Grace versus Government; Love versus Justice

I know I write hard stuff.  I don't always write it in the right spirit either, but even when I do it's hard stuff.  Even when I produce evidence I find that I'm accused of just personally feeling a certain way.  That is, I can give evidence that the Roman Church is totalitarian, wants to rule the world, engineers the bringing in of illegal aliens, and even with the best evidence, people, yes usually on the left, insist that I just hate Catholics.  It doesn't matter how often or clearly I say it's not about Catholics, it's about the institution, there's a mental set out there that's so fixed the information can't get through. 

The same of course with Islam.  Just as totalitarian, converted people by violence and murder, rules tyrannically.  You can quote from histories of Islam and still it's just you being somehow irrationally personally biased against Islam. 

I just encountered an enraged reaction to my complaints about illegal immigration, comparing the law that makes it illegal to Jim Crow.  It takes the breath away that an intelligent person can't tell the difference between a law for citizens and a law to keep out illegal noncitizens, an unfair law on the one hand and a necessary law on the other.  However, the same person then launched into an amazing litany of all the Marxist accusations made up against America since the sixties, so it's more of a case of the usual educational brainwashing than naivete. 

I've been thinking it's the concerted pursuit of evil for good and vice versa that is the worst thing about the time we live in;  but this is sort of a naïve version of that, and it's just as irrational and just as destructive and dangerous.  Because of such false sympathy, which I suppose is how they see it, we may soon have jihadist attacks as a regular thing in this country.  The illegal immigration problem will at least bring us down by crashing the economic system, but also by cultural incompatibility.  Another example of the naïve type is the people who are against the death penalty, somehow having no sense of the difference between innocence and criminality.  Staggering really. 

I sometimes wish I didn't think the thoughts I think, write the posts I write, because I don't see any good coming from it.  Those who already think the same way can share it but it's the people who don't who need to be reached.  I can tell myself it's the truth against the propaganda and deceitfulness of the Left, but if all it does is get them angrier and more irrational what good does it do?

There is this idea people have that Jesus wouldn't be for keeping people out of the country, that's not "love."  Same reasoning about the death penalty, it supposedly isn't showing Jesus' love to execute murderers.  I've said a lot about this recently, how it's really hate if it puts other people in danger.  There is a general concept involved though that should be spelled out:  Watchman Nee said it in answer to the people who call those who defend the head covering for women "legalistic"  -- He said we mustn't confuse God's grace with God's government.  It's a necessary and important distinction between different categories of God's working in the world, and people do confuse them all the time.  We are to cover our heads because of God's creation ordinance about the different roles of the sexes. 

Jesus' love never violates God's government.  Jesus love' did not rescind God's instruction to Noah that whoever sheds man's blood, by man must his blood be shed.  Of course the most venomous hatred is expressed against anyone who argues for God's government, while they are wrongly contending that you should be applying God's grace and love in those cases.  Another way to make the distinction is between grace and justice.  Justice doesn't become irrelevant because of God's offer of grace to sinners.  It is love to honor God's government and respect God's justice;  it is hate to dishonor them.

Some of the reversal of morality and values in this country was intentionally produced to destroy the country.  Yes, a real conspiracy.  I've posted some on the big foundations that rewrote textbooks to favor Communism and denigrate American history, which was investigated by a Congressional committee in the 50s, and is reported by Senator Dodd in an interview you can find at You Tube.  I'll have to collect all that information in another post when I can.

Deceiving America: Fake News

ot of us have known for a long time that the mainstream media are politically biased, that they whitewash their guys and their favorite political positions, and find all kinds of things wrong with their opponents.  They do it as if it's just factual news, including the occasional fact contrary to their opinion for effect.  This has been true for years and years and years.  The idea of neutral objective journalism that we used to take pride in has been gone a long long time.  And the bias is to the Left, in case anyone has any doubts.  But you'll even see misinformation claiming the press is biased to the Right.  It seems they will say anything.  And we've known it, most of us on the Right have known it.  It's depressing and demoralizing.  Where has America gone?

In this election season they pulled out all the stops to vilify Trump and give Clinton the whitewash treatment.  They put out fake polls and fake prognostics saying Trump had no chance to win.   I guess there are uncritical people who unfortunately believe such stuff.  Then what happens when they turn out to be wrong?  They double down on their attempts to deceive the public.  They accuse their opponents of putting out "fake news" when it's been their doing all along.

The alternative or independent media, such as Infowars, Drudge Report and Breitbart, were calling it like it is all along, so now the MSM has launched this attack on THEM, calling THEM "fake news."  What a scurrilous bunch.  Here's a page on the subject that Infowars just put out.

And on the excuse of "fake news" there are also rumblings about how those sites they've falsely called fake news should be shut down.  No shame about calling for outright censorship of other points of view.  Where has America gone?

It's gone to the Left, it's gone to lies and disinformation, it's gone to revisionist American history designed to discredit the nation in as many ways as possible, much of it aimed against the "evil" white man, and "Christians," making use of the weapons of Political Correctness, by calling us racists and so on; it's gone to manufactured destructive philosophies that are pushed on generations of university students, and for that matter on students at every level of American education.  Postmodernism is essentially an attack on basic morality.  The Jesuits couldn't have done a better job ....  or perhaps this IS their doing.

Talk shows like Rush Limbaugh's and some on Fox News try to keep the truth on the table, and of course they are ridiculed by the Leftists.  I'm afraid that some of us have seen it all happening but done nothing.  We haven't really known what to do.  Cry a lot I guess.  Hide from it, hope we'll wake up and find out it isn't really going on?  Some of us anyway no doubt.  One reason I make so much of the need to pray is that I don't pray enough myself. 

Twisted "Christian love" is really hatred

In my previous post I was hoping to find a way to help the Muslim refugees that wouldn't put the nation in danger.  You can't love one neighbor while putting another in danger by that love, that would in fact be hating your neighbor.  This is of course what all the "sanctuary" churches are doing, hating Americans while "loving" illegal aliens. 

That's the Catholic churches.  Now I'm hearing that Methodist churches in Texas are turning themselves into sanctuary churches to accommodate the Muslim refugees, adding some teachings from Islamic sources to their sermons, turning their buildings over to the refugees, taking down crosses and other Christian symbols and effectively making them into mosques.  The scripture comes to mind that describes the "abomination of desolation standing in the holy place."  That was first of all shown by the Protestant Reformers to refer to the Pope, who is the Antichrist who sits in the temple of the living God, the people themselves who identify as Christians.  But Islam in a Christian church fits only too well.

