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
That we may do the duty of every condition of life, every event of providence, and every relation wherein we stand.
Lord, enable me in a day of prosperity to be joyful, and in a day of adversity to consider, because God has made the one as well as the other; Ecclesiastes 7:14(ESV) to add to my knowledge self-control, and to self-control steadfastness. 2 Peter 1:6(ESV)
Let those who have been called, being slaves, be freedmen of the Lord; and those who have been called, being free, be slaves of Christ. 1 Corinthians 7:22(ESV)
Let all in every relation dwell in unity, Psalm 133:1(ESV) that it may be like the dew of Hermon, which falls on the mountains of Zion. Psalm 133:3(ESV) O that I may dwell together as a joint heir of the grace of life with your people, that my prayers may not be hindered. 1 Peter 3:7(ESV)
Give me grace to honor everyone, to love the brotherhood, to fear God, 1 Peter 2:17(ESV) and to be subject to the governing authorities, Romans 13:1(ESV) not only to avoid God’s wrath but also for the sake of conscience. Romans 13:5(ESV)
Nehemiah 13:1-31 In this week’s studies, we look at Nehemiah’s final reforms when he returned to Jerusalem and served as the governor a second time.
Theme
A Worm in the Big Apple
These problems were dramatically illustrated by what Nehemiah found to be going on at the temple. Eliashib, the high priest (v. 28) with whom he had worked closely during his earlier governorship and whom he had placed in charge of the temple storerooms, had affiliated himself with Tobiah the Ammonite, Nehemiah’s old enemy (vv. 4-5). Later we learn that Eliashib had also given a daughter in marriage to Nehemiah’s other archenemy, Sanballat the Horonite of Samaria (v. 28). Here we are told that he had provided Tobiah with rooms in the temple, putting him in a suite of rooms where the temple articles, tithes and offerings had formerly been stored. Why had Eliashib done it? Probably because, as he would have said, “We are living in a new day. Nehemiah has returned to Babylon. His old style of aggressive leadership was all right in the past, but it is not politically astute for this time. What we need today is compromise, a building of bridges, a handout to old friends.”
We can be sure that Tobiah had been working his side of the alliance too. He would have been maneuvering for entry into the highest leadership positions in the city. He must have been delighted with the splendid arrangements Eliashib made for him. From the temple precincts he had a base from which to ferment intrigue and increase his bad influence. One of the very best sections of the book is what comes next, in my opinion. When Nehemiah got back to Jerusalem and discovered what had been done he wasted not the slightest bit of time either in investigation or negotiation. He simply threw Tobiah and all his possessions out! He dumped his possessions outside the door onto the sidewalk, fumigated the room, and then restored the temple articles. Just like that! Charles Swindoll, who is entertaining on this point, says, “Nehemiah didn’t even want the smell of Tobiah to hang around the building.1
Was Nehemiah angry? He was. He says he was “greatly displeased” (v. 8), and he showed it.
Was he right to be angry? The answer is yes to that too.
Many Christians are uneasy with anger, and some have not hesitated to criticize Nehemiah at this point. They are forgetting a few things. First, Nehemiah’s angry cleansing of the temple is a foretaste of the similar action taken later by Jesus Christ. Jesus was angry, and He was not wrong to be so. Second, although he was displeased with Eliashib and calls what he had done “the evil thing,” Nehemiah is not as outspoken in condemning the evil of these days as God had already been through Malachi. Malachi had said that God was sending a curse on this priesthood (Mal. 2:2). Indeed, his whole prophecy is a denunciation of the evils for which spiritual leaders like Eliashib were responsible.
Third, critics of Nehemiah forget that deep-seated wrongs are seldom corrected except by people who have first become sufficiently angry. The cool, the complacent, the compromisers don’t change anything.
It is possible to be wrongly angry, of course. That is often the case when a wrong only against ourselves is involved. We can be wrong if we do nothing more than get angry. Righteous anger, the kind God approves, always acts to correct the injustice. But wrong anger is not our major problem in today’s Christianity. The bigger problems are compromise and cowardice.
Apparently, Nehemiah did not fear to place his actions before God for judgment, for he says in verse 14, “Remember me in this, O my God, and do not blot out what I have so faithfully done for the house of my God and its services.” We should all be so bold!
1Charles R. Swindoll, Hand me Another Brick (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, 1978), 194.
Study Questions
When Nehemiah returned, what did he discover was going on in the temple?
What did Nehemiah do about this problem? Why was he correct?
Application
Reflection: What is the difference between righteous anger and wrongful anger? Can you think of any examples where the Church displays compromise when it should be working to promote righteousness?
Key Point: Righteous anger, the kind God approves, always acts to correct the injustice. But wrong anger is not our major problem in today’s Christianity. The bigger problems are compromise and cowardice.
In this featured video, philosopher Dr. William Lane Craig shares 5 arguments for God’s existence. They include:
The Contingency Argument
The Kalam Cosmological Argument
The Fine-tuning Argument
The Moral Argument
The Ontological Argument
If you are unfamiliar with these arguments, this video is a great place to start. Dr. Craig methodically works through each of the arguments and uses short animated videos that make the presentation both informative and engaging.
Be sure to watch the Q and A as well!
Which argument do you find most compelling? Please share in the comments below!
*Have you ever felt discouraged and tempted to give up?*
In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus faced the ultimate test—the cup of God’s wrath. While His disciples slept and failed, the Savior prayed, submitted, and triumphed.
Because Jesus was not defeated in the garden, and because He was not ultimately defeated by the cross, He now reigns from the throne.
You can trust Him with your trial.
You can trust Him with your betrayer.
You can trust Him with your darkest hour.
*Want to skip the ads and get straight to the good stuff? Download the G3+ App now and enjoy seamless learning, anytime, anywhere!*
Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, and being made in the likeness of men. Being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. (2:5–8)
In his book Miracles, C. S. Lewis offers some helpful insights for understanding the unfathomable reality of Christ’s incarnation:
In the Christian story God descends to re-ascend. He comes down; down from the heights of absolute being into time and space, down into humanity.… But He goes down to come up again and bring the whole ruined world up with Him. One has the picture of a strong man stooping lower and lower to get himself underneath some great complicated burden. He must stoop in order to lift, he must almost disappear under the load before he incredibly straightens his back and marches off with the whole mass swaying on his shoulders. Or one may think of a diver, first reducing himself to nakedness, then glancing in mid-air, then gone with a splash, vanished, rushing down through green and warm water into black and cold water, down through increasing pressure into the deathlike region of ooze and slime and old decay; then up again, back to colour and light, his lungs almost bursting, till suddenly he breaks surface again, holding in his hand the dripping, precious thing that he went down to recover. He and it are both coloured now that they have come up into the light: down below, where it lay colourless in the dark, he lost his colour too. In this descent and re-ascent everyone will recognise a familiar pattern: a thing written all over the world. It is the pattern of all vegetable life. It must belittle itself into something hard, small and deathlike, it must fall into the ground: thence the new life re-ascends. It is the pattern of all animal generation too. There is descent from the full and perfect organisms into the spermatozoon and ovum, and in the dark womb … the slow ascent to the perfect embryo, to the living, conscious baby, and finally to the adult. So it is also in our moral and emotional life. The first innocent and spontaneous desires have to submit to the deathlike process of control or total denial: but from that there is a re-ascent to fully formed character in which the strength of the original material all operates but in a new way. Death and Re-birth—go down to go up—it is a key principle. Through this bottleneck, this belittlement, the highroad nearly always lies. The doctrine of the Incarnation, if accepted, puts this principle even more emphatically at the centre. The pattern is there in Nature because it was first there in God. All the instances of it which I have mentioned turn out to be but transpositions of the Divine theme into a minor key. I am not now referring simply to the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ. The total pattern, of which they are only the turning point, is the real Death and Re-birth: for certainly no seed ever fell from so fair a tree into so dark and cold a soil as would furnish more than a faint analogy to this huge descent and re-ascension in which God dredged the salt and oozy bottom of Creation. (New York: Macmillan, 1947, 115–17)
The Incarnation is the central miracle of Christianity, the most grand and wonderful of all the things that God has ever done. That miracle of miracles is the theme of Philippians 2:5–8. Some scholars believe this passage was originally a hymn, sung by early Christians to commemorate and celebrate the incarnation of the Son of God. It has been called a Christological gem, a theological diamond that perhaps sparkles brighter than any other in Scripture. In a simple, brief, yet extraordinarily profound way, it describes the condescension of the second Person of the Trinity to be born, to live, and to die in human form to provide redemption for fallen mankind. Yet as profound and unfathomable as this passage is theologically, it is also ethical. As the introductory words (Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus) make clear, it is primarily designed to motivate Christians to live like their Lord and Savior. Paul was not merely describing the Incarnation to reveal its theological truths, magnificent as those are. He presents the supreme, unparalleled example of humility to serve as the most powerful motive to believers’ humility. The Incarnation calls believers to follow Jesus’ incomparable example of humble self-denial, self-giving, self-sacrifice, and selfless love as He lived out the Incarnation in obedient submission to His Father’s will (cf. Luke 2:49; John 3:16–17; 5:30; 12:49; 15:10). Verse 5 is a transition from exhortation to illustration, and the phrase this attitude looks both backward and forward. It looks backward to the principle just given, “Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind regard one another as more important than yourselves; do not merely look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others” (vv. 3–4). It looks forward to the illustration of that principle in Jesus’ perfect fulfillment of it as described in verses 6–8. The goal of believers having this attitude is spiritual unity in the church by their being “of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose” (v. 2). Unity in the church can come only from an attitude of genuine humility, of believers truly regarding others as more important than themselves—the attitude that was supremely manifested in Christ Jesus during His incarnation. The apostle John makes it clear that “the one who says he abides in [Christ] ought himself to walk in the same manner as He walked” (1 John 2:6). Jesus commanded: “Take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls” (Matt. 11:29). Addressing the ethical impact of this passage, Paul Rees writes:
“Don’t forget,” cries Paul, “that in all this wide universe and in all the dim reaches of history there has never been such a demonstration of self-effacing humility as when the Son of God in sheer grace descended to this errant planet! Remember that never—never in a million aeons—would He have done it if He were the kind of Deity who looks ‘only to his own interests’ and closes His eyes to the ‘interests of others’! You must remember, my brethren, that through your union with Him, in living, redemptive experience, this principle and passion by which He was moved must become the principle and passion by which you are moved.” (The Adequate Man: Paul in Philippians [Westwood, N.J.: Revell, 1954], 43)
In yourselves is not directed at the individual believer’s personal virtue, but targets the whole church, which is so susceptible to the division and strife produced by pride and self-exaltation. The whole church must manifest the humility of the Lord and head of the church. One of the most revealing instances of that humility was His washing the disciples’ feet during the Last Supper. The menial task of washing dirty feet was reserved for the lowest servants. Jesus had just been acknowledged as the prophesied Deliverer and Messiah, the “King of Israel,” at His triumphal entry into Jerusalem a few days earlier (John 12:12–15). He was well aware “that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come forth from God and was going back to God” (13:3). Yet in gentle humility He “got up from supper, and laid aside His garments; and taking a towel, He girded Himself. Then He poured water into the basin, and began to wash the disciples’ feet and to wipe them with the towel with which He was girded” (vv. 4–5). This act was especially poignant because the disciples, insensitive to Jesus’ coming suffering, were engaged in wrangling with each other over which of them would be the “greatest” in the Messiah’s kingdom (cf. Luke 22:24). Afterward the Lord asked, “Do you know what I have done to you?” Knowing full well that they did not understand the significance of what He had just done, He did not wait for an answer but continued to explain:
You call Me Teacher and Lord; and you are right, for so I am. If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them. (John 13:12–17)
That demonstration of humility so clearly exemplifies the attitude … which was also in Christ Jesus that it may well be the very one the apostle had in mind when he wrote this passage. It also exemplifies his admonition to the church in Rome that “we who are strong ought to bear the weaknesses of those without strength and not just please ourselves. Each of us is to please his neighbor for his good, to his edification. For even Christ did not please Himself” (Rom. 15:1–3). Accentuating again the inseparable relationship between humility and spiritual unity, he added, “Now may the God who gives perseverance and encouragement grant you to be of the same mind with one another according to Christ Jesus, so that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, accept one another, just as Christ also accepted us to the glory of God” (vv. 5–7). Because Paul consistently followed that principle, he could remind the Corinthians, “I also please all men in all things, not seeking my own profit but the profit of the many,” and then admonish them to “be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ” (1 Cor. 10:33–11:1; cf. 2 Cor. 8:7–9). Similarly, he reminded the Thessalonians that “our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction; just as you know what kind of men we proved to be among you for your sake,” offering the encouraging commendation that “you also became imitators of us and of the Lord, … so that you became an example to all the believers in Macedonia and in Achaia” (1 Thess. 1:5–7). The way of humility is not the way of the world. It is especially not the choice of its honored leaders, who are expected to take the very best of everything for themselves. They are accorded the highest places of honor and respect, and they are expected to be served rather than to serve. Jesus described the scribes and Pharisees as men who
tie up heavy burdens and lay them on men’s shoulders, but they themselves are unwilling to move them with so much as a finger. But they do all their deeds to be noticed by men; for they broaden their phylacteries and lengthen the tassels of their garments. They love the place of honor at banquets and the chief seats in the synagogues, and respectful greetings in the market places, and being called Rabbi by men. (Matt. 23:4–7; cf. 20:25–28 for a similar Gentile attitude)
Most Jews of Jesus’ day, including the Twelve for most of His ministry, expected the Messiah to come as a conquering, reigning, and highly honored deliverer. Like those Jews, if Christians were somehow by themselves to imagine a plan for the incarnation of God’s Son, they doubtless would expect Him to be born into a prominent family and attend the finest schools. He would be surrounded by the brightest minds and most capable helpers and live in regal splendor, with countless assistants to do His bidding and satisfy His every need and want. He would have constant protection from physical danger and from destructive criticism. And He would deserve it all. But that was not God’s way. His only begotten Son was born into the humblest of families in the humblest of places. In the eyes of those around Him, including His own family and friends, He lived an unexceptional life. The twelve men He chose to be His apostles were, with the possible exception of Matthew, common men with little education, skills, or position. He submitted to every humiliation and indignity from His enemies and refused to defend Himself. The highest of all became the lowest of all. Obviously, believers cannot follow the example of Christ’s deity, incarnation, moral and spiritual perfection, miracles, or redemptive work. But they are commanded to follow His example of humility as expressed in His incarnation. In marked contrast to the glory-loving scribes and Pharisees, Jesus commanded His followers not to
be called Rabbi; for One is your Teacher, and you are all brothers. Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. Do not be called leaders; for One is your Leader, that is, Christ. But the greatest among you shall be your servant. Whoever exalts himself shall be humbled; and whoever humbles himself shall be exalted. (Matt. 23:8–12)
As he expounded Jesus’ ethically flawless example of humility, Paul also chronicled theologically the descent of the Son of God from heaven to earth, describing the exalted position that He left, then presenting a series of downward steps from that glory and honor to ever-increasing indignity. These parallel categories will be dealt with together in regard to each of the descending stages mentioned in this passage.
