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
And call upon me in the day of trouble: I will deliver thee, and thou shalt glorify me. (Psalm 50:15)
This is a promise indeed!
Here is an urgent occasion—”the day of trouble.” It is dark at noon on such a day, and every hour seems blacker than the one which came before it. Then is this promise in season: it is written for the cloudy day.
Here is condescending advice, “Call upon me.” We ought not to need the exhortation: it should be our constant habit all the day and every day. What a mercy to have liberty to call upon God! What wisdom to make good use of it! How foolish to go running about to men! The Lord invites us to lay our case before Him, and surely we will not hesitate to do so.
Here is reassuring encouragement: “I will deliver thee.” Whatever the trouble may be, the Lord makes no exceptions but promises full, sure, happy deliverance. He will Himself work out our deliverance by His own hand. We believe it, and the Lord honors faith.
Here is an ultimate result: “Thou shalt glorify me.” Ah, that we will do most abundantly. When He has delivered us we will loudly praise Him; and as He is sure to do it, let us begin to glorify Him at once.
Note from Randy: We all know that one of the ways we fail each other in the body of Christ is by our judgmental and self-righteous attitudes. What we don’t seem to realize is how often we fail each other by looking the other way and not going to each other to give warning and wisdom, exhortation and edification.
For example, a pastor ends up leaving his wife and kids for his secretary, and dozens of church people, including leaders, say, “I knew they were involved, or headed that way; I could just see it coming.” Well, it wasn’t grace and non-judgmentalism that kept them from speaking up—it was indifference or cowardice or the lie that we are not our brother’s keeper, that we don’t have a responsibility to each other and to God.
There are times we think we’re being nonjudgmental and gracious with our brothers and sisters in Christ by not kindly sharing the truth with them. In fact, we are being neglectful or cowardly. We fall for the lie that sin can be in someone’s true best interests. It can’t be. It never is. Matthew 7 doesn’t tell us not to help remove the splinters from our brother’s eye. It tells us to first remove the log from our own eye, so we can see more clearly to remove the splinter from our brother’s eye. We owe it to each other to do what Scripture commands: “Speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15).
This is an important message from Desiring God’s Scott Hubbard on Hebrews 3:13 and exhortation, and it’s well written. May we take his words to heart, and not be afraid to speak up when God calls us to do so.
Who Needs to Hear Your Hard Words?
By Scott Hubbard
Exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. (Hebrews 3:13)
You know the experience. Someone in your church or among your friends says something distasteful, does something concerning. A little alarm bell goes off inside you, but you decide not to say anything. Surely it’s an anomaly.
But then it happens again — and maybe again. Another gossipy comment. Another Sunday gathering missed with a weak excuse. Another snap at her husband or jab at his wife. Another apparent compromise with sin.
Now you’re pretty sure you should say something. But you’re also busy. Or you think someone else might be in a better position to bring it up. Or you hate uncomfortable conversations. (Or all of the above.) So you convince yourself to stay quiet.
Meanwhile, however, your brother’s or sister’s sin does not stay quiet. It goes on speaking and tempting, alluring and deceiving. And ever so slowly, your friend’s heart becomes harder.
Anatomy of an Exhortation
I know the experience. As I think back on my years as a Christian, I remember too many concerns unspoken. Too many hard words held back. Too many times when I stayed quiet from comfort instead of heeding the words of Hebrews:
Exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today,” that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin. (Hebrews 3:13)
That verse, familiar to many of us, repays careful observation. “Exhort one another,” it tells us. What does that mean?
The word suggests speech that rouses and stirs. When we exhort, we urge others to action — sometimes away from sin (Hebrews 3:13), sometimes toward good works (Hebrews 10:24–25), always nearer to God. “Pay much closer attention” (Hebrews 2:1). “Lift your drooping hands” (Hebrews 12:12). “Do not refuse him who is speaking” (Hebrews 12:25). Such is the language of exhortation.
If we take our bearings from Hebrews as a whole — which the author calls a “word of exhortation” (Hebrews 13:22) — the anatomy of an exhortation becomes even clearer. Exhortations deal with the specifics of a person’s sins and temptations. They rely on God’s word as their authority. They wisely weave comforts, promises, and warnings together. They hold sin as the enemy and God-pleasing obedience as the aim.
Most importantly, exhortations set forth the supremacy of Jesus. “He’s better,” Hebrews says, over and over again (see Hebrews 7:19, 22; 8:6; 9:23; 10:34; 11:16; 12:24). And that’s what we echo to one another. “Brother, he’s better”; “Sister, he’s better” — better than gossip and slander, better than anger and lust, better than anything we need to give up.
Power to Protect
A well-offered exhortation holds tremendous spiritual power. But many of us still hesitate, finding any number of reasons not to exhort. So along with the what of exhortation, Hebrews also presses upon us the who, when, and why.
WHO
Exhort one another . . . that none of you may be hardened.
Later in Hebrews, the author will sound the same sweeping note: “See to it that no one fails to obtain the grace of God” (Hebrews 12:15). Hebrews casts a vision for Christian community where everyone is ready to exhort anyone so that no one falls away. We are our brother’s keeper — and we have many brothers.
True, some Christians (like those in our family or small group) lie more immediately within our sphere of responsibility. But if we see a Christian we know wandering, and if we see no one else going after him, then we know who should take the first step: us.
WHEN
Exhort one another every day, as long as it is called “today.”
The “today” in this verse (quoted from Psalm 95:7) refers to all our days on this side of heaven’s rest (Hebrews 4:1). Like pilgrims in the wilderness, we haven’t yet reached our promised land; we haven’t yet crossed our Jordan. And until we do, we live embattled lives.
If we were already home, if we were already out of our enemy’s reach, then warnings and exhortations would be odd. But dangerous lands still lie between us and our Father’s house; as John Bunyan puts it, we “are not yet out of the gun-shot of the devil” (Pilgrim’s Progress, 101). We need exhortations, then, if we’re going to avoid making an early grave in the wilderness. And we need to give them.
The more we grasp our present endangered position, the more normal exhortations will seem, and the more we will realize why Jesus and the apostles so regularly spoke this way. On this side of heaven, exhortations are not strange; they are everyday.
WHY
Exhort one another every day . . . that none of you may be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.
Under God, the loving, wise, courageous words of a fellow Christian protect our hearts against hardness. They are one of the main ways God helps us hold fast till heaven.
Do you see the potential that God has placed in your words? Your brother may seem entrenched in disobedience. But by God’s design and the Spirit’s power, your words can break the spell of sin’s deceit. Your words can humble destructive pride, dispel lustful passion, keep a heart soft amid suffering. And in some situations, your words may be the main means God intends to use in a person’s life. As the apostle James said about prayer (“You have not because you ask not”; see James 4:2), so we might say about some exhortations: That person changes not because you speak not.
Dear brother or sister, God means to use you to keep others from falling away.
Who Needs to Hear?
So think for a minute about the Christians in your church or among your friends. Whose sin have you been avoiding? Whose heart seems harder than it once was? Who needs to hear your exhortation?
By all means, pray and consider the best approach to take. Ponder how to apply God’s word wisely and how to set forth Jesus as better. Plan a good time to talk. And then, in the actual conversation, perhaps ask questions about what you’ve observed — why he’s been acting like this, why she’s said words like those.
But then open your mouth and speak. Name the sin you notice. Honestly share your concern. Commend the Christ who satisfies. And see if God doesn’t take your words and use them to melt the hardness from this brother’s or sister’s heart.
The article originally appeared on Desiring God, and is used with permission of the author.
[Editor’s Note: in November 2025, at the Evangelical Philosophical Society meeting in Boston Massachusetts, Tim Stratton and Phil Kallberg presented a coauthored essay, “Is Divine Determinism a Different Gospel?”. You can see it here or listen to here. The provocative essay – critiquing a major brand of historic Christian thought: Calvinism – evoked some controversy. Phil responds here to one of the critiques.]
I’m inspired to write this both for the accusations of “straw manning” that came from Tim’s and my essay at the 2025 EPS, and due to examples that I have seen. While no one accused me of this directly (all the interactions I had with people in relation to the essay were positive, even when they were pushing back), I heard through the grapevine that some people were complaining that Tim and I were straw manning Calvinists and other divine determinists. Additionally, I did see examples of people straw manning Calvinists in response to Tim and my essay. I’m pretty confident that Tim and I didn’t do this, but some other people have. And further “straw manning,” is one of those accusations that gets tossed around pretty liberally these days so this whole thing will be instructive and useful elsewhere. So let me explain.
What is the Straw Man Fallacy?