I suppose the Methodists think they are showing Christian love to the Muslims.   In fact this is the opposite of loving your neighbor.  It's not loving the Muslims because it keeps them in bondage to their false ideology, when they desperately need to hear the gospel of salvation by Christ.  And it is not loving your American neighbors because the ultimate aim of Islam is to convert or subjugate all nonMuslims and bring the entire world under "Allah." 

But we're seeing the reversal of Christian values all over the place these days, love for hate and hate for love, good for evil and evil for good.  Islam is an ideology that hates "infidels" even if many Muslims are peaceable at any given time.  I've read enough about Islam to know that it is a totalitarian ideology whose agenda is to rule the world.  That doesn't mean individual Muslims are pursuing that agenda, but they can become tools of their ideology in spite of themselves, by being indoctrinated in their mosques and in exclusively Muslim communities. 

So it is to me a really difficult task to figure out how to live out Christ's love to them.  I've often thought that missionaries to Muslim countries must start out with a mindset to possible martyrdom -- in fact the certainty of martyrdom -- certainly a well-developed dependence on Providence and a massive support group of prayer warriors, but first and foremost a willingness to die to get the gospel to the Muslims.  You would think that the refugee situation would make missionary work a lot easier, and I suppose it does in many ways, but not if we are obligated to bring great numbers of them into our country.

If they are already in the country then it seemed to me that churches and Christians should be sure they are not isolated in Muslim communities, have a chance to hear the gospel and receive genuine Christian love.  The idea would be to live out our Christian calling toward both Muslim and American neighbors, by reducing the threat of Islam if possible.  Christians have been responding to the refugee problem in many ways already.  Perhaps the most effective is the ministries that take Bibles to them in their refugee camps, to those who are hungry to hear it and there are many. 

Turning Christian churches into mosques, or Muslim-friendly deChristianized sanctuaries, is in fact hatred:  hatred of God, hatred of Christians, hatred of Americans, and hatred of Muslims.

Perhaps there are some Christians out there who are willing to do the self-sacrificial service I was contemplating in the previous post.   THAT would be loving Muslims.  But being a friendly resource is also a service, and a lot more feasible, as the email I received suggested. 

How about American churches take in Muslim refugees?

UPDATE:  Got an email from someone who has experience of Christians helping refugees in the country, but not by taking them in, and thinks that would be too much to ask.  I've posted the email at the bottom.
=====================================================

The idea of helping the Muslim refugees by Christians taking them into their homes came up in a forum discussion and it reminded me that some time ago I'd had a similar idea but abandoned it.  It would be a solution to the problem of bringing in people who remain strangers with an alien ideology that conflicts with American culture and is even hostile to us.  It would be a lot to ask, of course, I wasn't sure how feasible it would be, and since I couldn't do it myself it seemed wrong to push the idea on others.  But it IS a good idea if people could set themselves to do it.  And even I might be able to do it if someone helped me set up my place for it.

It could be set up through the churches, each adopting a certain number of Muslim families and individuals, and helping get them settled in the homes of congregation members who volunteer to do that.  With the whole congregation providing various kinds of support, the burden on the volunteer family would be a lot easier.  It would take a terrific commitment, you'd have to learn some of the language and customs and be able to explain things, while of course they would have to be learning English, and it could, even should, be a fairly lengthy stay. 

But isn't this a good idea if it can be worked out?  If they are to come into the country it is better that they connect as soon as possible with Americans in an intimate way, rather than be left to agencies and institutions and even wellmeaning counselors, or kept in communities of Muslims only.  Such agencies and other professional help would have to be involved too, but the important thing would be the daily interaction within the families.
================================================
UPDATE:  Got this email answering the post:
I

I have a friend ... who adopted a family from Syria. When they first arrived she spent time with them once a week to help them get settled in the country. This continued for quite awhile. She was a good resource and they still keep in touch. All that to say, I believe there were many Christians or churches involved in helping that group of refugees that came in

You pose having them live with a family from the church. I think that is a lot to ask anyone to do. We have had people live here over the years and it is a lot of work, both physically and mentally to have another family in the same home. You don't know these people at all and you may not even feel safe in your own home. Although many Muslims are peaceful, many actually might hate Christians. I think the idea is better to let them settle in their own home and be a support person, like my friend has done. She has shown Christian love and hospitality.

A Sketch of Jesuitism

I mentioned in the previous post that John Adams had lamented the restoration of the Jesuits after years of being banished by the Pope and many European nations.   He uses strong language:  "a step toward darkness, cruelty, despotism [and] death. ,,. If ever there was a body of men who merited eternal damnation on earth and in hell, it is this Society of Ignatius de Loyola."  

Here's the whole quote, which I had to assemble from different websites that only quote part of it:

My history of the Jesuits is not eloquently written, but it is supported by unquestionable authorities, [and] is very particular and very horrible. Their [the Jesuit Order’s] restoration [in 1814 by Pope Pius VII] is indeed a step toward darkness, cruelty, despotism, [and] death. … I do not like the appearance of the Jesuits. Shall we not have regular swarms of them here, in as many disguises as only a king of the gypsies can assume, dressed as painters, publishers, writers, and schoolmasters? If ever there was a body of men who merited eternal damnation on earth and in hell, it is this Society of [Ignatius de] Loyola. Nevertheless, we are compelled by our system of religious toleration to offer them an asylum.

Today in America we hear only good things about the Jesuits.  If you pay attention you will find they are everywhere in positions of influence and power.  That is a rather disconcerting fact to anybody who knows anything about their history, recently acquired knowledge in my case, which I described in my post Waking Up Among Wolves.  It's a startling experience to say the least.  It's a bit of that history I want to quote here from J.A. Wylie's section on the Jesuits from his History of Protestantism.

He is writing this in 1881, when apparently the Jesuits were entering Scotland:

The influx into our country of an order of men whose principle is the negation of all principle, and whose moral code is the subversion of the moral law, forms, in the author's humble judgment, a source of no small danger to the nation. 

Cast out of all kingdoms for their execrable maxims and their treasonable practices, the Jesuits bestow themselves upon us....  They come to pursue in their new home the intrigues which drew upon them expulsion from their old...  What...is to be done to counteract the evils sure to arise from the presence of men who have always and everywhere been the disturbers of the public peace?  We can but expose their arts, and put the unwary on their guard...  

They call themselves the 'Companions of Jesus.'  The name is but 'the sheep's clothing.'  ...Their teaching is 'the doctrine of devils,' and their deeds are the work of 'Apollyon, the Destroyer.' ...  To humble and cripple our empire is a first object with the Jesuits at this hour.  'They aim... to subjugate and rule...'    

