Thursday, April 25, 2013

Studies in Islam: Another Proud Mother

Now that it has been established, beyond any doubt, that the bombers of the Boston Marathon were, in fact, committed Muslims, the world is beholding yet again the insatiable bloodlust of the followers of "the religion of peace."  What is instructive, however, is not that they were Muslims, but that one of them was what is usually termed a "moderate Muslim."  In any case, their Mother, now living in Russia, is proud of both of them.  Of course.

The eldest of the two bombers, Tamerlan Tsarnev (26), was ushered into Hell, and the presence of the "prophet" Muhammad, during a shootout with Boston police a few days after the bombings.  It has now come to light that not only was he a freelance Muslim terrorist, but had actually been in the CIA terrorist database for 18 months prior to the Marathon attack.  (He had also been investigated by the FBI, at the request of the Russian government, before that.)  With both the CIA and the FBI aware of his proclivities, he and his younger brother, Dzhokar (19), had been enjoying the hospitality of Boston for years: Tamerlan came to the United States in 2002, and converted to Islam through the efforts of "moderate, peaceful" Mohammedans in 2008, and Dzokhar had been here since he was eight years old.  

Tamerlan was a typical believing Muslim; he beat and otherwise abused his wife, and was at least suspected of being involved in various felonies,** while he and his family collected welfare benefits, scholarship funds, and various other amenities. Dzhokar, now lying in a Boston hospital, gradually converted to Islam as well, but on a strictly amateur basis.  But when Mohammedanism comes to term in any man or woman's life, a moment comes to "turn pro."  Dzhokar did this by assisting his brother in the bombing of the Marathon, and in planning future attacks elsewhere.*

Nevertheless, Mama couldn't be any less repentant, or any less proud.   In an interview this week, she expressed her feelings as follows:

video

There is the voice of Islam, as expressed by a typical (although non-Arab) Muslim woman.  "Allahu akbar!"  Glory to the no-name deity ("Allah" simply means "the god"), even as one's children are needlessly killing innocent civilians and being killed in turn.  Hatred and bloodlust that runs so deep is sub-human.

No, the brothers Tsarnev weren't members of Al Qaeda, or Hamas, or any of the other most faithful Muslim groups; as noted, they were freelancers (although literature provided by Al Qaeda taught them how to construct their bombs). But a Muslim freelancer is no less a savage than Osama Bin Laden. Islam is hate, and death, and it cannot be refined or reformed.***

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Boston and throughout America, non-Muslim parents mourned for the other three people killed that day - - - who died because they didn't follow the demon-possessed savage, Muhammad.


* UPDATE:  Although this probably does nothing to diminish Mama Tsarnev's pride in her two boys, it now appears that they were, in fact, anything but unknown, "lone wolf" terrorists.  According to the May 1 Boston Globe, three more suspects in the case have now been detained: also Muslims, and also Khazaks like the Tsarnevs.  Additionally, the Saudi government has now denied earlier reports that it warned the U.S. State Department about Tamerlan Tsarnev in 2012.  This denial appears to be yet another example of taqiyya, or "lying for Islam," which is an important and universally accepted practice within "the religion of peace."

** UPDATE #2: As suspected earlier, but now officially confirmed by Middlesex County investigators (May 11),  these included a gruesome triple murder in 2011. 

*** UPDATE #3: According to CBS News, the younger brother's commitment to Mohammedanism was far more than a passing fancy: 

"Boston bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev left claiming responsibility for the April 13 attack on the Boston Marathon, reports CBS News senior correspondent John Miller.
.
Sources tell Miller that Tsarnaev wrote the note in the boat he was hiding in as police pursued him, and as he bled from gunshot wounds sustained in an earlier shootout between police and his older brother, Tamerlan Tsarnaev.

"The note, scrawled with a pen on the interior wall of the cabin, said the bombings were retribution for U.S. military action in Afghanistan and Iraq, and called the Boston victims collateral damage in the same way Muslims have been in the American-led wars. "When you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims," the note added.