The straw man fallacy is when you deliberately misrepresent your opponent’s position to make it easier to argue against. It’s why from time to time you hear internet atheists complain that people believe in the “sky daddy” instead of critiquing the Kalam Cosmological argument. If you want some good non-philosophical examples of this just watch any Democrat and/or Republican talk about the other side. The reason for the name is that it’s obviously easier to attack a man made of straw than it is a real man. Now it’s important to notice what this is not. The straw man fallacy is not when you are ignorant of your opponent’s position and/or just get something wrong. Nor is it when there is a disagreement about what the entailments of that view are, i.e., “I think physicalism and naturalism necessarily lead to an amoral universe.” There are physicalists and naturalists who disagree and argue for a real objective morality. I think they are being inconsistent and will argue as such. They disagree and will argue against me. I’m not “straw manning” them by arguing “this is what follows from your view.” I’m only doing that if I claim that they are moral nihilists. I don’t claim that they are, rather my claim is that they should be moral nihilists or else they are inconsistent.
An Example in Atheism
So, to carry the example further, suppose I’m arguing against an atheist who argues that morality is just an illusion caused by evolutionary adaptation, like the late Micheal Ruse. An atheist who believes in objective morality (they do exist) might want to accuse me of straw manning him as “You claimed atheists don’t believe in morality, but I do.” But this is a misunderstanding of the straw man fallacy. If I’m arguing against Micheal Ruse, and he really did think that (he did), then there is no straw man here. The other atheist is free to disagree with Ruse and then he and I can discuss and argue about what he actually does think, and if a belief in objective morality is a reasonable, plausible, or even a possible outlook on atheism (it is on some variants and not on others). The point here is that if I can cite someone in group B who really does claim X, then it’s not straw manning if I argue against X, even if other people in group B reject X. At that point I should just be happy that those other people in the group have seen the light by rejecting X and they should be happy that they have an ally in arguing against X. At the worst my criticisms just don’t apply to those other people.
Now it is possible (but it’s unlikely) for someone to do the above in a very dishonest way where the error becomes something like straw manning. I could claim that all atheists follow the philosophy of Nietzsche and Marx (I wouldn’t. This is obviously wrong but just go with it for the example). Then I offer critiques of Marx and Nietzsche and claim that I have defeated atheism. An atheist who rejects Marx and Nietzsche would rightly take offense. If I knowingly do this that is straw manning. If I do this out of ignorance (I’m naive enough to think that Marx and Nietzsche are the authority on all things atheism) then that is a problem, but it’s not straw manning. It’s me not knowing what I’m talking about.
An Example from Politics
Or for a political analogy, I might argue, “You shouldn’t vote for a Democrat as they support trans-surgery for minors and that’s wrong.” It is true that there are Democrats who support this. But not all Democrats do, so if you are one of the Democrats who don’t support such things did I straw man you with that argument? Since I can point to Democrats who do support such things this is not a straw man, but the moment I start claiming that you have that view then it is. It’s still a poor argument as it’s uncareful and doesn’t appreciate the nuance that many Democrats think and support different things, but it’s not a straw man.
And of course, it’s possible for people to make arguments like that in bad faith wherein they attribute minority and/or fringe views of the group to the whole. I suspect if we could ask all the self-described Democrats, “Do you support sex-change operations for 8-year-olds?” the majority of them would say no. So given this, if the above exchange happens, and you tell me, “well I’m a Democrat and I think such things are barbaric” then my response should be something like, “Good I’m glad you are with me on this.” If at that point I insist that since you are a Democrat you must support sex change operations for 8-year-olds, then I am straw manning you (and I’m being an obstinate fool).
So, straw manning is when you deliberately misrepresent someone or something to make it easier to argue against it. It is not when you misrepresent things due to ignorance or a mistake. Nor is it when you have a disagreement about the entailments of the viewpoint. If you make a mistake or speak out of ignorance and are given correction but continue in the initial error, then that becomes straw manning.
What about Calvinism?
So, if you call yourself a Calvinist or some other type of divine determinist and also don’t think that God determines everything then it’s pretty likely that Tim and my criticisms just don’t apply to you. I strongly suspect that if you and I sat down to hash it all out I’d end up claiming that you are, in some way, being inconsistent as it seems to me Calvinism and other variants of divine determinism just naturally lead to the problems that Tim and I point to. But if you reject those problems then I say, “Great!” We agree on that point and I’m happy to have any ally in claiming things like it’s ridiculous to believe that God demonstrates love for people by condemning them to hell (for example). If you and I disagree about what is entailed by your theological and philosophical system and we are both being honest (or at least trying to be) then no one is straw manning anyone. We just have a philosophical or theological disagreement.
This is an area where I saw the “anti-Calvinists” (for lack of a better name) commit this fallacy. A significant amount of them claimed things like Calvinists don’t believe in the Bible. Now this is plainly not what any Calvinist claims. Further it’s the opposite of what every single one that I’ve read and talked to claims. When I attempted to drill down where those “anti-Calvinists” were getting this from it turned out that they thought that the theological system of Calvinism undermines the Scriptures and our ability to know and trust them (this argument sounds awfully familiar). I agree with that critique, but that’s an implication of the view, not the view itself. Hence those “anti-Calvinists” are straw manning Calvinists as they are attributing to them a view that is flatly denied. Now I think that is denied on pain of a contradiction or inconsistency, but we still need to give Calvinists credit for denying the claim that they don’t believe in the Bible. It’s not reasonable, fair, or good practice to do otherwise.
Naturally this has many implications in a lot of other areas as “straw manning” is one of those phrases that just gets constantly thrown around now. And some people do indeed do this in a malicious way. But I’ve found that much of the time people are simply confusing a disagreement about what logically follows from a view with straw manning. For now, I’ll just avoid getting into specific examples of people who do straw man in a malicious way. It’s not worth the time it would take, as it would probably just alienate people.
So, the point here is if someone is knowingly and maliciously misrepresenting you, that is straw manning. It’s not only a logical fallacy, it’s a moral wrong. But if someone is just ignorant of what you think, genuinely doesn’t understand your view, or disagrees with you on the implications of your view, that’s not straw manning.
Phil Kallberg Host of “The Examined Life” podcast is a proud follower of Christ, Phil Kallberg has an MA in Philosophy from Holy Apostles College and Seminary where he wrote a thesis on the Modal Ontological Argument for God’s existence. He greatly enjoys a good story, follows politics far more than is warranted, and makes use of a PlayStation for breaks from all the work of raising children and doing philosophy. Before studying philosophy Phil spent time in the military, worked several jobs in different fields, and thanks to his love of stories got a bachelor’s degree in English. Phil lives in Missouri with his wife, son and daughter. He may be reached for comment at theexaminedlifewithphil@gmail.com
There is so much to worry about in this world and in our lives, so how can we have peace and rid ourselves of all our troubles and anxieties?
Step One
To start with, you cannot cast your troubles onto Christ if you don’t trust in Christ, so unless you come to Christ, having repented and put your trust in Him (Mark 1:15), you cannot be saved or come to Him. You are stuck with your own heavy laden, burdens. Only after believing in the Son of God is there no more condemnation (Rom 8:1) The only reason there is no more condemnation is because“we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ”(Rom 5:1). So step one in casting all your anxieties away is to trust in Christ. This is why He says,“Come to me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest”(Matt 11:28). You must come to Him first, confessing your sins, repenting and trusting in Christ’s finished work on the cross. That is the only way to find true rest. You and I were heavy laden and under unbearable labors before salvation, but we learned that only Jesus Christ can give us true rest. When we trust in Him, we can come to Him, and as the Apostle Peter says we should be“casting all your anxieties on him, because he cares for you”(1 Pet 5:7).
Step Two
When animals plowed fields in the ancient days, they either used plow horses, mules or, the best of them all, oxen. These beasts of burden were meant…they were created to carry heavy loads and burdens that their owners couldn’t. When they were yoked together, they found they could do even more work than one alone. Why? Because a burden shared is halved. That is, the burden is split in half or shared…and it makes it easier for both of the ox. This makes sense in light of Jesus statement for us to“Take my yoke upon you, and learn from me, for I am gentle and lowly in heart, and you will find rest for your souls”(Matt 11:29). Rest comes after the load is unloaded upon God’s broad shoulders. Hey, nothing is too heavy for God, is it? We are to take His yoke upon us and not some other human device that is supposed to make our lives easier. These could be alcohol, drugs, over-indulging, shopping, working, etc. So step two is to take His yoke upon us…depend on God to take over when things happen that we can’t control. That takes some learning…so we must learn from Him, take our burdens to Jesus, and then and only then will you“find rest for your souls.”
A yoke is an implement that is used to harness animals together to pull a load or a plow.
Step Three
Once you learn to come to Him and are able to rest, that is, resting because He’s sharing the load with you with His yoke, and you are resting in Christ’s finished works (1 Cor 15:1-5), then we can learn, as Jesus said,“my yoke is easy, and my burden is light”(Matt 11:30). You don’t know what something feels like till you wear it, and Jesus’ yoke lightens everything! To be yoked to something means to share the load and to walk in step with one another. Mules and oxen don’t plow together because it’s too hard on them and they are less productive…but when oxen are yoked together, they can get more done because two are better than one (Eccl 4:9-12). They are sharing the load.