God raised up Britain and gave her greatness beyond the measure of all former empires.  For what end?  That she might subserve the interests of the Gospel, as embodied in Protestantism.  This is our first duty as a nation.  The neglect of it is our first sin, no matter what other duties we make ourselves busy about.  The laws of God's providence being what they are, we cannot retain our supremacy, or, it may be, even our existence, and neglect our great mission....

So now they've lost their supremacy, and if their Muslim population continues to grow, their existence will certainly also be threatened.  Once they come under Muslim rule, that's the end of Britain.  And the same thing is happening in Europe.  Don't they see it happening?  On the surface this doesn't suggest the machinations of the Jesuits, but a bit of knowledge of their history suggests that it would be strange if they weren't involved.  Just as the Vatican has been manipulating our southern border they have certainly been manipulating the politics of Europe toward the European Union which they expect to dominate.  And the Jesuits are their foot soldiers.  Jesuits trained Marx, Stalin, Pol Pot, and Fidel Castro, and a Jesuit probably wrote Hitler's Mein Kampf; an RC priest intentionally incited the Rwanda massacre in a series of radio broadcasts;  and the Vietnam War was called by some [Cardinal] Spellman's War, and in any case is properly understood to have been a Catholic-engineered war. [From the Publisher's Forward:  "It was all engineered by the Whore and her Jesuits."]   See any trends here? 

Resuming Wylie's The Jesuits:

The Jesuits were called into existence to stem and, if possible, roll back the tide of the Reformation.   Advancing over all opposition, this great religious revival, [the Reformation], not yet half a century old, had acquired a strength and a breadth truly amazing.  ...In a marvelously short period, the night... had been chased away, and a countless multitude of men, of cities, and of nations, were rejoicing in the light of the new day.  [At the end of its sweep through Europe, only two countries,] Italy and Spain, now remained with the Pope.

To repeat the point, the Jesuits dedicated themselves to destroying the Protestant Reformation. That's their whole reason for existence. Loyola saw his job as subjugating the entire world to the Pope after the loss of Europe to the Protestants. There is no reason to think their objective has changed. It was their aim when they made themselves advisers to the rulers of Protestant European countries and tutors to their children, and it's their aim from positions of power in America too, especially as teachers of the next generation in their universities.  They also eventually made themselves obnoxious enough to the Catholic countries to be thrown out of them. 

The Reformers went to the source of truth in the scriptures, and ...led Christianity forward into the light..; so, in like manner did the Romanists l... [disclose] to the world the blackness and deformity of Popery, and the tremendous destructive power that is wrapped up in it.  Loyola....  helped to this issue. 

In other words, Jesuitism has nothing to do with Christ or Christianity, and neither does the papacy; it's all a religion of the flesh aided by the demonic spirits, and not the Holy Spirit of God, just as is Islam and all the other religions of the world.  Over the centuries up to Loyola the Roman Church had been accumulating more and more pagan practices and superstitions and jettisoning the spiritual teachings of the Bible, torturing and murdering those who lived by the Bible instead of their man-made rules.  [This is spelled out in the book The History of Romanism.]  The Pope eventually ruled over the monarchies of the "Holy Roman Empire" of Europe.  After the Reformation the Jesuits became their agents of intrigue to destroy the "heresy" of Protestantism that had brought those monarchs out from under their rule, all in the attempt to restore the Pope over it all.  When the New World was being settled, Jesuits were sent to take the country for Rome.  The Protestants  who settled here saw their mission as preventing that from happening [this is explicitly stated in early documents].

As Adams is quoted to say above, the Jesuits are masters of all "guises," selected and trained to fit any calling known to humanity, for the purpose of furthering the power ambition of Rome while pretending to be something completely unrelated to Rome's interests.   It is a genuine conspiracy, not just somebody's "conspiracy theory."  Wylie lays out the methods of an amazing organization that is structured to place its members all over the globe, each chosen to carry out a particular mission of subversion of the people to Rome.  They excel at gaining the confidence of kings and presidents, as advisors and confessors, and as teachers of the young, and at plots to assassinate those they can't subvert.  The stories that confirm these things are in many books, in Wylie as well as others.  Today they have acquired even more trust and popularity and therefore more influence than ever. 

The Jesuits are particularly famous for their morality of defeating all morality by casuistic reasoning.  

Their Tomes contain a system of ethical and theological science such as the world never saw before, and such as it can never see surpassed or even repeated. Here are sophisms, prevarications, subtle distinguos, logical spells and incantations, pleas, justifications, and a vast variety of inventions wherewith if a man arm himself, and know to use them aright there is nothing which he may not do. He may change falsehood into truth, convert villainies into virtues, violate every precept of the Decalogue, and yet contract no guilt; commit the most abominable and monstrous deeds and yet suffer no pollution and feel no remorse; swear and yet not bind himself; in short, he can banish virtue and vice from the world....[Wylie goes on to spell out amusingly sarcastically many of their maxims, including three principal maxims that are too lengthy for me to copy and too complicated for me to paraphrase easily:  "The ends justify the means" is the first, followed by "Probabilism"  in which the "probability" that an action is moral or not is parsed out to absurdity until it is rendered acceptable no matter how clearly it violates commonsense morality;  and "Intention" by which any evil act may be made morally acceptable by simply directing one's intention elsewhere while performing the act.   You can commit murder with a clear conscience by simply meditating on something holy while committing the act. Or something like that.]

 Wylie gives examples of their reasoning as it is used to completely undermine each of the Ten Commandments and justify its exact opposite.

As regards the doctrine of sin, the Jesuits, while retaining the word, have taken away the thing.... As regards calumny [lying slander] a wide margin indeed is allowed.

[quoting from Jesuit writing] It was maintained in the public Theses of Levain, in 1645, that 'it is only a venial sin to calumniate and impose false crimes, to ruin their credit who speak ill of us.' 'That it is not any mortal sin to calumniate falsely, to preserve one's honor, is no doubt a probable opinion' says Caramuel, 'for it is maintained by above twenty grave doctors, by Gaspar Hutrado, &c., so that, if this doctrine be not probable there is hardly such in all the body of divinity.'

As regards promises, the Jesuit teaching provides that one may keep or break them as one has a mind.

'Promises oblige not,' says Molina, 'when a man hathg no intention to engage himself when he makes them ....

Sanchez has taught a doctrine which must administer great relief to all prevaricators.

It is permitted to use ambiguous terms, leading people to understand them in another sense from that in which we understand them ourselves.

...It is hard to say what limits the Fathers have put on homicide, murder, and assassination, or whether they have put any.

...By the universal consent of the casuists, it is lawful to kill our calumniator, if there be no other way of averting the affront.["Again"] ...Priests and monks may lawfully prevent those who would injure them by calumnies from carrying their ill design into effect, by putting them to death

Then there is a section on justifying killing "heretical" kings while claiming to abhor regicide.

