Category Archives: A World of Darkness

The moral and spiritual collapse of the United States

The Gender Confused

In Egypt is the ancient temple complex at Karnak.  Second only to the great pyramids and the sphinx, millions of tourists a year visit this massive and imposing compound.  Encyclopedia.com describes Karnak as follows –

“On the banks of the Nile, between the ancient cities of Luxor and Thebes, lie the remains of Karnak, one of the most magnificent temple complexes ever constructed. In ancient Egyptian, Karnak means “the most select of places,” and it became a religious center during the period known as the New Kingdom (founded c. 1550 b.c.).

Dedicated to the sun deity Amon-Ra (also Amun-Re) and built around 1500 b.c., Karnak consists of massive pillars, towering columns, avenues of sphinxes, and a remarkable obelisk that stands 97 feet tall and weighs 323 tons. The Great Hypostyle Hall, one of the largest single chambers ever built, covers an area of nearly 54,000 square feet. The entire Cathedral of Notre Dame could fit comfortably within its walls.”

Now located in the Cairo museum but originally located in the temple at Karnak is what is known as the Restoration Stela of Tutankhamen. Stelae were stone tablets that were placed in the temple to commemorate special events.  This stela of Pharaoh Tutankhamen was essentially a declaration that under his leadership the old and true religion of worshipping the true King of the Gods, Amun-Ra, also commonly spelled Amun-Re, was to be restored.

Tutankhamen’s father had introduced the great heresy of worshipping Aten.  Wiki describes this radical religious heresy as –

“During the latter part of the eighteenth dynasty, the pharaoh Akhenaten (also known as Amenhotep IV) disliked the power of the temple of Amun and advanced the worship of the Aten, a deity whose power was manifested in the sun disk, both literally and symbolically. He defaced the symbols of many of the old deities, and based his religious practices upon the deity, the Aten.

“He moved his capital away from Thebes, but this abrupt change was very unpopular with the priests of Amun, who now found themselves without any of their former power. The religion of Egypt was inexorably tied to the leadership of the country, the pharaoh being the leader of both. The pharaoh was the highest priest in the temple of the capital, and the next lower level of religious leaders were important advisers to the pharaoh, many being administrators of the bureaucracy that ran the country.  The introduction of Atenism under Akhenaton constructed a monotheist worship of Aten in direct competition with that of Amun.

The famous “boy-king” Tutankhamen which means “Living Image of Amun” was originally named Tutankhaten, “Living Image of Aten” by his father, but changed it to the name we commonly know when his father dies and he assumed the throne in 1332 b.c. at the age of 9 or 10 and ruled 9 years till his death in 1323 b.c.

Great damage had been done to the old religion by Amenhotep IV, as he essentially attempted to stamp out all traces of it.  In his stela, Tutankhamen (or who actually wrote if for him) said in part –

“The good ruler, performing benefactions for his father (Amun) and all the gods, for he has made what was ruined to endure as a monument for the ages of eternity and he has expelled deceit throughout the Two Lands, and justice was set up so that it might make lying to be an abomination of the land, as in its first time. Now when his majesty appeared as king, the temples of the gods and goddesses from Elephantine down to the marshes of the Delta had gone to pieces (or fallen into neglect).

“Their shrines had become desolate, had become mounds overgrown with weeds. Their sanctuaries (or chapels) were as if they had never been. Their halls were a footpath (or trodden roads). The land was topsy-turvy and the gods turned their backs upon this land.

“If the army was sent to Djahi to extend the frontiers of Egypt, no success of theirs came at all. If one prayed to a god to seek counsel from him, he would never come at all. If one made supplication (or petition) to a goddess similarly, she would never come at all.”

King Solomon wrote in the book of Ecclesiastes 1:9 that “what has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done; there is nothing new under the sun.”  Whether in ancient Egypt or America today, humans make the same mistakes because human nature doesn’t change.

In Egypt one Pharaoh attempted to uproot and destroy the old ways, the traditions, the prevailing religion of his nation that lent stability to the culture and replace it with another.  Decay and destruction was left in the wake.  America today is uprooting and casting away all of the valuable things that made America what it was.  The Egyptian gods were no true gods, America’s God was the real God, the God of gods.  Which will have the greatest fall?

America has indeed become a land of “topsy-turvy” which means in utter confusion or disorder.  Liberals are plunging our nation into this condition.  Their latest assault on order and reason is their insistence that “transgender” persons be given their “rights”.  Liberals insist that the 99.9% give in to the whims of the 0.1%.  After their stunning victory over the institution of marriage and family, now they push their depravity down to the next levels.

Obviously any honest person would quickly conclude that gender confusion is a mental disease.   While the scriptures don’t specifically address the issue, we can confidently conclude that God regards it as depravity along with homosexuality, based simply on the fact that God “created them (Adam and Eve) male and female”.

At the root, gender confusion indicates a pathological self-loathing, the tormented soul merely saying, “I hate myself, I hate what I am”, in essence telling God “I refuse to be what you made me”.   Only in our opulent decadent west can these sick souls have the luxury of even trying to pretend to be something they are not.

Realizing the democrat party is Satan’s party and it works continually to thwart God at every turn helps bring crystal clarity to the issue.   Somehow, I don’t picture Bill and Hillary or Barry and the Mooch sitting around in the evenings at home discussing the plight of the transgenders with any honest concern and empathy.   I imagine howls of laughter at the sick foolishness of these psychos, yet they smile as they get to use the issue to attack Christianity, God, American values and reason.

Fresh on the heels of their smashing sodomite victory last year, the liberals are attempting to strike America while their iron is hot.  Obama has loaded up the lower federal courts with reliable anti-American leftists and the Supreme Court is in a stalemate.  Obama has ordered his Department of “Justice” to advance this madness with all haste, his time is short.  Unless Hillary is elected to carry on his “vision” for America, the nation will undo much of the damage he has already inflicted.  Do you really think Hillary will be charged and tried for her crimes?  Highly unlikely.

However, advancing the cause of the gender confused is a real head scratcher for the vast majority of Americans, including their black and Hispanic plantation hands.  This issue is hard to wrap one’s head around.   These gender “confused” need mental help and most assuredly spiritual help.  The sheer madness of this is staggering.  The democrats act as if these confused people will be traumatized if they must share a facility with their own “kind”.   Yet, what do these males see every time they take a bath or shower, or look in a full length mirror while naked or even take a leak?   Their arguments surpass silly.

In their haste, the liberals haven’t even done the grunt work.  There are no credible scientists, doctors, psychologists or sociologists who have come out with any research indicating that these confused and deluded souls are anything but.  They spend the past several decades building the case for the “normality” and beneficence of the homosexual lifestyle.  Our children have been propagandized to accept that chosen lifestyle as “no big deal”.  Our society awaits the destruction that will be the result of glorifying the deviants.

In 2014 Obama praised the first open homosexual to be drafted by an NFL football team saying, “From the playing field to the corporate boardroom, LGBT Americans prove every day that you should be judged by what you do and not who you are”.   What they do is statistically lead in adverse health statistics of depression, drug and alcohol dependence, suicide and STD’s, including AIDS.  Now that they adopt children, one can only shudder to think of the mental stability of children brought up in such an environment.  What they and their enablers do is shake their fists at God in rebellion and our nation will pay a steep price.