"Dzhokar said he didn't mourn older brother Tamerlan, the other suspect in the bombings, writing that by that point, Tamerlan was a martyr in paradise -- and that he expected to join him there." (May 16, 2013)
 

Tuesday, April 23, 2013

The Gospel Singer

The two greatest Gospel singers of the 20th century have been reunited.  A week ago, George Beverly Shea died, at the age of 104, and was gleefully welcomed into his Saviour's presence by Mahalia Jackson.

Because of his six decades of traveling with Billy Graham, it is estimated that Shea sang "live" in front of over two hundred million people, on every continent, more than any other singer in Christian history.  In the latter decades, Shea was regarded as something of an "extra" to the crowds that came to hear Graham preach; but at the beginning, when they were young, it was Shea's popularity as an established and beloved singer that drew the crowds.  George Beverly Shea was the "sidekick" of only one Man: the Lord Jesus Christ.

He was born in Ontario, Canada, in 1909, the son of a Wesleyan minister.  He wasn't simply a man who sang Christian music; he was, first and foremost, a Christian.  In a 2001 interview, he said that he was actually born again around the age of six, but dedicated his life completely to God at age 18: "There were times when I needed to rededicate my life to the Lord Jesus. When I was 18, my dad was pastoring a church in Ottawa, and I was feeling not too spiritual. The church was having a 'special effort,' as they called it, for a week. I remember that on Friday night Dad came down from the pulpit and tenderly placed his hand on my shoulder. He whispered, 'I think tonight might be the night, son, when you come back to the Lord.' And, yes, that was the night!"


The details of his life can be found in obituaries in The New York TimesTime, and Christianity Today, among many other places.  By the time he joined Graham in 1943, he had already recorded numerous albums, and was well-established as one of the world's most beloved Gospel singers.

His "signature" song was probably "How Great Thou Art," which he was given by an obscure English songwriter, Stuart K. Hine, and which was itself a translation of a Swedish poem written in 1885 by Carl Gustav Boberg.  But equally beloved were "I'd Rather Have Jesus," and his rendition of this classic, from a recording made in the 1950s:

video

It's not terribly important that he received several Grammies, including a Lifetime Achievement Award in 2011; or that he sang at the White House for numerous Presidents; or that he was awarded an honorary Doctorate of Sacred Music.  These things are ephemeral.  The important thing is that he never stopped singing, praising God, even as the health of his friend Billy Graham began to fail.  As pictured below, he was still recording, with a new generation of Gospel singers, to the day he died; and that he enjoyed robust health until the brief illness that took his earthly life.

And his priorities were important.  After he passed the age of 100, friends purchased a fabulously expensive organ from Europe, and had it installed in his home for his personal enjoyment.  Gratitude and courtesy demanded that he keep the gift, but within two years, he had given it to the men's chapel at Angola Prison in Louisiana.  He felt that it would be put to better use there.

Like Mahalia Jackson, George Beverly Shea will be remembered, but cannot be replaced. And, like Mahalia, he had no interest whatsoever in singing secular music, although both singers had many offers.  In these days when the death of a Kurt Cobain or a Whitney Houston is met with worldwide hysteria, the promotion of George Beverly Shea to Heaven is being met with joy, thankfulness, and an expectancy of a future reunion by generations of the world's Christians. 


Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of his saints.
- - - Psalm 116:15


Recording with Guy Penrod, at age 103

Friday, April 19, 2013

"Drop the ropes!"

"Faith." Religious people, as well as genuine Christians, talk about it all the time, just as unbelievers and atheists revile it as "superstition" or "self-delusion." But if you're a Christian, here's an interesting question: is your faith in God a matter of belief,  or is it something that can actually be seen

At the outset, let's clarify our terms. Every real Christian, of course, has a measure of faith, if he or she has been born again according to John 3:3-7. Faith in God's grace is the prerequisite for being a Christian: not church membership, not baptism, not family heritage, not even "good deeds."  For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast (Ephesians 2: 8, 9).  That's what we call "saving faith," the very starting point of the Christian life; that's when we come to Christ on a personal basis for the first time. Some would say that's when we meet Christ, and that's a good way of putting it. That's what John 1:12 refers to as receiving Christ: not just an intellectual assent, not having a priest put a wafer on your tongue, not "joining the church," but literally receiving Jesus Christ into your life by an act of the will.  That's the faith that saves, and even a child can have it.