THE EXALTED POSITION JESUS LEFT
although He existed in the form of God, (2:6a)
Jesus’ humiliating step downward was from the exalted position seen in the truth that He existed in the form of God. Both before, during, and after His incarnation, He was, by His very nature, fully and eternally God. Existed translates a present active participle of the compound verb huparchō, which is formed from hupo (“under”) and archē (“beginning”) and denotes the continuance of a previous state or existence. It stresses the essence of a person’s nature, that which is absolutely unalterable, inalienable, and unchangeable. William Barclay comments that the verb refers to “that part of a [person] which, in any circumstances, remains the same” (The Letters to the Philippians, Colossians, and Thessalonians. Rev. ed. [Louisville, Ky.: Westminster, 1975], 35). Jesus Christ eternally and immutably existed, and will forever continue to exist, in the form of God. Morphē (form) refers to the outward manifestation of an inner reality. The idea is that, before the Incarnation, from all eternity past, Jesus preexisted in the divine form of God, equal with God the Father in every way. By His very nature and innate being, Jesus Christ is, always has been, and will forever be fully divine. The Greek word schēma is also often translated “form,” but the meaning is quite different from that of morphē. As Barclay points out,
Morphē is the essential form which never alters; schēma is the outward form which changes from time to time and from circumstance to circumstance. For instance, the essential morphē of any human being is humanity and this never changes; but his schēma is continually changing. A baby, a child, a boy, a youth, a man of middle age, an old man always have the morphē of humanity, but the outward schēma changes all the time. (Philippians, 35–36)
To the Colossians, Paul expressed the truth of Christ’s deity in these words: “He [Jesus Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn of all creation” (Col. 1:15). Speaking of Christ, John opened his gospel with the declaration: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.… And the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, and we saw His glory, glory as of the only begotten from the Father, full of grace and truth” (John 1:1–2, 14). Jesus said of Himself, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was born, I am” (John 8:58), and later prayed, “Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was.… Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world” (17:5, 24). The writer of Hebrews reminds us that God “in these last days has spoken to us in His Son, whom He appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the world. And He is the radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature, and upholds all things by the word of His power” (Heb. 1:2–3). In light of the profound reality of Jesus’ full and uncompromised deity, His incarnation was the most profound possible humiliation. For Him to change in any way or to any degree, even temporarily by the divine decree of His Father, required descent. By definition, to forsake perfection requires taking on some form of imperfection. Yet without forsaking or in any way diminishing His perfect deity or His absolute holiness, in a way that is far beyond human comprehension, the Creator took on the form of the created. The Infinite became finite, the Sinless took sin upon Himself. The very heart of the gospel of redemption is that the Father “made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). Although that infinitely marvelous and cardinal gospel truth is impossible to understand, it is necessary to believe. The example for those who have saving faith in Christ is clear. Because of their relationship to Christ, they have special standing and privilege before God. Through Christ, they are God’s children. “As many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name” (John 1:12); and because they are His children, “when He appears, [they] will be like Him, because [they] will see Him just as He is” (1 John 3:2). Although they will always be His servants, He deigns to call them His friends: “I have called you friends, for all things that I have heard from My Father I have made known to you” (John 15:15). Believers are indwelt by Jesus Christ (Eph. 3:17) and by the Holy Spirit (John 14:17; Rom. 8:9, 11; 2 Tim. 1:14). While on earth, they are the living temples of God (1 Cor. 6:19) and “ambassadors for Christ” (2 Cor. 5:20). They have been divinely “blessed … with every spiritual blessing in the heavenly places in Christ,” chosen “in Him before the foundation of the world,” predestined “to adoption as sons through Jesus Christ to Himself” (Eph. 1:3–5). They are “predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son” (Rom. 8:29), “called according to His purpose, … justified,” and one day will be glorified (8:28, 30). They are “living stones, … being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ … a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession” (1 Peter 2:5, 9; cf. Rev. 1:6; 5:10; 20:6). But Christians are God’s children solely by adoption (Rom. 8:15; Gal. 4:5; Eph. 1:5), not by inherent right. Every marvelous blessing and privilege they have is entirely because of divine grace, theirs because of their union with God’s only true eternal Son, Jesus Christ. Therefore, if God’s eternal Son humbled Himself in such an incomparably sacrificial way, how much more should God’s adopted children be determined to live humbly and sacrificially? It is tragic that, in self-centered disregard both of their Lord’s teaching and example, some Christians take pride in their position as children of God. As “children of the King,” they believe that they deserve to live like royalty, although the King of kings, the Lord Jesus Christ, often had “nowhere to lay His head” (Matt. 8:20; cf. John 7:53–8:1) and commands His followers to “take My yoke upon you and learn from Me, for I am gentle and humble in heart” (Matt. 11:29). It is not by accident that the first Beatitude reads: “Blessed are the poor in spirit, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:3).
STEP ONE
did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, (2:6b)
From His exalted position as God, Christ’s first step downward was not to regard equality with God a thing to be grasped. Although He continued to fully exist as God, during His incarnation He refused to hold on to His divine rights and prerogatives. Equality with God is synonymous with the preceding phrase “form of God.” In repeating the declaration of Christ’s true nature and essence, Paul emphasizes its absolute and incontestable reality. It is interesting that isos (equality) is in a plural form (isa, “equalities”), suggesting that Paul may have been referring to every aspect of Jesus’ deity. The term refers to exact equivalence. An isosceles triangle has two equal sides. Isomers are chemicals that differ in certain properties and structure but are identical in atomic weight. In becoming a man, Jesus did not in any way forfeit or diminish His absolute equality with God. During His earthly ministry, Jesus never denied or minimized His deity. He was unambiguous in acknowledging His divine sonship and oneness with the Father (John 5:17–18; 10:30, 38; 14:9; 17:1, 21–22; 20:28), His “authority over all flesh” and power to “give eternal life” (John 17:2), and His divine “glory which [He] had with [the Father] before the world was” (John 17:5; cf. v. 24). Yet He never used His power or authority for personal advantage, because such prerogatives of His divinity were not a thing to be grasped. That was the choice that set the Incarnation into motion. He willingly suffered the worst possible humiliation rather than demand the honor, privilege, and glory that were rightly His. Nor did He use the powers of His undiminished sovereign deity to oppose the purpose of His Father because the price was too high. To be grasped translates the Greek noun harpagmos, which refers to something that is seized or carried off by force. It was also sometimes used of a prize or award. Because Jesus already possessed equality with God, the meaning of to be grasped is not taking hold of but of holding on to, or clinging to. He had all the rights and privileges of God, which He could never lose. Yet He refused to selfishly cling to His favored position as the divine Son of God nor view it as a prized possession to be used for Himself. At any time He could have appealed to His Father and at once received “more than twelve legions of angels” to come to His defense (Matt. 26:53). But that would have thwarted His Father’s plan, with which He fully concurred, and He would not do it. Although He was doubtless terribly hungry after fasting for forty days in the wilderness, He refused to turn stones into bread in order to feed Himself (Matt. 4:3–4). Yet He graciously multiplied the loaves and fish so the hungry multitudes might be fed (Mark 6:38–44; 8:1–9). It is that attitude of selfless giving of oneself and one’s possessions, power, and privileges that should characterize all who belong to Christ. They should be willing to loosen their grip on the blessings they have, which they have solely because of Him. Christians are set apart from the world as children of God and joint heirs with Jesus Christ. Yet they must not clutch those privileges and blessings. Instead, like their Lord, they must hold them loosely and be willing to sacrifice them all for the benefit of others.