Perhaps that is enough to give a general portrait of the character and mission of the "Society of Jesus." Oh, that reminds me, despite their name, it is Mary, not Jesus, they particularly honor.

Has some features in common with Islam, doesn't it?  The right to lie to "infidels" for instance, and the right to break treaties with "infidels," although they don't hedge these about with such complex rationalizations as the Jesuits do theirs.

Attention, President-Elect Trump: The Bill for Building the Wall Should be Sent to the Vatican

Here's an interview with an ex-CIA agent objecting to Trump's plan to curtail illegal immigration, on the ground that this would be keeping out members of the world's greatest monotheism, by which of course he means Roman Catholics.  Which the CIA would of course object to because they are basically a Roman Catholic organization, an arm of the Vatican.  Bet you didn't know that.

There's a book you can get that describes how the Roman Church interferes with and actively promotes the movement of millions of illegal aliens into the US:  American Democracy and the Vatican:  Population Growth and National Security, by Stephen D. Mumford which discusses many facets of population growth* but also the effect of illegal immigration in America.   It's an old book, published in 1984, already talking about the effects of massive illegal immigration that can only escalate if it is not stopped, so how far into it are we now?  The book is available at various places on the web, even free at Mumford's site.  Read Chapter 2 about how the Catholic Church is the main obstacle to doing anything about illegal immigration. 

Not just interfering with preventing it, "the Catholic Church actively encourages illegal Mexican immigration."  

It's tempting to copy out the entire chapter. Well, I'll copy some of it. Remember, this was written in 1984.

Our government is addressing itself to dealing effectively with this problem of illegal immigration ... those efforts are systematically negated by the posture of the Roman Catholic Church leadership, which has organized opposition to an adequate response to halt the invasion of illegal aliens. If the [RCC] were to withdraw from this political arena, most remaining opposition would be vitiated. During Pope John Paul II's visit to the United States in Octore 1979 he campaigned for the right of illegal aliens to migrate at will to the United States. He made his stand on this issue clear to American politicians and labor unions, the American Catholic hierarchy, the news media, and other sectors. It is estimated that over 90 percent of all illegal aliens coming into the United States are Roman Catholics. The [RCC] dpes mpt recognize national boundaries and national sovereignty. There is but one world -- a Catholic world -- and it has no boundaries.

The move to globalization we've been witnessing for the last few decades is a movement to tear down all borders. This is what the EU has been doing in the project to turn Europe into a Muslim enclave. The Left is the loudest advocate of tearing down borders, and the Left that propagandizes in favor of illegal immigration in the US and against Donald Trump's promise to erect a wall. But behind it all is the Vatican. The One World Religion Bible believers expect to emerge with the global government will most surely be headed by the Vatican. The prophesied Antichrist himself is very likelyt to be a Pope. It's amazing how this view of the Pope as Antichrist which was the conclusion of all the Protestant reformers has been suppressed over the last few centuries.  (The Pope may find a Muslim Europe hard to control in the end but for now the idea is to destroy it, and I'm sure they think they have some kind of deal worked out anyway.)

Also the underhanded work of the Catholic order of the Jesuits, which used to be hated and frequently expelled from European nations. Our second President John Adams wrote about the danger he saw coming when the Jesuits were again allowed to move freely. We've lost all this knowledge. Anyway, back to the chapter: (By the way I've been substituting [RCC} for the word Church because it's not a church, it's a monolithic totalitarian Antichristian political ideology that aims to rule to the world. No, rank and file Catholics know nothing of this and may even oppose much of the RCC's political activity. They need to wake up and join the fight against the papal monstrosity.)

The [RCC] created and maintains a nationwide network of centers devoted to locating and assisting illegal aliens to circumvent the immigration laws of the land. These centers have been described in widely distributed pamphlets and have been advertised on Spanish language radio stations. In one such spot an announcement aired on a station in our nation's capital, our former director of the Imkmigration and Naturalization Service urged illegal aliens to use these centers. One lengthy handbook in Spanish, El Otro Lado, a guide for illegal aliens states that assistance can be obtained from a church in any Catholic diocese, thus suggesting that all Catholic churches participate in the network.

The handbook also directs them to taxpayer-funded free Legal Aid for help in fighting deportation. The author of the book says that it's a felony to aid or harbor an illegal alien. Is this still the law or has our indefatigable anti-American Jesuit-run Left removed it? The book makes it clear that American Catholics for the most part oppose illegal immigration as hazardous to the economy. The chapter goes on detailing the many ways the Vatican manipulates American politics to promote illegal immigration and interfere with efforts to curtail it. The book is generally about the RCC's refusal to support any kind of population-limiting efforts across the world. This is of course doctrine-based but the goal is to flood the world with Catholics so that the Vatican can rule the world, as it once did the "Holy Roman Empire." I wish more people would become aware of the information that's out there about the subversive work of the Vatican against all nations, and especially the work of the Jesuits.  The information tends to be old because such information has been suppressed since early in the 20th century, but it's possible to find quite a bit of it.  I've listed many books on the subject in the right hand margin of my Catholicism blog.

Hillary chose a Jesuit for her Vice President, and much was made of his Jesuit training as something to be proud of. The Jesuits used to be known for their assassinations and manipulations of European kings, and especially for their twisting of morality to justify anything they want to do. Blaise Pascal wrote a satire of this characteristic. There is no doubt they are promoting such thinking in the schools where they teach. Bill Clinton was taught by Jesuits at Jesuit Georgetown University. They have the reputation for providing an excellent education. They also provide the undermining of morality -- "the ends justify the means" is big with them, as it is in the Rules for Radicals  concocted by Saul Alinsky, Hillary's mentor. All Machiavellian methods of acquiring power. They have no respect for free speech or anything American, they just want to run it all for their own purposes.

So, Mr. Trump, it's the Vatican you should send the bill to for the wall you are going to build. The Mexican President too, but primarily the Vatican.

=====================================
* The book strongly endorses abortion as a necessary means to population control, and of course I oppose abortion as murder.  Other means of birth control have to be emphasized.  However, the Vatican opposes all of the effective ones, and it tends to be Protestants who use birth control methods and Catholics and Muslims who don't, so their populations are going to increase while Protestants decrease.  There are lots of problems involved in this, obviously.

Status Report on the War Between Good and Evil

After he is inaugurated Donald Trump is expected to receive an invitation to meet the Queen of England some time next year.