But after that transaction has taken place, there's another kind of faith: faith to believe God's words, and God's propositional revelation about Himself, and God's promises. "Saving faith" gets you into Heaven; but this kind of faith gets you through the days, and the decisions, and the disasters, and through all the rest of your earthly life. And every Christian has a different amount of faith: some very little, some very much.

There are many definitions of this kind of faith, the best-known being in Hebrews 11:1: Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.  But if you're an unbeliever, or if you haven't read the Bible very much, that definition might not mean much to you.  For the moment, try this: faith is simply the willingness to believe that God will do exactly what He promises to do, and what He has said about Himself.  It's believing God, just as you'd believe a trusted friend who made you a promise.  The only difference is that your friend might have an accident, and not be able to keep the promise; God always keeps His promises - - - whether they're glorious, or terrifying.

Jesus is teaching in a large private home in Capernaum.  It's early in His ministry, but He's already become well known as a Teacher and Healer.  He sits in the largest room of the house, surrounded by a crowd of people from all the neighboring cities; it's "standing room only."  The people are fascinated by Him, just as they're fascinated today.  But there's a small group of men, maybe no more than three or four, who are understandably frustrated.

They have a friend who's hopelessly paralyzed, and they've carried him, on a sort of stretcher, to see Jesus, in hopes that Jesus will heal him.  They've heard the stories of Jesus healing the blind, and the leprous, and the crippled .... and they believe the stories.  They have absolute faith and confidence that Jesus can heal their friend. But they have a problem: the crowd is so big, that they can't get anywhere near Jesus!

But they're determined.  They hit upon an ingenious solution.  In those days, in that place, houses had flat roofs, which were sometimes used as areas of relaxation or observation.  Usually, these roofs were made of tiles, not the shingles of today.  So, the men carried their sick friend up the outside staircase to the roof, above the room where Jesus was teaching ....  and began to remove the tiles, one by one, until they had created a man-sized hole directly above Jesus. 

As the crowd took notice of this, and began to watch the ceiling open up, Jesus saw it, too.  And, once the hole was big enough, the men attached their friend's stretcher or cot to ropes, and began lowering it down to the floor:



And it came to pass on a certain day, as he was teaching, that there were Pharisees and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and Judaea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was present to heal them. And, behold, men brought in a bed a man which was taken with a palsy: and they sought means to bring him in, and to lay him before him. And when they could not find by what way they might bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch into the midst before Jesus. And when he saw their faith, he said unto him, Man, thy sins are forgiven thee (Luke 5:17-20).

Physical disease, in the Bible, is a picture of sin; and, very often, physical healing and forgiveness of sins went together.  In this case, Jesus' words, "Thy sins are forgiven thee," also implied that he would be physically healed.

But look at the passage again, and ask yourself a question:  when the paralyzed man had been lowered to the floor, and Jesus was watching the man's friends, it says "he saw their faith."  How?  What did Jesus see, that indicated such faith?  Was it just their great effort in making a way around the crowd, or was it something else?

The Bible doesn't explain, but I once heard a very wise preacher who probably had the answer.  Jesus watched the men carefully lowering their friend to be healed .... and then they dropped the ropes! 

They let go of the ropes because they knew Jesus would heal the man; they had complete faith that He wouldn't refuse, or fail.  So, they didn't even hold on, in case they had to pull him back up again.  They knew that once he got to Jesus, he'd be healed, stand up, and walk out by himself.  That's faith: and that's what Jesus saw.  And their faith was rewarded; the man was healed.

If you're a born again Christian, you have plenty of needs in your life.  There are things that you know only God can do for you ... such as showing you His will for your life, or helping you to make an important decision, or perhaps something as practical as choosing a mate, finding a job, or deciding where to live.  Maybe you have a physical or mental infirmity that requires His intervention.  You pray, and you ask His help .... but what sort of faith do you have?  Is it the kind that leads you to pray, but without any real expectation that He'll answer?  Or is it the kind of faith that really and truly puts the situation in God's hands, and forsakes your own "wisdom" and half-baked solutions?