Come to Christ
“And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.” John 6.35
Feel weary and heavy laden? Then come to Christ.“Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst”(John 6:35). He fills not only the spiritual thirst but the hunger too, and we shall never hunger or thirst again for He is totally sufficient for us. Have we strayed like sheep from the Lord? Then the Good Shepherd beckons us,“Return, O my soul, to your rest; for the LORD has dealt bountifully with you”(Psalm116:7). You can’t be any more burdened than the Apostle Paul was who said“there is the daily pressure on me of my anxiety for all the churches”(2 Cor 11:28), but even Paul knew that when he was weak, the Lord would show Himself strong.
Summary
Why would Paul boast about His weakness and his inability to go on at times, where he even despaired of life (2 Cor 1:8)? It was to boast of the power of God Who uses weak, broken, clay vessels (that’s us!), so that He alone receives the glory. God didn’t tell Paul to grow his faith first in order to make it on his own, but rather, God would use Paul’s weakness to show how strong God was. This is why God told Paul,“My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.” Therefore I will boast all the more gladly of my weaknesses, so that the power of Christ may rest upon me”(2 Cor 12:9). Who wouldn’t want“the power of Christ”to“rest upon”them!?
Conclusion
I pray you have put your trust in our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ. If that has not happened yet, my friend, you are in real danger of hell fire. And I mean, in immediate danger. You’re one breath, one heartbeat…one accident away from eternity when it will be too late to repent. Today is the best day to believe (2 Cor 6:2) since tomorrow is no guarantee. If Jesus Christ came today, here is your fate (Matt 7:21-23). This is why I plead with you as you read this, repent today…and I mean right now. Put your trust in Jesus Christ. If you do not, you will face God’s judgment after death guaranteed (Heb 9:27) or at Jesus Christ’s appearance (Rev 20:12-15), which could happen at any moment.
Resource – Scripture quotations are from The Holy Bible, English Standard Version®(ESV®), Crossway Bibles. (2007). ESV: Study Bible: English standard version. Wheaton, Ill: Crossway Bibles. Used by permission. All rights reserved.
My work here involves encouragement, theology, and discernment. I have not done any discernment work on the NAR, an acronym which stands for New Apostolic Reformation. I have not felt the pull of the Holy Spirit to do so. I can’t cover everything.
However, the NAR is a deadly false movement, with sub-topics within it containing their own dangers, which demand attention and discernment from us to avoid. To that end, Amy Spreeman and Michelle Lesley have done a ton of work to alert us ladies to the errors of this movement, and I want to highlight their work on this topic since it is making such inroads to the faith.
Amy Spreeman of Berean Research collected testimonies from people who have left a NAR church. She wrote that the spiritual abuse is real, and it lingers in the heart and mind long after their church departure:
“The New Apostolic Reformation (NAR) is a dominionist movement which asserts that God is restoring the lost offices of church governance, namely the offices of Prophet and Apostle. Leading figures in this seemingly loosely organized movement claim that these prophets and apostles alone have the power and authority to execute God’s plans and purposes on earth. They believe they are laying the foundation for a global church, governed by them.“
At Michelle Lesley’s site we have “What is the New Apostolic Reformation?”
The Podcast A Word Fitly Spoken hosted by Amy Spreeman and Michelle Lesley featured Dawn Hill recently, who spoke about a growing subset of the NAR- ‘Deliverance Ministries’. It is an interesting and informative discussion-
“There’s a growing movement within the charismatic and New Apostolic Reformation camp that we’re hearing more and more about these days: deliverance ministry. If you’ve ever seen a video of someone practicing deliverance, or if you have a friend who’s dabbling in deliverance, you might wonder if it’s biblical, and if it’s OK for Christians to take part in. Our friend, Dawn Hill, joins us to explore what the Bible has to say about deliverance ministry.“
Both women have many more resources at their sites for you to explore on this important topic. I hope this helps you if you decide to research this important topic.
Not everyone who says to Me, “Lord, Lord,” will enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of My Father who is in heaven. Many will say to Me on that day, “Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles?” And then I will declare to them, “I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness.” (7:21–23)
A Jew could use the term lord simply as a title of respect and honor, given to any political, military, or religious leader, including teachers. But for those people to say, Lord, Lord, suggests much more than human respect, as their following comments make clear. That they claimed to have prophesied, cast out demons, and performed miracles in Jesus’ name indicates they acknowledged Him as Lord in a supernatural way. Lord was a common Jewish substitute title for Jehovah, or Yahweh, which name they considered too holy to utter. Therefore to address Jesus as Lord was to address Him as the one true God. To address Him as Lord, Lord was to add a spirit of intense zeal to demonstrate strength of devotion and dedication. In verse 22, the three references to your name are emphatic and convey the significance of who He is. Jesus is therefore talking about those who make a profession of faith in Him. These people claim to be followers of the God of Israel, the Creator and Lord of all earth. Not only that, but they acknowledge Jesus Himself to be divine, because they will say to Me [that is, to Jesus] on that day, “Lord, Lord.” And the fact that they have claimed so many outstanding works in His name tells us they are especially fervent religious workers. The final judgment, on that day, is presented here in general, without reference to the distinction between the separate tribunals for believers (2 Cor. 5:10) and for unbelievers (Rev. 20:11–15). That day is a frequently used reference to the era of divine judgment known throughout Scripture as “the day of the Lord” (Isa. 2:12; Joel 2:1; Mal. 4:5; 1 Thess. 5:2; 2 Pet. 3:10; etc.). Matthew uses that day here and in 24:36, where it refers to the second coming of the Savior. It is noteworthy that the second coming parable of the ten virgins (Matt. 25:1–13) makes reference to those virgins who are shut out of the kingdom as crying out, “Lord, Lord,” to which He also replies, “I do not know you” (vv. 11–12). These few passages together reveal that Matthew has in mind the unspecified season of judgment that will accompany the return of Jesus Christ. That some of the ones Jesus is talking about here are true believers is shown by His saying, Not everyone and many. The same many who entered the wide gate (v. 13) are now at the end of the broad way facing the Judge. For some people, however, the claim Lord, Lord will be legitimate, because Jesus will have indeed been their Lord on earth and they will have served Him genuinely. If Jesus is speaking about the great white throne judgment, many professing believers who are not genuine will already have spent centuries in hell awaiting their final judgment (see Luke 16:23–26; Acts 1:25). Because they were so zealous and active and diligent in religious work—in the Lord’s own name—they are incredulous that they are even standing before Christ to be judged. Even at that time they will address Christ as Lord and speak to Him in desperation with the greatest respect and sincerity. Their words and their works will seem impressive to them, but their lives will not support the claim of their lips. In Luke 6:46 Jesus said, “Why do you call Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?” It is not the one who simply claims the Lord, but the one who does the will of My Father who is in heaven who is saved. The issue is obedience to the Word of God. “If you abide in My Word, then you are truly disciples of Mine,” Jesus said (John 8:31; cf. 6:66–69; Matt. 24:13; Col. 1:22–23; 1 Tim. 4:16; Heb. 3:14; 10:38–39; 1 John 2:19). Salvation and obedience to the will of God are inseparable, as the writer of Hebrews makes clear: “He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation” (5:9; cf. Rom. 1:5; 6:16; 15:18; 16:19, 26; 1 Pet. 1:2, 22). Jesus’ word to the disobedient claimers will be, I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness. All their words of respect and honor and all their works of dedication and devotion will be declared empty and worthless. They may have had God’s name in their mouths, but rebellion was in their hearts. His saying, I never knew you, does not, of course, mean that Jesus was unaware of their identity. He knows quite well who these persons are; they are deceived professing Christians whose lives were spent in the practice [of] lawlessness. “To know” was a Hebrew idiom that represented intimate relations. It was frequently used of marital intimacy (see Gen. 4:1, 17; etc.; where “had relations” is literally “knew,” as in the KJV). It was also used of God’s special intimacy with His chosen people Israel and with all of those who trust in Him. In a unique and beautiful way the Lord “knows those who take refuge in Him” (Nah. 1:7). The Good Shepherd knows His sheep intimately (John 10:1–14). Jesus therefore will say to those who claim Him but never trusted in Him, I never knew you. “I have never known you as My disciples, and you have never known Me as your Lord and Savior. We have no intimate part of each other. You chose your kingdom, and it was not My kingdom.” Depart from Me is the resulting final sentence to hell, and is identical in thought to the judgment of Matthew 25:41 at the Lord’s return: “Depart from Me, accursed ones, into the eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels.” The lake of fire awaits all false professors (Rev. 20:15). Practice lawlessness is a present participle in the Greek, indicating