STEP TWO
but emptied Himself, (2:7a)
In the next step downward, Jesus continued to not cling to His divine prerogatives. Instead, He emptied Himself. The Greek conjunction alla (but) means “not this but that,” indicating a clear contrast of ideas. Although He was absolutely “full” of deity, as it were, He emptied Himself of all of its prerogatives. Emptied is from kenoō, which means to empty completely. It is translated “nullified” in Romans 4:14 and “made void” in 1 Corinthians 1:17. Jesus Christ emptied Himself completely of every vestige of advantage and privilege, refusing to assert any divine right on His own behalf. He who created and owned everything forsook everything. It must always be kept in mind that Jesus emptied Himself only of certain aspects of His prerogatives of deity, not of His deity itself. He was never anything, and never will be anything, but fully and eternally God, as Paul was careful to state in the previous verse. All four gospels make it clear that He did not forsake His divine power to perform miracles, to forgive sins, or to know the minds and hearts of people. Had He stopped being God (an impossibility), He could not have died for the sins of the world. He would have perished on the cross and remained in the grave, with no power to conquer sin or death. As R. C. H. Lenski comments, “Even in the midst of his death, he had to be the mighty God in order by his death to conquer death” (The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, and to the Philippians [Minneapolis: Augsburg, 1961], 782). Another scholar, Bishop Handley C. G. Moule, writes,
Whatever is meant by the “made Himself void” [emptied Himself], eauton ekenōsen, which describes His Incarnation here, one thing it could never possibly mean—a “kenōsis” which could hurt or distort His absolute fitness to guide and bless us whom He came to save. That [emptying] placed Him indeed on the creaturely level in regard of the reality of human experience of growth, and human capacity for suffering. But never for one moment did it, could it, make Him other than the absolute and infallible Master and Guide of His redeemed. (Philippian Studies [London: Pickering & Inglis, n.d.], 99)
The Son of God emptied Himself of five divine rights. First, He temporarily divested Himself of His divine glory. Shortly before His arrest, Jesus lifted “up His eyes to heaven” and implored: “Father, the hour has come; glorify Your Son, that the Son may glorify You.… Now, Father, glorify Me together with Yourself, with the glory which I had with You before the world was” (John 17:1, 5; cf. v. 24). The Son of God forsook the worship of the saints and angels in heaven and submitted to misunderstanding, denials, unbelief, false accusations, and every sort of reviling and persecution by sinful men. He gave up all the shining brilliance of heaven to suffer an agonizing and ignominious death on the cross. It was not that He forfeited His divine glory but rather that it was veiled, hidden in His humanity (John 7:5, 24; cf. 2 Cor. 4:4–6) from men’s view. Glimpses of it were seen in His many miracles, in His gracious words, in the humble attitude that Paul here calls His followers to emulate, and certainly in His ultimate sacrifice for sin on the cross. It was briefly and partially manifested to Peter, James, and John on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luke 9:31–32; cf. 2 Peter 1:16–18). But it was not witnessed again until His resurrection and ascension, and then only by those who belonged to Him. Second, Jesus emptied Himself of independent divine authority. The operation of the Trinity is, of course, a great mystery. Within the Godhead there is perfect harmony and agreement in every possible way and to every possible degree. Jesus unambiguously stated His full equality with the Father when He declared, “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30; cf. 17:11, 21). Yet He just as clearly declared during His incarnation that “I can do nothing on My own initiative. As I hear, I judge; and My judgment is just, because I do not seek My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me” (John 5:30), and “I have come down from heaven, not to do My own will, but the will of Him who sent Me” (John 6:38). While teaching in the temple, Jesus said, “You both know Me and know where I am from; and I have not come of Myself, but He who sent Me is true, whom you do not know. I know Him, because I am from Him, and He sent Me” (John 7:28–29). In the Garden of Gethsemane on the night of His betrayal and arrest, He pleaded three times: “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me”; yet He followed each request with the submissive, “yet not as I will, but as You will” (Matt. 26:39–44). The writer of Hebrews notes that, “although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered” (Heb. 5:8). Third, Jesus emptied Himself of the voluntary exercise of some of His divine attributes, though not the essence of His deity. He did not stop being omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent, or immutable; He chose not to exercise the full limit of those attributes during His earthly life and ministry. He did, however, exercise some of them selectively and partially. Without having met him, Jesus knew omnisciently that Nathanael was “an Israelite indeed, in whom there is no deceit, … because He did not need anyone to testify concerning man, for He Himself knew what was in man” (John 1:47; 2:25). Through His omnipresence, He knew where Nathanael was even before He saw him (1:48). Yet He confessed that, as to the exact time of His return, “of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father alone” (Matt. 24:36). Fourth, Jesus emptied Himself of His eternal riches. “For your sake He became poor,” Paul explains, “so that you through His poverty might become rich” (2 Cor. 8:9). Although many commentators have interpreted His “poverty” as a reference to His earthly economic condition, it has nothing to do with that. The point is not that Christ gave up earth’s riches, but that He gave up heaven’s riches. As already noted, He forsook the adoration, worship, and service of angels and the redeemed in heaven, because “the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28). Fifth, He emptied Himself temporarily of His unique, intimate, and face-to-face relationship with His heavenly Father—even to the point of being forsaken by Him. To fulfill the divine plan of redemption, the Father “made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him” (2 Cor. 5:21). That was the Father’s will, which Jesus came to fulfill and prayed would be done. Yet even the brief separation from His Father caused by His sinbearing caused Him to cry “out with a loud voice, saying, ‘Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?’ that is, ‘My God, My God, why have You forsaken me?’ ” (Matt. 27:46). It was the unbelievably horrible prospect of being alienated from His Father and bearing sin that had caused Him earlier to sweat drops of blood in great agony, being “deeply grieved, to the point of death” (Luke 22:44; Matt. 26:38). Christians obviously cannot empty themselves to the degree that the Lord emptied Himself, because He started so high and Christians start so low. Believers have infinitely less to empty themselves of. Even what they have is given to them by His grace. Believers are obligated to follow their Lord’s example by emptying themselves of everything that would hinder their obedience and service to Him. Just as Jesus did not cease to be God when He emptied Himself, neither do Christians cease to be His children when they empty themselves as He did (cf. Eph. 5:1–2). Just as Jesus’ self-giving obedience made Him pleasing to the Father (Matt. 3:17), so does believers’ self-giving obedience make them pleasing to Him (25:21, 23). The humble believer is aware of his rights and privileges as a child of God but refuses to cling to them. He empties himself of all claims to any earthly benefits that those rights and privileges might seem to merit.
STEP THREE
taking the form of a bond-servant, (2:7b)
In the next statement of His descent, as He further emptied Himself, Jesus forsook the full rights of lordship by taking the form of a bond-servant, a slave. Although He had the inherent morphē (form) of God (v. 6), He willingly took upon Himself the form (morphē), the very essence and nature, of a bond-servant. Just as certainly and fully as He “existed in the form [morphē] of God,” He now existed in the form of a bond-servant. He did not merely put on a slave’s garment, so to speak; He actually became a slave in the fullest sense. A doulos (bond-servant) owned nothing, not even the clothes on his back. Everything he had, including his life, belonged to his master. Jesus did own His own clothes, but He owned no land or house, no gold or jewels. He owned no business, no boat, and no horse. He had to borrow a donkey when He rode into Jerusalem on Palm Sunday, borrow a room for the Last Supper, and even was buried in a borrowed tomb. He refused any property, any advantages, any special service to Himself. Relative to His glory, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords willingly became the Bond-servant of bond-servants. The one who “was in the beginning with God” and through whom “all things came into being” (John 1:2–3) claimed as His own nothing that He had created. Among other things, a bond-servant was required to carry other people’s burdens. As the supreme Bond-servant, Jesus carried the burden that no other man could carry, the sin-burden for all who would believe. As Isaiah revealed, “The Lord has caused the iniquity of us all to fall on Him” (Isa. 53:6). Jesus came to do His Father’s will and to serve the needs of His people in His Father’s name. He completely waived His rights as the Son of God and became a bond-servant, also claiming no rights as the Son of Man. As He Himself testified while heading toward Jerusalem for the last time: “The Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many” (Matt. 20:28). A few days later, during the Last Supper, He asked the disciples rhetorically, “Who is greater, the one who reclines at the table or the one who serves? Is it not the one who reclines at the table? But I am among you as the one who serves” (Luke 22:27). Through His provision of salvation, Jesus served others more completely than any other servant or slave who has ever lived. But He was also an example of servanthood for His disciples to follow. He reminded them that “a disciple is not above his teacher, nor a slave above his master” (Matt. 10:24) and that, “If I then, the Lord and the Teacher, washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet. For I gave you an example that you also should do as I did to you. Truly, truly, I say to you, a slave is not greater than his master, nor is one who is sent greater than the one who sent him. If you know these things, you are blessed if you do them” (John 13:14–17). He declared that “the greatest among you shall be your servant” (Matt. 23:11). Yet after they have faithfully done “all the things which are commanded,” Christians are to take no credit for themselves but rather confess with genuine humility: “We are unworthy slaves; we have done only that which we ought to have done” (Luke 17:10).
STEP FOUR
and being made in the likeness of men. (2:7c)
Continuing His move downward, Jesus was made in the likeness of men. God made Him thus by His miraculous conception and virgin birth (Luke 1:30–35). Homoiōma (likeness) refers to that which is made to be like something else, not just in appearance (cf. v. 7) but in reality. Jesus was not a clone, a disguised alien, or merely some reasonable facsimile of a man. He became exactly like all other human beings, having all the attributes of humanity, a genuine man among men. He was so obviously like other human beings that even His family and disciples would not have known of His deity had not the angels (Matt. 1:20–21; Luke 1:26–35; 2:9–11), God the Father (Matt. 3:17; 17:5), and Jesus Himself (John 8:58; 14:1–4; 16:13–15; 17:1–26) revealed it to them. And despite His countless miracles, His enemies rejected the idea of His deity out of hand. In their eyes, He not only was merely human but the lowest kind of human, a blasphemer (John 5:18; 10:33). It is important to understand that Jesus did not become the second, or last, Adam (1 Cor. 15:45), in the sense of being like pre-Fall mankind. Rather, in the Incarnation, He took upon Himself all the frailties, limitations, problems, and suffering that were the heritage of the Fall, enduring all its terrible earthly consequences. Without a human father, Jesus was “born of a woman” (Gal. 4:4) in a “fleshly body” (Col. 1:22) and, as any human child, He needed the attention and care of loving parents (Luke 2:40–51). Except in degree, He grew and developed like other children, “increasing in wisdom and stature, and in favor with God and men” (v. 52). He became hungry and thirsty, suffered pain, and felt sadness. Like other men, He became tired and weak and needed sleep. “Since the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of the same” (Heb. 2:14); and although He was completely without personal sin, He nevertheless was “tempted in all things as we are” (Heb. 4:15; cf. Matt. 4:1–11). As the writer explained earlier, it was because “He Himself was tempted in that which He has suffered, [that] He is able to come to the aid of those who are tempted” (Heb. 2:18). Because Jesus was “in the likeness of sinful flesh” (Rom. 8:3), He was subject to physical death. In fact, it was only through His death that He could fulfill His divine purpose of redemption. Again as the writer of Hebrews explains, Jesus “had to be made like His brethren in all things, so that He might become a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people” (2:17). He came to die. Although Jesus forgave sins (Matt. 9:2, 6; Luke 7:47) and acknowledged the propriety of His being worshiped as the Son of God (Matt. 28:17; John 9:38), He did not ask for or accept any special privilege or honor as a man. In the greatest conceivable humility, He lived and acted not merely as a man among men, but as a Servant of servants. He took His place among the common people (cf. 1 Cor. 1:26–29).
STEP FIVE
Being found in appearance as a man, (2:8a)
The descent continued with Jesus being found in appearance as a man, advancing the truth that He was “made in the likeness of men.” Having been made a true human being by divine power through the virgin conception, Christ was found, or recognized, as a man by those who saw and observed Him during His incarnation. Schēma (appearance) is the source of the English word “scheme.” Unlike morphē (“form,” vv. 6–7) and homoiōma (“likeness,” v. 7), which refer to essence and basic nature, schēma refers to outward shape or form; not to actuality but to appearance. Jesus suffered, and still suffers, the added humiliation of being considered a mere man. Paul used the word in speaking of “the form (schēma) of this world [which] is passing away” (1 Cor. 7:31). Both Paul and Peter used a compound negative form (suschēmatizō) in warning believers to “not be conformed to this world” (Rom. 12:2) and to “not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance” (1 Peter 1:14). As Isaiah had predicted some seven hundred years earlier, the Messiah “was despised and forsaken of men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and like one from whom men hide their face He was despised, and we did not esteem Him” (Isa. 53:3). And as John wrote, “He was in the world, and the world was made through Him, and the world did not know Him. He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him” (John 1:10–11). They said, “Is not this Jesus, the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How does He now say, ‘I have come down out of heaven’?” (John 6:42). Sadly, “not even His brothers were believing in Him” (John 7:5). Some of the religious but unbelieving Jews declared: “We know where this man is from; but whenever the Christ may come, no one knows where He is from” (John 7:27), and “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God” (John 10:33). Still others accused Him of having a demon (John 7:20; 8:48).