It has been truly said that God won't do for a man what the man can do for himself.  If you need a job, God might not just drop it into your lap; yes, you have to pray, but then you have to do what you can to find it.  If you're sick, you need to pray about it; but God doesn't usually send a team of doctors to your front door.  You and I have to do our part.  But when faith is called for (and it's always called for, in a Christian's life), we need to be willing and able to put it in God's hands, and expect Him to act.  Most Christians, sadly, don't do that; if they were honest, they'd pray, "God, I need your help, but I don't really expect it, so I'm going to work this thing out by myself."  And that's not the kind of faith that Jesus notices.

He notices the kind of faith that causes us to abandon our own foolish, inadequate solutions, and depend on Him.  He notices the kind of faith that says "God, Your help is 'Plan 'A.' I have no 'Plan B!'"

He notices the kind of faith that causes us to drop the ropes!

Monday, April 15, 2013

Studies in Islam: Rape in Theory and Practice

Here are two reports, not unrelated, that demonstrate once again the savagery and sexual insanity of the followers of Muhammad.  In the first story, we have a report of a fatwa issued by the distinguished Saudi "cleric" Muhammad al-Arifi, explaining the necessity and desirability of rape by Mujahideen "soldiers" fighting in Syria.  Although soldiers in any army, in any era, experience certain "romantic" deprivations while stationed on foreign fields, this is merely a part of military life, and is a hardship to be endured in the line of duty.  (This hardship is often alleviated by the dubious comforts of professional prostitutes, but those are consensual relationships.)  But special rules apparently apply to Muslim "soldiers," who are, according to their "Prophet" Muhammad, the most noble and flawless of men.  Thus, "intercourse marriages" are encouraged by the Mohammedan clerics.  As the following video suggests, the victim of such a "marriage" is often required to accommodate multiple rapists; this practice, among such non-Muslim groups as the Hell's Angels and other outlaw groups, is called "pulling a train."  But in Islam, it is a religious duty, not only for the rapists, but for their victims, whose non-compliance will prevent them from entering Paradise:

video

The report mentions critics of this barbarism, but quotes no Islamic objections.  The reporter also mentions that the "Reverend" al-Arifi issued an earlier fatwa stating that girls should remain with their fathers until they marry, which wasn't such a good idea for three-year-old Lama al-Ghamdi, who was raped, sodomized, and tortured to death by her father, another Saudi "cleric," who served an entire month in prison for his actions.  

But offering ecclesiatical sanction to rapists, or even prescribing rape as a religious duty, is hardly necessary; it's like giving bats permission to fly, or sharks permission to swim.  Mohammedan men do it anyway.  The following video, widely circulated on Arabic television this month, shows a group of Egyptian men gang-raping two Christian women.  (The video is horrific, but not sexually graphic.)  As the women scream, one hears the men shouting "Nasara," which is the Koran's invidious term for Christians; and, of course, "Allahu Akbar:" Muslim men seem to think that "Allah" is very great indeed for allowing them to rape anyone they please.  Many Muslims protested that the video was a "hoax," but this oft-repeated claim is given the lie by the very fine writer Raymond Ibrahim, on his site "Islam Translated."

video

That's Islam: "the religion of peace," so beloved of George W. Bush and Barack Obama, and so unspeakably atavistic to anyone who cares about such trivialities as human decency.  It is the most evil "religion" ever conceived by the mind of man, and it is high time that anyone claiming to be a civilized human being avows this.

