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
You don’t buy or earn your way into an inheritance. The Greek word translated “inheritance” (klēronomia, 1 Peter 1:4) speaks of possessions passed down from generation to generation. You receive them simply because you’re a family member.
Whether Our Good Works Will Add to Our Degree of Future Glory? – Augustus M. Toplady
Augustus Montague Toplady (4 November 1740 – 11 August 1778) was an Anglican cleric and hymn writer. He was a major Calvinist opponent of John Wesley. He is best remembered as the author of the hymn “Rock of Ages”.Background and early life, 1740–55
Augustus Toplady was born in Farnham, Surrey, England in November 1740. He attended Westminster School from 1750 to 1755.Trinity College, Dublin: 1755–60In 1759, Toplady published his first book, Poems on Sacred Subjects.Toplady met and was influenced by several prominent Calvinist ministers, including George Whitefield, and John Gill. It was John Gill who in 1760 urged Toplady to publish his translation of Zanchius’s work on predestination.Church ministry: 1762–78In 1762, Edward Willes, the Bishop of Bath and Wells, ordained Toplady as an Anglican deacon, appointing him curate of Blagdon, located in the Mendip Hills of Somerset.Toplady wrote his famous hymn Rock of Ages in 1763.
Toplady never married.
Calvinist controversy: 1769–78Toplady’s first salvo into the world of religious controversy came in 1769 when he wrote a book in response to a situation at the University of Oxford. Six students had been expelled from St Edmund Hall because of their Calvinist views, which Thomas Nowell criticised as inconsistent with the views of the Church of England. Toplady then criticised Nowell’s position in his book The Church of England Vindicated from the Charge of Arminianism, which argued that Calvinism, not Arminianism, was the position historically held by the Church of England.1769 also saw Toplady publish his translation of Zanchius’s Confession of the Christian Religion (1562), one of the works which had convinced Toplady to become a Calvinist in 1758. Toplady entitled his translation The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated and Asserted. This work drew a vehement response from John Wesley, thus initiating a protracted pamphlet debate between Toplady and Wesley about whether the Church of England was historically Calvinist or Arminian. This debate peaked in 1774, when Toplady published his 700-page The Historic Proof of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of England, a massive study which traced the doctrine of predestination from the period of the Early Church through to William Laud. The section about the Synod of Dort contained a footnote identifying five basic propositions of the Calvinist faith, arguably the first appearance in print of the summary of Calvinism known as the five points of Calvinism.The relationship between Toplady and Wesley that had initially been cordial, involving exchanges of letters in Toplady’s Arminian days, became increasingly bitter and reached its nadir with the “Zanchy affair”. Wesley took exception to the publication of Toplady’s translation of Zanchius’s work on predestination in 1769 and published, in turn, an abridgment of that work titled The Doctrine of Absolute Predestination Stated and Asserted, adding his own comment that “The sum of all is this: One in twenty (suppose) of mankind are elected; nineteen in twenty are reprobated. The elect shall be saved, do what they will; the reprobate will be damned, do what they can. Reader believe this, or be damned. Witness my hand.” Toplady viewed the abridgment and comments as a distortion of his and Zanchius’s views and was particularly enraged that the authorship of these additions was attributed to him, as though he approved of the content.Toplady published a response in the form of A Letter to the Rev Mr John Wesley; Relative to His Pretended Abridgement of Zanchius on Predestination. Wesley never publicly accepted any wrongdoing on his part and seemingly denied his authorship of the comments contained in his abridgement when, in his 1771 work The Consequence Proved that responded to Toplady’s letter, he ascribed his additions to Toplady. Subsequently, Wesley avoided direct correspondence with Toplady, famously stating in a letter of 24 June 1770 that “I do not fight with chimney-sweepers. He is too dirty a writer for me to meddle with. I should only foul my fingers. I read his title-page, and troubled myself no farther. I leave him to Mr Sellon. He cannot be in better hands.”Last yearsToplady spent his last three years mainly in London, preaching regularly in a French Calvinist chapel at Orange Street (off of Haymarket), most spectacularly in 1778, when he appeared to rebut charges being made by Wesley’s followers that he had renounced Calvinism on his deathbed.Toplady died of tuberculosis on 11 August 1778. He was buried at Whitefield’s Tabernacle, Tottenham Court Road.
John Knox (1514 – 1572) was a Scottish minister, theologian, and writer who was a leader of the country’s Reformation. He was the founder of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland.
By the end of March 1543 he was committed to the Christian gospel. It was at this time that he was persuaded to take a more public stand for the gospel and act as the bodyguard for the preacher George Wishart. who had been accused of conspiring to assassinate Cardinal Beaton, the Roman Catholic emissary to Scotland. Only five hours after Knox eventually left him George Wishart was arrested, tried, convicted, and condemned to death.
The exact time of John Knox conversion is not known, however it is clear that by the end of March 1543 he was committed to the Christian gospel. At this time he was persuaded to take a more public stand for the gospel and act as the bodyguard for the preacher George Wishart. who had been accused of conspiring to assassinate Cardinal Beaton, the Roman Catholic emissary to Scotland. Only five hours after Knox eventually left him George Wishart was arrested, tried, convicted, and condemned to death.
Having been Wishart’s bodyguard meant that Knox himself was now in danger. He ended up fleeing to St Andrews where a group of gentry and their supporters had killed Cardinal Beaton and taken over his castle. While in St Andrews Knox was officially appointed preacher, and preached his first sermon on Daniel 7:24-25. It soon became apparent that Knox was prepared to strike at the very root of the Catholic system. When The castle of St Andrews finally surrendered to the French backed forces of Mary Stuart in August 1547, Knox was sentenced to serve as an oarsman in the French galleys. While this was a time of great physical suffering it was also a time of great strengthening spiritually.
After his release from the galleys in 1549 he settled in England and became a minister in the Church of England which was then at the height of its own reformation. It was not long after before differences began to show themselves between Knox and those in the Church of England who only wanted a partial reformation of the Roman Catholic system.
In 1553 King Edward VI died and was succeeded by his sister Mary who was an ardent Catholic. Knox felt it was time to leave England for continental Europe. Not long after this he was appointed Pastor of an English speaking church in Frankfurt, this did not last long though as the church became dominated by those who insisted upon an Anglican form of worship rather than one with gospel preaching at its center. Knox moved on to Geneva where he began to Pastor the first true Puritan church, a church which held preaching to be the center of church worship.
After the death of Queen Mary of England the Geneva church decided to transfer home to England, this allowed Knox to return to his home country of Scotland in 1559. Things were not straightforward for Knox even then. In Scotland Mary of Guise was ruling as Queen of France and Scotland. Knox preached around Scotland gaining support for the reformation, while Mary used French troops in an attempt to gain a decisive military victory over the Protestants. Her victory was not to be, While Mary looked for support from France, The Protestants had secured support from Elizabeth in England.
In July 1560 Mary of Guise died and by August 1560 Scotland was declared Protestant by an act of Parliament, a National Reformed church was established and John Knox was active in organizing it. While all of this was going on Mary Queen of Scots was living in France with her husband. In December he died, and Mary was allowed to return to Scotland on the condition that she did not attempt to bring back the blasphemous Catholic mass to Scotland. Mary did not keep to this agreement and was soon using every available subterfuge to promote Catholic influence throughout Scotland.