Hopefully this bridge the liberals are attempting to force America to cross will prove to be a bridge too far.  Hopefully, this one issue will easily sweep Trump into the Whitehouse as the only candidate willing to defend traditional Judeo-Christian values that once marked this nation…hopefully.  As liberals continue to grind America into dust, as it destroys the building blocks of our society, it’s time for America to rebel and take a stand against the prevailing liberal culture.

Ancient Egypt enjoyed its time in the sun only to collapse as all great nations and empires have.  Now it is nothing but a hell-hole in the barbaric muslim backwater of the world.  There is no guarantee that America won’t join it, in fact it appears hell-bent to do so.

An Age of Darkness

The way I figure it, there are three kinds of citizens in the United States.  I prefer the word “citizen” here rather than “American” because there is a difference.  The three groups are liberals/socialists/democrats (LSDs), “moderates” and conservatives.  I like calling the first group LSDs because it gives us the commonly used initials for Lysergic acid diethylamide, a mind altering drug that this group behaves as if they’re under the influence of, as what they believe, advocate and advance always leads to bizarre outcomes, failure and destruction.  They continually validate Einstein’s definition of insanity of doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

“Moderates”, so called, are a different breed all together and probably the most aggravating because they generally seem to be the sort of people who are incapable of developing any sort of inner conviction about anything.  We know LSDs are nuts and are so far subsumed into their collective that there’s little hope for them.  On rare occasions will one escape the mental programming and flee the plantation.

Liberals advance FEAR in order to win converts.  Fear of climate, fear of capitalism as it “leaves people behind”, fear of “racism”, fear of an assault on women, fear of conservatives.  This fear leaves its mark on the liberal cult members and the “moderates”.  Fear is what motivates them as opposed to anger which tends to motivate conservatives, anger that liberals are destroying our nation.

Moderates, out of fear, will gravitate to whoever appears to offer a solution to whatever fear has a grip on them at the moment.  The problem with dealing with moderates is that more often than not, they will side with the politician who has the least painful “solution” to the problem, or more correctly, the least painful solution to themselves.  The best motto for a moderate is “out of sight, out of mind”.

It must be realized the moderates do very little if any investigation into issues because they would prefer to just bury the issue.  Moderates are the ones who prefer to dope up on anti-depressants, tune out and pretend that problems really don’t exist, or at least they don’t want to be bothered by them.

Take any issue.  “Everybody” seems to believe that man is destroying the planet.  Thus fear is instilled that we are turning our planet into an inhabitable one like Venus where run-a-way “warming” has created surface temperatures that melt lead, greater than 800 degrees Fahrenheit.  Polar bears are dying, the ice is melting, our coasts will be underwater in the meantime.  Of course, none of this is true, but the poor moderate is bombarded with these fantastical tales constantly and thus come to believe that, indeed, the sky truly is falling.

The moderate view on warming is simple, they really have no skin in the game.  They refuse to understand the true motive of the warmers since that invites conflict and anxiety and they really don’t care where their electrical power comes from as long as their light switch works.  The simplest way to deal with the warming issue is simply to go along with the warmers just to get them to shut up if nothing else.

Moderates have no idea of what our nation will look like once reliable and cheap power sources are taken off line.  Even a superficial investigation into man caused global warming will quickly reveal that it is a hoax perpetrated by western socialists in order to gain control and power over our lives.  Control our energy, control our modern lives.

They will be the first ones screaming when the cities go dark and the denizens start burning them down.  Fortunately, only a small percentage of Americans believe warming is a very serious issue, about 25 percent, with another 25 percent or so who believe that man is contributing to some warming.  As long as it is an issue, moderates will tend to side with the warmers.

On social issues, moderates side with the liberals much for the same reason, the squeaky wheel gets the grease.  Moderates are easily swayed by pseudo-scientific, pseudo-sociological and pseudo-economic (Keynesian) arguments.  Few conservatives and certainly no moderates truly understand the liberal movement and the attempt at a  coup that has been afoot in this nation.

Morally, spiritually and culturally speaking we can trace our current situation to events of a century ago.  Theological liberalism landed on our shores by the late 1800’s and by the 1930’s, this anti-biblical, liberal theology had captured most of our protestant denominations.  The Great Depression and World War II in many ways dampened it, but during the 1950’s the nation began a rapid drift from its founding ethos, principles and fealty to a biblical God and the age of materialism began.  The American economy was booming in peacetime, jobs were plentiful and the first generation of baby boomers, rather than being subjected to hardship and or discipline that builds character, were pampered and spoiled.

Theological liberalism, does among a number of adverse things, divorces what they believe to be the “real” world from the ethereal world of the spiritual.  Liberalism breaks the true connection that exists between a true God and his creation, man.  By the 1960’s, the “God is dead” movement was in full swing.  The opening paragraph on the movement from Wikipedia sums it up very well,

—“Is God Dead?” was an April 8, 1966, cover story for the news magazine Time. A previous article, from October 1965, had investigated a trend among 1960s theologians to write God out of the field of theology. The 1966 article looked in greater depth at the problems facing modern theologians, in making God relevant to an increasingly secular society. Modern science had eliminated the need for religion to explain the natural world, and God took up less and less space in people’s daily lives. The ideas of various scholars were brought in, including the application of contemporary philosophy to the field of theology, and a more personal, individual approach to religion.—

So, as God was losing “relevance to an increasingly secular society” by the 1960’s, we witnessed the “revolution” of that decade.  The boomers, now of age, and a significant number thoroughly secularized, had lost their way.  Their minds could not tolerate the contradictions of their lives.  Without religion, without Christianity, where were the higher ideals?  Where were the higher standards?  Where were the goals, where was the meaning of life itself?

It was and isn’t necessary to say there is no God (atheism), it was only necessary to say that God does not care about nor is he involved in the affairs of man; God has his domain and mankind has its (deism).  It has as a result the deleterious effect of reducing man to despair, simply because he doesn’t see a God attempting to interact with his creation in a personal way.  Man does not reject this truth in a vacuum, there are consequences to suffer as a result.  Man loses his sense of worth and meaning.  Being told he is nothing special, that he is merely a speck of nothingness in an immense materialistic universe has the effect of convincing him that he is of no value.

Whether he knows it or not, he then engages in his own “individual approach to religion” in an attempt to attain a higher meaning to life by attempting to make something of himself because he can’t stand the nothingness into which his own belief system has cast him.  They proclaim as Lucifer did once upon a time, “I will be like the Most High”.  This has led to all of the various radical ism’s that we are confronted with today.

Homosexuality, radical feminism, transgenderism and all of the sexual deviations and even racism are all cries to be heard, to have the right to be an individual in their culture of despair.  I suspect that many of our deranged “mass killers” (almost all of them, by the way, belonging to the liberal “camp”) perform their final deed of killing as many innocents as possible simply to be seen, to be validated as a real person.  As they pull the trigger they are in effect screaming, “I am my own god, I am here, I exist, I am real, I have meaning”.

In the remarks above describing the God is Dead movement, notice the critical words, “application of contemporary philosophy”.  The “contemporary philosophy”, while always existing throughout human history to some extent, we can trace to the European mainland philosophers of the 17th and 18th centuries who institutionalized the belief that God was dead.