STEP SIX
He humbled Himself (2:8b)
Continuing this profound description of Christ’s descent, Paul says that Jesus humbled Himself. The emphasis here moves from Jesus’ nature and form to that of His personal attitude. He was not merely humiliated by the nature and circumstances of His incarnation. Humbled Himself translates tapeinoō, which has the idea of lying low. Jesus lowered Himself not only relative to God, but also to other men. The most dramatic and poignant time of Jesus’ self-abasement was during His arrest, trial, and crucifixion. He was mocked, falsely accused, spat upon, beaten with fists, scourged, and had part of His beard painfully plucked out. Yet He was never defensive, never bitter, never demanding, never accusing. He refused to assert His rights as God or even as a human being. Seeing the ethical implications of this humbling, Paul Rees perceptively wrote:
Look at Him—this amazing Jesus! He is helping Joseph make a yoke in that little carpenter’s shop at Nazareth. This is the One who, apart from His self-emptying, could far more easily make a solar system or a galaxy of systems. Look at Him again! Dressed like a slave, with towel and basin for His menial equipment, He is bathing the feet of some friends of His who, but for their quarrelsomeness, should have been washing His feet.… “ ‘He humbled himself!’ “Don’t forget this,” cries Paul to these dear friends of his at Philippi. “Don’t forget this when the slightest impulse arises to become self-assertive and self-seeking, and so to break the bond of your fellowship with one another!” (The Adequate Man: Paul in Philippians [Westwood, N.J.: Revell, 1954], 45–46)
STEP SEVEN
by becoming obedient to the point of death, (2:8c)
In His stepping downward, Jesus was willing to suffer humiliation and degradation even to becoming obedient to the point of death. His obedience and its impact on redemption is the theme of Romans 5:12–19, where the key thought is “through the obedience of the One the many will be made righteous” (v.19). Ralph Martin insightfully observes that
His obedience is a sure token of His deity and authority, for … only a divine being can accept death as obedience; for ordinary men it is a necessity. He alone as the obedient Son of His Father could choose death as His destiny; and He did so because of His love, a love which was directed both to His Father’s redeeming purpose and equally to the world into which He came. “I come to do thy will” (Heb. 10:7f.) was the motto-text of His entire life. (The Epistle of Paul to the Philippians. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1975], 102. Italics in original.)
One would think that somewhere short of that ultimate sacrifice He would have said, “It is enough!” But His perfect submission took Him all the way to death, because that was the Father’s will. Even in agony, as He implored God in the garden, “My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me,” He acknowledged that avoiding crucifixion was not possible within His Father’s will as He continued to pray, “yet not as I will, but as You will” (Matt. 26:39). Commitment to God’s will was His will. Speaking of that heart-wrenching time, the writer of Hebrews says of the Lord: “In the days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud crying and tears to the One able to save Him from death, and He was heard because of His piety.” Yet, as he goes on to explain, “although He was a Son, He learned obedience from the things which He suffered. And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation” (Heb. 5:7–9; cf. 10:7). Long before His arrest Jesus had declared, “For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life so that I may take it again” (John 10:17). Peter vehemently objected to Jesus’ clear prediction of His impending and necessary death and was strongly rebuked: “Peter took Him aside and began to rebuke Him, saying, ‘God forbid it, Lord! This shall never happen to You.’ But He turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind Me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to Me; for you are not setting your mind on God’s interests, but man’s’ ” (Matt. 16:22–23). Because Jesus’ mind was set entirely on God’s interests, not man’s or His own, He willingly and gladly became obedient to the point of death. “While we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly” (Rom. 5:6). The Father did not force death upon the Son. It was the Father’s will, but it was the Son’s will always to perfectly obey the Father. He had a free choice. Had He not had a choice, He could not have been obedient. “No one has taken [My life] away from Me,” He said, “but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father” (John 10:18). He was commanded by the Father, but not compelled. As love incarnate, He became the perfect example of the truth He Himself had declared: “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends” (John 15:13).
STEP EIGHT
even death on a cross. (2:8d)
In the final feature of His descent and degradation, Jesus submitted even [to] death on a cross. There were many ways by which He could have been killed. He could have been beheaded, such as John the Baptist was, or stoned or hanged. But He was destined not for just any kind of death but for death on a cross. Crucifixion is perhaps the most cruel, excruciatingly painful, and shameful form of execution ever conceived. It was originally devised by the ancient Persians or Phoenicians and later perfected by the Romans. It was reserved for slaves, the lowest of criminals, and enemies of the state. No Roman citizen could be crucified, no matter how egregious his crime. In his book The Life of Christ, Frederick Farrar describes crucifixion as follows:
A death by crucifixion seems to include all that pain and death can have of the horrible and ghastly—dizziness, cramp, thirst, starvation, sleeplessness, traumatic fever, shame, publicity of shame, long continuance of torment, horror of anticipation, mortification of intended wounds—all intensified just up to the point at which they can be endured at all, but all stopping just short of the point which would give to the sufferer the relief of unconsciousness.… The unnatural position made every movement painful; the lacerated veins and crushed tendons throbbed with incessant anguish. (Vol. 2 [New York: E. P. Dutton, 1877], 403–4)
The Jews considered crucifixion to be a form of hanging, and those who were hung to be cursed by God. The law demanded that a man’s “corpse shall not hang all night on the tree, but you shall surely bury him on the same day (for he who is hanged is accursed of God), so that you do not defile your land which the Lord your God gives you as an inheritance” (Deut. 21:23). For that reason, the idea of a crucified Messiah was an insurmountable stumbling block to unbelieving Jews (1 Cor. 1:23). Like Peter, they could not even conceive of the Messiah being put to death, much less being put to death by an ignominious, horrifying, humiliating, and accursed death on a cross. The curse of Deuteronomy 21:23 meant being outside God’s covenant, banned from His people and His blessing. But Jesus bore the curse for believers to bring them to God and to glory. But in God’s perfect plan, the crucifixion of His Son not only was acceptable but mandatory. “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law,” Paul explains, “having become a curse for us—for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’ ” (Gal. 3:13). As Peter declares, “He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed” (1 Peter 2:24). In God’s infinite wisdom, death on a cross was the only way of redemption for fallen, sinful, and condemned mankind. Crucifixion was bloody, as were the Old Testament sacrifices that prefigured it. Priests in the service of the temple were butchers, blood-splattered in their duty. The Lamb of God would also die a bloody death. After reflecting on the divine plan of salvation for the first eleven chapters of Romans, Paul declared in awe and wonder: “Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways!” (Rom. 11:33).
MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (2001). Philippians (pp. 117–135). Moody Press.
Though I have afflicted thee, I will afflict thee no moreNahum 1:12
There is a limit to affliction. God sends it, and God removes it. Do you sigh and say, “When will the end be?” Remember that our griefs will surely and finally end when this poor earthly life is over, Let us quietly wait and patiently endure the will of the Lord till He cometh.
Meanwhile, our Father in heaven takes away the rod when His design in using it is fully served. When He has whipped away our folly, there will be no more strokes. Or, if the affliction is sent for testing us, that our graces may glorify God, it will end when the Lord has made us bear witness to His praise. We would not wish the affliction to depart till God has gotten out of us all the honor which we can possibly yield Him.
There may today be “a great calm.” Who knows how soon those raging billows will give place to a sea of glass, and the sea birds sit on the gentle waves? After long tribulation the Rail is hung up, and the wheat rests in the garner. We may, before many hours are past, be just as happy as now we are sorrowful. It is not hard for the Lord to turn night into day. He that sends the clouds can as easily clear the skies. Let us be of good cheer. It is better on before. Let us sing hallelujah by anticipation.
If pastors or ministries make the claim that they are sharing the Gospel and many are coming to the Lord, does that mean those ministries or churches have a license to allow or ignore false teachings? The disciple Jude has given an answer to that question when he stated:
Beloved, when I gave all diligence to write unto you of the common salvation [i.e., the Gospel], it was needful for me to write unto you, and exhort you that ye should earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints. (Jude 1:3)
In other words, while Jude wanted to just focus on the Gospel, he had to issue an exhortation to “earnestly contend for the faith.” He went on to warn about “certain men [who] crept in unawares” (v. 4) and said in reference to them, “Woe unto them!” (v. 11).
In today’s church, there are far too many examples of well-known pastors, authors, and teachers who boast about preaching the Gospel but who ignore contending for the faith. This ought not to be so.…continue reading Lighthouse Trails article….
My scariest movie moment happened at a drive-in theater in 1986. I was in a car with some friends, watching a new release called Aliens. Seen it?
We had no idea what the movie was about, so imagine our shock when a man eating a meal began choking and convulsing violently. I won’t describe the horrifying thing that happened next—just in case children are reading this—but we screamed in absolute terror.
In space, no one can hear you scream, but they sure heard us that night at the drive-in.
I am reminded of that horrific scene when I read these words:
So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. (Romans 7:17)
What does it mean to say, “Sin dwells in me”? The mind boggles. Is Paul describing a sin nature, a sin parasite, or some kind of sin… alien?
Before we answer that, let’s look at a couple of other interesting phrases in Romans:
Our old self was crucified with him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with (Romans 6:6)
Who will set me free from the body of this death? (Romans 7:24)
If you don’t have a whole-Bible theology, you might think that you have a sin virus inhabiting your sinful body giving birth to sinful fruit. You might think you have two natures inside dueling for supremacy. You can keep that sin nature subdued for a while, but one day it’s going to burst forth like a freaky you-know-what.
Let me put your mind at rest.
Christian, you do not have a sin nature or a sin virus inside you. The only thing that dwells in you is the mighty Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:9, 11).
When Paul says, “Nothing good dwells in me” (Rom. 7:18), he does not mean, “Something evil dwells in me.” He means your flesh is incapable of living the good life that God wants for you:
For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. (Romans 7:18–19)
Our body of sin?
Perhaps you have heard that your body is bad, sinful, or unsaved. It’s not true. Your body belongs to the Lord. It is the holy temple of the Holy Spirit.
When Paul speaks of the “body of sin” (Rom. 6:6), he is referring to our physical or mortal body, a.k.a. our body of death (Rom. 6:12, 7:24). Our physical body is the battleground where we engage with sin and experience its deathly effects (Rom. 6:13, 19, 7:5, 23–24, 8:10).
Your body connects you to the world where sin resides. Sin tempts us through our natural senses, and it is with the members of our body—our eyes, hands, tongues, etc.—that we sin.
Our body parts or members are not sinful, but they can be used for sinful purposes (Rom. 6:13). When the old desires of the flesh collide with the new desires of your spirit, the conflict is waged in your members (Rom. 7:23).
Is my body saved or unsaved?
Like the law of gravity, the law of sin affects our bodies. But this does not mean your body is evil. Your mind and body are gifts from God. They are tools that can be used as instruments of righteousness or unrighteousness (Rom. 6:13).
Some may say, “My spirit is saved, but my body remains unsaved,” which is like saying God only does partial salvations. How can we glorify God in our bodies if they are unsaved (1 Cor. 6:20)? How can we present our bodies as holy sacrifices to the Lord if they are unholy (Rom. 12:1)?
When Paul refers to the “sin which dwells in me,” he is simply saying that the influence and effects of sin are felt in our physical bodies.
Sinful passions… work in the members of our body to bear fruit for death (Romans 7:5)
Your enemy wants you to be double-minded and uncertain about this. He wants you to think that you have two natures dueling inside you, or that parts of you are unsaved and need work, or you are infected with sin virus and there’s nothing you can do about it. When you stumble, he will say, “Your behavior is bad because you are bad.”