He preached for the last time on 9 November 1572 and was taken ill a few days later and he died on 24 November 1572.
…He that believeth on me, the works that I do shall he do also; and greater works than these shall he do; because I go to my Father.
JOHN 14:12
I don’t mind telling you that it is my earnest faith that all that is worthwhile in Christianity is a miracle!
The trappings and paraphernalia and outward dressings of Christianity are unnecessary—we could get along nicely without them.
But there is a series of miracles, throbbing and beating within the divine message of God, and within the hearts of those who believe truly—and that’s about all there is to the Christian faith.
When Peter wrote that God “according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,” he arrived at a major miracle of the New Testament.
Peter was witnessing about a major miracle, that is, being born again—begotten again! Supernatural grace has been the teaching of the Christian Church from Pentecost to the present hour.
It is sad that some men are being forced from their pulpits because they have insisted upon preaching the supernatural quality of the acts of God. We stand with them in the belief that pure religion is a continuing perpetuation of a major miracle, and we cannot settle for just the mental quality of things.
The new birth is the creating of a new man in the heart, where another man has been. It is the putting of a new man in the old man’s place, and we are born anew! It is a vital and unique work of God in human nature.1
Peace and rest belong not to the unregenerate, they are the peculiar possession of the Lord’s people, and of them only. The God of Peace gives perfect peace to those whose hearts are stayed upon him. When man was unfallen, his God gave him the flowery bowers of Eden as his quiet resting places; alas! how soon sin blighted the fair abode of innocence. In the day of universal wrath when the flood swept away a guilty race, the chosen family were quietly secured in the resting-place of the ark, which floated them from the old condemned world into the new earth of the rainbow and the covenant, herein typifying Jesus, the ark of our salvation. Israel rested safely beneath the blood-besprinkled habitations of Egypt when the destroying angel smote the first-born; and in the wilderness the shadow of the pillar of cloud, and the flowing rock, gave the weary pilgrims sweet repose. At this hour we rest in the promises of our faithful God, knowing that his words are full of truth and power; we rest in the doctrines of his word, which are consolation itself; we rest in the covenant of his grace, which is a haven of delight. More highly favoured are we than David in Adullam, or Jonah beneath his gourd, for none can invade or destroy our shelter. The person of Jesus is the quiet resting-place of his people, and when we draw near to him in the breaking of the bread, in the hearing of the word, the searching of the Scriptures, prayer, or praise, we find any form of approach to him to be the return of peace to our spirits.
“I hear the words of love, I gaze upon the blood,
I see the mighty sacrifice, and I have peace with God.
’Tis everlasting peace, sure as Jehovah’s name,
’Tis stable as his steadfast throne, for evermore the same:
The clouds may go and come, and storms may sweep my sky,
This blood-sealed friendship changes not, the cross is ever nigh.”1
THIS know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
2–5 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.
These persons will be in the church, and trouble it exceedingly. Many such are already around us, and they are on the increase: it is little use controverting with them, or seeking to set them right: we had better leave them to their own devices, and as they are in the Lord’s hands he will know how to deal with them.
6, 7 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. (These deceivers acted like Jesuits, spreading their doctrine secretly among the weaker sort. Truth fears not the light, but falsehood is a night bird, and flies abroad by stealth. If any religious teacher asks us to conceal from our friends what he has told us, we may be sure that he is good for nothing.)
8 Now as Jannes and Jambres, (Pharaoh’s magicians,) withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.
9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their’s also was. (Paul laid bare the deceitful workings of the false teachers, boldy exposing them. However gentle we may be, we must not allow falsehood to be secretly spread, but must drag it to the light, and smite it till it dies.)
10, 11 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience; Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me.
12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. (Christ’s soldiers must expect hard blows. The cross is always to be borne by those who trust in the Crucified: it is idle and mean to endeavour to escape it.
“Must I be carried to the skies,
On flowery beds of ease,
While others fought to win the prize,
And sailed through bloody seas?”)
13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived.
There is no mending them, they must go on to the bitter end. Terrible will be their doom.
14, 15 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. (Happy Timothy to be thus prepared for the conflict with error! Happier still to be enabled by grace to remain steadfast in that truth which from a child he had been taught. Yet he needed to be exhorted to steadfastness, and so do we. Never, never may any one of us give ear to false doctrine, but may we cling to the gospel with all our might.)
16, 17 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works. (Never let us forget this. The whole of the Bible is inspired, and is to be devoutly received as the infallible truth of God. Get away from this, and we have nothing left to hold by. Whatever we do, let us never give up the Bible. Those who would weaken our reverence for it are our worst enemies.)
Amos 1:1 — Who was Amos? A herdsman as opposed to the influential Isaiah who lived at the same time. In Amos 7:14 we’ll see “I was no prophet, neither was I a prophet’s son; but I was an herdman, and a gatherer of sycomore fruit.” He lived a few miles southeast of Bethlehem.
Tekoa in relation to Bethlehem
We can see, then, that Amos had to travel to his job. He was a migrant worker, if you please. His sheep and his sycamores pushed Amos far out into that desert. He was truly a farmer. He was a country rube. He was a rustic. He was a yokel and a hayseed. He was a country preacher. He was a clumsy bumpkin who was “all thumbs” among the ecumenical preachers up yonder in Bethel. But before you laugh at Amos, may I say this? He was one of God’s greatest men, and he was a remarkable individual.
Amos 2:3 — Judgment on Damascus, Gaza, Ashdod, Tyrus, Edom, Ammon, Moab, and now Judah! Why? “… they have despised the Law of the LORD and have not kept His commandments.”
Amos 2:12 — Nazarites were forbidden from drinking (Numbers 6:3).
Amos 3:15 — What’s a house of ivory? Probably meant that the house was full of ivory artifacts.
Revelation 2:2 — Jesus appreciated the intolerance of the Ephesians! They recognized the importance of doctrine (Acts 2:42).
Revelation 2:4 — The Ephesians were good separatists, but they forgot the reason they separated!
Revelation 2:10 — Not exactly your best life now! We have a promise: for those faithful unto death, Christ offers us the crown of life!
Revelation 2:13-14 — These churches have unique problems! Pergamos hadn’t denied Jesus, but they tolerated false teaching. They needed to separate from the false teachers (see Ephesus in Revelation 2:4)!
Psalm 129:4 — What does it mean to say “The LORD is righteous”? From the BlueLetterBible.org:
God’s righteousness, or justice, is an attribute that leads Him to do only those things that are right. Because God is righteous He must judge evil. God’s justice allows Him to reward those who have been faithful to Him. Someday He will rule in absolute righteousness.
I will pour my spirit upon thy seed, and my blessing upon thine offspring.Isaiah 44:3
Our dear children have not the Spirit of God by nature, as we plainly see. We see much in them which makes us fear as to their future, and this drives us to agonizing prayer. When a son becomes specially perverse, we cry with Abraham, “Oh, that Ishmael might live before thee!” We would sooner see our daughters Hannahs than empresses. This verse should greatly encourage us. It follows upon the words, “Fear not, O Jacob, my servant,” and it may well banish our fears.