I'm SO glad she hasn't yet been succeeded by Charles, who would/will be an absolute disaster for England with his multicultural views of religion that embrace both Islam and Catholicism.   I'm not sure what the Queen herself believes,  but thanks to Henry the Eighth the monarch is the head of the Church of England, and she has always had the reputation of putting her duty as monarch above all else.  Charles has been reported to want to change the monarch's title from "Defender of the Faith" to "Defender of faiths."  THAT is scary.  Poor England, to have lost the reason for its former strength in its illustrious faithful Protestants.  Don't know William's beliefs, I hope they aren't as scary as his father's. 

Recently I watched the first season of the Netflix series, The Crown, which is about Elizabeth's reign. It's no doubt fictionalized, and probably wrong on some points, but the believable and admirable theme is the priority of the Crown itself as the symbol of the nation, to be put above all personal concerns, and Elizabeth is presented as dedicated to that duty.  The series also shows her being schooled as a young girl in the English Constitution, and quoting it as defining the monarch's foremost duty as to God, above the Crown.  (How sad that God was left out of our Constitution.)   But anyway, God is presented as the ruler of the nation above the monarch, a genuinely Protestant point of view, which she as devoted to duty must still uphold.

The recent decision of the people of England to leave the European Union has probably gone some way to protecting the Crown from eventual subjugation under alien government, ultimately ruled by the two major totalitarianisms, Islam and the Roman papacy, entwined with the totalitarian ideology of Communism/Marxism.  The two gigantic religions represent the two legs of the Roman Empire as depicted in the Book of Daniel the Prophet, in Nebuchadnezzar's dream of the statue representing the succession of the empires from Babylon to Rome. 

What's surprising about both Brexit, the English vote to leave the EU, and Trump's winning the American Presidency, is that it suggests that Biblical prophecy of the One World Order has been set back for a time.  It's all been coming together so neatly in line with prophecy that it's even rather shocking to think God is giving us a break from its inexorable march.  If Marine Le Pen wins the Presidency of France there will be three great nations that now have some hope of reclaiming their threatened sovereignty and culture.  I'm not completely sure of Le Pen but Nigel Farage says he's supporting her, which is in her favor.  Maybe poor miserable Sweden will be emboldened by their example to join them, a nation awash in violent alien refugees who rape their women with impunity.  It would be nice to think Germany would join us, because their citizens are also suffering mightily from the violent Muslim population that is being forced on them by Political Correctness/Cultural Marxism.   In Germany this Political Correctness that has poisoned the minds of the leaders of the European Union has even been taking away the apartments and houses of citizens to give them to these foreigners.  This is sheer evil being treated as if it were good.  In France where the Muslim population is very large they have been torching cars in the thousands for years, taking time out occasionally to kill people at work and play. 

And of course all this is because Europe has abandoned its Christian foundations.  They are under judgment by the God they have abandoned who is now abandoning them to their enemies.  The Bible reveals that one of the punishments for turning away from God and God's Law is a nation's being overtaken by foreigners.  This is what is going on in America too.

That being the case, any political victories over this trend have to be short-lived unless there is a great movement back to God.  Then and only then would the judgment be lifted.  How we need a great revival of true Christianity.   Not politics, not counter-violence, just revival, Knee Power.

(I just got a picture in my mind of Queen Elizabeth on her knees before God to intercede for her nation.  What a wonderful thought.  The Crown can and must bow to the King of Kings.  One day all crowns will be flung at His feet.  Then let all Europe and America follow suit.  It makes me cry.)


=============================================
The fact is that the history of the entire world is outlined in the Bible and without that revelation history is incomprehensible.  From the Fall in Eden the world has been dominated by Satan and his hordes of demons, because he succeeded in turning our first parents against God, winning him the right to rule over us as "the Prince of this world" in Jesus' words.  All the religions of the world are his invention, sometimes containing vague memories of the true God but always twisted into something that keeps the peoples enslaved to the demons.  From the beginning, however, God promised to send a Savior to free us from bondage to the sin that brings God's judgment against us, which also enslaves us to the demons.  This prophecy is repeated in hints throughout the Old Testament until finally He arrived,  God Himself incarnate as a Man, which is what the entire New Testament is about.  He lived the perfect righteous life of a perfectly sinless man, and then chose to die to pay for the sins of those who would believe on Him, to save us from an eternity of punishment for our sins.  He is the only Man who could do that for us, being perfectly sinless.  Although he was God during His life on earth He nevertheless lived and died as a man in order to be the propitiation for human sins. 

That's what Christians believe.  That's what has to be reclaimed if there is any hope of restoring the formerly Christian nations and bringing peace in the world.  If God would permit us a great revival of true Christian faith it would no doubt also convert great numbers of others, such as Muslims and Roman Catholics who aren't saved.
That would be a wonderful reprieve, and the world would be dramatically changed by it, and millions would be rescued from the bondage to Satan. 

But Christianity always deteriorates over time in this fallen world, with the help of Satan of course, so even such a wonderful blessing would eventually come under the devil's influence again.  Prosperity brings complacency, we lose our vigilance, evil takes advantage of us again and again.  Only when Jesus returns to claim His rightful rule over all Creation will Satan be banished and we be freed once and for all from his influence.  We've been watching the prophetic signs of the coming End increasing for some time now, all an accumulation of evil which the Lord's return will put a stop to, a trend which Trump  seems to have interrupted.  The hatred of Trump and his supporters is so furious, irrational, uncivilized, unAmerican, crazed, barbarian, thuggish, murderous, it will be  something of a miracle if he is able to be the President he wants to be for long enough to carry out his promises. 

Even if Trump is God's mercy on us, we still have to repent of our sins, the churches have to reform, we have to pray constantly to maintain the blessing.  That's a lot to ask of us, but what is impossible for us is possible with God, so I'm hoping and praying.  For America to be revived, for the UK, for Europe, for the salvation of millions of the unsaved.  And against the forces of evil which are of course working feverishly every second to destroy as many of us as possible.

Happy Thanksgiving!

Which should be celebrated as thanks to God for His bountiful providence, as it was by the Pilgrims.

Here are some earlier posts about that first Thanksgiving, true accounts along with the anti-American revisionist version the Cultural Marxists have foisted on our schools over the last few decades.

Hillary may not have won the popular vote if election fraud can be proved

The attack on the Electoral College comes up in every election and has to be answered in every election.  We have the Electoral College because America is composed of separate sovereign states and this is a way to protect their sovereignty.  If we didn't have it the big cities could easily dominate the vast geography of the country and obliterate the separate states.  Most people will have seen the map that shows the election results by counties rather than states, how red it is from sea to shining sea, with little tiny islands of blue mostly where the big cities are.  It's all that red that the anti-Electoral College argument seeks to disenfranchise.  The idea that the popular vote should trump geography sounds sensible but it's only an argument to disenfranchise the rural areas.  I heard Jesse Ventura on Infowars a few days ago calling for a change from the Electoral College to the popular vote and all I could think was how utterly ignorant he is. 