It’s not true. You are not a bad person. You are not even partly bad.
Your body belongs to the Lord
Learn to see yourself as God sees you. One with the Lord, you are as holy and righteous as he is. No sin dwells in you, and your body is the glorious temple of the Holy Spirit.
Knowing this, that our old self was crucified with him, in order that our body of sin might be done away with, so that we would no longer be slaves to sin. (Romans 6:6)
Your old self was incapable of resisting sin. But the person you used to be died with Christ so that you might walk in the new and better way of the spirit (Rom. 6:4–6). Put it all together and Paul is saying something like this:
Something happened (your old self was crucified), and now something needs to happen (your body needs to be rendered ineffective as an instrument of sin), so that something else will happen (you will no longer be a slave to sin).
Paul is not saying your body needs to be destroyed (you still need it). He’s saying use your body to serve the Lord (Rom. 6:13, 21–22, 12:1).
This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus, who gave Himself as a ransom for all, the testimony borne at the proper time. And for this I was appointed a preacher and an apostle (I am telling the truth, I am not lying) as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth. (2:3–7)
This powerful and dramatic passage answers the question “Why pray for the lost?” It is one of the most definitive statements in all of Scripture of the saving purpose of God. It contains several reasons for evangelistic prayer.
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER IS MORALLY RIGHT
This points back to the commandment to pray for the lost in verses 1–2. Kalon (good) refers to what is intrinsically, morally good. God defines prayer for the lost as the noble and spiritually proper thing to do, and our consciences agree. The lost suffer the agony of sin, shame, and meaninglessness in this life, and the eternal hell of unrelenting agony in the life to come. Knowing that, it is the most excellent task to pray for their salvation. Some might argue that Jesus said in John 17:9, “I do not ask on behalf of the world.” But there Christ was praying as Great High Priest for God’s elect. Because He is sovereign, omniscient Deity, His prayer was specific in a way ours cannot be. It was a prayer exclusively for the salvation of those whom He loved and chose before the foundation of the world to be partakers of every spiritual blessing (Eph. 1:3–4). “The world” was specifically excluded from the saving design of this prayer. Our prayers, however, are not the prayers of a high priest; we pray as ambassadors of Christ, whose task it is to beseech men and women on His behalf to be reconciled to God (2 Cor. 5:20). We are therefore commanded to offer our entreaties and prayers, petitions and thanksgivings … on behalf of all men. Our earnest desire ought to be for the salvation of all sinners (cf. Rom. 9:3; 10:1). We are not to try to limit evangelism to the elect only. There are two reasons for this. First, God’s decree of election is secret. We do not know who the elect are and have no way of knowing until they respond to the gospel. Second, the scope of God’s evangelistic purposes is broader than election. “Many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:14). Even Jesus’ high priestly prayer does embrace the world in this important regard. Our Lord prayed for unity among the elect so that the truth of the gospel would be made clear to the world: “that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me.… that the world may know that Thou didst send Me” (John 17:21, 23). God’s call to all sinners is a bona fide and sincere invitation to salvation: “ ‘As I live!’ declares the Lord God, ‘I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked turn from his way and live. Turn back, turn back from your evil ways! Why then will you die, O house of Israel?’ ” (Ezek. 33:11).
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER IS CONSISTENT WITH GOD’S DESIRE
Obviously, in some inscrutable sense, God’s desire for the world’s salvation is different from His eternal saving purpose. We can understand this to some degree from a human perspective; after all, our purposes frequently differ from our desires. We may desire, for example, to spend a day at leisure, yet a higher purpose compels us to go to work instead. Similarly, God’s saving purposes transcend His desires. (There is a crucial difference, of course: We might be compelled by circumstances beyond our control to choose what we do not desire. But God’s choices are determined by nothing other than His own sovereign, eternal purpose). God genuinely desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. Yet in “the eternal purpose which He carried out in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Eph. 3:11), He chose only the elect “out of the world” (John 17:6), and passed over the rest, leaving them to the damning consequences of their sin (cf. Rom. 1:18–32). The culpability for their damnation rests entirely on them because of their sin and rejection of God. God is not to blame for their unbelief. Since God desires all men to be saved, we are not required to ascertain that a person is elect before praying for that person’s salvation. God alone knows who all the elect are (2 Tim. 2:19). We may pray on behalf of all men with full assurance that such prayers are good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior. After all, “the Lord is gracious and merciful; slow to anger and great in lovingkindness. The Lord is good to all, and His mercies are over all His works” (Ps. 145:8–9). Apodektos (acceptable), is from apodechomai, which means “to receive gladly,” “to accept with satisfaction,” or “to heartily welcome.” The Lord eagerly accepts prayer for the lost because it is consistent with His desire for their salvation. Such prayer is also consistent with His nature as Savior. The phrase God our Savior appears five other times in the Pastoral Epistles (1:1; 4:10; Titus 1:3; 2:10; 3:4), as well as in Jude 25. God is not only creator, sustainer, king, and judge, but also savior. His saving character is manifested through His Son, Jesus Christ (2:5–6; 2 Tim. 1:10; Titus 1:4; 2:13; 3:6). God is the “Savior of all men” in a temporal sense, but “especially of believers” in an eternal sense (1 Tim. 4:10b). That truth of God’s saving nature is also taught in the Old Testament (cf. 2 Sam. 22:3; Ps. 106:21; Isa. 43:3, 11). The idea that the God of the Old Testament is a vengeful, wrathful ogre mollified by the gentle, loving, New Testament Christ is not at all accurate. When God desires all men to be saved, He is being consistent with who He is. In Isaiah 45:22 God said, “Turn to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth.” Isaiah 55:1 invites “every one who thirsts” to “come to the waters” of salvation. Again, in Ezekiel 18:23, 32 God states very clearly that He does not desire that the wicked should perish, but that they would sincerely repent (cf. Ezek. 33:11). In the New Testament, Peter writes, “The Lord is not slow about His promise, as some count slowness, but is patient toward you, not wishing for any to perish but for all to come to repentance” (2 Peter 3:9). No true biblical theology can teach that God takes pleasure in the damnation of the wicked. Yet though it does not please Him, God will receive glory even in the damnation of unbelievers (cf. Rom. 9:22–23). How His electing grace and predestined purpose can stand beside His love for the world and desire that the gospel be preached to all people, still holding them responsible for their own rejection and condemnation, is a mystery of the divine mind. The Scriptures teach God’s love for the world, His displeasure in judging sinners, His desire for all to hear the gospel and be saved. They also teach that every sinner is incapable yet responsible to believe and will be damned if he does not. Crowning the Scripture’s teaching on this matter is the great truth that God has elected who will believe and saved them before the world began. What mystery!
Oh, the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! How unsearchable are His judgments and unfathomable His ways! For who has known the mind of the Lord, or who became His counselor? Or who has first given to Him that it might be paid back to him again? For from Him and through Him and to Him are all things. To Him be the glory forever. Amen. (Rom. 11:33–36)
To come to the knowledge of the truth is to be saved. Epignōsis (knowledge) is used three other times in the Pastoral Epistles (2 Tim. 2:25; 3:7; Titus 1:1). In all four occurrences, it refers to the true knowledge that brings about salvation. Far from desiring their damnation, God desires the lost to come to a saving knowledge of the truth. Some have argued that this passage teaches universalism. If God desires the salvation of all men, they argue, then all will be saved, or God won’t get what He wants. Others argue that what God wills comes to pass, because all men means all classes of men, not every individual. Neither of those positions is necessary, however. We must distinguish between God’s will of decree (His eternal purpose), and His will expressed as desire. Desire is not from boulomai, which would be more likely to express God’s will of decree, but from thelō, which can refer to God’s will of desire. This is precisely the distinction theologians often make between God’s secret will and His revealed will. God desires many things that He does not decree. It was never God’s desire that sin exist, yet the undeniable existence of sin proves that even sin fulfills His eternal purposes (Isa. 46:10)—though in no sense is He the author of sin (James 1:13). Jesus lamented over Jerusalem, “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, the way a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were unwilling” (Matt. 23:37). John Murray and Ned B. Stonehouse wrote, “We have found that God himself expresses an ardent desire for the fulfillment of certain things which he has not decreed in his inscrutable counsel to come to pass” (The Free Offer of the Gospel [Phillipsburg, N.J.: Presb. & Ref., 1979], 26). God desires all men to be saved. It is their willful rejection of Him that sends them to hell. The biblical truths of election and predestination do not cancel man’s moral responsibility.
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER REFLECTS THE UNIQUENESS OF GOD
One of the most fundamental teachings of Scripture is that there is one God (cf. Deut. 4:35, 39; 6:4; Isa. 43:10; 44:6; 45:5–6, 21–22; 46:9; 1 Cor. 8:4, 6). That runs counter to the pluralistic religiosity of our world, which rejects the concept of any exclusive religious truth. We are taught by the spirit of our age that the gods of the Christians, Jews, Moslems, Buddhists, and Hindus are to be charitably considered equally valid. If that were true, there would be many ways of salvation, and hence no need for evangelism. But since there is only one true God, then He is the One in whom all must believe to be saved. There is no other name under heaven by which sinners may be saved (Acts 4:12). Evangelistic prayer recognizes that all must come to the one true God.
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PERSON OF CHRIST
Not only is there only one God, but one mediator also between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. Mesitēs (mediator) refers to one who intervenes between two individuals to restore peace, or ratify a covenant. The concept of a mediator is seen in Job’s lament, “There is no umpire between us, who may lay his hand upon us both” (Job 9:33). Because Christ is the only mediator, all must come to God through Him (Acts 4:12). There isn’t an endless series of aeons, or subgods, as the Gnostics taught. We do not approach God through the intercession of angels, saints, or Mary. Only through the man Christ Jesus can men draw near to God. The absence of the article before anthrōpos (man) suggests the translation, “Christ Jesus, Himself man.” As the perfect God-man, he brings God and man together. Hebrews 8:6 calls Him “the mediator of a better covenant,” while Hebrews 9:15 and 12:24 describe Him as the mediator of the new covenant. All men who come to God must come through Him.
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER REFLECTS THE FULLNESS OF CHRIST’S ATONEMENT
Our Lord freely gave His life when He died for our sins. In John 10:17–18 He said,
For this reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up again. This commandment I received from My Father.