The Lord will give His Spirit; will give it plentifully, pouring it out; will give it effectually, so that it shall be a real and eternal blessing. Under this divine outpouring our children shall come forward, and “one shall say, I am the Lord’s; and another shall call himself by the name of Jacob.”
This is one of those promises concerning which the Lord will be inquired of. Should we not, at set times, in a distinct manner, pray for our offspring? We cannot give them new hearts, but the Holy Spirit can; and He is easily to be entreated of. The great Father takes pleasure in the prayers of fathers and mothers. Have we any dear ones outside of the ark? Let us not rest till they are shut in with us by the Lord’s own hand.
How can we be certain the Resurrection really happened? Is it anything more than a fairy tale? Are Christians who believe in the Resurrection exercising nothing more than “wishful thinking”?
To see more training videos with J. Warner Wallace, visit the YouTube playlist.
For many years, the Council of Nicaea has been the subject of much confusion among laypeople. The misapprehensions which have come to be associated with the council of Nicaea have, in part, been fueled by popular fictional novels such as Dan Brown’s notorious The Da Vinci Code. No matter what group you are dealing with in your apologetic exploits (including atheists, Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Unitarians), you are almost guaranteed to encounter some of these misconceptions. For this reason, it is important for Christians to study and learn church history, so that they might correct common myths and falsehoods.
Did Constantine Invent the Bible and the Deity of Christ?
The Council of Nicaea was famously convened on May 20, 325 AD, at the request of Emperor Constantine (pictured above). What did the council of bishops meet to discuss? Contrary to common misconception (popularized particularly in Muslim circles) that has been widely circulated via the internet, the Council of Nicaea did not meet to discuss the canon of Scripture — that is, the decision about which books should make up the New Testament. In fact, there is not a shred of evidence that the canon of Scripture was even brought up at Nicaea. Another misconception is that the council of Nicaea, at the encouragement of Constantine, “invented” the deity of Christ or, at the very least, that the bishops in attendance at Nicaea were significantly divided on the issue, the matter being decided with a vote. This too, however, is completely inaccurate. In 325 AD, when the bishops convened at Nicaea, the deity of Christ had been affirmed almost unanimously by the Christian movement for close to three hundred years!
The bishops who met at Nicaea had just come out of an extremely challenging time of intense persecution by the Romans, having lived through the cruelty of the Emperors Diocletian (ruling 284-305) and Maximian (ruling 286-305). One of the bishops present at Nicaea, Paphnutius, had even lost his right eye and been given a limp in his left leg as a consequence of his profession of faith. According to one ancient writer, Theodoret (393-457),
“Paul, bishop of Neo-Cæsarea, a fortress situated on the banks of the Euphrates, had suffered from the frantic rage of Licinius. He had been deprived of the use of both hands by the application of a red-hot iron, by which the nerves which give motion to the muscles had been contracted and rendered dead. Some had had the right eye dug out, others had lost the right arm. Among these was Paphnutius of Egypt. In short, the Council looked like an assembled army of martyrs.” [Ecclesiastical History, 1.7.5]
It strikes me as odd, therefore, that one would suppose that the early Christian movement, having come out of such difficult times as those, would capitulate so easily to the emperor Constantine’s demands with respect to defining the very fundamentals of their faith!
It Was About the Aryan Heresy
The story of the Nicaean council begins in Alexandria in northwest Egypt. The archbishop of Alexandria was a man by the name of Alexander. A member of his senior clergy, called Arius, took issue with Alexander’s view of Jesus’s divine nature, insisting that the Son is, in fact, himself a created being. In similar fashion to modern Jehovah’s Witnesses, Arius maintained that Jesus was like the Father inasmuch as they both existed before creation, played a role in creation and were exalted above it. But the Son, according to the theology of Arius, was the first of God’s creations and was commissioned by the Father to create the world.
On this point, Alexander strongly disagreed, and publicly challenged Arius’s heretical teachings. In 318 AD, Alexander called together a hundred or so bishops to talk over the matter and to defrock Arius. Arius, however, went to Nicomedia in Asia Minor and rallied his supporters, including Eusebius of Nicomedia, who was a relative by marriage to Constantine the emperor, and a theologian in the imperial court. Eusebius and Arius wrote to many bishops who had not been involved in the defrocking of Arius. The effect was the creation of divisions among the bishops. Embarrassed by such bickering, the emperor Constantine convened the ecumenical council of Nicaea in 325.
Constantine’s primary concern was imperial unity rather than theological accuracy, and he desired a decision that would be supported by the greatest number of bishops, regardless of what conclusion was reached. His theological advisor, Hosius, served to get the emperor up to speed before the arrival of the bishops. Since Arius was not a bishop, he was not invited to sit on the council. However, his supporter Eusebius of Nicomedia acted on Arius’s behalf and presented his point of view.
Arius’s position regarding the finite nature of the Son was not popular with the bishops. It became clear, however, that a formal statement concerning the nature of the Son and his relationship to the Father was needed. The real issue at the Council of Nicaea was thus how, and not if, Jesus was divine.
The Deity of Christ was Never In Question A formal statement was eventually put together and signed by the bishops. Those who declined to sign the statement were stripped of their rank of bishop. The few who supported Arius insisted that only language found in Scripture should feature in the statement, whereas Arius’s critics insisted that only non-Biblical language was adequate to fully unpack the implications of the language found in the Bible. It was Constantine who eventually suggested that the Father and Son be said to be of the “same substance” (homoousios in Greek). Although Constantine hoped that this statement would keep all parties happy (implying the complete deity of Jesus without going much further), the supporters of Arius insisted that this language suggested that the Father and Son were equal but didn’t explain how this was compatible with the central tenet of monotheism (i.e. the belief in only one deity).
Nonetheless, the Nicaean creed did indeed incorporate this language. It stated,
“We believe in one God, the Father almighty, maker of all things, visible and invisible; And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten from the Father, only-begotten, that is, from the substance of the Father, God from God, light from light, true God from true God, begotten not made, of one substance with the Father, through Whom all things came into being, things in heaven and things on earth, Who because of us men and because of our salvation came down and became incarnate, becoming man, suffered and rose again on the third day, ascended to the heavens, and will come to judge the living and the dead; And in the Holy Spirit. But as for those who say, ‘There was when He was not, and, Before being born He was not, and that He came into existence out of nothing, or who assert that the Son of God is from a different hypostasis or substance, or is created, or is subject to alteration or change — these the Catholic Church anathematizes.”
Aryanism Denounced by not Defeated
With just two exceptions (Secundus of Ptolemais and Theonas of Marmarcia), the creed was signed by all the bishops, numbering more than 300. Arius’s supporters had been overwhelmingly defeated.
Arius’s supporters, however, managed to find some wiggle room. A single letter “i” (iota), changes the meaning of homo (“same”) to “like” (homoi). The latter could be exploited by Arius and his followers to describe a created Christ. Moreover, it was argued, the creed could be interpreted as supporting Sabellianism, an ancient heresy which fails to discriminate between persons of the godhead. It was this in-house squabbling between bishops that ultimately led to the Council of Constantinople in 381.