continuous, regular action, and identifies the unforgiven sin and unrighteous life patterns of those claimers of salvation. You continually and habitually practice lawlessness is the idea. Profession of Christ and practice of lawlessness are totally incompatible. A good tree cannot bear that sort of fruit (Matt. 7:18; John 3:4–10). A good tree not only can but will bear good fruit, and a life that professes to be Christian, but in no way reflects Christ’s righteousness, has no part in Him. That kind of profession comes from the kind of faith that has no works and is dead (James 2:17). It is the demon faith James refers to (James 2:19), which is orthodox and accurate, but unholy. In the ultimate and most tragic sense such a false profession is to take the Lord’s name in vain. “The blasphemy of the sanctuary,” G. Campbell Morgan observed, “is far more awful than the blasphemy of the slum” (The Gospel According to Matthew [New York: Revell, 1929], p. 79). Mere professed devotion to Christ is but another Judas kiss. The Lord knows well that even His most faithful disciples will fail, stumble, and fall into sin. Otherwise He would not have told us to pray, “Forgive us our debts” (Matt. 6:12). And when “we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:9). No Christian is sinless, but the fact that we continually confess our sins, seek the Lord’s forgiveness, and long for righteousness (Matt. 5:6) is evidence that we belong to Him. God’s will may not be the perfection of the true believer’s life, but it is the direction of it. Those who continually practice lawlessness, however, give evidence that they do not belong to Christ. They do not recognize or confess their sins or hunger for righteousness, because they have no part of Christ. All religious activity, no matter how orthodox and fervent, that does not result from obedience to the lordship of Christ and the pursuit of His glory is rebellion against the law of God, which demands heart conformity. This passage is all the more amazing when one considers the impressive works that those professing believers claim to have accomplished. They tell the Lord, Did we not prophesy in Your name, and in Your name cast out demons, and in Your name perform many miracles? As already mentioned, we know from verse 21 (not everyone) that some of these claims will be made by genuine believers. And because Jesus does not question the factualness of the claims, it is possible that actual prophecies were made, demons cast out, and some kind of miracles performed even by those who were not genuine believers. There are three possible explanations for the claim of the false believers. It may be that they were allowed to do those amazing works by God’s power. God put words in Balaam’s mouth, even though that prophet was false and wicked (Num. 23:5). King Saul, after he became apostate had the “Spirit of God [come] upon him mightily, so that he prophesied” (1 Sam. 10:10). The wicked high priest Caiaphas unwittingly and unintentionally “prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the nation” (John 11:51). A second possibility is that those amazing acts were accomplished by Satan’s power. Jesus predicted that “false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect” (Matt. 24:24). The unbelieving sons of Sceva, for example, were Jewish exorcists, who made their living casting out demons (Acts 19:13–14). Mark 9:38–40 tells of someone outside the apostles casting out demons. Paul promises false signs in the last days, lying wonders of Satan (2 Thess. 2:8–10). Acts 8:11 describes the work of a satanic sorcerer. Today there are miracle workers, healers, and exorcists who claim to work for Jesus Christ but are satanic deceivers. A third possibility is that some of the claims were simply false. The prophecies, exorcisms, and miracles were fake and contrived. No doubt all three will be represented. But whether the works themselves were done in God’s power or not, the people who did them did not belong to Him and did not truly recognize Him as Lord, despite their profession. They had no part in His kingdom or its righteousness, and those works, whether genuine or false, divine or Satanic, would stand them in no good stead before the judgment seat of Christ. The words of an engraving from the cathedral of Lübeck, Germany, beautifully reflect our Lord’s teaching here:
Thus speaketh Christ our Lord to us, You call Me master and obey Me not, you call Me light and see Me not, you call Me the way and walk Me not, you call Me life and live Me not, you call Me wise and follow Me not, you call Me fair and love Me not, you call Me rich and ask Me not, you call Me eternal and seek Me not, if I condemn thee, blame Me not.
MacArthur, J. F., Jr. (1985–1989). Matthew (Vol. 1, pp. 477–480). Moody Press.
The first paragraph begins as follows: 21–23. Not everyone who says to me, Lord, Lord, will enter the kingdom of heaven, but the one who puts into practice the will of my Father who (is) in heaven. Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, in thy name did we not prophesy, and in thy name did we not cast out demons, and in thy name did we not perform many mighty works? That there is a connection between these words and the immediately preceding warning against false prophets (verses 15–20) is clear. Jesus had told his audience to be on guard against false prophets, those who, while telling lies, pretended to be speaking the truth. Did this mean that if a man proclaims the truth he thereby proves himself to be a true prophet? “Not necessarily,” says Jesus as it were. A man who speaks the truth but acts the lie is also in a sense a false prophet. Let every person therefore examine not only his neighbor but also himself. As has already been shown, the “fruit” that indicates whether a man is reliable or untrustworthy relates not only to doctrine but also to life. Thus with tremendous force the message is driven home to every heart. The people whom Jesus condemns are branded as false because in their case life and lip had not been in harmony. Their exclamation “Lord, Lord” had been deceitful. By means of it they also now, on this day of the Great Assize, present themselves as Christ’s loyal servants; yet in their previous life they by their actions had constantly been claiming lordship for themselves (Mal. 1:6 ff.; Luke 6:46). But on this day of the last judgment they discover that, whatever may have been their previous success in deceiving others, and perhaps while on earth even themselves, they cannot fool the Judge. From the kingdom in its final phase they are excluded.—The lesson is clear: let everyone examine himself! What makes introspection important is that there will be many “sayers” who have not been “doers.” Jesus says they have not practiced the will of “my Father.…” See p. 215. As in Matt. 25:34–46 so also here (7:22, 23) what happens on the judgment day is represented under the figure of a dialogue between those who have refused to carry out the will of the Father, on the one hand, and Jesus the Judge, on the other. Even before the verdict is pronounced those about to be doomed realize, as is clear from their words, that it is not going to be in their favor. In this connection it must be remembered that with respect to their souls the great majority of these people have already spent some time in hell. Cf. Ps. 73:12–19; Luke 16:23, 26; Acts 1:25. So now that with soul and body they are arraigned before the Judge what else but further doom can they expect? Besides, the very manner in which their ranks, in sharp contrast with those of the righteous, have been arranged before the Great Tribunal confirms their fears (25:32, 33). Nevertheless they argue with the Judge. They address him as “Lord, Lord.” Trembling with fear they pronounce this title with awe and reverence, pouring into it far more meaning than they had ever done before the arrival of this crisis of deepest despair. Cf. Ps. 66:3; Mic. 7:17; Phil. 2:11. Three times, and in each case at the very beginning of the clause, as is clear from the original and from my translation, they appeal to the name of Jesus (“in thy name”), as if genuinely intimate union with Christ had been the conscious source both of their preaching and of their miracle-working power. Actually they had degraded that very name, having used it merely as a kind of magic formula. But now they appeal to their former use of it, desperately hoping that it may still prove the God-glorifying character of their former words and deeds and may even now secure for them a place in the kingdom of heaven. Cf. 25:11, 12. In their appeal these false prophets state that in the name of Jesus they had prophesied, driven out demons, and performed many mighty works. Jesus does not deny the claim that they had indeed represented themselves as his ambassadors and that in connection with the invocation of his name they had indeed performed astounding deeds. The question that divides commentators is, “Were these deeds genuine products of supernatural power or were they fraudulent?” 2 Thess. 