That group ranged from atheists who totally rejected the notion of God, to deists who at least allowed that there may have been a creator but was now silent, and further, rejected any supernatural intrusion into the affairs of man.  If man was to improve, then he would have to do it himself.  These teachings provided much of the philosophical undergirding of the French Revolution and wormed its way into Christian theology over the next century, particularly in protestant Germany.  As stated above, this corrupt theology reached America, corrupted the Churches, corrupted much of the American citizenry and began bearing its damaged fruit in the 1960’s.

What was viewed as something new, was simply the end product of something that began nearly three centuries earlier.  Those corrupted by it replaced God with the “individual experience” or as the quote above states, replaced a faith in a biblical God with “a more personal, individual approach to religion”.  Christian orthodoxy was replaced with whatever it took – mysticism, sex, drugs and rock and roll, in order to fill the void left by the rejection of spiritual truth in an endeavor to seek meaning.

The rejection of True Truth, made the minds fertile ground for everything else, which would logically then be things that are not true.  The past things that were held as true, right, good and beneficial were replaced with things that were not true, were wrong and detrimental.  Wrong in all areas, that’s why liberalism never works.  Detrimental in the sense that not only is truth ignored and shoved aside, but evil is embraced and our nation began its rapid descent into moral darkness and choas over the next half century to today and now on course for eventual oblivion.  The great error of America isn’t, as bad as this is, a rejection of God, but rather now it actively is an enemy of God.  It is one thing to be neutral concerning God, and another entirely to work to destroy God and any Christian influence that exists in America.

The DNC knew what is was doing when it took God out of its party platform in 2012.  As you recall He was only put back in after it made the news and democrats were roundly criticized.  It’s not that the democrats were much on honoring God anyway, the platform’s only mention of God in 2008 was “We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”

As ABC News reported at the time,

“Moments after convention chairman Antonio Villaraigosa gaveled in day two of the Democratic Convention, the hall burst into chaos as Democrats voted to amend their party’s platform to include the word “God” and name Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Villaraigosa called the vote three times. The first two voice votes, which require a two-thirds majority to pass, were tied between “ays” and “nos.” On the third vote it was still hard to tell whether the “ays” were audibly louder than the “nays” in the half-full arena.

When Villaraigosa announced “the ays have it,” loud boos erupted across the arena.“

Other onlookers reported that the Nos overwhelmed the Ays and in no wise did the Ays come close to the 2/3rds required.  God, even as pitiful a reference as it was, was put back in at the insistence of Barry Obama who realized the negative impact this move to totally remove any reference to God had.  While the democrat party is a coalition of disparate groups, most of whom are Godless, they aren’t all like that.  Millions of blacks,  Hispanics and dumbed down whites who are enslaved on the democrat plantation are people of faith.

Getting back on point, this is where we find the moral and spiritual state of America today.  True liberals, the children of the ‘60’s are nothing more than godless heathens – materialist, hedonistic, despisers of the truths of God and bent on the transformation of America in order to control all levers of power.  Moderates are functionally near identical but lack the intensity of liberals on these issues.

Liberals are rigid ideologues who work tirelessly to advance their godless philosophies and Moderates just don’t want to have intrusions by the issues of the day into their lives that make them feel uncomfortable.  Moderates have no sense of discernment, no sense of wisdom to carefully weigh options and draw logical conclusions, therefore they always take the paths of least resistance.

In order to win over moderates, conservatives must approach them from an emotional angle, or at least understand that moderates will evaluate and react emotionally.  You must convince the “soccer moms” that you won’t get little Johnny (and now Janie, thanks to Obama) killed in a war.

You must convince them that you really don’t hate minorities, that you only put America and our minorities first and really don’t see any need to overrun their communities with the dregs of the third world.  Conservatives must realize that moderates are typically incapable of decision making and may vacillate between a radical leftist like Barry Obama and a decent, though flawed Romney up to the very day of election.  They cannot understand the great gulf that exists between the two camps and why it exists.  “Can’t we just all get along”, is their motto, not realizing that the differences between liberals and conservatives are irreconcilable.

Our third and remaining group are the conservatives.  How do you go about defining modern American conservatism?

Wikipedia gives an opening definition that just about sums it up, at least for me anyway.

Historically, the central themes in American conservatism have included respect for American traditions, support of republicanism and the rule of law, Judeo-Christian values, anti-Communism, advocacy of American exceptionalism and a defense of Western civilization from perceived threats posed by moral relativism, multiculturalism, and postmodern ridicule of traditional culture. Liberty is a core value, with a particular emphasis on strengthening the free market, and opposition to high taxes and government or labor union encroachment on the entrepreneur.

The wiki article goes on to quote William F. Buckley who at one time was just about the only conservative voice in America on a national stage.  In the first issue of his magazine, “National Review” in 1955 he defined his conservative movement as-

Among our convictions:

It is the job of centralized government (in peacetime) to protect its citizens’ lives, liberty and property. All other activities of government tend to diminish freedom and hamper progress. The growth of government (the dominant social feature of this century) must be fought relentlessly. In this great social conflict of the era, we are, without reservations, on the libertarian side. The profound crisis of our era is, in essence, the conflict between the Social Engineers, who seek to adjust mankind to conform with scientific utopias, and the disciples of Truth, who defend the organic moral order. We believe that truth is neither arrived at nor illuminated by monitoring election results, binding though these are for other purposes, but by other means, including a study of human experience. On this point we are, without reservations, on the conservative side.

So, to list these traits of American conservatism we find –

1)  Respect, modellings one’s life after American traditions.

2)  Support for our constitutional government as created and intended by our founders.

3)  The rule of law, every citizen should be treated equally under it and that all law should have the consent of the governed.

4)  Judeo-Christian values.  Our nation was founded by Christians for Christians and it was these values that compelled our revolt against England.

5)  Anti-communistic.  Communism was the great enemy of our nation for many decades.  America fought a long hard cold war and some hot wars to stop its encroachment upon the world against nation enemies such as the Soviet Union, China and North Korea as well as our domestic enemies the liberals who have much more in common with commies than traditional Americans.

6)  Conservatives are proud of our country and see no need to “transform” it.  By nearly any standard, America is exceptional, not as Obama would proclaim just as any other nation considers itself exception, but truly exceptional and unique.

7)  Conservatives are opposed to forces attempting to destroy what America is and represents.  Conservatives, therefore, oppose moral relativism, multiculturalism, and postmodern ridicule of traditional culture.

8)  Conservatives do defend the free market, entrepreneurism against government intrusion and growth beyond constitutional boundaries.

The plight of Christianity today in America reminds me of a Star Trek episode, “Who mourns for Adonais”.  On a routine expedition to a planet called Pollux IV, they encounter a very powerful being who had visited earth with others of his kind thousands of years in the past and were worshipped by the Greeks as their gods.  Only Apollo remained as the others had long departed this plane of existence.

Upon encountering this group of earthlings, Apollo believed he could force them to stay on the planet, populate it.  Apollo promised to meet their needs and be a benevolent god.  All Apollo demanded was their worship, but humanity had outgrown its need for a god.  Kirk and his landing party weakened Apollo to the point that he suffered defeat at their hands and decided to join the other gods who had been long departed.

“I would have cherished you.  Cared for you.  I would have loved you as a father loves his children.  Did I ask so much?”  Apollo

“We’ve outgrown you, you’ve asked for something we can no longer give.” Kirk

Apollo then addresses his kind,

“you were right, there is no room for gods”, then asks them to “take him” into the plane they now inhabited and he slowly disappears.