Here's one of the inevitable necessary defenses of the Electoral College that comes up every election:  Fox News on The current Democrat plot to get Electors to defy the people's will.  This is the plot based on the idea that Hillary won the popular vote though Trump won the Electoral Vote, so they want to reflect the popular vote over the Electoral Vote, but the plan seems to be to talk (or threaten) electors into changing their vote for Hillary no matter what the popular vote in that state was.  The Electoral Vote reflects the popular vote for each state, but the actual numbers can vary enough so that for the nation overall there can be more popular votes than the Electoral votes reflect.   Watch the video on the right hand side.   It starts out with the argument that elections would be very different if they were determined by the popular vote.  Right now candidates aim for the electoral votes in each state, they direct their attention to each state according to it's electoral votes.  If elections were determined by the popular vote they would have an entirely different strategy.  In other words, for this particular election it would be utterly unfair to try to change the results on the basis of the popular vote.

HOWEVER, it seems to me that there is enough evidence to show that if illegal votes are taken into account, Hillary did NOT win the popular vote anyway.  Alex Jones said on a recent show that he intends eventually to cover the evidence for this claim. (As of today, the 24th, he's rerun his interview with Bev Harris about how huge fraud is possible, but possible isn't the same thing as proven in a particular election).  I've posted some information below about how the vote could easily have been manipulated, through central computer control of the voting machines, along with the statement by the investigator that the manipulation would favor Hillary, but also through using ineligible people to vote, illegal aliens or dead people, and again, evidence of intention by Democrats to manipulate the vote for Hillary.   One fraud watcher, Gregg Phillips claimed in a tweet that he counted over three million noncitizen voters on the rolls in this election.  The tweet is there but I haven't been able to find the original source of that number.   There are claims that there are millions of dead people registered to vote as well.  If these claims are true, and I hope Alex Jones can come up with the evidence, Hillary most definitely did NOT win the popular vote, so the argument about the Electoral College in this case would be irrelevant anyway.

Here are some links to allegations of election fraud:

Gateway Pundit

The Federalist

Breitbart

Some random rambles on the meaning of the Trump election and what we're up against

{Update:  I've changed some things in this post since I originally wrote it.  About waterboarding and about the Hamilton cast booing Pence.}

Fox News has this article on Sanctuary Cities.  Those are American cities that have committed themselves to protecting illegal aliens against our immigration laws and enforcers.  Ain't that sweet?  How on earth did things get to the point that our own "public servants," the mayors of these cities, are willing to trash our laws in favor of protecting non-Americans against Americans?  They plan to fight Trump's intention of deporting the criminals among them. 

That includes Muslims too of course.  Trump wants to vet them before admitting them into the country though such a commonsensical policy is treated by the Left as some kind of moral outrage.  Do they just not understand the intentions of Islam, or do they want to see America destroyed?  Sometimes it's hard to tell.  Woopsie, here comes the charge of Islamophobia or xenophobia or racism to intimidate anyone who thinks this way out of thinking this way.  Hey, I realized I might as well accept that I'm Islamophobic, because I know what Islam intends and it IS something to fear if you care about America and Americans.  I'm sick of the hateful propaganda that defends our enemies and seeks to bring down the nation.

The sad thing is how totally polarized the nation is on what the election of Trump means.  The Left thinks it's scary, seeming to believe all their own propaganda.   But do they have any idea how those of us on the other side felt when Obama was elected?  THAT was at least as scary to us as Trump is to them, and in fact Obama has proved to be the nightmare we were afraid he'd be.  But the fears of the Left about Trump are simply the fruit of their warped ideology.  They are so deep in Marxist thinking they can't recognize a standard pro-America point of view, which should benefit them as well as Trump supporters.  If he isn't assassinated right out of the gate they may have a chance to discover that.  (And praying for Trump's protection has to be top priority for Christians I would think).

[I have to change an opinion I expressed here earlier that I thought Trump would have to take back some of his positions such as his support of waterboarding, but I see that he hasn't taken it back and that Pence is supporting the possibility.  (It's called torture and I'm sorry to say I got convinced of that by the movie The Railway Man because waterboarding was shown to be THE method of interrogation used by the Japanese against the British POW, who was emotionally wracked by whatever they did to him years after the end of the war;  but now I believe that was probably propaganda -- the film itself gave the caveat that the POW was tortured in many ways not presented, that the real-life POW's wife said were far worse than what was shown, methods that are more likely to be the reason for his emotional problems after the war.  So I probably fell for some typical propaganda.)   So we'll see how that discussion goes after Trump takes office.]   

What does that incident mean, the incident where the cast of a play booed VP-elect Mike Pence when he attended a performance, and Trump responded by calling it harassment and demanding an apology.  I've seen retorts from the other side that Trump is being a bully, a Hitler in fact.   Pence himself has denied being offended by the reaction. 

One thing we've liked about Trump is that he doesn't cave in when he's called politically correct names.  PC is the bully, PC intimidates and controls, PC is the reason we can't do anything about the problem of illegal aliens, it's the reason Europe is being overrun by Muslims that want to destroy them, PC is the weapon of "Critical Theory" that has the objective of bringing down Western Civilization and it's been succeeding awfully well recently.  A lot of us complain but all they have to do is scowl at us and accuse us of racism or xenophobia and we shut up..  Trump on the other hand doesn't cave, he knows how to handle bullies.

Most of the objection to Trump is PC:  he's racist or xenophobic or sexist or etc etc etc.  That's what makes him a "Hitler."  But what if it turns out that THEY are the Hitlerian brown shirts?   The parallel isn't all that apt on either side but one thing we ought to know is that huge numbers of people supported Hitler.  There are huge numbers for Trump and huge numbers that want to kill him in one way or another.  If he represents the salvation of good things then they are the Hitlers.

Could Trump turn into a Hitler?  It's said so often by the Left I suppose it has to be considered.  He has a strong determined personality that doesn't take much guff from anybody.  But that just makes him Churchillian -- we'll fight the bullies wherever they engage us.  It all depends on what the strength is defending.  Strength on the wrong side is dangerous;  on the right side it could save the country.  The Left isn't used to being called on their plots, they're used to being able to scream "racist" and have all their opponents fall down in a heap.  Cuz THEY are the bullies.