2:9, 10 teaches that in connection with the coming of “the lawless one” there will be a mighty display of power, signs, and wonders, all of them false. Acts 19:13, 14 shows that when the seven sons of Sceva, a Jew, tried to imitate Paul’s exercise of miraculous power their attempt at exorcism failed miserably. There was also the similar failure of Egypt’s magicians to reproduce the third plague, which failure, as many see it, sheds doubt on the genuine character of their earlier “successes” (Exod. 7:22, 8:7, 18, 19). Does not all this point to the possibility that also the demon expulsions and other mighty works of which the false prophets of Matt. 7:22 boast had been nothing but sham? Have not investigations proved again and again that among false prophets illusions, trickery, sleight of hand, etc., abound, and that what is presented as genuine is very often nothing but deception? Populus vult decipi (“The people wish to be deceived”). All this, however, must not blind us to the fact that by God’s permission Satan at times exerts influence upon the physical (as well as upon the moral-spiritual) realm, as is clear from the book of Job (1:12; 2:6, 7). Is it not possible that, by God’s power and/or permission, Egypt’s magicians had been enabled to change rods into serpents (Exod. 7:11, 12a)? Note, however, that in each case—the one recorded in the book of Job and the one described in Exodus—the end result was a victory for the Lord and for his people (Exod. 7:12b; Job 19:23–27; 42:5, 6). It is unnecessary to exclude the possibility that among the feats of which the false prophets are now boasting there had been some that were accomplished by the aid of supernatural power, whether divine or Satanic. Similarly, it is entirely possible—probable even—that the men whom Jesus condemns had actually spoken many a true word when they prophesied in the name of Jesus. Is it not true that the Lord at times makes use of the wicked to proclaim marvelous truths (Num. 23:8–10, 18–24; 24:5–9, 17; Rev. 2:14; Acts 16:16, 17)? Demas may have preached many a fine sermon (Col. 4:14; 2 Tim. 4:10). And was not even Judas Iscariot among those who were commissioned to heal the sick and to cast out demons (Matt. 10:1)? The reason why the men described here in Matt. 7:22 are condemned is not that their preaching had been wrong and/or their miracles spurious but that they had not practiced what they preached! It is for that reason that the Lord continues: And then will I say to them openly, “Never have I known you; go away from me, you law despisers!” “Never,” that is, not a single moment. Just what does Jesus mean when he says, “Never have I known you”? There is a knowledge of the mind. That according to his divine nature Jesus possessed this knowledge in unlimited degree is clear from John 1:47, 49; 2:24, 25; 21:17. It was exactly because he knew the false prophets so thoroughly that he was so completely justified in condemning them. There is, however, also a knowledge of the heart, that is, of electing love, acknowledgment, friendship, and fellowship (Amos 3:2; Nah. 1:7; John 10:14; 1 Cor. 8:3; Gal. 4:9; and 2 Tim. 2:19). The connection makes plain that it is this knowledge that is referred to in our passage. The false prophets speak as if Jesus had been their friend. Jesus replies, as it were, “Not for a single moment have I acknowledged you as my own, or known you to be my friends.” When he now forever expels the law-despisers (literally “workers of lawlessness”), he is dooming them to eternal destruction, in body and soul, away from his loving presence (Matt. 25:46; Luke 13:27, 28; 2 Thess. 1:9). Before leaving this little paragraph (verses 21–23) attention should be called to the honors to which Jesus here lays claim. He is Lord of the universe and all it contains, the sovereign ruler of all men and of all things (cf. 11:27; 28:18; Phil. 2:11; Rev. 17:14). Though, to be sure, it would be wrong to attach to the title “Lord, Lord,” uttered by the false prophets during the days of Christ’s sojourn on earth (verse 21), the same exalted significance which they attach to it on the day of the final judgment (verse 22), nevertheless even in the former case it must have implied paying lip service to the fact that Jesus was their superior, the One to whom they owed honor and obedience. Again, though during Christ’s sojourn on earth the term kurios (Lord) with reference to him can hardly have attained to the fulness of meaning which it reached when applied by loyal disciples to the One exalted at the Father’s right hand in glory (1 Cor. 12:3), yet even when this appellative was used by the men described in 7:21 it must have meant more than simply “Sir” (the meaning which the vocative of this title has in John 12:21, with reference to Philip). When used by true disciples it meant no less than that Jesus was regarded, in an ever ascending measure, as the object of their faith, love, and devotion. Jesus also claims to be the One who is coming to judge all men. Note: “Many will say to me in that day.… Then will I say to them.” Cf. 25:31, 32; 26:64; 28:18; John 5:22, 27; Phil 2:9, 10. God through the Lamb, Jesus Christ, will be the Judge (Rev. 20:11–15). Already here in 5:21, 22—hence, rather early in Christ’s ministry—we have a clear testimony to the effect that Jesus laid claim to nothing less than being the One to whom the entire world, believing and unbelieving, would be answerable. In a far more detailed manner this tremendous fact will be set forth in 25:31 ff. Finally, Jesus claims to be in a unique sense “God’s Son.” He says “my Father” (verse 21). Just what does he mean when he says this? In which sense does he call himself, by inference, the Son of God? In the sense in which believers can all say, “Our Father”? Answer: The very fact that he never includes himself when he uses the term “our Father,” and, of course, never includes any others when he says “my Father” or “my own Father,” shows that he viewed himself as Son of God in a very special sense. He enjoys community of essence with the Father. See John 10:30; also Matt. 11:25–28; 14:33 (Jesus accepted the testimony of the disciples); John 1:18 (“the only begotten God,” according to the best reading); 3:16; 5:18 (Jesus called God “his own Father”); etc. Now if, as has been proved, Jesus was conscious of his natural, essential, divine, trinitarian sonship, then is it not reasonable to believe that whenever he used the term “my Father,” a reference, direct or indirect, to this divine sonship is never wholly excluded? See the following passages: Matt. 7:21; 10:32; 12:50; 15:13; 16:17; 18:10, 19; 20:23; 25:34; 26:39, 42, 53; Luke 10:22; 22:29; 24:49; John 5:17, 43; 6:32; 8:19, 49, 54; 10:18, 29, 37; 14:7, 12, 20, 21, 28; 15:1, 8, 10, 15, 23, 24; 16:10; 18:11; and 20:17. To be sure, Jesus was God’s Son in a fourfold sense: a. ethical sonship, being “a child of God”; b. official sonship, being the Messiah; c. nativistic sonship, being virgin-born, so that God is the Father of his human nature; and d. trinitarian sonship, being eternally begotten by the Father, and partaking of the divine essence equally with the Father and the Holy Spirit. But these four are not separate. Do not the first three relationships rest upon the fourth? On “Father in heaven” see pp. 287, 326.
Hendriksen, W., & Kistemaker, S. J. (1953–2001). Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew (Vol. 9, pp. 375–378). Baker Book House.
“Let us recollect that peace or war will not always be left to our option; that however moderate or unambitious we may be, we cannot count upon the moderation, or hope to extinguish the ambition of others.” —Alexander Hamilton (1788)
Khamenei and Ahmadinejad are dead: Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is dead. He was killed in Operation Epic Fury, the U.S.-Israel joint operation against the Iranian regime. Khamenei had ruled Iran since 1989, directing that country in its decades of global terrorism, primarily targeting Israel and the U.S. He was responsible for thousands of American deaths and infamously led chants of “Death to Israel” and “Death to America.” At least 40 of the regime’s leadership were also killed in the strikes, including former hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who pushed hard for Iran’s nuclear weapons program. A Holocaust denier, Ahmadinejad focused much of his ire on Israel, mirroring the language of Khamenei.
Four U.S. service members killed in action: After the U.S. announced military action against Iran, retaliatory missiles from the Iranian government struck the surrounding nations haphazardly. Unfortunately, one missile managed to impact a U.S. tactical operations center in Kuwait, killing three and seriously wounding five more. One of those wounded later succumbed to injuries. President Donald Trump proclaimed, “As one nation, we grieve for the true American patriots who have made the ultimate sacrifice.” Details on the strike and the identities of the four fallen service members are being withheld until 24 hours after notification of next-of-kin.
Islamic terrorism in Austin: A Senegalize naturalized American citizen carried out a terror attack in Austin, Texas, in the wee hours of Sunday morning. Ndiaga Diagne parked his truck outside the Buford’s Backyard Beer Garden and opened fire on patrons before turning his weapon on pedestrians walking down the street. Two victims are dead, and 14 wounded were rushed to the hospital, with three in critical condition. Police responded within 60 seconds of the first gunshot and heroically ended the threat, killing the assailant. Diagne had a lengthy rap sheet, and the attack seems to have been revenge for U.S. strikes on Iran. He was wearing a “Property of Allah” shirt and a Quran was found in his vehicle.
Congress will tackle war powers: The U.S. Congress is attempting to exercise its constitutionally mandated authority over declaration of war in the face of Operation Epic Fury. A bipartisan group led by Democrats is attempting to force a vote on the president’s war powers. Senators Tim Kaine (D-VA) and Rand Paul (R-KY), along with House members Thomas Massie (R-KY) and Ro Khanna (D-CA), are expected to bring forward war powers resolutions for a vote this week. Kaine explicitly stated his goal of ending Operation Epic Fury. Currently, the 1973 War Powers Resolution requires the president to report to Congress within 48 hours of deployment and caps any engagement not authorized by Congress at 60 days. Both chambers will be briefed by top administration officials today, and the president has said that he expects the operation to conclude within four weeks.
Pahlavi incoming? Iranian Prince Reza Pahlavi, son of the late Shah, has been living outside of Iran since the 1979 Islamic Revolution. Now, Pahlavi believes the regime could fall. He also believes there can be peace with Israel and agrees that Iran’s nuclear program should be completely dismantled. He laid out the core principles for rebuilding Iran: “Number one is Iran’s territorial integrity. Number two is a clear separation of religion from state, which is a prerequisite to democracy.” The prince highlighted the importance of “equality of all citizens under the law and individual liberties” as the third pillar, and concluded that the democratic process of allowing “the people to elect and decide what the future system of governance should be” was of utmost importance. Pahlavi said he’s not running for office but wants to be the “bridge” to a free Iran.