McCoy “I wish we hadn’t had to do this”.

Kirk “So do I, they gave us so much, the Greek civilization, much of our culture and civilization came from a worship of these beings.  In a way, they began the golden age.  Would it have hurt us, I wonder, just to have gathered a few laurel leaves?”

My point is that even the non-Christian, who shudders to see America crashing and burning in every direction, should recognize the importance of Christianity to our once great culture and be willing to “gather a few laurel leaves”.  Now that culture is shattered.  The democrats have worked tirelessly to destroy it.  It, more than anything else is their target, because they know they gain power by fracturing what was once a monolithic nation that honored god and forging the various groups they’ve convinced are disenfranchised into a voting block motivated by hatred, envy and class warfare.

Western Europe, America and the rest of the Christianized west have lost much by forsaking Christianity.  Even for the sake of argument, if we allow that God doesn’t exist our nation and our culture sacrifices what made it what it was.  When John Adams observed that “our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other”, what exactly did he mean by that?  He meant, our founders meant, that the newly formed central government of the fledgling United States of America was never intended to micromanage the lives of its citizens.

The 18 enumerated powers we find in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution severely limited the new central government.  Those powers mainly provided for the new government to conduct international affairs, regulate certain activities between the states to ensure a level playing field between them and as touching the individual citizen, citizenship and bankruptcy laws.

The founders, or certainly the anti-federalists who appeared to have their way with the constitution and the additional Bill of Rights, had no intent of ever allowing the new government to overly meddle in the lives of its citizens.  The constitution was intended to allow the freest citizenry on earth.  However, radical individual “liberty” to do anything one may choose to do leads to anarchy.  Therefore, as the culture was Christian at the time of the conception of the new nation and it was unthinkable that it would never be so, the founders intended then that the civilian institutions would compel the citizenry to conform to uniform societal standards based on  Christian teachings found in the Bible.

As the nation has drifted from its moorings over the past century, first the people forgot what freedom was and then became ever so willing to turn more and more control over their lives to the government.  As conformity to religious ideals faded to be replaced by decadence and vice, the government has been eager to step in and fill the void.  America traded constructive freedom for the balls and chains of government.

What did Obama truly mean when he said he was about to “transform” America?  Let’s define “transform”.  From the Merriam-Webster dictionary we find this rather chilling definition –

-to change in composition or structure

-to change the outward form or appearance of

-to change in character or condition

Now, I will concede that America is in dire need of repair.  Returning to our Christian and constitutional roots would cure, almost overnight most of our problems or at least get us back on the road to recovery.  However, I think all would agree that that was not what Obama had in mind when he spoke of his upcoming transformational agenda.  Obama has roundly criticized biblical Christianity and our constitution.  He believes the constitution is seriously flawed.  He decried the fact that the constitution was a document that limited government, as he put it,

“But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution, at least as it’s been interpreted, and the Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties. Says what the states can’t do to you. Says what the federal government can’t do to you, but doesn’t say what the federal government or state government must do on your behalf.”

Liberals, certainly including Obama and Hillary, would have been much more at home participating in the French Revolution than the American one.  Liberals believe the government should guarantee property, a “living wage”, and the necessities of life in total contradiction to the American experiment of merely providing an equal playing field to allow one’s own talents and gifts to take one as far as one can go.  They believe in as much government as possible, a “nanny” state, cradle to grave care, along the lines portrayed by  the Obama campaign’s fictional characters depicting the typical American drones known as “Julia” and “pajama boy” cared for by the beneficent government under the careful guidance of liberals.

Obama’s opposition to biblical Christianity is so well known and documented, there’s no need to go into great detail here, just do a search on the subject and read away, you will remember many of Obama’s episodes and the objections from true Christians over his outbursts.  To list just a few of his beliefs you will find, we note the following –

-He doesn’t believe the bible is inspired.

-He believes man evolved from lower life forms and rejects the biblical account of creation.

-Obviously he is the most powerful advocate for sex deviants and the confused.

-He attended a Black Liberation Theology church for 20 years.  BLT is nothing but Marxism disguised in the trappings of religion.  Feel free to read up on that movement.

-He doesn’t know if there really is an afterlife.

-He believes that man is “saved” based on how he treats his fellow man.

-He believes that all religions are valid and simply worship god in their own ways but will all end up in heaven (apparently if one actually exists at all).

-Obama never criticizes “Islam” and always defends it against Christianity which he never misses an opportunity to criticize.

There’s much more to learn about Obama’s religious beliefs but rest assured, when using terms familiar to us such as “bible”, “God”, “Jesus Christ”, “baptized”, etc he means something entirely different from any sense an orthodox Christian understands them, i.e. God hates white people, Jesus was black and any god not “down for the struggle” is no God, according to Jeremiah Wright and Black Liberation Theology.

Understand that Obama and his merry band of LSD associates do have every intention of changing the “composition” and “outward form” of America by importing as many third world socialist democrat voters as possible.  He is changing the “structure” of America by creating an imperial presidency presiding over a nanny state and the worst, he is changing the “character” of America from a prosperous and free society to a European style totalitarian bureaucracy or technocracy, from a nation with at least nominal moral standards based on Judeo-Christianity by advancing atheism, depravity and hedonism.

I’ll close with a chilling assessment of Barry Obama, who does well represent the democrat party, by Deborah C. Tyler who authored an article for the website Americanthinker.com, entitled, “Why People Can’t Face the Truth About Obama”, December 28, 2015.  I would encourage you to read the entire article.

“…The antecedents of Barack Obama’s hatred of America are now well understood. Obama was groomed from the womb to abhor this white majority, predominantly Christian, free enterprise Republic.  From his expatriate, capitalism-hating mother, from his alcoholic Communist father and his perv Communist mentor, detesting America was in his mother’s milk and the blood in his veins…

America is Barack Obama’s prey. He is tearing America apart and feeding the pieces of her life to his foreign and domestic fellow travelers.  He is not transforming the nation but terminating it.”

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/12/why_people_cant_face_the_truth_about_obama_.html#ixzz3yUutP6it

What is the Proper Response to the Homosexual Agenda

A recent ABC poll about religious beliefs found that 83 percent of Americans identify with Christianity.  The next largest was 13 percent who claim no religious preference or are atheists, the remaining four percent are Jews, and other adherents of various world religions.  An interesting follow up question would be, “what is Christianity”?  What founding documents would we use in order to define Christianity?

Most manufactured things have a manual.  If you buy a new appliance, a manual comes with it that explains how it works, how to troubleshoot when problems arise, how to perform maintenance, how to order repair parts, etc.  Of what benefit would a manual be for a refrigerator to understand the workings of a toaster?  Or a manual for a half-ton, Chevrolet 4×4 truck to understand the workings of a Honda dirt bike?  Or a manual for an Armalite AR-15 semi-automatic rifle to understand a Mossberg 12 gauge pump shot gun?  Obviously, the manual must be exactly for the thing it attempts to explain or describe.