Sunday, April 14, 2013

Sunset in Jerusalem

It's a birthday ... but not just any birthday.  It's one which was never supposed to have happened, and against which empires, nations, and individuals have steadfastly and fanatically fought, and sought to prevent.  But it's here in spite of all that: this evening, at sundown, observant Jews worldwide began to celebrate Yom Ha'atzmaut, Israel's 65th Independence Day. 

video

Minutes after this proclamation was made, and against the advice of many of his advisers, the old cussing Baptist, Harry Truman, led the world in recognizing the new State, throwing America's support behind the fledgling country:


Needless to say, Israel's enemies attacked immediately, and have been fighting to destroy the nation, and exterminate her people, from that day to this.  But they have not prevailed; and, despite the perfidies of subsequent European and American administrations, they will not prevail.  Israel, having been miraculously regathered by God, is here to stay:

For thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I, even I, will both search my sheep, and seek them out. As a shepherd seeketh out his flock in the day that he is among his sheep that are scattered; so will I seek out my sheep, and will deliver them out of all places where they have been scattered in the cloudy and dark day. And I will bring them out from the people, and gather them from the countries, and will bring them to their own land, and feed them upon the mountains of Israel by the rivers, and in all the inhabited places of the country.  I will feed them in a good pasture, and upon the high mountains of Israel shall their fold be: there shall they lie in a good fold, and in a fat pasture shall they feed upon the mountains of Israel (Ezekiel 34:11-14).

Bible believing Christians join the Jewish people this week in proclaiming, "Thank God for His promises, and His faithfulness.  Happy Birthday, Israel!"


Wednesday, April 10, 2013

Trials

We must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God.  
--Acts 14:22

God's people have their trials. It was never designed by God, when He chose His people, that they should be an untried people. They were chosen in the furnace of affliction; they were never chosen to worldly peace and earthly joy. Freedom from sickness and the pains of mortality was never promised them; but when their Lord drew up the charter of privileges, He included chastisements amongst the things to which they should inevitably be heirs. Trials are a part of our lot; they were predestined for us in Christ's last legacy. So surely as the stars are fashioned by his hands, and their orbits fixed by Him, so surely are our trials allotted to us: He has ordained their season and their place, their intensity and the effect they shall have upon us. Good men must never expect to escape troubles; if they do, they will be disappointed, for none of their predecessors have been without them. Mark the patience of Job; remember Abraham, for he had his trials, and by his faith under them, he became the "Father of the faithful." Note well the biographies of all the patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, and you shall discover none of those whom God made vessels of mercy, who were not made to pass through the fire of affliction. It is ordained of old that the cross of trouble should be engraved on every vessel of mercy, as the royal mark whereby the King's vessels of honour are distinguished. But although tribulation is thus the path of God's children, they have the comfort of knowing that their Master has traversed it before them; they have His presence and sympathy to cheer them, His grace to support them, and His example to teach them how to endure; and when they reach "the kingdom," it will more than make amends for the "much tribulation" through which they passed to enter it. 

 
- - - Charles Haddon Spurgeon
Morning and Evening

Sunday, April 7, 2013

The World's Biggest Hypocrite?

Now comes the word that His Holiness, the Vicar of Christ on Earth, the Prince of the Apostles, Pope Francis, has ordered his collaborators in the Roman Catholic hierarchy to toughen up on pedophiles in the priesthood.  According to The Guardian:

"Pope Francis has directed the Vatican to act decisively on ecclesiastic sex abuse cases and take measures against paedophile priests, saying the Catholic church's credibility was on the line.

"The announcement was quickly dismissed by victims' advocates as just more talk. 'Once again … a top Catholic official says he's asking another top Catholic official to take action about paedophile priests and complicit bishops,' said Barbara Dorris, an official of Snap, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, a US-based organisation.

"'Big deal. Actions speak louder than words. And one of the first actions Pope Francis took was to visit perhaps the most high-profile corrupt prelate on the planet, Cardinal Bernard Law, who remains a powerful church official despite having been drummed out of Boston for hiding and enabling crimes by hundreds of child molesting clerics,' Dorris said in a statement.

"Clergy abuse victims have called for swift and bold action from Francis as soon as he was elected pope last month. In the pope's homeland, Argentina, Roman Catholic activists had characterised him as being slow to act against such abuse while he was head [of] the church there....."  Pope Francis pedophile priests 


At the outset, let's be clear about two things.  First of all, none of us are entirely free from hypocrisy in our own lives; we all fall short, and our actions are not always consistent with our aspirations.  Second, the most outrageous example of hypocrisy in the contemporary world is that of the Mohammedans, who constantly bleat that "There is no compulsion in religion," even as they persecute and slaughter those who refuse to follow Muhammad (another child molester, interestingly enough).  But neither you, nor I, nor even the Muslim imams, claim to be God's highest and most divinely-sanctioned spokesman on Earth.  That puts Francis, and every other Pope, in a unique position. (We're not implying that he's a pedophile; but he's covered for them.) The man who, according to Catholic dogma, takes the place of Jesus Christ on earth should not be a protector of predators.