Unity, But at What Cost?
A company of bishops started to campaign for the formal re-instatement of Arius as a presbyter in Alexandria. Constantine yielded to their petition and, in 332, re-instated Arius as a presbyter. Athenasius, who had recently succeeded his mentor Alexander as bishop of Alexandria, was instructed to accept Arius into the church once again. Needless to say, Athenasius did not comply with this order. The consequence was exile. Constantine had little interest in the precision of his theology — rather, it was the struggle for imperial unity that was his motivation.
In conclusion, although popular misconceptions about the Council of Nicaea are rampant, the idea that the Council of Nicaea determined which books comprised the New Testament or that it invented the deity of Christ to comply with the demands of Constantine are myths. Indeed, correct theology was of little concern to Constantine, who cared much more about imperial unity. Christians must make a serious effort to study and learn church history, so that when we encounter such claims in the media and in our personal evangelism, we may know how to present an accurate account of our history.
Recommended Resources:
How Can Jesus be the Only Way? Mp4, Mp3, and DVD by Frank Turek
Why We Know the New Testament Writers Told the Truth by Frank Turek (mp4 Download)
The Top Ten Reasons We Know the NT Writers Told the Truth mp3 by Frank Turek
Dr. Jonathan McLatchie is a Christian writer, international speaker, and debater. He holds a Bachelor’s degree (with Honors) in forensic biology, a Masters’s (M.Res) degree in evolutionary biology, a second Master’s degree in medical and molecular bioscience, and a Ph.D. in evolutionary biology. Currently, he is an assistant professor of biology at Sattler College in Boston, Massachusetts. Dr. McLatchie is a contributor to various apologetics websites and is the founder of the Apologetics Academy (Apologetics-Academy.org), a ministry that seeks to equip and train Christians to persuasively defend the faith through regular online webinars, as well as assist Christians who are wrestling with doubts. Dr. McLatchie has participated in more than thirty moderated debates around the world with representatives of atheism, Islam, and other alternative worldview perspectives. He has spoken internationally in Europe, North America, and South Africa promoting an intelligent, reflective, and evidence-based Christian faith.
Christmas is upon us again—the season of twinkling lights, cheerful songs, endless shopping, and, yes, Santa with his elves performing acrobatics on our bookshelves. The world, predictably, is consumed with the “season” itself, offering little more than cheap sentiment wrapped in tinsel and marketed as meaning. It’s all a colossal distraction—lulling millions into a superficial celebration devoid of substance.
But let’s not get too smug, brethren, because even within the Church, the temptation to sentimentalize Christmas is alive and well. We exchange gifts, gather with family, and toss out vague notions of “goodwill toward men,” patting ourselves on the back for embracing the “Christmas spirit”—whatever that hollow phrase means. And while these things might have their place, they often drown out the one thing that actually matters: the gospel of Jesus Christ.
Wayne Allyn Root speaks on Real America’s Voice. (Real America’s Voice / Rumble screen shot)
Wayne Allyn Root with the most important stories in America: Why Barack Obama is a criminal, guilty of treason, and responsible for everything going bad in America today… the open borders disaster continues… more stories about the deadly, poisonous Covid vaccine… and proof positive the 2020 election was stolen, as were the 2022 midterms… and 2024 too – in House & Senate races.
Watch Wayne’s “America’s Top Ten Countdown” with his World-Famous “Final Four” airing every Friday at 10pm ET and Saturday at Noon ET on Real America’s Voice TV Network. Also watch Wayne’s new nightly show, “The ROOT Reaction” every night at 10 PM ET on Real America’s Voice TV.
“The bosom of America is open to receive not only the Opulent and respectable Stranger, but the oppressed and persecuted of all Nations and Religions; whom we shall welcome to a participation of all our rights and privileges, if by decency and propriety of conduct they appear to merit the enjoyment.” —George Washington (1783)
Douglas Andrews, Thomas Gallatin, & Jordan Candler
Justice
Jury rules Daniel Penny not guilty: Common sense prevailed just minutes ago, as the jury in the case of New York City subway hero Daniel Penny declared him not guilty on the remaining charge of criminally negligent homicide after having deadlocked last week on the most serious charge of second-degree manslaughter, which could’ve put him behind bars for 15 years. Penny’s attorneys wanted the judge to declare a mistrial, but the judge instead urged the jury to consider that lesser charge, which would’ve carried a sentence of up to four years. This lesser charge was a diabolical attempt to coerce a weary jury into considering a “compromise” charge after having rejected the gross overcharge of second-degree manslaughter — and we have woke Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg to thank for what the New York Post editorial board called an “obscene” request. Lest you think Bragg is the worst of it, get a load of what the founder of New York’s Black Lives Matter chapter, Hawk Newsome, had to say about the dismissal of the most serious charge: “Today, white supremacy got another victory. Today, the KKK, the klansmen, the evil in America got another victory.” We hope we’re wrong, but we suspect we’ll hear more racial rabble-rousing in the hours and days ahead.
Satire: Daniel Penny judge tells jury to go back and deliberate again until they come back with the correct verdict (Babylon Bee)
Foreign Policy
Regime change in Syria: Bashar al-Assad fled Syria over the weekend as rebel troops entered the capital city of Damascus. It was a stunning and rapid collapse of the dictator’s regime in the more than decade-long civil war. Assad’s government quickly crumbled after the unexpected fall of Aleppo, Syria’s second-largest city, to rebel forces last week. His exit marks the end of the brutal 50-year reign of his family dating back to 1971, when Hafez al-Assad, Bashar’s father, took control of the country. Assad has fled to Russia, where Vladimir Putin, who has long provided support for the dictator, is giving him and his family asylum “on humanitarian grounds” — which Assad afforded to few Syrians. “At long last, the Assad regime has fallen,” Joe Biden said. “This regime brutalized, tortured, and killed literally hundreds of thousands of innocent Syrians.” Donald Trump also weighed in, saying the U.S. “SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT,” while also turning his attention to Russia and Ukraine, calling for “an immediate ceasefire and negotiations” there too. His coming presidency certainly offers an opportunity for peace.
Government & Politics
Trump vows to pardon J6 rioters on day one (Just the News)
Trump names Alina Habba as White House counselor (Just the News)
Tim Walz says he and Kamala lost because Americans didn’t want a “more positive message” (Not the Bee)
Biden’s historic disappointment: A new poll belies the laughable claim among some high-profile Democrats that Joe Biden is among our nation’s most achieved and admirable presidents. In fact, the survey from J.L. Partners found that U.S. voters relegate Biden to the bottom of the presidential rankings spanning the last 55 years, during which nine presidents were elected. According to The Washington Times’s Valerie Richardson, “About 14% of voters polled ranked Mr. Biden in the top two, while 44% placed him in the bottom two for a net score of negative 30, below [Richard] Nixon, who scored negative 25.” So much for being lionized as George Washington reincarnate.