When we consider the world’s religions, the muslims have their Koran, the Jews have their Torah -the first five books of the “Old Testament”, the Nevi’im -the OT books of the prophets, and the Ketuvim -the remaining OT writings.  Additionally, the Jews have the Talmud which basically reflects the beliefs and practices of the Pharisees we encounter in the New Testament, especially after the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 A.D.  Christians have what we call the Bible, made up of the Old and New Testament.  The Roman Catholics have a few more books that have been removed as uninspired by most protestant denominations.  The additional books in contention are mainly historical in nature and don’t add or subtract from what we would consider doctrinal orthodoxy.

What is the value of the Bible?  I maintain it is the “manual” for Christianity.  I maintain that true Christianity cannot be divorced from the manual and that the manual is authoritative.  Why must the Bible, the scriptures, be held as authoritative?  The answer is simple, because it claims to be.  If we allow that any part of it is untrue, then we depart from a solid base to one of shifting sands.  We leave what can be understood as absolute truth, to relative “truth” based on what any given individual says is truth.  We totally lose any basis for defining God and understanding God’s message, if one exists at all, to mankind.

Considering what the Scriptures themselves say about themselves leaves one with only two options.  It is true and of supernatural origins, or they were created in the minds of men and have no special standing other than the moral value, if any, one may place on them.  The first option forces us to accept it as it claims and the second allows to us reject part or all of it and view it no differently than we would any other writings from antiquity, or any other time for that matter.

Our first option provides the basis to define and know God, the second allows us to fashion a God of our own imagination.  Another factor the latter view would inject is that the various human authors of the scriptures were liars or delusional as they claimed their message originated from God.  Not exactly a great beginning if the second choice is followed.  Following delusional men engaged in a grandiose scheme to proclaim God has given them a message leaves virtually everything they write as untrustworthy.

So, where do the scriptures claim to be of supernatural origin, claim to be from the mind of God himself?  It is recognized that Moses wrote the first five books of our Bible.  He begins Leviticus by writing,

“And the LORD called unto Moses and spoke to him out of the tabernacle of the congregation, saying,”

Moses began the book of Numbers by saying,

“And the LORD spoke to Moses in the wilderness of Sinai in the tabernacle of the congregation…saying”,

The book of Joshua begins thusly,

“Now after the death of Moses the servant of the LORD it came to pass that the LORD spoke unto Joshua, the son of Nun, Moses’ minister, saying,”

Isaiah begins by stating he has a “vision” (from God) and in the second verse states, “Hear, O heavens and give ear O earth, for the LORD has spoken…”

The first two verses of Jeremiah says, “The words of Jeremiah…to whom the word of the LORD came in the days of Josiah…”

Ezekiel in the first three verses says, “…I saw visions of God…the word of the LORD came expressly unto Ezekiel the priest…”

Hosea, “The word of the LORD that came unto Hosea…”

Joel, “The word of the LORD that came to Joel…”

Obadiah, “The vision of Obadiah.  Thus saith the LORD God concerning Edom;”

Ok, I assume you get my point, over and over again the human writers claimed their words came from God.  Many in the New Testament, including Jesus himself quoted and referred to the Old Testament writings as true and authoritative.

Probably the most definitive passage we find in the New Testament that speaks to the supernatural origin of Old Testament scriptures, as the New Testament was in the making, we find in 2nd Timothy, 3:16 which states that,

“All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine (teachings), for reproof, for correction and for instruction in righteousness”.

There’s a word in the verse in our English translation that loses much of its meaning from the original in Greek.  The word “inspiration” in our English translates the Greek in which it was given which states “God breathed”.  The verse should properly read, “every scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness”.  What is the claim made regarding the origins of the scriptures?  That they emanate from God himself.

The Apostle Paul, who humanly authored most of the books of the New Testament, described this process of receiving divine truth from God in I Corinthians, chapter 2.  Beginning at verse 9, Paul writes,

“But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.  Now God has revealed these things to us by the Spirit, for the Spirit searches everything, even the depths of God…Now we have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who comes from God, so that we may understand what has been freely given to us by God.  Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teaches, but which the Holy Spirit teaches; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.  But the unbeliever does not welcome what comes from God’s Spirit, because it is foolishness to him; he is not able to understand it since it is evaluated spiritually.”

Verse 9 here is often misapplied, quoted as if the verse speaks of various blessings in store for his people, but the context demands that it is about Paul’s explanation of the origin of the scriptures, including his own writings.  The eye cannot see, nor the ear hear, nor can the heart of man fabricate the God-breathed scriptures.  Paul makes it clear that his words and the scriptures as a whole are given by the Holy Spirit, the third person of the Trinity.

Other than a brief Bible lesson on the inerrancy of the scriptures and their supernatural origin, what is my point here?  How can one claim to be Christian, or identify with Christianity, yet deny the very scriptures of its origin?  True Christianity and a conviction that the word of God is what it claims to be must go hand in hand.

Of course Christians don’t believe the Bible is authoritative simply because it says it is.  The bible has stood the test of time, the true Christian understands that the Bible is truly God’s word and that it is without error, as it was originally written.

I fear that due to the fact that we can find bibles everywhere in America, we treat it as common.  How often do you read it?  Yet, if the Bible is indeed of supernatural origin, then we have a message originally given in 8,674 Hebrew words (this would also include some Aramaic words) and 5,624 Greek words.  Our King James bible has 12,143 English words in translation.  God, the creator of all the universe chose to give us a little over 12 thousand words as our manual for life and for preparation for the next phase of our lives, eternity.  If 83 percent of Americans identify with Christianity, then why do so many ignore the clear teachings of its manual?

One of the most amazing stories I have ever heard of the value and preciousness that the true Christian holds of the scriptures was told by the great Christian apologist, Ravi Zacharias.  I had heard this account on one of his broadcasts years ago, and it can be found on the web even today.  His account of a Vietnamese Christian whose faith wavered briefly but God intervened is as follows-

“Throughout history, the Old and New Testaments have shown themselves to be reliable and true; they rise up to outlive their pallbearers, if you will. The following story probably stirs my own confidence in the power of God’s Word and His sovereignty more than any other. Let me share part of it with you today.

I was ministering in Vietnam in 1971, and one of my interpreters was Hien Pham, an energetic young Christian. He had worked as a translator with the American forces, and was of immense help both to them and to missionaries such as myself. Hien and I traveled the length of the country and became very close friends before I returned home. We did not know if our paths would ever cross again. Seventeen years later, I received a telephone call. “Brother Ravi?” the man asked. Immediately, I recognized Hien’s voice, and he soon told me his story.

Shortly after Vietnam fell, Hien was imprisoned on accusations of helping the Americans. His jailers tried to indoctrinate him against democratic ideals and the Christian faith. He was forced to read only communist propaganda in French or Vietnamese, and the daily deluge of Marx and Engels began to take its toll. “Maybe,” he thought, “I have been lied to. Maybe God does not exist. Maybe the West has deceived me.” So Hien determined that when he awakened the next day, he would not pray anymore or think of his faith.

The next morning, he was assigned the dreaded chore of cleaning the prison latrines. As he cleaned out a tin can overflowing with toilet paper, his eye caught what seemed to be English printed on one piece of paper. He hurriedly grabbed it, washed it, and after his roommates had retired that night, he retrieved the paper and read the words, “Romans, Chapter 8.”