It must also be noted that there are untold numbers of genuine Christians in the Roman Catholic Church: namely, among the pew-sitters, who are ignorant of their church's doctrine and history, or maintain their loyalty for family reasons.  This is not an "anti-Catholic" post; there are saved and unsaved Catholics, just as there are saved and unsaved Baptists and Presbyterians.

But the members of SNAP, the Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests, have earned the right to their skepticism - - - or, rather, they have had that right thrust upon them, by the priests and prelates who murdered their innocence.  We'll take their word over that of any Pope, any day.

New readers of this blog might think, "Wow!  This guy thinks he's right, and everybody else is wrong!"  That's not true at all.  I'm wrong on many things, and when I discern my errors, I try to correct them.  But I despise the Mohammedan "religion" because it is barbaric and unworthy of human beings; and I have utter contempt for the Roman Catholic hierarchy, and the church's teachings, because I know a little bit about two subjects: the Bible, and church history.  

The world's biggest hypocrite?  That's for God to judge.  But, like the Muslim imams, Pope Francis is cerainly in the running.  Don't believe me: ask the Christians persecuted by Muslims, or the members of SNAP.

And then, for a complete and total lack of hypocrisy .... look at the Lord Jesus Christ.  Even a child can see His perfection and love ... and even a hypocrite can find forgiveness and new life by receiving Him, according to John 1:12, as their personal Lord, Saviour, and Friend.

Thank God for that!


Saturday, April 6, 2013

America ALREADY paying Muslim extortion

Here's a bit of enlightening news for Westerners: according to our Mohammedan friends, we are already paying the "sacred extortion" that Islam requires "unbelievers" to pay for the privilege of not being slaughtered like animals.  We're paying it in the form of foreign aid, and Americans (who are feeling the bite of "sequestration" at home) are paying more than anybody.  The Mohammedans, according to their own words, don't regard this as "aid;" they regard it as their due, as the world's wisest and most godlike people.

Jizyah is the "head tax" demanded in Mohammedan countries on all those residents who do not follow the so-called "religion" of Islam.  It's straight from the Koran: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and His Messenger have made unlawful and who do not adopt the religion of truth from those who were given the Scripture - [fight] until they give the jizyah willingly while they are humbled" (Surat 9:29).  It's also mandated in the Hadiths, and practiced in every Muslim country in 2013.  In American gangster slang, jizyah simply means "protection" or a "street tax:" "pay the money or suffer the consequences." This racket has been practiced by hoodlums from Al Capone to the Crips and the Bloods.   Since Islam is essentially criminal at its core, this comparison is not far-fetched.

But never has it been so eagerly paid, or in such copious amounts, as by recent American administrations, most particularly that of Barack Obama, which recently gave Egypt (ruled by the Muslim Brotherhood) $25 billion dollars.  I single out the current administration because the following remarks were made, both in the present and future tense, by an Islamic "cleric" on Egyptian television, less than a month ago:

video

The Muslim interviewer laughs, and seems to treat this as a joke, but clearly it is the laughter of delight, not derision.

Cheer up, Americans, and all those in nations that aid the Mohammedans with your aid: you may be facing economic depression at home, but your leaders, especially Barack Obama, are being good little boys and girls, and paying their masters what they owe.  As your paychecks shrink because of higher deductions (if you get a paycheck), just consider the lost money a tithe to the demon-possessed pedophile Muhammad.

You're welcome! Have a happy day! 

Thursday, April 4, 2013

"Put away that Bible!"