Blackburn rolls out DOGE legislation: The government efficiency efforts of Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy were given a boost last week as Tennessee Republican Senator Marsha Blackburn announced that she would introduce a package of bills in support of the newly created Department of Government Efficiency. DOGE, it seems, has gotten Washington’s attention. Of Blackburn’s bills, Fox News reports, “They would seek to move federal agencies out of Washington, D.C., freeze federal hiring and salaries for one year, and get federal workers back in the office.” What’s not to like? Perhaps more important, though, is that DOGE has already gotten at least a modicum of bipartisan support. Florida Democrat Congressman Jared Moskowitz has joined the House’s GOP-led caucus, and Musk has expressed his eagerness to have Moskowitz and other Democrats on board. It’s long, long overdue, but it appears that government efficiency is an idea whose time has finally come.
Revisiting an ominous climate-change arrest: Back in March, the Biden-Harris administration’s Department of “Justice” arrested a man named Michael Hart on charges related to “smuggling potent greenhouse gases.” It was a precedent-setting arrest for a decidedly odd “crime,” and the DOJ’s announcement at the time didn’t allay our concerns. “It is illegal to import certain refrigerants into the United States because of their documented and significantly greater contribution to climate change,” said Assistant AG Todd Kim of the DOJ’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “We are committed to enforcing the AIM Act and other laws that seek to prevent environmental harm.” That AIM Act bears watching, and the Biden administration bragged about it last week in a final report on its climate enforcement efforts. As Fox News reports, “The EPA worked to implement the American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act, which requires the agency to reduce hydrofluorocarbons, a synthetic compound commonly used for refrigeration or air conditioning, by 85% by 2036.” On the bright side, we suspect Donald Trump’s EPA nominee, former New York Republican Congressman Lee Zeldin, might have something to say about the Environmental Prison Agency’s thuggishness going forward.
Economy
Powell preserved: Jerome Powell is poised to remain at the helm of the Federal Reserve. Powell, you’ll recall, waited a painfully long time to hike interest rates during the explosive inflation that resulted from Bidenomics, further inflaming the situation. Nevertheless, Donald Trump appointed Powell in 2018, and the president-elect says that when he reenters the Oval Office in January, Powell will remain chair of the Fed. Part of the calculation may have to do with the fact that Powell’s term is up in 2026. Moreover, according to Reuters, “Last month, Powell said he would refuse to leave office early if Trump tried to oust him, arguing that removing him, or any of the other Fed governors, ahead of the end of their terms is ‘not permitted under the law.’” Either way, it’s a de-escalation. The question is how long that will last.
National Security
Court upholds TikTok ban: A federal appeals court ruled Friday that Chinese Communist spyware can indeed be banned in the U.S. due to concerns about national security. The commonsense decision, handed down by a three-judge panel, thus upholds a federal law requiring that TikTok separate itself from its Chinese ownership if it wants to keep serving up addictive content to Americans. The DC Circuit “rejected arguments by TikTok and several of its star users that the ban was an unconstitutional infringement on free speech,” The Wall Street Journal reports. Judge Douglas Ginsburg wrote, “The First Amendment exists to protect free speech in the United States. Here the Government acted solely to protect that freedom from a foreign adversary nation and to limit that adversary’s ability to gather data on people in the United States.” There are indeed First Amendment considerations here, but as the Journal’s editorial board rightly put it, “The Constitution is not a suicide pact, as the saying goes, and the First Amendment is not a license for foreign adversaries to propagandize America’s youth.”
Culture
A realtor’s free speech and religion are under assault: Can one’s political beliefs limit one’s career opportunities? It certainly seems so, if the ordeal of a Virginia realtor is any indication. As The Christian Post reports, “Wilson Fauber, a Staunton, Virginia-based realtor with a career spanning four decades, appeared before the Virginia Association of Realtors on Wednesday in a hearing to determine whether he violated the National Association of Realtors’ Standard of Practice 10-5.” For those not familiar with the standards governing the publicly expressed opinions of property sellers, this “standard” was adopted in 2020. It says realtors “must not use harassing speech, hate speech, epithets, or slurs based on race, color, religion, sex disability, familial status, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity.” Fauber’s thought crime? Apparently, he posted his support for the traditional biblical view of marriage on social media … in 2015. Said Fauber’s attorney, Michael Sylvester, “He loves everyone. He serves everyone. He doesn’t hate anyone, he doesn’t discriminate against anyone, but he stands with the Word of God.”
Supreme Court justices take heat for using male pronouns to address trans-identified female ACLU lawyer (Christian Post)
It seems that Donald Trump plans to tackle one element of the immigration crisis with a carrot and a stick.
In an interview with NBC’s Kristen Welker that was released yesterday, President-elect Trump discussed immigration at length. “You have no choice” but to deport all illegals, he said, albeit with other work to be done to figure out all the components — especially when it comes to kids.
For that, he has a two-pronged approach.
Step one: Work with Congress to craft a legislative deal for the so-called “Dreamers,” clever branding for the kids who were brought here illegally by their parents or someone else and who think of America as their only home. They are covered under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals, or DACA. According to Newsweek, “DACA applicants, also commonly known as dreamers, must have entered the United States before turning 16, lived in the country continuously since June 15, 2007, completed high school or obtained a GED, and have no prior convictions.”
There’s widespread sympathy for this group, again thanks to the Democrats’ marketing campaign on their behalf. Who could be against letting “Dreamers” stay?
“We have to do something about the Dreamers because these are people that have been brought here at a very young age, and many of these are middle-aged people now, they don’t even speak the language of their country,” Trump said. “I will work with the Democrats on a plan.”
On numerous occasions during his presidency, Barack Obama rightly asserted that he had no power to create legal status for this group in the face of deliberate inaction by Congress. Rather than work with Republicans, he did it on his own anyway.
Trump undid Obama’s lawless decision, only to be immediately sued by Democrats. It has been tied up in court for years, so here we are, a decade later, with an immigration crisis that dwarfs anything Obama conceived of.
Step two: Eliminate birthright citizenship. As we have argued previously, birthright citizenship is a clear constitutional violation. Heritage Foundation scholar Hans von Spakovsky calls it a “fundamental misunderstanding of the 14th Amendment.
The 14th Amendment states, “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” Its authors would never have conceived of our modern reality where someone crosses the border illegally only to have a child and win citizenship for that child based on nothing other than the location of his or her birth.
Trump called it “ridiculous.” Indeed, it is, and this flagrantly lawless practice has existed for far too long. “We have to end it,” he said.
He’s right, but that’s going to be a lot easier said than done, in part because even he seems to be under the mistaken impression that it’s what the 14th Amendment says.
The Supreme Court ruled in 1898’s U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark that a child born to Chinese immigrants was a citizen. The catch is that his parents were legal permanent residents, but in practice, that distinction has become irrelevant.
Regarding illegal immigration, there are those pesky words in the 14th Amendment: “subject to the jurisdiction thereof.” A person who illegally crossed our border is only subject to American jurisdiction in the sense that deportation is the legal consequence of their illegal crossing. Rewarding illegal behavior with immediate citizenship for any lawbreaker’s child is insane, not least because it incentivizes illegal behavior.
That’s why what started as a very small group of people has ballooned to perhaps millions of “anchor babies.” Once a baby is born and granted citizenship, he or she becomes an “anchor” for other family members to stay.