Oil prices rise: Following Operation Epic Fury, stock markets across the globe have initially slumped. Meanwhile, oil prices have jumped by roughly 7%. In the U.S., the price of a barrel of oil rose 8% to $72.70. The last time oil prices jumped was last summer during the U.S.-Israel strike against Iran’s nuclear facilities. President Trump has said this operation will last several weeks, which means oil prices may continue rising. This will likely lead to higher pump prices across the country. Natural gas prices also rose by 6%.
Pakistan and Afghanistan go to war: On Friday, growing tensions between Afghanistan and Pakistan ignited into war, as Pakistan bombed Kabul and other areas across Afghanistan. The bombing was in retaliation for Taliban-controlled Afghanistan’s launching of a border offensive into Pakistan targeting military bases. No casualty numbers are yet known. While border skirmishes have repeatedly occurred over the last few years, this scale of attack has not been seen. The UN has called for a ceasefire, as has China, which is on friendly terms with both countries. Pakistan has accused the Taliban of supporting anti-Pakistan terrorists following a number of suicide attacks within Pakistan, including one within a mosque in Islamabad.
Medal of Honor ceremony: President Trump awarded the Medal of Honor to three U.S. Army Soldiers today: Master Sergeant Roderick (Roddie) W. Edmonds (posthumous), Staff Sergeant Michael H. Ollis (posthumous), and Command Sergeant Major Terry P. Richardson (Retired). Edmonds received the Medal for his courageous and sacrificial acts as a prisoner of war from January 27, 1945, to March 30, 1945, saving 1,200 American POW lives. Ollis was awarded for going above and beyond the call of duty as an Infantryman with Company B, 2d Battalion, 22d Infantry Regiment at Forward Operating Base Ghazni, Afghanistan, by, among other brave actions, inserting himself between a suicide bomber and an officer. Richardson demonstrated his mettle while serving as the Lima Platoon Leader with Company A, 1st Battalion, 28th Infantry Regiment, 1st Infantry Division in the vicinity of Loc Ninh, Republic of Vietnam, where his selfless actions saved 85 soldiers’ lives.
Republican DAs are better: “We find that narrow election of a Republican prosecutor reduces all-cause mortality rates among young men ages 20-29 by 6.6%.” So says a study published by Panka Benecsik of Vanderbilt University and Tyler Giles of Wellesley College. The study explains that electing a Republican DA leads to a large reduction in firearm homicide in black men and a smaller reduction in firearm suicide in white men. Conservatives may not be surprised that electing Soros-backed district attorneys who routinely downgrade charges and release violent criminals back onto the streets leads to more violence and death. This study is another example confirming the obvious: stopping crime can be as simple as putting criminals in jail.
DOJ charges 30 more in MN church disruption: On Friday, Attorney General Pam Bondi announced that the Justice Department has charged an additional 30 individuals in connection with the Minneapolis church disruption by anti-ICE activists in January. More than two dozen have been arrested, Bondi noted, with more to come. Thus far, nine charged defendants have pleaded not guilty, including Don Lemon. The indictment states, “Forced to terminate the church’s worship service, congregants fled the church building out of fear for their safety, other congregants took steps to implement an emergency plan, and young children were left to wonder, as one child put it, if their parents were going to die.” If found guilty, defendants face up to a year in prison and up to a $10,000 fine.
Headlines
State of the Union viewership down 3.4 million from last year (Daily Signal)
DHS releasing some illegal border crossers into U.S. despite claims of “zero” releases (Washington Examiner)
Illegal alien charged with rape while training to be corrections officer; prison released him (Not the Bee)
Mother stabbed to death at Virginia bus stop by illegal alien with over 30 prior arrests (NY Post)
The Executive News Summary is compiled daily by Jordan Candler, Thomas Gallatin, Sterling Henry, and Sophie Starkova. For the archive, click here.
At our Friday meeting of the National Medal of Honor Sustaining Fund last week, a colleague casually asked what I thought were Donald Trump’s strategic and tactical options in Iran. He was surprised when I responded to Part A and Part B of his question with one word: “Decapitation.”
None of the last six presidents, other than Trump, has been willing to confront Iran with regime-destabilizing kinetic action.
In what amounts to a textbook case of a foreign adversary anticipating the consequences of a powerful American president, on 20 January 1981, as President Ronald Reagan was 10 minutes into his 20-minute inaugural address, the Iranian regime under the tyrannical leadership of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini announced that all of the American hostages were being released.
No president since could conjure up the political will to take on Khomeini, or his Shia cleric successor, the second Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, until this week. Since Khamenei’s rise in 1989, Iran has been the perennial disruptor of Middle East peace as the region’s primary state sponsor of Islamic terror proxies.
Republican presidents, including Reagan’s successor George H.W. Bush and his son George W. Bush, drew lines in the sand, including Bush 41’s Desert Shield/Storm offensive to remove Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. But he did not have the resolve to decapitate Saddam, prompting Reagan’s contemporary, Margaret Thatcher, to protest, “Don’t go wobbly on us, George.”
Regarding Iran, Bush 43’s successor, Barack Obama, became Khamenei’s great appeaser, not only codifying the Iran nuke deal, effectively paving the way for the Islamic Bomb, but in 2016, just before Trump’s first term, Obama even shipped $400 million in palletized cash to Khamenei, and another $1.3 billion shortly thereafter.
In 2017, Trump took on Iran and largely held the line in defense of Israel.
But Iran’s state-terror-sponsor status surged back in 2021, when the feckless appeasers Joe Biden and Kamala Harris took office.
Biden empowered the 2023 Hamas (read: “Iranian”) attack on Israel, leaving Israel to defend itself alone.
Enter President Trump for a second term.
As Israel endeavored to contain the threat from Hamas, confident of America’s support under Trump, in June 2025, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched Operation Rising Lion, a 12-day war against Iran to protect the civilized world from that rogue nation’s development of nuclear weapons. Eleven days later, President Trump launched Operation Midnight Hammer, destroying Iran’s processed uranium and enrichment capabilities to further incapacitate its construction of nuclear weapons.
In the eight months since Rising Lion and Midnight Hammer, Israel and the U.S. have attempted to negotiate a peace settlement with Khamenei and President/Dictator Masoud Pezeshkian, but to no avail.
Despite Trump’s launch of Operation Absolute Resolve to capture Venezuela’s narco-trafficking dictator, Nicolás Maduro, Khamenei and Pezeshkian failed to understand the implications for their regime.
Ali Khamenei did not get the memo, and his role in any further negotiations ended abruptly on Saturday.
At 0230 on 28FEB, President Trump announced our nation’s collaboration with Israel in Operation Epic Fury. The attack was launched on the 35th anniversary of the end of Operation Desert Storm in 1991.
According to Trump: “A short time ago, the United States military began major combat operations in Iran. Our objective is to defend the American people by eliminating imminent threats from the Iranian regime — a vicious group of very hard, terrible people. Its menacing activities directly endanger the United States, our troops, our bases overseas, and our allies throughout the world.”
Trump made clear: “We’re going to destroy their missiles and raze their missile industry to the ground. It will be, again, totally obliterated. We’re going to annihilate their navy. … And we will ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. … We’re doing this not for now. We’re doing this for the future. And it is a noble mission.”
He spoke directly to “the great, proud people of Iran,” telling them, “The hour of your freedom is at hand.”
The UK, France, and Germany all backed Israel’s action. But as anticipated, hedging British bets because of the sheer number of Islamic terrorists they have allowed into their respective nations, UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer made clear, “The United Kingdom played no role in these strikes.”
Shortly after Epic Fury began, we confirmed that, once again, Israel’s HaMossad, in coordination with opponents of the Iranian regime, had very good intelligence. The IDF targeted and killed Ali Khamenei, and almost 50 of his key regime leaders were also killed.
Of the Ayatollah’s demise, Trump said: “Khamenei, one of the most evil people in history, is dead. … He was unable to avoid our Intelligence and Highly Sophisticated Tracking Systems and, working closely with Israel, there was not a thing he, or the other leaders that have been killed along with him, could do.”
I presume the fact that Masoud Pezeshkian survived the attack was a strategic decision.
It will take some days to determine how effective the decapitation has been — but the old adage that the best laid plans go out the window when the first shot is fired has certainly been challenged by Absolute Resolve and now Epic Fury.
As our military analyst, GEN B.B. Bell (USA Ret.), concluded: “This is a stunning achievement by Israel and the United States and will positively impact the region and the world for years to come. Thank God we have a President who is not afraid to wield military power when U.S. national interests are at risk!”
There have been American casualties, including four American service personnel killed Saturday in an Iranian missile attack against Kuwait, wounding four others. There have also been three U.S. F-15E Strike Eagles shot down in a “friendly fire” incident over Kuwait. U.S. Central Command reports that all six Air Force pilots and WSOs ejected safely and are in stable condition.