In a recent discussion of the same-sex marriage controversy, the insufferable blowhard Bill O'Reilly attacked those Christians who approach the subject from a Biblical perspective.  Apparently believing that the matter should only be addressed on a purely political basis, the former host of Inside Edition said the following:

"The compelling argument is on the side of homosexuals. That’s where the compelling argument is. 'We’re Americans. We just want to be treated like everybody else.' That’s a compelling argument. And to deny that, you’ve got to have a very strong argument on the other side. And the other side hasn’t been able to do anything but thump the Bible." ("The O'Reilly Factor," Fox News, March 24, 2013, emphasis added.)

This, however, is not a post about the same-sex marriage issue.  Rather, it is a reflection on O'Reilly's attitude, shared by the vast majority of Western unbelievers and many professing "Christians:" i.e., absolute and unwavering contempt for the Bible, and those who attempt to follow its teachings: the "Bible thumpers" that the "conservative" O'Reilly so despises. 



(The very term "Bible-thumpers," or "Bible-thumping," is itself not only a perjorative, but a hopelessly overused cliché; and, as a professional communicator, O'Reilly should recognize it as such.  But looking for original thought on Fox News, or MSNBC, is like looking for a garden of tulips in the Sahara desert. Indeed, the combined output of these two "news channels" can be easily encapsulated: The words of a wise man's mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself. The beginning of the words of his mouth is foolishness: and the end of his talk is mischievous madness. A fool also is full of words: a man cannot tell what shall be; and what shall be after him, who can tell him? [Ecclesiastes 10:12-14].)

Unbelievers, and most nominal Christians, are, to coin a term, Bibliophobes.  Although they seldom admit it, they both hate the Bible, and are deathly afraid of it.  (In this, as in all other posts, we emphasize that the genuine, authoritative word of God is the Authorized King James Version of 1611; but the Bibliophobes shrink from any translation.) It's a shame they won't acknowledge this; it would make things so much simpler: if you're scared, say you're scared!

People tend to be very inconsistent when a preacher, or even a Christian they know socially or in the workplace, begins quoting the Bible.  (Of course, they expect it from preachers, from the pulpit; that's one reason they avoid church.) But outside the pulpit, even pastors or counselors are expected to keep the words of the Bible to themselves. "I don't want to hear what that old book says," people say, "just tell me what you think, or what you believe!"  But expecting a genuine Christian to avoid quoting the Bible is unrealistic and, again, inconsistent.  No one seeking legal advice says to the attorney, "Put away those law books!  They don't matter!  I just want your personal opinion!"  When consulting a doctor, one expects him or her to be well-versed in the medical texts and literature.  In fact, we're so dependent on written "authority," in our day to day lives, that most people can't even program a new DVD player for their television, or fix a computer problem, without wading through a confusing set of written instructions,  But not the Bible: that's to be shunned at all costs. As Jeremiah said, behold, the word of the LORD is unto them a reproach; they have no delight in it (Jeremiah 6:10).


Among "religious" people, there's even a clever term for quoting the Bible, and it's not "Bible-thumping."  For example, if I say that a genuine Christian is someone who has received Christ according to John 1:12, and been born again according to John 3: 3-7, some people will immediately say, "You're just 'proof-texting!' You're simply finding verses that support your position, and ignoring all the rest!  You're just using a proof-text!"  "Proof-texting" is alleged by many people to be a cheap and manipulative way of addressing any issue, a substitute for real scholarship (God help us) or "independent thought" (God help us again). Such people are a little like the ancient Israelites, who, from time to time, became rather "Bibliophobic" themselves: But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy (2 Chronicles 36:16).

To use another rather mundane comparison, no one looks at his car's owners' manual for instruction on changing a flat tire, when the engine won't start: he looks for the section on ignition problems.  I suppose that's "proof-texting," too.

But has it ever occurred to you that non-Christians do the very same thing?  They use "proof texts" from the Bible to justify themselves, or to shut someone else up.  One simple example, which every Christian has heard ad nauseam, illustrates this perfectly. If I say that adultery or drunkenness or gossip are wrong, someone will invariably say, "Who are you to say?  The Bible says 'judge not!'"  That's one verse beloved even of Bibliophobes: "Don't tell me what's right! 'Judge not, that ye be not judged!'"  These people, it must be said, are really and truly "proof-texting."  I once had an angry, flagrant sexual deviant scream at me, "The Bible says 'judge not!'" Finally fed up with hearing this, I replied, "Thank you.  Where does the Bible say that?"  As he adjusted his brassiere, he answered with a smirk, "It's one of the Ten Commandments!"  Thank you, professor.  Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts (Proverbs 21:2.)