He voluntarily went to the cross and gave all of Himself, not merely something He possessed. Ransom is a rich theological term, describing Christ’s substitutionary death for us. It is not the simple word for ransom, lutron, but antilutron, the added preposition intensifying the meaning. Christ did not merely pay a ransom to free us; He became the victim in our place. He died our death, and bore our sin. He gave Himself. The phrase gave Himself as a ransom for all is a comment on the sufficiency of the atonement, not its design. To apply a well-known epigram, the ransom paid by Christ to God for the satisfaction of His justice is sufficient for all, but efficacious for the elect only. Christ’s atonement is therefore unlimited as to its sufficiency, but limited as to its application. Real benefits accrue for all because of Christ’s all-sufficient atoning work. The gospel may be preached indiscriminately to all (Mark 16:15); the water of life and the offer of divine mercy are extended freely to all (Rev. 22:17); Christ is set forth as Savior for all to embrace (1 Tim. 4:10; 1 John 4:14). Moreover, in a temporal sense, the entire race was spared from immediate destruction and judgment when Adam sinned (a privilege not afforded to the angels who fell—Heb. 2:16), and individual sinners experience delay in God’s judgment on their sins. Nineteenth-century theologian William G. T. Shedd wrote,
The atonement is sufficient in value to expiate the sin of all men indiscriminately; and this fact should be stated because it is a fact. There are no claims of justice not yet satisfied; there is no sin of man for which an infinite atonement has not been provided.… Therefore the call to ‘come’ is universal.” (Dogmatic Theology [reprint; Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1980], 2:482)
That does not mean that all will be saved. Again, “many are called, but few are chosen” (Matt. 22:14). Christ’s death was sufficient to cover the sins of all people, but it is applied to the elect alone. The price paid was infinite. If billions more had been added to the number of the elect, Christ would not have been required to suffer one more stroke of divine wrath to pay the price for their sin. On the other hand, “had there been but one sinner, Seth, elected of God, this whole divine sacrifice would have been needed to expiate His guilt” (R. L. Dabney, The Five Points of Calvinism [reprint; Harrisonburg, Va.: Sprinkle, 1992], 61). So the infinite price our Savior paid was certainly sufficient for all. “Christ’s expiation … is a divine act. It is indivisible, inexhaustible, sufficient in itself to cover the guilt of all the sins that will ever be committed on earth” (Dabney, 61). Therefore salvation can sincerely and legitimately be offered to all, though only the elect will respond. Shedd writes, “The extent to which a medicine is offered is not limited by the number of persons favorably disposed to buy it and use it. Its adaptation to disease is the sole consideration in selling it, and consequently it is offered to everybody” (Dogmatic Theology, 2:482). It is crucial to understand that the atoning work of Christ fully accomplishes everything God declared He would accomplish in eternity past with regard to the salvation of sinners. God’s sovereign purposes are not thwarted in any degree by the unbelief of those who spurn Christ. “I am God,” He states, “and there is no other; I am God, and there is no one like Me, declaring the end from the beginning and from ancient times things which have not been done, saying, ‘My purpose will be established, and I will accomplish all My good pleasure’ ” (Isa. 46:9–10). The atonement of Christ does not represent a failed attempt to save anyone who will not be saved. All those whom God purposed to save from eternity past will be saved (cf. John 17:12). Yet it is worth reiterating once more that while God’s saving purpose is limited to the elect, His desire for the salvation of sinners is as broad as the human race. He desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. And so Christ gave Himself as a ransom sufficient for all. How graphically the atoning work of Christ reveals to us the heart of God for the salvation of sinners! That is why Paul refers to the atonement as the testimony borne by Christ at the proper time. This thought precisely parallels Galatians 4:4–5, “But when the fulness of the time came, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the Law, in order that He might redeem those who were under the Law.” Christ gave Himself as a ransom at exactly the proper time in God’s redemptive plan. His redemptive work is the most eloquent testimony ever borne to God’s saving desire for all sinners. Evangelistic prayer for all men therefore reflects the heart of God, and honors Christ’s work on the cross.
EVANGELISTIC PRAYER IS IN ACCORD WITH PAUL’S DIVINE COMMISSION
And for this, Paul writes in verse 7, I was appointed a preacher and an apostle. This refers to the great truths that God is our Savior, Christ is our mediator, and Christ gave Himself as a ransom, as discussed in the preceding verses. Paul’s divine commission was based on those truths. Preacher derives from the verb kērussō, which means to herald, proclaim, or speak publicly. The ancient world had no news media, so announcements were made in the city square. Paul was a public herald proclaiming the gospel of Jesus Christ. An apostle was a messenger, sent on behalf of Christ. If the gospel message was exclusive, that would undercut Paul’s calling. Paul reinforces the truthfulness of his calling as a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and truth with the parenthetical statement in verse 7. He affirms I am telling the truth, I am not lying. In case some doubted his teaching in this passage, he insists that he is speaking the truth. We, too, are called to proclaim the gospel to the lost world. That call, like Paul’s divine commission, is based on God’s desire that all be saved. Evangelistic prayer acknowledges our responsibility.
MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1995). 1 Timothy (pp. 67–74). Moody Press.
The position, “God desires all men—men from every rank and station, tribe and nation—to be saved” is true, For (there is but) one God, and (there is but) one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus. There is not one God for this nation, one for another; one God for slaves and one for free men; one God for rulers, one for subjects. Paul is his own best interpreter: “For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free; and were all made to drink of one Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:13). Again, “or is God the God of Jews only? Is he not the God of Gentiles also? Yes, of Gentiles also: if it be true (and it certainly is true) that God is one …” (Rom. 3:29). That the apostle is actually thinking of the distinction “ruler … subject” follows from the immediately preceding context (1 Tim. 2:2a). That he has in mind the distinction “Jew … Gentile” is apparent from the immediately following context (1 Tim. 2:7b). Not only the realm of creation but also that of redemption is united under one Head. Hence, not only is there only one God; there is also only “one Mediator of (here in the sense of between) God and men.” The present is the only passage in which Paul speaks of Christ as “Mediator.” However, in Gal. 3:19, the apostle also uses the term, with probable reference to Moses, who as mediator transmitted God’s law to the people. In Gal. 3:20 he speaks in general about “a mediator.” It is the author of the epistle to the Hebrews who discusses at some length the position of Christ, our heavenly Highpriest, as Mediator (Heb. 8:6; 9:15; 12:24), “the Mediator of a new covenant.” By derivation the word simply indicates someone who stands “in the middle.” The purpose for which he takes this in-between position must be derived, in each single case, from the context, or from parallel passages. In the present case it is not open to legitimate doubt that the apostle takes his point of departure in the fact that Christ is the One who has voluntarily taken his stand between the offended God and the offending sinner, in order to take upon himself the wrath of God which the sinner has deserved, thereby delivering the latter. This is clear because the entire context speaks of salvation (verse 4), and of Christ as a ransom (see on verse 6). A striking explanation is found in Gal. 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for (or over) us.” In that passage the Savior is pictured as standing over us, that is, between us and the curse of the law, so that the curse falls on him, and we are saved. However, it is clear that in the present passage (1 Tim. 2:5) the concept Mediator is even slightly broader. Not only does Christ in this capacity restore sinners to the right legal relationship to God, but he also brings them to “the knowledge of the truth” (verse 4); and causes the testimony of this glorious truth to be borne to them (verse 6). Hence, he both establishes peace and reveals it to men, persuading them to accept the good news. He stands revealed as Mediator in this twofold sense. Note the manner in which the identity of this Mediator is revealed: “one Mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus.” To think of men in this connection means to think of man, the man Jesus Christ. Hence men and man are juxtaposed. Had salvation been intended only for one particular group—say, only for the Jews—the apostle would have written, “the Jew Christ Jesus.” Since it was intended for both Jew and Gentile, that is, for men in general, without distinction of race or nationality, he writes “the man Christ Jesus.” (By no means is this a denial of Christ’s deity. That he is the object of faith and worship is clear from 1 Tim. 3:16. The word man here in 1 Tim. 2:5 is not contrasted with God but with Jew or Gentile.)
Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953–2001). Exposition of the Pastoral Epistles (Vol. 4, pp. 97–98). Baker Book House.
“It has been a source of great pain to me to have met with so many among [my] opponents who had not the liberality to distinguish between political and social opposition; who transferred at once to the person, the hatred they bore to his political opinions.” —Thomas Jefferson (1808)
Trump’s third-term trolling: Though you could probably make the case that it may be beneficial for certain presidents to serve a third term, the Constitution is crystal clear. After months of teasing, Donald Trump acknowledged that the Constitution prohibits him from running for a third term. “If you read it,” he said, “it’s pretty clear. I’m not allowed to run. It’s too bad.” Some allies of Trump, especially Steve Bannon, have suggested there is a “plan” in place to secure a third term. Rep. Andy Ogles has also introduced a bill that seeks a constitutional amendment allowing Trump to run for a third term. The Republicans for National Renewal, a nonprofit advocacy group, launched the Third Term Project to encourage Republican lawmakers to support Ogles’s bill. Despite all of this, Ogles is the only sponsor.
Arctic Frost scheme keeps growing: The House Judiciary Committee has discovered that even more Republican lawmakers were targeted in the Biden DOJ’s investigation dubbed Arctic Frost than was previously known. Launched by then-FBI Director Chris Way, Arctic Frost aimed to investigate Donald Trump, which Republicans have asserted was in fact a weaponization of the federal government by the Biden administration against political opponents, particularly Trump. However, what is now being uncovered is just how wide-ranging the investigation was, with over 160 Republicans with connections to Trump being collected in the investigation. It appears the goal was to snoop on as many phone records as possible to build evidence for Special Counsel Jack Smith’s effort to prosecute Trump.
Trump appeals phony felony conviction: Donald Trump’s legal team has filed an appeal to overturn his New York felony conviction for falsifying business records. Robert Giuffra, who is heading Trump’s appellate team, raised five claims that justify the appeal. First, the case brought by Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg violated congressional statutes by attempting to enforce federal campaign finance law over which he lacked jurisdiction. The third claim concerns the contentious decision by Judge Juan Merchan that the jury did not need to reach a unanimous verdict on the unlawful means Trump allegedly used to promote his campaign. Giuffra explains this violated Trump’s right to a unanimous verdict and his right to know the offenses of which he was accused. The irregularities and grounds for appeal on this trumped-up felony case are abundant. It seems that justice dictates that the New York Appellate Division, First Department, overturn this conviction.
Trump and Xi discuss a fentanyl crackdown as China introduces a deadlier drug: Donald Trump is laser-focused on reducing and hopefully eliminating fentanyl-related deaths in the U.S. Discussions are underway with Chinese dictator Xi Jinping to halve the 20% tariff the U.S. has imposed if China curbs its export of fentanyl precursor chemicals. Meanwhile, some drug experts are warning that a new, even more potent opioid is being introduced into the market again by China. Nitazenes, developed in the 1950s, were kept off shelves due to their extreme addictiveness, and they can be up to 43 times stronger than fentanyl. From 2005 to 2019, the DEA reported zero nitazene discoveries. In the six years since, the DEA has logged 7,000 discoveries and linked the drugs to 2,000 deaths. Experts say China is the number one source of these new drugs without any close competition.
Even CNN fact-checks Dems on ballroom: Democrat lawmakers, desperate to deflect blame for their refusal to reopen the government, have pushed a deceptively edited clip of White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt. In the video clip, Leavitt states, “At this moment in time, of course, the ballroom is really the president’s main priority.” Democrats have claimed this is evidence that Donald Trump and the Republicans don’t care about the needs of the American people and therefore aren’t interested in working to reopen the government. Yet so egregiously deceitful is the Democrats’ claim that even CNN couldn’t stomach it, as reporter Kaitlan Collins fact-checked Democrat Rep. Jasmine Crockett live on air. Furthermore, CNN published a fact-check noting that “Democratic leaders misleadingly snip White House press secretary’s ‘main priority’ quote out of context.”
Obama berated Pelosi over Harris: In a new book by ABC News’s Jonathan Karl titled Retribution, Karl recounts that Nancy Pelosi’s quick endorsement of Kamala Harris following Joe Biden’s exit from the presidential race caught Barack Obama off guard. According to a Pelosi confidant, “The Obamas were not happy.” Karl writes, “This person summed up Obama’s message to Pelosi as, essentially, ‘What the f*** did you just do?’” Evidently, as it became increasingly apparent that Biden would need to exit the race, Obama communicated with Pelosi and the two “agreed Harris should not simply be handed the nomination unchallenged.” Pelosi then went ahead and endorsed Harris. This explains why it took so long for Obama to finally endorse her, as he clearly and accurately did not view Harris as a candidate who could win.
Illegal voters in Ohio: Ohio is setting the standard for rooting out voter fraud. Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose announced Tuesday that more than 1,200 criminal cases were being referred to the Department of Justice for consideration of prosecution. Some 1,084 noncitizens appear to have registered to vote in Ohio, and 167 of those voted in a federal election in one of the last four elections. LaRose found 100 people who appear to have voted in the same federal election twice in two different states, and 16 who voted twice in the same election in Ohio. Fourteen people are believed to have voted after their death. Democrats assure Americans that election fraud doesn’t happen. When red states like Ohio and Texas find illegal voting, it raises questions of what an audit of California or New York would turn up.