According to Secretary Pete Hegseth: “We didn’t start this war, but under President Trump, we are finishing it. Their war on Americans has become our retribution against their ayatollah and his death cult. … This is not Iraq. This is not endless. No stupid rules of engagement, no nation-building quagmire, no democracy-building exercise, no politically correct wars. We fight to win, and we don’t waste time or lives.”
Of the casualties and those anticipated, Hegseth said to military families, “We grieve with you, and we will never forget you.”
Sen. Tim Kaine (D-VA), who called the attack “tragic,” is prepping a war powers resolution to halt further action against Iran.
That nonsense prompted seasoned political analyst Brit Hume to conclude: “Democrats are trapped because they exist in a party that overwhelmingly despises Donald Trump — it’s called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and there’s something to that. And the result is that these Democrats … oppose this because they feel they must … galvanize resistance to Trump almost no matter what he does. One thing you can say about this president, he’s nothing if not bold.”
Hume added a cautionary note: “The thing about regime change is that the consequences are not foreseeable; all kinds of things can happen. I think the odds are that this will work well, but they’re not guaranteed.”
In the coming weeks, we will get a better picture of the direction Iran’s 90 million citizens will take their country.
In the meantime, please continue to pray for all our Armed Forces involved in Epic Fury and operations in the coming months.
It is a dangerous world, particularly after years of reckless foreign policy ineptitude and military atrophy under Joe Biden. We are about to find out if the FBI and CIA missed any of the Iranian terrorists who came across our southern and northern borders on Biden’s watch.
Finally, memo to Cuban dictator Miguel Diaz-Canel…
Douglas Andrews: Why the Paramount-Warner Merger Is a BIG Deal — If this massive media deal goes through, the American media landscape just might be in for an ideological rebalancing.
Thomas Gallatin: Trump’s New Retirement Plan — In a nutshell, President Trump wants to expand the government employee retirement plan to all American workers.
Gary Bauer: The DHS Deep State — “A few DHS staff had installed spying software on the phones and computers of myself and other political hires,” Kristi Noem has revealed.
Roger Helle: How to Be a Giant-Killer — If you haven’t had to face a few giants in your life, maybe you’ve been keeping a low profile so as not to draw attention to yourself.
Iranians Celebrate Attack on the Regime — The joint U.S.-Israel strikes on Iran sparked notable positive reactions from segments of the Iranian population and diaspora.
SHORT CUTS
Yellow Journalism
“With his bushy white beard and easy smile, Ayatollah Khamenei cut a more avuncular figure in public than his perpetually scowling but much more revered mentor, and he was known to be fond of Persian poetry and classic Western novels.” —The Washington Post’s William Branigin (“That is a bit narrow. He also had an avuncular predilection for mass killings, suppression of women, and the torture of dissidents…” —constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley)
Non Compos Mentis
“I criticized Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei a thousand times. He was oppressing his own people and preventing democracy. But there’s one thing you can’t take away from him, he died on his own two feet, instead of kneeling to Israel. That took courage. He didn’t bow.” —”The Young Turks” host Cenk Uygur
Demagogues
“Donald Trump is dragging the United States into a war the American people do not want. Let me be clear: I am opposed to a regime-change war in Iran, and our troops are being put in harm’s way for the sake of Trump’s war of choice.” —Kamala Harris
“Today’s military strikes on Iran — carried out by the United States and Israel — mark a catastrophic escalation in an illegal war of aggression. Bombing cities. Killing civilians. Opening a new theater of war. Americans do not want this. They do not want another war in pursuit of regime change.” —NYC Democrat Mayor Zohran Mamdani
“President Trump’s decision to initiate military hostilities into Iran starts another unnecessary war which endangers our servicemembers and destabilizes an already fragile region.” —Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA)
“Trump has launched an illegal regime change war. As someone who has survived the horrors of war, I know military strikes will not make us safer; they will inflame tensions and push the region further into chaos. When we abandon diplomacy, we choose destruction.” —Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) (“Any chance for regime change in Minneapolis?” —Larry Elder)
“Iraq was attacked by the US during Ramadan and it sickening to know that the US is again going to attack Iran during Ramadan. The US apparently loves to strike Muslim countries during Ramadan and I am convinced it isn’t what these countries have done to violate international law but about who they worship.” —Ilhan Omar (“The Iraq invasion began on March 20, 2003 and major combat operations were declared over on May 1, months before Ramadan that year. Surveys also show that in Iran only about 37% of the population identifies as Muslim, while nearly half describe themselves as non-religious.” —Community Note on X)
“Both the U.S. and genocidal Israel doesn’t care about the laws. This is who they are.” —Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)
“You cannot ‘free’ people by killing them and destroying their country.” —Rashida Tlaib
Credit Where It’s Due
“Iran massacred 30,000 of their own people… This war is not about the Iranian people. It’s about this poisonous regime. … I might be a Democrat, but in this specific case, the president is absolutely correct to do these kinds of actions.” —Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA)
For the Record
“The Hezbollah pager operation was incredible. The strike on the nuclear reactors was flawless. The Maduro operation was out of a Hollywood action movie. How can you even describe the Khomeini-leadership decapitation operation?” —Buck Sexton
“It’s more and more clear that October 7 was for Islamic radicals what Pearl Harbor was for the Japanese — a brilliant tactical success that carried within it the seeds of catastrophic strategic failure.” —Rich Lowry
“Save me your outrage. Obama bombed 8 countries without Congress approval and Clinton bombed an aspirin factory to cover up his affair.” —Rep. Tim Burchett (R-TN)
“We’re not trying to start a war in Iran. The president is trying to end the war in Iran.” —Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA)
“If Kamala were in office, we’d be sending Iran more pallets of cash.” —Tim Young
ON THIS DAY in 1807, Congress passed an act to “prohibit the importation of slaves into any port or place within the jurisdiction of the United States.” It would be another 58 years before slavery was abolished entirely
NEW YORK, NY — After U.S. military action against the Ayatollah, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani was reportedly getting nervous that President Donald Trump keeps assassinating Muslim dictators.
The radical extremist now ruling as the leader of an oppressive Islamic regime in the Big Apple was overheard asking his closest advisors for plans to take cover to avoid Trump’s ongoing campaign to wipe out all Muslim dictators who threaten the security of the United States.
“There aren’t many of us left,” Mamdani reportedly told one aide. “Trump keeps taking out all of our best guys. Every radical Muslim dictator is now in danger, including me. If I don’t want to be next, I need to hide somewhere. What are our options?
After being briefed on all available security and evacuation measures, Mamdani reportedly notified is Islamic regime to prepare for conflict with the United States. “It’s inevitable,” he said. “The Trump administration has made it clear that the days of Islamic dictatorships that take aggressive stances against the U.S. are numbered. That means us. If Trump keeps eliminating America-hating Muslim leaders, I know it’ll eventually be my turn.”
According to insiders, Mamdani then ordered all members of his staff to their battle stations to await further orders while he took refuge in a subterranean bunker in his mayoral headquarters underneath a major children’s hospital.
At publishing time, Mamdani had ordered retaliatory snowball strikes against strategic U.S. targets within New York City.
What Rubio’s speech gets right—and what a Christian worldview must add.
Civilizations do not collapse first because of enemies. They collapse because of misplaced loves. A renewed West without repentance would be a harder civilization, not a healed one. Strength without righteousness produces tyranny, not renewal. If armies fight for a way of life, the deeper question remains: What kind of people is the Church fighting to form right now?
Marco Rubio’s speech before European leaders was serious, centered, and right. He spoke in the language of civilization at a moment when the West had largely forgotten how to speak that way at all. Rubio named what many sense but hesitate to say. Civilizations require memory. Borders and national sovereignty exist for a reason. Inheritance carries obligation. Armies fight for a people and a way of life, not abstractions. Deindustrialization, strategic paralysis, and border collapse were choices, not accidents.
The reaction to the speech revealed more than disagreement over policy. It revealed discomfort with moral language. The modern West prefers to speak in systems and procedures—policy stripped of moral language. Rubio spoke about heritage, duty, and continuity. This contrast unsettled elites because it revealed our growing discomfort with the idea that a civilization possesses a moral center.
Christians should welcome that clarity. Naming decay matters. But clarity about decline is not the same as healing the cause of decline.
What Scripture Has Shown Us Before
This moment has a biblical echo.
When Israel asked the prophet Samuel for a king “like the other nations,” the request revealed something deeper than political preference. The people wanted order, security, and strength. God named the root: they were rejecting Him as their King (1 Samuel 8). The problem was not the desire for stability. The problem was disordered worship.
The prophets exposed the same problem with Judah. The people kept the forms of public life while their loves drifted. “This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me” (Isaiah 29:13). The temple still stood. The institutions still functioned. The heart of the people had already turned.
Rubio named the civilizational symptoms well. Scripture teaches us to name the spiritual disease beneath them.