Trump understands this, saying in a campaign video, “My policy will choke off a major incentive for continued illegal immigration, deter more migrants from coming, and encourage many of the aliens Joe Biden has unlawfully let into our country to go back to their home countries.”
To be clear, virtually no one is suggesting that citizenship be revoked from people who were granted it, however dubiously. Going forward, though, it must stop.
Unfortunately, that is nowhere near a majority opinion. Trump promises to craft an executive order to stop it, but it will immediately be challenged. Similar to the idea that possession is nine-tenths of the law, conferring birthright citizenship on babies born here to illegal alien parents has been happening for so many years that far too few Americans even question it. Democrats demand it and smear anyone who objects as a heartless ghoul.
That legal challenge is part of Trump’s strategy, hoping that the Supreme Court will set things right.
To that point, the mainstream media often trot out things like this from The Wall Street Journal’s new pages: “Many constitutional scholars and civil-rights groups have said a change to birthright citizenship can’t be done through executive action and would require amending the Constitution — a rare and difficult process.” Our contention, however, is that it does not require a constitutional amendment to interpret an already existing amendment correctly. Whether the courts get it right is another matter, especially given Chief Justice John Roberts’s preference for precedent.
Mark Krikorian, executive director for the Center for Immigration Studies, isn’t optimistic, saying, “I think [the Supreme Court will] probably uphold the current interpretation of the 14th Amendment.”
Ultimately, what Trump has laid out is a sound approach to the problem. We must deal with those who are here in satisfactory ways and disincentivize future illegal crossings.
UnitedHealthcare CEO Shooting Timeline — The unidentified man suspected of gunning down Brian Thompson remains at large, with police tracking his movements.
Fired for Honesty and Competence — Warren Smith discusses his unexpected virality after Elon Musk retweeted a video of him teaching critical thinking and how it eventually led to his firing.
“Word to the wise: Republican primary voters will not look kindly on Republican senators who supported Lloyd Austin but won’t support Pete Hegseth.” —Michael Knowles
“Thankfully, Donald Trump didn’t fall for the left’s smear tactics. He stood with Brett Kavanaugh in the middle of that firestorm. And he’s standing with Pete Hegseth now.” —Gary Bauer
“Democrats and other pestilential nudnicks are still trying to solve the impenetrable mystery of how their presidential candidate lost to someone as horrible as they pretended Donald Trump was.” —Andrew Klavan
Belly Laugh of the Day
“Since Trump’s victory half the country is excited and the other half is still at home in the fetal position.” —Lewis Black
Leftmedia Lob
“Joe Biden has played by all the rules that people told him you need to play by.” —MSBNC’s Symone Sanders-Townsend
“Flawless”
“[Harris] was the best position of all the possible people on our side. She had been sitting vice president for 3 ½ years and was also part of the campaign and was ready to jump in. … I would posit she ran a pretty flawless campaign, and she did all the steps that [were] required to be successful. And I think — obviously, we did not win, but I do think we hit all the marks.” —Harris Chief of Staff Sheila Nix
Village Idiot
“[Hunter Biden is] one of the finest people I know.” —actor Sean Penn, who must be hanging with entry-level lowlifes
For the Record
“I have stopped wars with tariffs by saying, ‘You guys want to fight, it’s great. But both of you are going to pay tariffs to the United States at 100%.’” Donald Trump
“Weapons of war do in fact belong in the hands of civilians.” —Joel Berry
“It doesn’t require a Ph.D. in biology or embryology to grasp that human beings (and any number of species of animals) have precisely two possible chromosomal structures: XX for ‘female,’ and XY for ‘male.’” —Josh Hammer
“Vetting the records of cabinet nominees is a legitimate journalistic function. It is not a legitimate journalistic function to kill a nomination based on hit pieces stuffed with anonymous sources.” —Tim Graham
“The current crew, not their proposed Trump replacements, prompted the sick and tired American people to demand different people. Voters want novel approaches to reform a government that they not only no longer trust but also now deeply fear.” —Victor Davis Hanson
“Journalists should be allowed to do journalism, which sometimes includes reporting that reveals inconvenient truths for propagandists.” —Ana Kasparian
Inquiring Minds Want to Know
“President Biden is pledging our billions to rebuild Syria. What about Hawaii, North Carolina and Tennessee?” —Congressman Tim Burchett
Shot/Chaser
“As we all turn to the question of what comes next, the United States will work with our partners and the stakeholders in Syria to help them seize an opportunity to manage the risk.” —Joe Biden
“Syria is a mess, but is not our friend, and THE UNITED STATES SHOULD HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH IT. THIS IS NOT OUR FIGHT. LET IT PLAY OUT. DO NOT GET INVOLVED!” —Donald Trump
And Last…
“Somehow I can’t imagine Whoopi Goldberg and the other bitter ladies on ‘The View’ or Joy Reid looking forward to doing their show every day.” —Michael Reagan
“The author is very anti-Christian, doesn’t understand Christianity, and has an overriding motive to demonize Christians, even if he has to invent problems as if he were a quack fortune teller.”
(Mary Dowling) A Politico article about Pete Hegseth sees him as too “aggressively Christian.” Author Jasper Craven called him “Joe Rogan of conservative military media.” The entire article reeks of anti-Christian bigotry, and this author is doing it openly. He’ll likely get rewarded for it.
The author doesn’t like a pastor Hegseth likes – he’s too Christian. The tattoos, one of the Jerusalem Cross and the other “Deus Vult” or “God wills it” somehow say he hates Muslims. Deus Vult is allegedly terrible because it dates back to the Crusades. In one of his books, he wrote about the militants fighting for God in the Middle East and said he understood them and their desire to fight for something more important than self. The author found that distasteful. View article →
[Original airdate: 8/23/24] Mary welcomes Britt Gillette today of End Times Bible Prophecy to help us catch up on the latest news on the economy and the global reverberations in a world that is run by technocrats. Around a year ago we heard of several major banks failing, followed by complete silence from the media. In the same way, August 5 of this year saw Japan’s largest market drop in their history, with weak knees ensuing around the world, all on the rumour that the US is “in a recession”. Followed by crickets, August 6. What is going on? Does anyone know? Worse yet is being kept in the dark by all parties, especially banksters. Of course, public panic is not something they wish to ignite but at some point, the elite plan for a global economy will become perfectly clear. Until then, we have guests like Britt Gillette to clue us in. You can also find his articles on his Substack page. His books can be found here. An informative hour.
JERUSALEM, Israel – One of the Middle East’s most brutal and long-lasting dictatorships, the Assad regime in Syria, has fallen.
Syria’s streets were filled with jubilation as people celebrated the overthrow of President Bashar al-Assad. He and his father Hafez had ruled Syria with an iron fist for more than five decades.
President Joe Biden declared, “This regime brutalized and tortured and killed literally hundreds of thousands of innocent Syrians.”
The Arab state should aim for a good relationship with Moscow based on mutual respect and interests, the commission’s president, Anas Al-Abdah, has told RT
The Syrian Arab Republic should maintain a good relationship with Russia based on mutual respect and interests, Anas Al-Abdah, the president of the Syrian Negotiation Commission (SNC), told RT International on Monday.