First Tylenol lawsuit: Texas is the first state to sue the company that makes Tylenol after the Department of Health and Human Services pointed to a link between prenatal acetaminophen consumption and the incidence of autism and ADHD in newborns. Attorney General Ken Paxton filed suit against Johnson & Johnson and its former subsidiary, Kenvue, for its deceptive marketing to pregnant mothers despite knowing the risk that early exposure to acetaminophen entails. Paxton accuses Johnson & Johnson of trying to escape liability by breaking off the Kenvue company as a separate entity and, by doing so, violating the Texas Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act. “Big Pharma betrayed America by profiting off of pain and pushing pills regardless of the risks,” Paxton said. “These corporations lied for decades, knowingly endangering millions to line their pockets.”
NC man murders four of his kids: A horrific story out of North Carolina is making national news after Wellington Delano Dickens III confessed over a 9-1-1 call that he had murdered four of his children. When police arrived on the scene, they found Dickens’s youngest child still alive inside the house. Dickens directed the police to the trunk of his car, where they found the remains of his stepchild, Sean Brasfield, and his three children, Leah, Zoe, and Wellington Dickens. The children are believed to have been dead since May 1. Dickens’s great uncle claims that Wellington is an Iraq War veteran, although that has not been substantiated. The popular X account Libs of TikTok reported on the story, saying that Dickens had been arrested and released as many as seven times, including for child abuse, but those claims are unproven.
Ceasefire update: The peace agreement that President Trump helped broker between Israel and Hamas on October 9 is now on tenuous ground after Israel Defense Forces came under fire from Hamas militants on Tuesday. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu directed the IDF to carry out retaliatory strikes in the Gaza Strip. Hamas has thus far refused to give up its weapons, as was part of the peace deal, and has sought to regain control of Gaza by killing off rival Palestinian factions. In response, Israel has moved the Yellow Line, which the IDF had withdrawn to, thus expanding Israel’s control in the Gaza Strip. Israel’s latest action comes after two IDF soldiers were killed in Rafah last week, which Israel blames on Hamas. Meanwhile, Israel is also accusing Hamas of slow-walking its return of Israeli hostages’ remains. Last week, Trump observed following footage of Hamas publicly executing Gazans, “If Hamas continues to kill people in Gaza, which was not the Deal, we will have no choice but to go in and kill them.”
Headlines
Hurricane Melissa makes second landfall in Cuba after lashing Jamaica (Fox Weather)
U.S. kills 14 narcoterrorists in Eastern Pacific strikes (Daily Signal)
9th Circuit votes to re-hear Trump appeal of National Guard deployment to Portland (KATU)
Truck drivers sound alarm about shocking number of non-English-speaking truckers (RedState)
Pam Bondi “reviewing” Joe Biden’s pardons (Newsweek)
Former Trump nominee embroiled in leaked text controversy sues Politico for $150 million (Washington Examiner)
Trump touts “$18 trillion” of investments in U.S., blasts Jerome “Too Late” Powell as “incompetent” (Washington Examiner)
Amazon laying off about 14,000 corporate workers as it invests more in AI (CNBC)
Major electronic health systems embed gender ideology into records, watchdog warns (National Review)
Humor: America’s obesity crisis solved as EBT benefits run out (Babylon Bee)
For the 13th time this month, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer voted with his party’s coalition to keep the government shutdown going into its 29th day. Yes, Republicans control the House, the Senate, and the White House, but the Senate minority can keep blocking the continuing resolution passed by the House in mid-September.
Few could sum up the shutdown as well as veteran journalist Britt Hume: “The gold standard for ending a shutdown has been a clean continuing resolution. … That is what the Republicans have passed in the House, that is what they sent to the Senate, and that is what Senate Democrats have blocked using the filibuster.”
You know — the same “Jim Crow” filibuster Democrats desperately wanted to kill when they were in power.
If it weren’t for double standards, Democrats wouldn’t have any.
For the first couple of weeks, the shutdown didn’t cause too much disruption outside the Beltway. Illustrative of how little we actually need the federal government in our daily lives, life went on without a hiccup.
That’s beginning to change.
Military personnel will miss their first paycheck this Friday. Air traffic controllers just missed their first. If those controllers start calling in sick or taking vacation days to avoid working for free, the resulting delays or cancellations could wreak havoc on business travel and holiday plans. “This is really easy, open up the government,” said Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy. “Don’t hold our skies hostage.”
Meanwhile, the fund for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) (a.k.a. food stamps) runs out on November 1. It’ll be interesting to see who’s angriest — people who work really hard and then don’t get paid, or unemployed brats posting TikTok videos demanding entitlements they did nothing to earn and threatening retribution by robbing grocery stores.
The political pain will be acute for both parties. A few Republicans are even pushing targeted bills to fund only the aforementioned items. Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley wrote an op-ed in The New York Times, advocating his bill to extend SNAP. He (wrongly) appealed to Scripture to argue that the government must feed people, while also making quite valid points about how the cost of living has ballooned in recent years. “What cost $100 five years ago costs $125 today,” he noted. “So if you’re not earning 25 percent more than you were five years ago, you’re getting poorer.”
He left out the part about inflation being entirely due to profligate government spending on “free” stuff, or why more of the same actually helps.
In any case, Senate Majority Leader John Thune isn’t interested, saying, “Most people recognize the way to get out of this mess is to open up the government.”
Democrats, of course, are still demanding a permanent expansion of the “temporary” increase in ObamaCare subsidies they created — and extended — with zero Republican votes. Zero Republicans voted to pass ObamaCare in the first place. Premiums are set to rise 30%, and no one wants to pay the price for the Democrats’ so-called “Affordable” Care Act debacle, but extending big subsidies for people making 400% of the poverty level isn’t exactly a winner.
“He knows damn well what Democrats want,” Schumer said of his counterpart, Thune. “It’s the very same thing that a vast majority of Americans want, including nearly 60% of MAGA voters. We want lower healthcare costs now.”
Healthcare costs will not be lower. The higher costs will simply be transferred to taxpayers. Well, to be more accurate, our future grandchildren will repay the Chinese for the Democrats’ expensive giveaway.
But to his point about MAGA voters, Georgia Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene has indeed become one of the loudest voices calling for more subsidies and for somebody to come up with a plan to really fix ObamaCare.
Greene, Hawley, and other Republicans are certainly getting anxious, which is understandable given that the Leftmedia always blames the GOP for shutdowns. This time, however, the polling shows that people aren’t buying it.
CNN polling guru Harry Enten has been sounding the alarm for well over a week. Yesterday, he rang it again: “We’ve got a situation here where Republicans with the shutdown are actually rallying their base, but it’s also something that’s not hurting them with the folks in the middle. If anything, it’s helping them with folks in the middle.” He added, “The Republican brand has actually gotten better among independents.”
Schumer’s brand? Not so much. The latest left-wing polling shows him with a job approval rating of just 26%.
Heck, even the American Federation of Government Employees, the nation’s largest union of federal workers, has begun pressuring Democrats to end their shutdown. What a strange new world.
Michael Swartz: Inflation Edges Up to 3%, Trump Tariffs Blamed — We’re not out of the economic woods yet, as consumer prices continue to rise at a rate higher than anyone wants to see.
Thomas Gallatin: Is War With Venezuela Coming? — President Donald Trump is reasserting the old Monroe Doctrine for American Western Hemisphere dominance, and his focus is on countering the growing threat from China.
Emmy Griffin: Argentina’s Encouraging Election Results — President Javier Milei comes out victorious, and the South American nation gets more time to sort out its socialism-caused economic woes.
Linda Moss Mines: The Election of 1912 — The unfolding campaigns were fascinatingly complicated while the outcome was predictable.
‘I Don’t Think Any Democrat Has’ — Nicolle Wallace has forgotten that she herself has compared Donald Trump and his administration to Hitler and Nazi Germany.
NYC’s Wild Mayor’s Race — The mayoral race in New York City has exploded into a full‑blown spectacle, with three radically different candidates all vying to steer the city’s future.
LA Is Third World — Bet you didn’t realize that Los Angeles was this much of a third-world hellscape.
SHORT CUTS
Saying the Quiet Part Out Loud
“Frankly, [the shutdown] is our only moment of leverage.” —Sen. Chris Coons
“It’s the only lever we have.” —Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse
For the Record
“I don’t know what Democrats are holding out for. The Democrats think that we’re suddenly going to vote for their partisan [continuing resolution]. … It wouldn’t pass here. It can’t pass in the House. And it wouldn’t be signed into law by the president.” —Senate Majority Leader John Thune
“You might think … that a government shutdown might actually hurt the Republican brand, but in fact, it hasn’t. If anything, it’s been helped a little bit.” —CNN’s Harry Enten, who may be causing CNN to wonder why they haven’t fired him yet
What Could Possibly Go Wrong?
“No New Yorker should ever be priced out of anything they need to survive. And we believe … it is government’s job to deliver that dignity. Dignity, my friends, is another way of saying freedom.” —New York City socialist mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani
The BIG Lies
“The president has time to do everything but what he needs to focus on. In fact, we heard the press secretary say that his main priority is the ballroom.” —Rep. Jasmine Crockett
“They are choosing not to fund these programs … and when the White House press secretary said the top priority is the ballroom, we could not disagree more.” —Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz
“[The ballroom] is his main priority. Can you believe that?” —House Minority Leader Chuck Schumer
Don’t Believe Your Lying Ears
“I haven’t suggested that Donald Trump is Hitler.” —Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker
“I don’t think any Democrat has.” —MSNBC’s Nicolle Wallace
Re: The Left
“‘I am not a secret Nazi,’ protested Graham Platner. ‘We are not the crazy ones!’ shrieked AOC. I’m not a campaign manager, but neither of those statements strikes me as the sort of thing you want on a candidate’s yard sign.” —Nate Jackson
“Islamophobia is a fake term made up to silence us. We’re allowed to not want Islam taking over American cities. Don’t be shamed out of that totally sensible position.” —Megyn Kelly
“For 50+ years, the federal government has been paying Americans not to work by feeding, housing, and medicating them for ‘free,’ and then wonder why we have so many useless, jobless, helpless people.” —Ann Coulter
“The Democratic Party is in a fight for its soul — and the breathtakingly dumb policies of its socialist wing are winning.” —Sen. John Kennedy
And Last…
“The Department has spent over TWO DECADES defending other homelands. Now, we’re defending our own. These narco-terrorists have killed more Americans than Al-Qaeda, and they will be treated the same. We will track them, we will network them, and then, we will hunt and kill them.” —Secretary of War Pete Hegseth
ON THIS DAY in 1929, investors traded an astonishing 16 million shares on the New York Stock Exchange, which plummeted in a Black Tuesday collapse that marked the beginning of the Great Depression.
Please join us in prayer for our nation — that righteous leaders would rise and prevail and we would be united as Americans. Pray for the protection of our uniformed Military Patriots, Veterans, First Responders, and their families. Lift up your Patriot Post team and our mission to support and defend our legacy of American Liberty and our Republic’s Founding Principles, in order that the fires of freedom would be ignited in the hearts and minds of our countrymen.
Hurricane Melissa pounds Jamaica with devastating winds, destroying homes and businesses, and forcing half a million people to evacuate; the Israeli military says the ceasefire is back on in Gaza after launching strikes saying Hamas had violated the deal, as President Trump defends Israel’s right to strike back and again warns Hamas it could be “terminated;” how churches in the Washington DC area are helping federal employees who are struggling to meet their needs during the government shutdown; a new survey reveals divisions among Americans over their views of the Bible; Studio 5 takes a look at the new movie, “Soul on Fire,” about the recovery and life of a nine-year-old boy who suffered burns over 100 percent of his body, and we have a preview of “Still Hope,” an upcoming movie about women who escape sex trafficking; and meet Bella, the dog whose slightly slanted mouth looks like a smile – and who has millions of views on social media.
CNN’s Jake Tapper discusses Karine Jean-Pierre’s book with former Hillary spokesperson Karen Finney and Stephen Liller’s wife, Katie. Credit: CNN screenshot
Katie Miller proved she is as smart and savage as her husband, Stephen, when she forced CNN propagandist Jake Tapper to wrap up a segment in a hurry because he could not answer her basic questions on former Biden White House Press Secretary Karine Jean Pierre.