Even so, an autocratic spirit COULD end up doing things of a Hitlerian sort.  There's always that danger.  But Trump is being watched closely by people even on his own side, to see if he's going to come through on his promises or let us down as politicians always do.  And nobody is treating him like a demigod the way Obama was treated.  At the time I posted some of the outright worship of Obama, the complete lack of a critical stance toward him on the part of his supporters.  THAT is far more worrisome I would think than the hopeful but cautious attitude toward Trump among his supporters.  Hitler was also worshipped.  There is none of that with Trump.

Found this at Breitbart:  WHAT TRUMP MEANS.  Among other things the author says:

Trump means an American government that will serve the people, and be rooted in common sense.

I think that says what most Trump supporters feel about Trump.  It's the Left that doesn't get it.  They've been deluding themselves for so long with a false agenda they've come to believe it's real, and they can't stop seeing everything through their distorting lens.  Cultural Marxism, Critical Theory, Political Correctness, have so come to rule their thinking they'll need massive deprogramming to relearn how to recognize reality. 

Serving the people.  Golly what a concept.  Did Obama serve the people?  Obviously not, he's been serving an agenda of his own, aimed at the destruction of America.  Far from serving the American people he's been serving any and all elements that are against us.  Destroying us by encouraging illegal invasions by foreigners who are either parasites on our economy or criminally dangerous or ideologically committed to our destruction, such as Islam;  destroying America's reputation with other nations by apologizing for us to our enemies;  destroying our sovereignty by supporting globalism which would put us under rule by those same enemies;  destroying the economy by supporting foreign economies against ours.  Isn't it interesting that some American businesses are thinking of bringing their manufacturing jobs back to America just because Trump has been elected? 

Marxism is a philosophy of envy and hatred of anybody who has more than others because of a better work ethic.  Envy is another word for covetousness, one of the Shalt Nots, the tenth of the Ten Commandments.  Stealing is another Shalt Not, but Marxism promotes stealing:  from the hard working successful people to the poor.  That's not charity, that's stealing.  It also promotes lying propaganda, that's one of the Shalt Nots too.  They lied to themselves so hard in this election they brought defeat on themselves.  Cultural Marxism also promoted Sexual Freedom of every kind, the Shalt Not against adultery which includes every kind of sexual sin, which undermines the society in many ways.  Organized Marxist nations of course also commit murder as a necessary means to bringing about their crazed idea of utopia.  Murder in the multiple millions.  Doesn't that about run the gamut of the Shalt Nots?  No wonder they have to get rid of the Ten Commandments that have always been the foundation of our court systems.  No wonder they want to erect a statue of Satan.

Well, that last paragraph may be a bit off topic, it just sort of poured out of me.  I think I'll leave it.

And I think I'll end this rather rambling post with the usual reminder that none of this could have happened if the true Christian Church had not enabled it with false doctrine and silly worldly preoccupations in the place of the gospel of Christ.  Trump seems right now to be God's mercy on us even in the teeth of His judgment against us.  But politics can't save us if we continue to ignore and dishonor God.  Repentance and prayer from the churches is the only way out of the evil morass we've been sinking into for decades.

Some evidence of election tampering, vote fraud, and provocation at Trump rallies

Here is some evidence of tampering with the election before the election occurred:

Infowars interview of Beverly Harris, October 31, 2016:  She explains the technology of mass voter election fraud by manipulating the results from a centralized computer;  says later in the interview that it appears things are already rigged for Hillary.  She's not partisan herself and she's very credible.


This is her website, Blackboxvoting.org:  Lots of information explaining the method of manipulating votes by assigning a fraction to each vote instead of a whole number, which makes it easier to manipulate the percentages of a great number of votes for any given candidate.

And here is the first of a series of videos made secretly, getting people on the Hillary side to talk about how they are rigging the election among other things.  There are at least four in the series available at YouTube.  This first one is mostly about how they send people to disrupt Trump rallies.

Trust not in horses and chariots but put all trust in God and PRAY

Far as I can see, the Leftists ARE the Fascists.  They are the ones who want to force their views on everybody else, force us to toe their line, who lie and manipulate and create propaganda to put blame on their opponents.  All the signs right now are that it's the Left that is making up the stories about Trump supporters committing racial violence.  There isn't any violence from the Trump side, it's all fabricated by the Left, all "false flag" lies.  I asked for proof in the last post but there is no proof.  The proof, the video evidence, shows Leftists attacking Trump supporters and whites.  I'm not saying some Trump supporters couldn't do such things but the evidence is not there, the evidence says it's the Left that is doing it all. 

The election was rigged by the Democrats too.  Why is this information confined to the alternative media?

The protestors are also brought in on buses, paid by Leftists such as billionaire Soros.  I don't know why more isn't made of this fact too.  There are pictures of the buses but there needs to be more.  Shouldn't we be peppering the MSM with this information and evidence?  Otherwise they just stay in their isolated Leftist-defined caves.

And now there are people on Trump's side warning about more false flag events such as some Leftist nut shooting into a crowd of protestors and blaming it on the Right.  They are openly calling for the murder of Trump and the rape of Melania.  What a bunch of disgusting barbarians.  This sort of thing is NOT AMERICAN, this IS the sort of thing the Communists, Marxists, Fascists, do.  Sheer evil. 

I suppose half the country has no clue about any of this.  They are buying the lying propaganda, believing it's the people on Trump's side who are doing such things because that's what the MSM is telling them.  You have to pay attention to the alternative media to get the truth.  Drudge Report, Breitbart, Infowars. 

SO.  There isn't much mere human beings can do against such things.  We have to trust God to keep such evil plans from succeeding.  Pray for the exposure of the lies, for the truth to reach people who are right now deceived by the lies, pray for protection of those targeted by the manipulators, pray that sanity will prevail, but pray pray pray. 

You can't just say it, you have to prove it.

PLEASE:  PROVE IT, one way or another, prove it.  The mainstream media and their talking heads say things like how Hillary won the popular vote by such and such a number.  The alternative conservative media says the DEMOCRATS STOLE THE ELECTION IN FIVE STATES.  Examples of this were reported during the election while it was happening.  If you compare the numbers it could be that Hillary did NOT have the popular vote. 

There shouldn't be some people who know this and some who don't. 

The mainstream is also reporting that there is violence by Trump supporters against Hillary supporters.  I've seen lots of video that shows it is the other way around and seen NO video that supports it.  Newt Gingrich said the viole3nce by Trump voters is completely fabricated.  This is a matter of FACT.  There shouldn't be different opinions on such an issue.  IT NEEDS TO BE PROVED ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

Propaganda is a known tool of Marxists and Communists.  Lying is their forte and a favorite method for getting their way.  They don't mind misleading the whole nation if it serves their selfish ends.  And I'm sure there are some among the conservatives who aren't above such things either, but it's practically the definition of the Left.