Trembling, he began to read, “And we know that in all things God works for the good of those who love him, who have been called according to his purpose. … For I am convinced that neither death nor life, neither angels nor demons, neither the present nor the future, nor any powers, neither height nor depth, nor anything else in all creation, will be able to separate us from the love of God that is in Christ Jesus our Lord” (Romans 8:28,38,39). Hien wept. He knew his Bible, and he knew that there was not a more relevant passage for one on the verge of surrender. He cried out to God, asking forgiveness. This was to have been the first day that he would not pray; evidently God had other plans.

As it were, there was an official in the camp who was using a Bible as toilet paper. So Hien asked the commander if he could clean the latrines regularly. Each day he picked up a portion of Scripture, cleaned it off, and added it to his collection of nightly reading.

Then the day came when, through an equally providential set of circumstances, Hien was released from prison. He promptly began to make plans to leave the country and to construct a boat for the escape of him and 53 others. All was going according to plan until days before their departure. Four Vietcong knocked on Hien’s door and said they had heard of his escape. He denied it and they left.

Hien felt relieved, but at the same time disappointed with himself. He made a promise to God—fervently hoping that God would not take him up on it—that if the Vietcong returned, he would tell them the truth. He was thoroughly shaken when only a few hours before they were to set sail, the four men returned. When questioned again, he confessed the truth. To Hien’s astonishment, the men leaned forward and, in hushed tones, asked if they could go with him!

In an utterly incredible escape plan, all 58 of them found themselves on the high seas, suddenly engulfed by a violent storm. Hien cried out to God, “Did you bring us here to die?” But then he said to me, “Brother Ravi, if it were not for the sailing ability of those four Vietcong, we would not have made it.” They arrived safely in Thailand, and years later Hien arrived on American soil where today he is a businessman.” (end  quote)

The Bible means everything to the true Christian and it should mean something to the 83 percent of Americans who claim to be so.   It is not the purpose of this article to offer all of the proof that can be mustered to prove that God’s word is… God’s word.  Ultimately, to the skeptic, we must merely say, that the believer sees the truths of God because he does believe and the unbeliever cannot see because he does not believe.  Jesus actually taught us this principle when he told “doubting” Thomas, “you see me and believe, more blessed are those who do not see me, yet believe”.

Was our nation founded upon Judeo-Christian principles?  Liberals now claim it was not, but their revision of history is more for children and not adults who know better.  It wasn’t too far in the past that American’s true history was taught in our schools.  Our “enlightened” supreme court oligarchs decided it was bad for children to be exposed to the evils of Christianity back in 1962.  Of course many school systems rebelled and even today one sticks its head up on occasion to be whacked off as fast as an atheist or degenerate can get the school’s rebellion before a judge.  For 355 years, from 1607 to 1962 our children studied and read the Bible freely in schools.

Any curious person can read the voluminous writings of our founders to understand what made them “tick”.  In particular, what premium did the founders place on Chistianity and the holy scriptures?  Lifting a few quotes of great Americans who have gone before from usa.church, we read –

“The rights of the colonists as Christians…may be best understood by reading and carefully studying the institutes of the Great Law Giver and Head of the Christian Church, which are to be found clearly written and promulgated in the New Testament.”  (And I would say, the Old Testament also) Samuel Adams

“The United States in Congress assembled … recommend this edition of the Bible to the inhabitants of the United States … a neat edition of the Holy Scriptures for the use of schools.” And “The Congress of the United States recommends and approves the Holy Bible for use in all schools.” – United States Congress 1782

“The general principles on which the fathers achieved independence were the general principles of Christianity. I will avow that I then believed, and now believe, that those general principles of Christianity are as eternal and immutable as the existence and attributes of God.” John Adams

Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other. John Adams

“Providence has given to our people the choice of their rulers, and it is their duty – as well as privilege and interest – of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers…The Bible is the best of all books, for it is the word of God and teaches us the way to be happy in this world and in the next. Continue therefore to read it and to regulate your life by its precepts.” – John Jay

“He is the best friend to American liberty, who is most sincere and active in promoting true and undefiled religion (Christianity), and who sets himself with the greatest firmness to bear down on profanity and immorality of every kind. Whoever is an avowed enemy of God, I scruple not to call him an enemy to his country.” – John Witherspoon

“Education is useless without the Bible. The Bible was America’s basic text book in all fields. God’s Word, contained in the Bible, has furnished all necessary rules to direct our conduct.” – Noah Webster

“And this be our motto, ‘In God is our trust’” – USA National Anthem, Third Verse

Moving on down through the years, other great leaders of America proclaimed their fealty to and appreciation of Christianity and the scriptures.

“[The Bible] is the rock on which our Republic rests.”– Andrew Jackson

“In regards to this great Book [the Bible], I have but to say it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this Book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man’s welfare, here and hereafter, are found portrayed in it.” – Abraham Lincoln

“Our laws and our institutions must necessarily be based upon and embody the teachings of the Redeemer of mankind. It is impossible that it should be otherwise; and in this sense and to this extent our civilization and our institutions are emphatically Christian…This is a Christian nation” – United States Supreme Court Decision in Church of the Holy Trinity v. United States, 1892

“I believe that the next half century will determine if we will advance the cause of Christian civilization or revert to the horrors of brutal paganism.” – Theodore Roosevelt, President

“The foundations of our society and our government rest so much on the teachings of the Bible that it would be difficult to support them if faith in these teachings would cease to be practically universal in our country.” – Calvin Coolidge

“[The United States is] founded on the principles of Christianity” – Franklin D. Roosevelt, President

“The fundamental basis of this Nation’s law was given to Moses on the Mount. The fundamental basis of our Bill of Rights comes from the teachings which we get from Exodus and St. Matthew, from Isaiah and St. Paul.” – Harry S. Truman

“Of the many influences that have shaped the United States into a distinctive nation and people, none may be said to be more fundamental and enduring than the Bible.” – Ronald Reagan

As we consider the social and moral issues of the day, how should 83 percent of Americans evaluate them?  There was a time not too long past when American law comported with biblical teachings and standards.  After 355 years of being so, the benefit was obvious to our nation.  America has now cast God aside to embrace relativism and we have entered an age when “men do what is right in their own eyes” and insist on their “right” to do so.  For most of the history of America, our nation had a Christian ethos, it defined our culture and obviously served us very well as America lead the world in freedom, opportunity and advancement in nearly all beneficial areas.

The latest assault on American values and the family as well as our standing with God has been the advancement of the homosexual agenda.  Just because five lawyers, our supreme court oligarchs have now mysteriously found a “right” to depravity, that this depravity is good and wholesome, that its perfectly acceptable to advance and foist this “right” upon the rest of the nation, must we acquiesce to the court’s diktat?

There are two ways we should evaluate this scourge upon society.  First and fore-most there is the Judeo-Christian view to be considered, what does God think?  What to the scriptures teach?  Secondly, we should evaluate this assault on society from a medical, both physical and psychological, perspective.  Just how damaging are the contents of this new Pandora’s box that has been opened?

If you believe that God exists and that his Word, what we call the “bible” is really a supernatural message from God, then it should be of the utmost importance to know exactly what God has to say about the subject.