The SNC was founded in 2015 under the mandate of the UN to supervise negotiations between Damascus and the opposition. The commission is made up of Syrian opposition forces.
On Sunday, various opposition groups, including Hayat Tahrir-al-Sham jihadists and US-backed Free Syrian Army fighters, seized control of Damascus following a swift advance across the country. The Syrian Army retreated and former President Bashar Assad and his family have been granted asylum in Russia.
Asked by RT about the future of Syria-Russia relations, Al-Abdah said: “We should aim for good relations with Russia based on the mutual interest of Russian people and Syrian people, the Russian state and the Syrian state.”
That means that the two countries’ mutual future “should be paramount in determining the relations that will happen in the future,” according to the politician, who served as president of the Syrian Interim Government from 2019 to 2021.
“I believe this is very important,” Al-Abdah said, adding that “Syria needs all the help in this world.”
He further pointed out that more than half of the country’s population is currently displaced or are refugees, 80% of the western city of Homs is destroyed, and much of the country’s infrastructure ruined.
“We are in the business of maximizing the number of our friends and minimizing the number of our enemies,” Al-Abdah stated, emphasizing that “Russia is a very important player in this world regionally and internationally.”
There are many avenues for the two nations to “explore” in order to maintain a good relationship and even improve it, the SNC head concluded.
The militant groups that overthrew Assad’s government in Syria have pledged to respect Russia’s military installations and diplomatic missions in the country, a Kremlin source told TASS on Sunday.
Russian military forces are present in Syria at Khmeimim Air base and a logistics support center in Tartus, located in the western part of the country along the Mediterranean coast. In 2017, Moscow and Damascus agreed to station Russian troops at these bases for a period of 49 years.
Commenting on the recent developments in Syria, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Monday they came as a surprise to the world, including Russia. Peskov noted that it will take time before Moscow can engage in “serious conversations with those who hold power.”
Tehran will have to re-evaluate its role in the region and adapt its foreign policy to reflect contemporary realities
By Farhad Ibragimov – expert, lecturer at the Faculty of Economics at RUDN University, visiting lecturer at the Institute of Social Sciences of the Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration
Syria’s longtime president, Bashar Assad, has stepped down as the country’s leader, marking the end of an era that shaped not only the fate of his nation but also the broader geopolitical landscape of the Middle East. This event is symbolic not only for the Syrian people, but for the entire region and the international community at large, since it opens a new chapter in the history of a country with an incredibly rich and ancient culture.
Syria, a land of ancient civilizations, has faced immense challenges over the past decade: war, destruction, millions of displaced people, economic instability, and the infiltration of terrorist groups. The country has become a battleground for various global and regional powers. Assad’s resignation could be a pivotal moment, potentially allowing Syria to break free from its cycle of conflict and begin a journey toward a new future.
This event will certainly be interpreted in different ways – for some, it may symbolize long-awaited reform and reconciliation, while for others, it could herald new uncertainties. Ultimately, the outcome will depend on whether the Syrian people and politicians make use of this historic opportunity. In any case, negotiations, reforms, and the search for a new governance model to unite society all lie ahead.
One thing remains certain, however: Syria’s rich history cannot be forgotten. The transformations unfolding before our eyes could signify the dawn of a new era, where, drawing on lessons from the past yet fueled by hope for the future, Syria finds stability and prosperity.
Assad’s resignation also represents a significant setback for Iran’s foreign policy ambitions. For Tehran, Syria has been a crucial link in its ‘Axis of Resistance’ – a network of alliances and proxy forces designed to counter Western influence and increase Iran’s role in the Middle East. However, Assad’s resignation is perceived in Tehran as a sign that this strategy – and, in fact, Iran’s influence in the entire region – has been significantly weakened.
Syria has been Iran’s strategic ally for decades, serving as a vital corridor for weapon supplies and support for Hezbollah in Lebanon, and a political platform for consolidating an anti-Western and anti-Israeli front. Since the start of the Syrian civil war in 2011, Iran has invested significant resources in backing Bashar Assad, providing military supplies and economic assistance, and dispatching military experts and Shiite forces to Syria. This alliance has been seen as the backbone of the Axis of Resistance.
However, Assad’s resignation fundamentally changes the balance of power. Firstly, the new political parties in Syria are likely to distance themselves from Iran in order to improve relations with the West, other Arab nations, and Türkiye. Secondly, Assad’s departure undermines Iran’s image as a guarantor of stability for its allies. Additionally, the weakening of Iran’s influence in Syria complicates its position in the entire region. Hezbollah, which has relied heavily on Syrian support, is now a lot more vulnerable. And, confident that Tehran no longer has considerable control over the region, Israel may increase pressure on Iranian infrastructure in Syria.
For Iran, the loss of Syria as a steadfast ally is a strategic failure that weakens its regional standing and may result in potentially strained relations with neighboring countries that increasingly view Iran as a source of instability rather than a unifying force.
Amid the turmoil in Syria, Iranian officials have made a considerable number of statements in recent days. Notably, Tehran has leveled accusations against the Ukrainian government. Ibrahim Rezaei, the spokesperson for the National Security and Foreign Policy Committee of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, claimed that Ukraine is supporting armed opposition groups in Syria by supplying them with drones. He noted that terrorists in Syria are better equipped than in the past because of drones supplied by the Ukrainian government.
Rezaei asserted that the Ukrainian government must be held accountable for this situation. While Kiev has yet to respond to these allegations, the intense anti-Iranian rhetoric coming from certain media outlets closely affiliated with Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky suggests that there may be some truth to Iran’s claims.
In September, major Turkish media sources reported that Ukraine’s Main Directorate of Intelligence (HUR) had established contact with Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS) jihadists. The media was surprised that Ukraine was willing to engage in dialogue with rebels engaged in terrorist activities against civilians. In support of this claim, the media presented photographic evidence showing a Ukrainian HUR official conversing with an HTS agent.
Turkish journalists conducted a high-profile investigation that found evidence of meetings between representatives of Ukraine’s HUR and HTS militants in Türkiye. According to the investigation, these encounters took place over the past several months in southeastern Türkiye, close to the Syrian border.
The journalists said the discussions may have focused on mutual interests in destabilizing Iran’s position in the region and increasing military activity against Assad’s forces. The involvement of HTS, which is labeled a terrorist organization by Türkiye, Russia, and other countries, has raised particular concern among the Turkish public.
The investigation was based on eyewitness accounts, information about rented venues for meetings, and alleged routes taken by the participants. Turkish analysts emphasized that, if the claims were verified, it could jeopardize Ankara’s relations with Kiev. While the Ukrainian side did not provide an official response to these allegations at the time, the reports sparked a negative reaction among the Turkish public and politicians. Coincidentally, a few days after the articles appeared in the Turkish press, they were removed from publication.
Iran also claimed to possess credible evidence indicating that representatives of the Kiev regime had trained HTS militants to operate drones and were involved in illegal arms trade. Tehran asserted that the HUR not only offered technical support to the militants but also trained them in the use of drones for combat purposes.
Furthermore, Iranian sources alleged that Ukraine had acted as a mediator in supplying weapons to the militant group through illicit channels. According to Iranian politicians, these actions were aimed at destabilizing the situation in Syria and undermining Iran’s regional influence. As of now, Kiev has not officially commented on these accusations. Iranian experts note that the claims were backed by technical details, such as drone operation methods and arms supply routes.
