time.
A Theological View of Marxism
Marxism is not merely a “shallow philosophy” (Colossians 2:8). As a theologian, I believe it is fair to refer to Marxism as a religion or a religious substitute. Of course, Marx did say that “religion is the opium of the people” so, although Marx himself would probably not refer to Marxism as a “religion,” it does share striking similarities with religion. Indeed, it seems to be an anti-Christ religion.
Just as Buddhism is often referred to as an “atheistic religion,” Marxism also seems to be worthy of that label. This is because it steps into the theological lane and attempts to provide answers to the problem of evil, sin, atonement, and forgiveness.
I have published two books and an academic journal article destroying particular arguments raised against the knowledge of God (2 Corinthians 10:5). Namely, all the problems of evil. I highly recommend reading the chapter I contributed to the book, Faith Examined (Wipf and Stock, 2023) where I show that if Christianity is true, combined with God’s necessary omniscience, then all the so-called “problems of evil” melt away. But, as philosopher Owen Anderson notes in his article, “Mere Marxism,” the Marxist seeks to take a non-theological approach to addressing why evil exists in the world. The problem is that some people have more stuff than other people. The Marxist’s answer is that the places where there is not as much suffering have exploited the places that have more suffering. Dr. Anderson writes:
In this story, those places were once Edenic. The people lived in harmony with each other and with nature until European sails were seen on the horizon, and all hell broke loose.
Of course, anyone with minimal knowledge of history knows this is historical revisionism (see, How Christianity Changed the Worldby Alvin J. Schmidt). As Anderson notes, before these lands were “colonized” by Europeans they were . . .
“filled with idolatry, sexual immorality, warfare, cannibalism, rape, self-mutilation, torture, and human sacrifice. But if you are taught the Mere Marxist narrative from K-12 and then in college, it is all you know.”
So there is a “problem of sin” in Marxism, and some are born sinners and some are born sinned against. But don’t worry, just as Jesus provides good news so that you can be set free from sin, the Marxist religion also provides atonement for your sins (more theology) if you happened to be born into the class of “oppressor.” Of course, this atonement is not through the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus, but rather, Marxism is a religion of works. If you were born into the class of the sinful oppressor, you can be saved and make the world a better place by giving lots of your money and time to progressive causes — along with much virtue signaling.
Anderson notes that
“Marxism should rightly be considered as a cult that borrows from Christian beliefs. It teaches about a perfect time, the introduction of sin (private property and greed), and the path through atonement and redemption. It is a religion of works. There is no grace or mercy. You can only be redeemed by doing your fair share.”
Now that we’ve shown Marxism to meet the requirements for being a religion, I’m sure the ACLU will be consistent and demand the separation of Church and State.
So, not only is Marxism the enemy of America’s Philosophical Foundations, it’s also opposed to The Law of Christ and the gospel message. Marx seemed to realize this inherent contradiction between these two worldviews when he decried that “religion was the opium of the people.” Thus, religion — especially Christianity — opposed the goals of Marxism. After all, if the ultimate goal of Marxism is equity (equal outcomes despite personal choices) it opposes the teachings of Jesus and the Law of Christ.
This is why, in order to transform America into a Marxist utopia, one of the first steps was to advance arguments raised against the knowledge of God. This is also why those advancing Marxist ideals have spent so much time focused on the growing number of theologians and philosophers who “destroy every argument raised against the knowledge of God” (2 Corinthians 10:5) and provide a cumulative case of arguments and evidence supporting the existence of God and the truth of the historical resurrection.
When Christianity thrives, Marxism dies.
Conclusion
This article briefly surveyed some key principles of Marxism and compared and contrasted them with key principles of America’s philosophical and theological foundations. We have seen that these two worldviews are logically incompatible and thus, natural enemies. Indeed, when one takes the oath to defend the U.S. Constitution . . .
I, [name], do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter. So help me God.
. . . one promises to defend it against all enemies foreign or domestic. Marxism is at the top of the list of these enemies.
Although the evil of Marxism presents itself in physical form against your neighbors, loved ones, and the least of these (Mark 12:30-31; Matthew 25:31-46), while promising to help them, it comes to destroy them. We must remember where this evil comes from. The Apostle Paul reminds us in Ephesians 6:
12 For our battle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the world powers of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavens. 13 This is why you must take up the full armor of God, so that you may be able to resist in the evil day, and having prepared everything, to take your stand.
Of course, these spiritual forces of evil in which Paul speaks have infected the minds of many humans. We must seek to reason together (Isaiah 1:18) and speak the truth in love (Ephesians 4:15) as we strive to free their minds (which is what FreeThinking Ministries is all about). We must always speak the truth, but we should begin with gentleness and kindness. If those we love refuse to listen — and as this evil becomes a clear and present danger to them and others — then Jesus and Paul give us examples of how the most loving thing to do is to stop worrying about being nice or coming across in humility. At that point, speaking the hard truth with cold facts is often the most loving thing a person can do for those refusing to see this danger.
Stay awake!
8 Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. 9 Resist him, firm in your faith, knowing that the same kinds of suffering are being experienced by your brotherhood throughout the world (1 Peter 5:8-9).
Bottom line: We must call out the evils of this “shallow philosophy” (some have referred to it as the “woke mind virus”) which has taken so many captive (Colossians 2:8). Your neighbors, your loved ones, and the least of these depend on your voice. With this in mind, do not be silent in the face of evil! Be loud for the sake of love.
Much more can be said on this topic. Don’t worry, although this article was written as an introduction to the topic, FreeThinking Ministries has many articles and videos about the evils of Marxism (including several from Phil Bair, the author of Marx Attacks). More are forthcoming. Stay tuned.
Stay reasonable (Isaiah 1:18) and live in freedom (Galatians 5:13).
Recommended Resources:
Correct not Politically Correct: About Same-Sex Marriage and Transgenderism by Frank Turek (Book, MP4, )
Tim Stratton (The FreeThinking Theist) Tim pursued his undergraduate studies at the University of Nebraska-Kearney (B.A. 1997) and after working in full-time ministry for several years went on to attain his graduate degree from Biola University (M.A. 2014). Tim was recently accepted at North West University to pursue his Ph.D. in systematic theology with a focus on metaphysics.
SACRAMENTO, CA — California Governor Gavin Newsom announced he will sign a bill banning political images generated by artificial intelligence after he was duped into thinking an online photo of Donald Trump depicted as a half-man/half-fish was real.
“I was humiliated,” fumed Newsom, still staring at the mer-man version of Trump on his phone. “It just looked so real, Trump with his glorious fish tail living in the sea. I sent it to my sister, only to learn I had been duped! I am therefore announcing a total ban on A.I. generated images on social media, so no one will ever have to suffer the shame I have felt.”
Newsom’s announcement shocked many in the social media community, who say that using artificial intelligence to generate memes is protected speech. Newsom brushed off the concerns after a photo he sent to his friend of Elon Musk riding a dragon in outer space also turned out to be a fake.
“We must obliterate these deep fakes. Never again do I want to see Trump riding an eagle or JD Vance fighting Brad Pitt in Fight Club. It’s just too easy to assume these are real and people are getting duped! Real people, hardworking people, Governor people!”
As of publishing time, Newsom also announced he’s banning any headline on social media that starts with “BREAKING!”, a move supported by members of both political parties.
BIG NEWS: We made a movie, and you can watch the trailer NOW:
Truth2Freedom's Blog 