The specific prohibition on the practice of homosexuality is found in the book of Leviticus in the Old Testament and in Romans in the New Testament.  To fully understand the depth of depravity that homosexuality represents, we really need to start with a passage from Genesis, chapter 15.  God had called Abraham (Abram at this time) to a new land, Canaan, and was telling Abram what the future held for his descendants.  God had promised him the land, what would be called Israel and more, that he had called him to and told him that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars he could see in the sky.  Then God told Abram,

“Know this for certain:  your offspring will be strangers in a land (Egypt) that does not belong to them, they will be enslaved and oppressed for 400 years.  However, I will judge the nation they serve and afterwards they will go out with many possessions.  But you will go to your fathers in peace and be buried at a ripe old age.  In the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorites has not yet reached its full measure.”

Who were these Amorites?  The Amorites were the primary inhabitants of Canaan (Israel) at that time.  While there were other groups or “nations” named later, God appeared to be using the name Amorites all inclusively.  God was informing Abram that his descendants would spend four centuries in Egypt, as slaves, but would eventually return to this land.  God though, was also foretelling the doom of the current occupants of the land he was giving Abram.

At the moment of this conversation, God told Abram that the Amorites and the others were a sinful people, yet their sins had “not yet reached its full measure”.  God was implying that four hundred years later, their sin would reach full measure.  Full measure for what?  Full measure that this group of people would be fit for destruction.  That God’s mercy he had and would continue to extend to these people for four centuries would come to an end.

It is sad to reflect on the possibility that an entire people, a nation, can be so steeped in sin and rebellion against God that God pronounces and affects its complete destruction.  One might quibble over the actual sins of Sodom and Gomorrah, were they destroyed for rampant homosexuality as is commonly thought and strongly implied by the scriptures or for other gross sins, so that they, like the Amorites had expended the measure of mercy that God had been willing to extend toward them?

With the Amorites and the others infesting Canaan who God names later, there is absolutely no doubt, because God tells Moses, what the sins were that God considered and determined the end of their existence.  God’s reason that time had run out, that the measure of sin was “full” nearly 430 years after the conversation with Abram.

We find these sins recorded in Leviticus, chapter 18 –

“Moreover you shall not lie carnally with your neighbor’s wife, to defile yourself with her.  And you shall not let any of your descendants pass through the fire to Molech, nor shall you profane the name of your God, I am the LORD.  You shall not lie with a man as with a woman.  It is an abomination.  Nor shall you mate with any animal, to defile yourself with it.  Nor shall any woman stand before an animal to mate with it.  It is perversion.  Do not defile yourselves with any of these things; for by all these, the nations (The Amorites and others)  are defiled, which I am casting out before you.  For the land is defiled, therefore I visit the punishment of its iniquity upon it, and the land vomits out its inhabitants.”

There are five specific sins listed here that God had had enough of.  The sins that filled the measure of their iniquities were adultery, child sacrifice to Molech (a false God), profaning (making common) the name of your God (Yahweh), homosexuality and bestiality.  Witchcraft and sorcery are also listed elsewhere as being common in the land.

For these sins God was Just in destroying these people and at the same time allowing his people, the Jews, who had fled Egypt, to occupy the land that God had given to their father Abraham.  God was using the Jews as the instrument of his judgment upon these depraved peoples, just as he used the Assyrians 800 years later to conquer a rebellious Israel (the northern ten tribes) and a century after that, Babylon, who God used to conquer a rebellious and sinful Judah (the southern two tribes including its capital, Jerusalem).

As Joshua led the children of Israel into this promised land, God ordered them to utterly destroy the inhabitants, men, women and children, all who resisted them.  God didn’t order the Jews to chase them if they fled, just as long as they did flee.

Since liberals go ballistic when Israel defends itself today against the aggressive, barbarian and murderous muslim foes who surround it, it’s no wonder they’re always quick to point out what they perceive in their self-induced ignorance as some equivalency between these muslim savages today and ancient Israel acting under God’s direction.  What they fail to consider is the truth of God’s Mercy.

Mercy means, “withholding judgment that is due” or “compassion or forbearance shown especially to an offender or to one subject to one’s power.”  Mercy exists between two parties, one party is all powerful and the other party has no power whatsoever.  Mercy flows only one way, from the all- powerful to the powerless.  A criminal before a judge can receive mercy.  The judge can, totally at his discretion, give a lighter sentence than what is deserved by the criminal.

Every human being who has ever lived drew the next breath simply due to the mercy of God.  God had warned Adam that the day he sinned, he would surely die.  When Adam sinned, he then existed day by day solely due to the mercy of God, there were no guarantees.  Yet Adam, who was created as an eternal being, both spiritually and physically, now had an appointment with death.  From the elements of the earth his physical body was created, and those elements would ultimately return to the earth.

This relationship of mercy between God and man is operative today with every human being, especially the unsaved.  Its critical to understand that the natural man has no “rights” with God, no leverage with God.  The only relationship between a perfect, holy and righteous God and fallen man is that man exists strictly due to the mercy, patience, tolerance and forbearance of God.  The just judgment against mankind, God- the righteous judge, had already rendered – guilty;  the sentence – death, both physical and spiritual.

Fortunately, there was a remedy for man’s undone condition.  God taught and showed Adam that man could escape his dark destiny of separation from God in eternal torment.  God showed Adam that a sacrifice could be offered on his behalf, the innocent would pay the price for the guilty.  God himself slew an innocent animal to clothe Adam and Eve after their first sin to hide their nakedness.

Adam’s first son’s Cain and Able understood the need for an offering, Able the correct one, an innocent animal – a blood sacrifice, Cain in rebellion offered the fruits of his own labors, vegetables of his field.  We see that Noah knew to sacrifice animals, Abraham knew also.  God gave The Law to Moses which gave thorough details about the various offerings and animal sacrifices.  All that would be “right” with God knew and did sacrifice animals to shed their blood to cover their sins.

Of course these animal sacrifices were a “type” of or represented the ultimate blood sacrifice that would be made, that is by God, the Son, as he shed his blood on the cross.  In the book of Romans, God tells us that he viewed the old testament believers as “saved” on credit, that God exercised patience and allowed the blood of animals to cover sins, to “hide” sins from his gaze until the day came when Jesus, the ultimate lamb, gave his blood, not to cover, but to wash away all sins of those of all time who believed.

The Old Testament believers had an understanding of this.  Jesus said that Abraham could see his day and was glad.  Job, said that he knew he would see his redeemer in his flesh, thus confirming the ancient’s belief and understanding that first, there would be a redeemer and that there would be a bodily resurrection.

God gave the “law” to Moses for two purposes.  First and fore-most to define sin, which means simply “missing the mark”, an archery term.  Any thought, any action or any inaction that missed the bull’s eye, that is, Godly perfection, misses the mark and is sin.  We think of the ten commandments which God wrote on tablets of stone as the law.  While these “tablets of stone” are often used synonymously for “the law”, the “law of Moses” also incorporated hundreds of other laws and ordinances that regulated the social and religious life of Israel found in the books of Exodus and Leviticus.

The second purpose was to prove once sin was defined that all men are sinners.  Paul calls the law the “schoolmaster” or teacher that would clearly demonstrate or prove that all men are sinners.  No person can honestly say that they have kept  the law, obeyed continually the ten commandments.  The law proves guilt.

The prohibition against homosexuality already noted above in Leviticus, chapter 18 is repeated in chapter 20, verse 13 saying,

“If a man also lie with mankind as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination:  they shall surely be put to death, their blood shall be upon them.”