Tensions between Tehran and Kiev have been high lately, especially following Kiev’s unfounded accusations against Iran regarding drone supplies to Russia.
On Sunday evening, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Iran Abbas Araghchi made several statements about the situation in Syria. He described the events there as an “American-Zionist plan to create problems for the Axis of Resistance,” adding that Iran’s national security interests require it to confront ISIS in Syria.
Araghchi emphasized that Qassem Soleimani, the late commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), was responsible for defeating ISIS, and Iran played a vital role in combating the terrorist group at the request of the Iraqi and Syrian governments. “If we hadn’t fought ISIS in Iraq and Syria, we would have had to fight it within Iran’s borders,” he said.
Araghchi also mentioned that Tehran had urged the Syrian government to engage in meaningful dialogue with the opposition. During his last meeting with Assad, he discussed the morale of the army and expressed frustration over the government’s hesitance to implement necessary reforms. According to Araghchi, Iran has always understood that “the United States and Israel were attempting to plunge Iran into successive crises.” He also noted Syria’s crucial role in supporting the Palestinians and the Axis of Resistance.
In conclusion, Araghchi asserted that Iran had not interfered in Syrian affairs and has consistently advised the Syrian government to seek political and peaceful solutions through dialogue with the opposition.
Currently, Iran faces a serious challenge in maintaining its influence in Syria. Tehran hopes to preserve its strategic relations with Damascus, even if the opposition comes to power. However, Iranian officials are skeptical about the new Syrian authorities, who might reconsider Syria’s traditionally close ties with Iran. For decades, Syria has been a key player in Iran’s Middle East strategy, serving as an important ally in the Axis of Resistance. Through Syria, Iran has supported Hezbollah in Lebanon and pursued its geopolitical ambitions. However, the rise to power of the opposition forces – many of them backed by the West, Türkiye, and the Gulf monarchies – could jeopardize this cooperation model.
Iranian leaders emphasize their commitment to maintaining diplomatic and economic ties with the new administration in Damascus. However, there are growing concerns in Tehran that the new Syrian authorities, eager to restore relations with the Arab nations and the West, may distance themselves from Iran. Furthermore, Iranian officials fear that certain opposition groups could openly oppose the presence of Iranian forces and the country’s overall influence, which would undermine Iran’s position in the region.
These doubts are fueled by the fact that many key players within the Syrian opposition have strong ties to the US, Saudi Arabia, and Türkiye – countries that have traditionally resisted Iranian influence. Tehran does not rule out the possibility that, as the opposition comes to power, Syria could become a staging ground for containing Iran, which would complicate the situation further.
Nonetheless, Iran plans to leverage its economic, cultural, and religious ties to strengthen its foothold in Syria. Tehran may offer new forms of cooperation focused on infrastructure development and post-conflict reconstruction to maintain its influence. However, Iranian experts believe that the new Syrian leadership will be cautious about cooperating with Iran, and will aim to avoid dependency on any single power.
The future of Iran-Syria relations in this new reality remains uncertain. Tehran will need to adapt to the shifting geopolitical dynamics and seek ways to preserve its influence, especially as traditional means of leverage may prove insufficient.
The dawn of a new era for Syria is bound to impact Middle Eastern geopolitics at large, including Iran’s foreign policy. With its deep historical, religious, and cultural ties to Syria, Tehran needs to recalibrate its strategy to align with the changing reality. This moment marks the beginning of a new chapter in Iran’s long-standing foreign policy history, which has always been closely tied to regional events. Having played a prominent role in the Syrian conflict, Iran now finds itself at a crossroads: it must either reconsider its influence in Syria or risk losing this strategic ally.
The situation in Syria is a turning point for the country, and it is compelling Iran to reassess its traditional approaches to foreign policy. First and foremost, Tehran must explore new tools and means of influence, including economic partnerships, cultural diplomacy, and assistance in rebuilding the war-torn nation. Additionally, Iran may seek to strengthen ties with other regional allies to offset potential losses. This will require flexibility and a willingness to make compromises.
On the other hand, this new era also opens up opportunities for Iran. The change of power in Syria could offer a chance to establish more balanced relationships, grounded not just in military cooperation but also in mutually beneficial economic projects. Such an approach could bolster Iran’s image as a nation committed to stability in the region, especially in light of increasing pressure from the West and Arab states.
However, this new chapter will also bring challenges. Iran will face competition from other international players like Türkiye, Saudi Arabia, and Western countries, which are all competing for influence in Syria. This means that Tehran must reevaluate its long-term strategy and seek innovative ways to engage with various Syrian political parties.
For Iran, the new era in Syria is both a challenge and an opportunity to redefine its role in the region and adapt its foreign policy to contemporary realities. It is a moment when Iran – with its rich history, diplomatic experience, and geopolitical skills – must demonstrate its resilience and ability to respond to the challenges of the times.
Islamist rebels overthrow the Syrian government of Bashar al-Assad, ending one of the worst dictatorships in the Middle East, leading Syrians to rejoice, although President Biden says some of those rebels have their own grim record of terrorism, and others warn of a potential Islamic state arising, how Israel played a role in al-Assad’s downfall, and Israel takes over the buffer zone with Syria; Chris Mitchell talks about the potential threat rebels pose to Israel, the impact of what’s happening in Syria on Hezbollah and Lebanon, the impact of Iran’s goals in the region, the geopolitical winners and losers, and what’s happening with the Christians in the areas controlled by the rebels; Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy tells CBN News he will be looking for opportunities to end the war when President-elect Trump comes into office; the illegal immigration crisis has taken a terrible toll on border agents, but many are optimistic for the future with Trump’s return to the White House; and a look at the reasons why Bible sales are booming this year.
“So when it came time to deliver his whopping lie at his “Democracy Forum,” did Mr. Smooth suddenly glitch himself? Does the man still have a conscience somewhere in there, a warning voice that told him that smearing his opponents with charges of which his friends and allies are guilty was immoral? Probably not, as Obama went on to make a statement that was frankly ominous.”
(Robert Spencer – PJ Media) No one seems sure who first said it, maybe Joseph Goebbels, but in any case, it’s a tried-and-tested Alinskyite tactic: accuse your enemy of what you’re doing. Barack Obama is a practiced expert at this, and he gave a master class in it on Thursday at his Obama Foundation’s Orwellian-named Democracy Forum.
With some notable and revealing difficulty in getting the words out, Obama accused the Republicans of doing everything that the Democrats have been doing for the past few years: rigging elections, weaponizing the justice system, and trying to ensure that they would remain in power on an indefinite basis. Whatever can be said of Barack Obama, the man certainly has a lot of chutzpah. View article →
“So when it came time to deliver his whopping lie at his “Democracy Forum,” did Mr. Smooth suddenly glitch himself? Does the man still have a conscience somewhere in there, a warning voice that told him that smearing his opponents with charges of which his friends and allies are guilty was immoral? Probably not, as Obama went on to make a statement that was frankly ominous.”
Truth2Freedom's Blog 