The Deeper Diagnosis
The collapse of the West did not begin with trade policy, naive diplomacy, or open borders. Those are downstream failures. The deeper crisis is spiritual.
The battle raging at home is disordered worship. Misordered love calls destruction compassion and decay mercy.
When love loses its order, empathy loses its aim. Compassion is redirected toward what corrodes culture.
Fox News contributor Kellyanne Conway joins ‘Mornings with Maria’ to weigh in on President Donald Trump’s Iran strike, Democratic backlash over the War Powers Resolution and what it means for the midterms.
Special Reporter anchor Bret Baier just got off the phone with President Trump: “He is very pleased with how things are going. Obviously, he is disheartened by the loss of life, and there may be more, he said, along the way. But as far as the progress, he said, they are ahead of… pic.twitter.com/dLdNjbt5sH
Footage circulating on social media early Monday appeared to show the first operational use of the new Iron Beam laser air-defense system against rockets and drones launched by Hezbollah from southern Lebanon.
The now-viral clip, first posted by Israel War Room on X, reportedly shows the high-energy laser system intercepting and destroying an incoming Hezbollah drone overnight along Israel’s northern frontier.
If officially confirmed by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), this would mark the first known combat deployment of Iron Beam as part of Israel’s active air defense network since the system was delivered to the Israeli Air Force in late December 2025.
The Iron Beam has been under active development for more than a decade since its initial unveiling in 2014 and officially entered service with Israeli forces on December 28, 2025, following years of live-fire testing against rockets, mortars, and UAVs across southern Israel.
Israel War Room wrote on X:
“HISTORIC: For the first time ever, Israel used the Iron Beam to intercept rockets fired by Hezbollah.”
⚡HISTORIC: For the first time ever, Israel used the Iron Beam to intercept rockets fired by Hezbollah. pic.twitter.com/DU63REU22k
Israel’s Iron Beam, developed by Rafael Advanced Defense Systems in cooperation with Elbit Systems, represents a paradigm shift in counter-rocket, artillery, mortar (C-RAM), and UAV defense architecture.
Unlike kinetic interceptor systems such as Iron Dome, the Iron Beam utilizes a high-energy directed laser capable of destroying aerial threats at the speed of light by superheating structural components mid-flight.
U.S. Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee retweeted the Iron Beam footage with a message lauding Israel’s technological innovation and defensive resolve.
His caption read:
“Hezbollah gives IDF an opportunity to successfully test their new laser Iron Beam technology. Been in shelter twice in last hour. Grateful for Israeli innovation this morning.”
Hezbollah gives @IDF an opportunity to successfully test their new laser Iron Beam technology. Been in shelter twice in last hour. Grateful for Israeli innovation this morning. https://t.co/BQCyltFhDV
— Ambassador Mike Huckabee (@GovMikeHuckabee) March 2, 2026
According to Andrey Marochko, Kiev lost around 16,300 drones and 1,400 tanks and other armored vehicles in combat operations between December and February
Watch RSBN’s LIVE coverage as we bring you the latest updates on Operation Epic Fury, including new developments and official statements from Washington.
Plus, President Trump hosts a Medal of Freedom ceremony honoring distinguished Americans for their contributions to the nation. Stay tuned for real-time reporting, analysis, and key moments as they happen.
Day 3: War with Iran. The latest news, information and Christian perspective on Operation Epic Fury and Operation Roaring Lion, an ongoing joint military strike by the U.S. and Israel vs. Iran.
For over 20 years, CBN has beamed life-giving Farsi broadcasts into Iran despite internet shutdowns. Now, with war erupting across the country today and civilians facing mass displacement and suffering, CBN is ready to deliver prayer support, emergency food, humanitarian aid, and the hope of Jesus to families whose lives have been upended by conflict. DONATE HERE — cbn.com/iran
Former President Barack Obama furthered radical Islam inthe United States
Former President Barack Obama furthered radical Islam in the United States. It was Barack Obama who ended investigations of Hezbollah crime syndicates in the US despite the ATF warning of the dangers. When the Holy Land Foundation was caught raising funds for terror, he ended the probe. It was Obama and his acolytes who forbade probes into and surveillance of radical mosques.
The former president legitimized the Muslim Brotherhood, CAIR, and other radical organizations.
Masih Alinejad, the courageous Iranian-American journalist and current CBS News contributor who has survived multiple Tehran-backed assassination plots, took to X to expose the staggering hypocrisy of “Squad” member Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN).
She issued a “letter from an Iranian woman wounded by the regime,” accusing Omar of maintaining a cozy ambiguity toward the Islamic Republic while the regime systematically slaughters its own people.
The heart of Alinejad’s message centered on the tragic story of Sara Saeidi, a 39-year-old mother of two who was executed by the regime while peacefully protesting.
At the time of her death, she was reportedly wearing a sweatshirt that said “MANHATTAN” with an American flag, which some activists claim symbolized her desire for freedom.
Following her death, Iranian authorities allegedly falsified her death certificate, listing the cause of death as a “collision with agricultural machinery” to mask the shooting.
Alinejad’s critique highlights a growing frustration among Iranian dissidents who see far-left U.S. lawmakers as “anti-war” only when it benefits the mullahs in Tehran. She slammed Omar’s “No War With Iran” campaigns as a shield for the regime’s internal massacre of over 30,000 civilians.
“I am a woman from Iran. Let me tell you honestly how women like me see politicians like you in America, women who speak about freedom from the safety of Congress while sympathizing with our killers under Islamic regimes.
You stand next to the American flag, speaking about freedom. Now you launch campaigns saying, “No War With Iran.”
Now I want to introduce you to a brave Iranian woman who understood America better than you ever will.
Her name is Sara Saeidi. Born and raised in Iran. 39 years old. A mother of two daughters, 19 and 6.
She was shot in the head for the “crime” of peacefully protesting while wearing a sweatshirt that said MANHATTAN, with the American flag beneath it.
While you stood in Congress under that flag, she carried its name on her chest, not as symbolism for a photo opportunity but as a dream.
Three days after she was killed, her body was returned to her family only after threats and money were taken from them. They were banned from holding a proper funeral. Authorities falsified the circumstances of her death.
That is the regime you refuse to confront clearly.
She wanted the freedom Manhattan represents, the freedom to live without fear, without morality police, without a bullet in her head. The same freedom protected by the Constitution you swore to uphold.
You speak of “No War With Iran,” but you refuse to condemn the war being waged against us, the Iranian people, by the Islamic Republic.
More than 30,000 unarmed civilians have been killed. Women blinded. Teenagers hanged. Mothers executed.
When American lawmakers like you reduce this reality to a partisan talking point, you do the regime’s work for it. Dictatorships thrive when moral clarity disappears and when lawmakers choose ambiguity instead of standing firmly with victims.
You call yourself anti war. But where is your condemnation of the regime’s massacre? Where is your outrage at its war against its own people? You are anti-Iranian women.
Peace without justice is surrender.
Your hatred of President Trump appears stronger than your love for America, stronger than your love for Manhattan, for freedom, for women’s rights. That is why you sound sympathetic to the Islamic Republic while remaining silent about women like Sara, like me, and like millions of Iranians who are victims of this barbaric regime.
You celebrating hijab day in Manhattan in beautiful New York and watching women get killed in Iran for not wearing hijab.
I dare you to share the picture of Sara, and say no to the war being wage by Islamist terrorist on us, Iranians.”
Help Persecuted Christians TODAY: https://csi-usa.org/Christian Solidarity International
On today’s Quick Start podcast:
•
•
NEWS: WAR breaks out with Iran as missiles and drones hit multiple Middle Eastern nations, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Bahrain, Qatar, Jordan, and the UAE. A fire erupts at Saudi Arabia’s Ras Tanura oil refinery, U.S. fighter jets crash amid heavy fire in Kuwait, and Israel claims to have eliminated senior Iranian intelligence officials in Tehran. The U.S. and Gulf allies condemn Iran’s “reckless and indiscriminate” attacks as the region teeters on the edge of full-scale conflict.
•
•
FOCUS STORY: Rev. Shah Ahmadi lived in Iran for 22 years before fleeing after converting to Christianity. He shares what life is really like under the regime, what happens when someone leaves Islam for Christ, and how his family paid a price for his faith. His firsthand account offers a sobering look at the cost of discipleship inside Iran.
•
•
MAIN THING: As bombs fall and global powers maneuver, what does this war mean for Iran’s underground church? Chris Mitchell, Joshua Swanson, and Pastor Robbie Dawkins weigh in on the spiritual battle behind the military one — and why persecution has historically fueled explosive church growth in Iran. Is this crisis a turning point for the region?
•
•
LAST THING: 2 Timothy
3:12 — “In fact, everyone who wants to live a godly life in Christ Jesus will be persecuted.”
Truth2Freedom's Blog 