Again: there's probably not a drunkard in the English-speaking world who doesn't know, and won't quote eagerly, the words "Drink a little wine for thy stomach's sake...."  That's proof-texting, too, and of the lowest order; not only does it misrepresent what they're doing (drinking for non-medicinal purposes), but they couldn't tell you where the verse appears if you put a Bible in their hand and asked them to show you. If they could, they'd know that they were misquoting the verse (1 Timothy 5:23).



The yammering of Bibliophobes is predictable, and sometimes even amusing, but God doesn't find it funny at all.  He was not compelled or required to give us His propositional, written revelation; He'd already revealed Himself in the Law, in nature, and in the Person of Jesus Christ.  But He went a step further, because He loved His fallen, rebellious creatures, and gave us a comprehensive (though not exhaustive) revelation that we can hold in our hands and read.  (It's comprehensive, because it contains all we need to know; it's not exhaustive, because it doesn't tell us everything God knows.) He is not pleased when people avoid or shun it - - - whether those people are unbelievers or believers.  


Jesus Christ said, And if any man hear my words, and believe not, I judge him not: for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world.  He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day (John 12:47, 48).  In context, Jesus was speaking to Jewish Pharisees in the first century; but the spiritual application of His words, today, refers to the entire word of God, the Bible.  (Every verse has three applications: historical, doctrinal, and spiritual.)  Jesus actually went so far as to say, in this passage, that people who reject the word of God will be judged by that very same word.  That's an impossible standard to meet: which is why He died, so that we could be saved by receiving Him ... if we choose to do so.

There's a verse pertaining to this matter that is often misused, with the best of intentions, by many Christians: My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee, that thou shalt be no priest to me: seeing thou hast forgotten the law of thy God, I will also forget thy children (Hosea 4:6). Many Christians merely quote the first part of the verse, My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge, implying that people are unsaved because they haven't heard the words of the Bible.  But that's not what the verse says.  (In the first place, 21st century Gentiles, even in the "Christian West," are not "God's people.") The verse actually says that people are destroyed for rejecting knowledge. That's a very different matter ... and it applies to the Bibliophobes who constantly refuse to hear God's words, from the Bible, or who claim that the Bible doesn't contain His words anyway.

That's no laughing matter .... and not something to be taken lightly.


Tuesday, April 2, 2013

Soccer: a Zionist plot

They just won't give up, will they?  Ever since the so-called "Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion", one of the most outrageous forgeries in history, surfaced in Europe towards the end of the 18th century, Jew-haters of every stripe have pointed to it as the "Jewish Master Plan" for conquest of the world.  Originally, and shamefully, it was professing "Christians" who circulated the manuscript; to this day, a few conspiracy-minded fundamentalists still maintain a dogged belief in the legitimacy of the "Protocols." (Any genuine, born again Christian who harbors ill will towards the Jewish people is in violation of his own scriptures, is in rebellion against God, and is a reproach to the Name of Christ; thank God, most fundamentalists and evangelicals have left this sort of thing behind.) Nowadays, as might be predicted, the followers of Muhammad are the main adherents to the "Protocols" myth, and the alleged legitimacy of the forgery is taught in elementary schools throughout the Muslim world.  But then, as we may have noted before, Muslims are liars by nature, and will use any weapon at hand to promote their own foul "religion."



But the Mohammedans are so enthusiastic in their hatred of the truth that they make claims that are genuinely funny - - - at least to those of us in the West, who are not impressionable children in Islamic schools.  In this brief clip, Egyptian "cleric" Mahmoud Al-Masri explains that the game of soccer, which probably originated in China in the first or second centuries before Christ, is actually a plot, outlined in the "Protocols," to ruin the faith of Muslims.


You can't make this stuff up....

video

infidel!