While some liberals, who feign religiosity, rationalize and say that the old testament laws and prohibitions aren’t operative any longer, that Christ fulfilled the law and that it now has no value, claim that a loving God accepts their homosexual lifestyles.  Paul, in the book of Romans completely blows that nonsense out of the water when he pens the words,

“Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonor their own bodies between themselves.  Who changed the truth of God into a lie and worshipped and served the created more than the Creator, who is blessed forever, Amen.  Because of this, God gave them up to vile affections.  Their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature and likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another, men with men working that which is unseemly and receiving unto themselves that recompense of their error which was fit.  And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do things which are morally wrong…who knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death…”  Can it be any clearer?  To believe otherwise is to subvert the clear teachings of the Christian “manual”.

The word antichrist is found only five times in the scriptures, 4 times in 1 John and once in 2 John.  We never get from these five uses of the word much of an understanding or definition for The Anti-Christ who many Christians believe will shortly arrive on the scene to plunge the world into a seven year tribulation period as human history as we’ve known it comes to a close.  This “Anti-Christ” however is known by many other names and titles we encounter in the prophetic scriptures – the man of sin, the son of perdition, the lawless one, the beast, the prince that shall come, etc.

John speaks however of the spirit of antichrist as existing in his time and would be in existence until the Anti-Christ would come,

“By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God, and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God. And this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming; and now it is already in the world.”— 1 John 4:2–3  

Of interest and relevancy to our discussion is the actual meaning of the Greek word or prefix translated “anti”.  Anti as we use the word means “opposed to” or “against”.  The Greek meaning is a bit more nuanced meaning “instead of”, “in place of” or a “substitution for”.  When the real man, the antichrist does come, he won’t come resembling his father Satan but will appear as a wonder worker, a knight in shining armor, bringing peace to a war ravaged world…for a little while until his true nature is revealed.

He will come to power proclaiming “he is the one we’ve been waiting for” and stirring the fawning crowds to scream, “yes we can!”.  He may even promise to stop the oceans from rising.  He will have all of the answers for the world’s problems.  Most of the world will accept him as the messiah, as the Christ, but just as Jesus described the Pharisees, he will be like a white sepulcher, beautiful on the outside, but on the inside, only the stench of destruction and death.

Likewise, so many of the “83 percent” of Americans who claim Christianity as their religion, subvert the scriptures, their “manual”, and “instead of” standing on what the scriptures very clearly teach concerning homosexuality, they pervert it.   “In place of” the truth, they “substitute” a lie.  Rather than standing firm on what has been called “true truth”, they embrace a “christianity” of their own creation which in reality, is nothing but anti-Christianity.

Now let’s turn our attention to the second aspect of our opposition to homosexuality, the medical reasons.  Another article on this site lists some startling facts released by the Canadian health care system early last year.  Their studies resulted in findings that homosexuals were multiple times more likely to commit suicide, to be drug and alcohol addicted, to suffer from depression and to suffer from HIV and other STD infections than heterosexuals.

I commented on those findings that if the FDA was to evaluate a drug or foodstuff that caused all of those serious problems the product would be banned.  Yet our nation has now decided, or at least five of our oligarchs decided for us, to foist this depravity upon us as good, wholesome, protected and even advanced with the force of law.

Our own CDC has statistics and conclusions, current as of September of 2015, about homosexuals that seem to be in keeping with the Canadian report –

-However, compared to other men, gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men are additionally affected by:

  • Higher rates of HIV and other sexually transmitted diseases (STDs);
  • Tobacco and drug use;
  • Depression

-There are many reasons why gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men may have higher rates of HIV and STDs. Some of them are:

  • Prevalence of HIV among sexual partners of gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men is 40 times that of sexual partners of heterosexual men;
  • Receptive anal sex is 18 times more risky for HIV acquisition than receptive vaginal sex;
  • Gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men on average have a greater number of lifetime sexual partners.

-In fact, gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men make up more than half of the people living with HIV in the United States and experience two thirds of all new HIV infections each year. Further, young gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men 13-24 had over 72% of the estimated new HIV infections in 2010. In 2012, 75% of reported syphilis cases were among gay and bisexual men.  (End quotes from CDC)

So, once again, is this lifestyle something to glorify?  I don’t think so, what rational person would.  The supreme court oligarchs struck down sodomy laws on the books of 14 states in 2003 in the Lawrence vs Texas case and of course, last year opened the flood gate and basically dictated that sodomites were essentially a protected minority class entitled to all the benefits of society at large.

Americans, by and large, are pretty much live and let live sorts of people.  Historically, homosexuals haven’t been drug out of their homes by police and burned at the stake.  About the only known government actions against homosexuals are very few.  In 1970, the state of Connecticut refused to grant a driver’s license.  In 1986, the supreme court heard the Bowers v. Hardwick case where a homosexual had been arrested for engaging in homosexual sex in his home.  The Court ruled against him.  Then things began to change when the court legalized sodomy nationally with the Lawrence v. Texas case in 2003.

The final nail was put in the coffin of the biblical moral standard that had held sway over our nation for centuries and was put to rest last year when the Court ruled in the Obergefell v. Hodges case that homosexuals could marry, that states must recognize these marriages performed in other states and jurisdictions.  They ruled that failure to do so, violated the 14th Amendment, an amendment intended to give citizenship rights and equal protections under the law to former slaves who had just been freed.  My, my, what liberal judges can do with words.

The issue here isn’t that we had a law on the books that was almost totally ignored.  The issue and point is that at least we as a nation had standards that rested on God’s standards.  A don’t ask, don’t tell policy served our nation very well.  Our nation still stood on truth, at least on paper, rather than moving in direct opposition to God.  The value of the sodomy laws was that they defined homosexuality for what it was, an evil to be shunned.  They at least, provided a basis for attempting to cure the problem, whether through religious or applying possible mental health therapies.  Now, the gate is open nationwide to implement the 2012 California style ban on any therapeutic attempts to rescue minors from the scourge of this mental and spiritual affliction.

The homosexual community, numbering a few million, make up a valuable component of the democrat party coalition.  Their value to democrats are two-fold.  Many homosexuals are very wealthy, very influential in Hollywood, are big contributors to the democrat party and about 86 percent of them vote democrat.  A very reliable member of team democrat.  Their second purpose is their usefulness in destroying the Judeo-Christian roots of the nation.  We already see their assault on businesses who refuse, due to religious reasons, to participate in their marriage ceremonies.  Only America is left in all the west where speaking out against the sin of homosexuality is legal, in all others it is considered “hate” speech and is a prosecutable offense.

In conclusion, I would ask the 83 percent of Americans who claim to identify with Christianity as their preferred religion a question.  Do you want to stand with a Biblical God, the true God, whose views on homosexuality are crystal clear or do you want to be a part of an anti-God coalition that shakes its collective fist at God in rebellion?  The Apostle Paul exhorted his fellow followers of Christ to “Proclaim the message; persist in it whether convenient or not.”  Certainly in our post-Christian culture, it is not “convenient” to take a biblical stand for truth, yet God calls upon his followers to do exactly that.   You can treat God’s word as “toilet paper”, as quaint and irrelevant in today’s “modern” age or you can embrace it for what it is,  the only supernatural written instructions for living this life and preparing for the next, doing so will allow you to be on the right side of history and eternity.