As The Gateway Pundit reported, Jean-Pierre has published a tell-all book called “Independent: A Look Inside a Broken White House, Outside the Party Lines,” which was released on Oct. 21. The book goes into detail regarding why she decided to ditch the Democratic Party.
Of course, Jean-Pierre’s newfound ‘independence’ has nothing to do with discovering conservative values. She is just upset over how her party treated her former boss.
This, of course, raises a reasonable question regarding whether she became successful because of her qualifications or due to her ethnicity and sexuality.
On Tuesday, Tapper brought on Katie Miller and Karen Finney, who served as the spokesperson for Crooked Hillary’s 2016 presidential campaign, to discuss Jean-Pierre.
The segment went off the rails when Miller mocked Jean-Pierre as a DEI hire and noted her poor performance as press secretary. She also asked why she got the job over former Pentagon spokesperson John Kirby.
Finney responded by implying that current White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt is a DEI hire before Tapper interjected to praise Jean-Pierre’s previous work as a CNN and MSNBC commentator.
Miller responded by observing that the reason why Jean-Pierre constantly brags about her ethnicity and sexuality is that she’s been promoted that way throughout her career.
Having no response, a stunned Tapper quickly ended the segment.
WATCH:
Katie Miller: "Why has she been trained every four sentences to say she is a black queer LGBTQ woman? Because that's how she's been promoted her entire career."
MILLER: What I think you’re seeing and what Karen is attesting to is that she’s quite incompetent to do the job. This is what Republicans have been saying for years now, she is just another evidence that DEI doesn’t work, whether that’s in a press secretary role, an air traffic controller, an air pilot, whether that’s your doctor.
You know, you want to hire the best for the role, not just based on skin color. Why did she get the job over John Kirby?
FINNEY: Why are we assuming that she is a black LGBT…a gay woman is DEI, but a white woman who is behind the podium right now, which DEI initially started as affirmative action, which was about affirmatively hiring women and minorities, why is one DEI and the other is not?
MILLER: Why did she get the job over John Kirby? Because, as everyone has said this week, she is woefully incompetent.
TAPPER: She (Jean-Pierre) used to be a commentator on CNN and MSNBC…And she was good at that…It didn’t seem crazy to me because she was eloquent as a commentator.
MILLER: Why has she trained every four sentences to say she is a black queer LGBTQ woman? Because that’s how she’s been promoted her entire career.
TAPPER: Thank you so much. Why is the Pentagon taking issue with the top movie on Netflix right now?
A federal judge took an unprecedented step in overseeing the Trump administration’s immigration crackdown throughout the Chicago area.
U.S. District Judge Sara Ellis, appointed to the bench in Illinois by the Obama administration, ordered Border Patrol chief Gregory Bovino on Tuesday to report to her daily over immigration enforcement operations in The Windy City, according to multiple reports. The order follows sweeping immigration raids across the city as the Trump administration seeks to remove criminal illegal migrants around the country.
“Mr. Bovino’s going to be here every day at 6 to tell me what happened,” Ellis said, declaring that the meetings would take place every weekday, according to Politico.
“My role is not to tell you that you can or cannot enforce validly passed laws by Congress,” the Obama judge said. “My role is simply to see that any enforcement of those laws is done in a manner that is consistent with your obligations under the law.”
The Trump administration officially launched Operation Midway Blitz in early September, with the stated goal of locating and arresting illegal migrants that have been protected by Chicago’s and Illinois’ sanctuary policies.
The Trump administration — which already conducted large-scale illegal migrant crackdowns in Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.,— has since focused on The Windy City by deploying federal immigration authorities from Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement. President Donald Trump asked the Supreme Court earlier in October to allow the deployment of National Guard members into Chicago after a lower court blocked the action.
“In recent weeks, federal officers in Chicago have been threatened and assaulted, attacked in a harrowing pre-planned ambush involving many assailants, rammed in their government vehicles, shot at with fireworks and other improvised weapons, injured and hospitalized, and threatened in person and online — including by a $10,000 bounty for the murder of a senior federal official,” Solicitor General John Sauer wrote in the administration’s application, arguing that the National Guard is needed to help federal immigration agents.
In the meantime, opponent’s of the Trump administration’s immigration enforcement agenda have waged stiff opposition to ICE’s and Border Patrol’s presence in Chicago. Ellis is presiding over a court challenge waged by local residents who claim they were endangered by the use of chemical agents by law enforcement.
“I’ve been a lawyer for almost 50 years, and I’ve never seen anything like this,” Phillip Turner, a former federal prosecutor in Chicago, said to the Associated Press about the federal judge’s demand for Bovino to report to her every single weekday.
When reached for comment, a spokesperson for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) pointed to statements made on social media that indicate violent rioters in Chicago are putting law enforcement agents in danger, such as when a group of 75 to 100 rioters surrounded law enforcement earlier in October and allegedly shot at agents with commercial artillery shell fireworks. The administration indicated that Bovino promptly got back to targeting illegal migrant criminals after Tuesday’s court hearing.
“As soon as he left the courthouse, he was immediately on an operation to remove violent criminals from the streets of Illinois,” a DHS spokesperson said to the Daily Caller News Foundation.
All content created by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent and nonpartisan newswire service, is available without charge to any legitimate news publisher that can provide a large audience. All republished articles must include our logo, our reporter’s byline and their DCNF affiliation. For any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
A shocking poll shows that two years after Hamas’s October 7, 2023, massacre that murdered more than 1,200 Israelis, a majority of Palestinians still say the terror group was right to launch the attack. The post appeared first on Breitbart .
Rep. James Comer, R-Ky., joins ‘Mornings with Maria’ to discuss the House Oversight Committee’s explosive report alleging a cover-up of President Biden’s mental decline and unauthorized use of the auto pen to sign executive actions and pardons.
FIRST ON FOX: The U.S. economy could lose up to $14 billion due to the ongoing government shutdown, a new analysis said Wednesday.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released new projections that show the shutdown is likely to have a temporary negative impact on the U.S. economy, though gross domestic product (GDP) — adjusted to remove the effect of inflation — is expected to take a modest permanent hit.
It is Day 29 of the government shutdown, with Democrats and Republicans appearing no closer to a deal on ending the standoff than when it began on Oct. 1.
House Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, asked the CBO for an analysis earlier this month of how the shutdown will impact the U.S. economy.
The office sent Arrington an initial response on Oct. 17, which said “the government shutdown will have negative effects on the economy, although many of those effects will be temporary.”
“The effects will increase with a longer shutdown,” the initial analysis said.
The most recent analysis looks at three scenarios — a four-week shutdown ending Oct. 29, a six-week shutdown ending Nov. 12 and an eight-week shutdown ending Nov. 26.
“In CBO’s assessment, the shutdown will delay federal spending and have a negative effect on the economy that will mostly, but not entirely, reverse once the shutdown ends,” the analysis said.
However, CBO projected that real GDP will be lower in the fourth quarter of 2025 than it would have been otherwise.
“Depending on its length, the government shutdown will reduce annualized real GDP growth in that quarter by 1.0 to 2.0 percentage points. After the shutdown, real GDP will be temporarily higher than it would have been otherwise,” CBO said.
“Although most of the decline in real GDP will be recovered eventually, CBO estimates that between $7 billion and $14 billion (in 2025 dollars) will not be.”
CBO noted that some variables, including responses to the shutdown by the Trump administration and federal employees affected, still mean the final effects remain to be seen.
“Democrats are playing politics, and the American people are paying the price. Even the independent, nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office confirmed the economy will lose 1% in growth because of the Schumer shutdown. For hardworking families, that means higher unemployment, lower wages and less money in their pockets,” Arrington told Fox News Digital.
“And while Democrats believe ‘every day gets better for them,’ the same cannot be said for the American people. In fact, a six-week shutdown means growth would be 1.5 percentage points lower, an eight-week shutdown would reduce growth by 2.0 percentage points, and it only gets worse from there.”
Democrats, however, have blamed Republicans for refusing to negotiate with them on a bipartisan solution to end the shutdown and make changes that they say will save healthcare for millions of Americans.
CBO noted that while many of the economic effects of the government shutdown will be temporary, “Those effects will intensify the longer the shutdown lasts.”
The analysis also noted three factors behind a likely decline in economic activity at the end of 2025, due to the shutdown: “Fewer services will be provided by federal workers, federal spending on goods and services and SNAP benefits will be temporarily lower, and a temporary reduction in aggregate demand will lower output in the private sector.”
“Real GDP will rebound when federal funding resumes, with most of the forgone output made up in the future. The reduction in output stemming from the time furloughed employees did not work will not be recovered,” the analysis said. “In all three scenarios that the agency analyzed, the shutdown leads to a temporary economic slowdown. Real GDP is lower in the fourth quarter of 2025 than it otherwise would have been; the reduction in economic activity will intensify the longer the shutdown persists.”
Most of that slowdown will likely be reversed, however, due to “rebound in federal spending for employee compensation, the purchases of goods and services, and SNAP benefits that occurs after the shutdown ends.”
The government shutdown is already the second-longest in history behind the 2018-2019 shutdown during President Donald Trump’s first term, when Democrats and Republicans were at odds over funding for Trump’s border wall.
That standoff lasted 35 days, just six days longer than the current fiscal fight.
Obamacare has emerged as the critical divide this time, with Democrats pledging to reject any funding deal that does not extend Affordable Care Act (ACA) subsidies that were enhanced during the COVID-19 pandemic. Those subsidies are set to expire by the end of 2025 without congressional action.
Republican leaders have signaled they are willing to hold discussions on extending the Obamacare subsidies — albeit with significant reforms — but are refusing to pair it with an unrelated federal funding bill.
The GOP-led plan, which passed the House on Sept. 19, would keep the government funded through Nov. 21 at roughly similar levels to fiscal year (FY) 2025. The measure is called a continuing resolution (CR) and is aimed at giving negotiators time to strike a longer-term deal on FY 2026 funding.
But the CR has failed 13 times in the Senate, where several Democrats are needed to reach the 60-vote threshold to overcome a filibuster.
The House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform (Republican-majority) released a report titled “The Biden Autopen Presidency: Decline, Delusion, and Deception in the White House”, alleging that Biden experienced cognitive and physical decline during his presidency.
House Republicans are calling on the Justice Department to launch an investigation into the Biden administration’s use of an autopen.
The report says that some executive actions (including pardons/commutations) were signed via the presidential autopen—a device that replicates the president’s signature—without clear documentation that Biden personally authorized them.
Specifically, the GOP report argues that in the absence of documented direct approval, the actions might be considered “void” or “illegitimate.”
The allegations include that Biden’s aides “exercised presidential powers without authorization” and that the chain of command was compromised.
Byron Donalds: Unelected bureaucrats ran the US with an autopen while an elected POTUS sat on the sidelines in cognitive decline.
This is the biggest cover-up in US history.
A months long House investigation has concluded that President Biden “was losing command of himself” while in office and was not personally involved in many of the pardons, commutations and other executive actions signed by an autopen. The Oversight and Government Reform Committee asked the Justice Department to “address the legal consequences” of House investigators’ conclusion, which “deems void” executive actions and clemency warrants signed by the autopen during the Biden administration that do not include documentation proving the president made the decision. “The Committee requests that you investigate all executive actions taken during the Biden Administration to ascertain whether they were duly authorized by the President of the United States,” Chairman James Comer wrote (Washington Times).
“The Biden Autopen Presidency will go down as one of the biggest political scandals in U.S. history. As Americans saw President Biden’s decline with their own eyes, Biden’s inner circle sought to deceive the public, cover-up his decline, and took unauthorized executive actions with the autopen that are now invalid,” House Oversight Chairman James Comer said in a statement (Just the News).
Truth2Freedom's Blog 