WE NEED EVIDENCE.  WE NEED PROOF ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

And I'm tired of hearing how Trump's concern with national security is racism or xenophobia.  NO, IT IS A CONCERN WITH NATIONAL SECURITY.  Turning that into racism is Leftist politically correct propaganda-generated paranoia.  It's unfortunate that there are racist groups that support Trump, and he should repudiate them to be absolutely clear, but he isn't responsible for their supporting him.   Is Trump a misogynist?  In spite of his crude talk at times I don't think so.  Stop using such epithets.

America has never been perfect but I don't remember ever before seeing anything like the degree of manipulation and self-serving lies we've been seeing by the Left over the last few decades.

OK, so what IS love of neighbor? It begins with the Ten Commandments

What does it mean to "love your neighbor?"  This is the second of the two great commandments as Jesus preached them, the first being to love God with all your heart, soul, mind and strength.  What is that but the first of the Ten Commandments? 

I've seen this teaching of Jesus about the two great commandments distorted by "liberal" Christians, who don't understand that He uses them to stand inclusively for all the Ten Commandments, all the "Law and the Prophets."  They also distort the passage to make it mean that He is commanding us to love ourselves, although the passage actually says that we are to love our neighbor AS ourselves.  Loving ourselves is taken for granted;  the commandment is to love others in the same way as we love ourselves.*

The true understanding of the two great commandments is that the first, loving God, is contained in the First Table of the Law or the first three commandments of the Ten Commandments:  loving God means first loving Him with all our faculties, then it means having no other gods before Him, understood as worshiping ANYTHING above Him, not just literal gods;  making no graven images to bow down to them and so on.  I used to think the tables were divided equally, five and five, but it's only the first three that are about how we are to relate to God.  

Then Jesus says the second commandment is "like unto the first," to love your neighbor as yourself.  The first great commandment includes all the First Table of the Law that defines what loving God means;  the second includes all the Second Table of the Law that defines what loving neighbor means.  So, what does it mean?  Well, it starts with the fourth commandment to honor the Sabbath, and the fifth to honor parents -- which includes all legitimate authority, then it goes on through the five Shalt Nots:   Thou shalt not murder, steal, lie, commit adultery or covet your neighbor's possessions.  THAT's what loving your neighbor means.  Doing no harm to your neighbor IS loving your neighbor.  There are of course positive expressions of loving your neighbor spelled out in the Old Testament  discussions of the Law and in Jesus' teachings, but the Ten Commandments is the foundation of them all.  And the two great Commandments, love of God and love of neighbor, are condensations of them all.

Liberal Christians may prefer to substitute some mush-headed idea of love they make up themselves for the second great commandment, and ignore all the Shalt-Nots which are HOW we love our neighbors.  This ends up being hating your neighbor in reality.

So think of the people out there trashing things and beating people up because they lost the election.  Some of them carry signs saying Trump supporters are haters.  Really?  Jesus also preached in the Sermon on the Mount that hatred in the heart is really murder, and there is a lot of hatred among the protestors, frothing-at-the-mouth hatred because they didn't get their way.  Destroying people's property and beating them up is certainly not loving your neighbor. 

But of course the protestors are on the side that has thrown out the Ten Commandments that would have told them what love is. 

This is no doubt a case of where "Judgement begins at the house of God" since the churches that distort the Ten Commandments, like those that violate God's laws by allowing women preachers and elders, like churches that don't require women to cover our heads in the assembly, like churches that treat homosexuality as a legitimate lifestyle rather than a sin, that even ordain them to the leadership,  churches that call good evil and evil good, are the starting point of God's judgment that has been coming down on the whole nation, now expressed in these selfish hateful barbarian protests.

So these protests against a legitimate election are fruit of the Church's failure to obey God.  That's where it starts.  That's where we have to start to undo it.  By repentance and prayer.  God has had mercy on us in this election by saving us from the worst of the anti-Christ anti-American options and giving us somebody who might be able to begin to turn the tide back from evil to good.   But this can't be done without looking to God at every turn.  Trump says he's a Christian.  Then let him live it by starting every day with prayer that God will guide his decisions.

==============================================
*The reason for changing the wording to mean that it also commands us to love ourselves, is that we supposedly suffer from self-hate.  While in some sense this is a practical reality, people DO get depressed and want to do away with themselves, which is self-hating, in the Biblical sense it isn't:  self-hate in the Biblical sense is a form of self-love or of pride:  we "hate" ourselves because we aren't as perfect as we think we should be.  Our pride is wounded by seeing our flaws, our guilt, our sins.  If we weren't self-loving we wouldn't have such a feeling as self-hate at all.  The cure for "self-hate" then is accepting that we are flawed, being able to testify to our sinfulness and foolishness and wrongness without feeling hurt by it.  Not easy of course, but it is the Christian ideal. 

The Hateful Face of Political Correctness

So you've probably seen the sign that says "Love Trumps Hate" with a screaming face behind it.  We know what they think they mean, of course, but all they are doing is showing their own hatred, and their anti-Americanism.  Let's be clear, the Leftists are the haters, the ones who run into the streets to harm and kill those they hate, to destroy their property, to act like barbarians and fascists because of nothing more than hurt feelings.  Truth be told, even a nonviolent protest of the results of a legitimate election (even one their side did try to steal) is a deep offense to this nation.  Bleagh, these aren't Americans.  When Hillary said in her "concession" speech, that was really more of a bitter call to her troops, that she "loves America" and hates to give up her American "values" all I could do was roll my eyes.  She has no AMERICAN values, she doesn't love the true America, she loves some imaginary Marxist redefinition of America, an ugly alien parody.  She, and Obama too as I recall, emphasized the very American tradition of the peaceful transition of power between administrations, but hypocritically neither of them has come out and condemned the violent protests. 

I guess I'm a bit irritable this evening.  Anyway, WHAT "love" is that sign talking about?  What love is there in defying the law?  What love is there in allowing illegal immigrants to keep coming into the country and threaten the jobs of citizens?:  Or their lives if we're talking about Islamists?  Or get benefits and medical care paid for by these American citizens?   Do you love the Christians who are being sued out of their businesses because they can't in good conscience support gay marriage?  No, you hate them.  YOU'RE the haters.  Do you love the 60 million voters who legitimately won this election?  Obviously not, you hate us all, you still want to steal it from us.

You wave the Mexican flag and claim to be Americans?  Hey, Mexico could use some help, a lot of help obviously since so many of them want to move here.  How's about THAT's where you move to get away from the Trump administration?  Help the poor people down there to better their lot instead of tearing down America.  You are so loving, stop the hatred and show it!

===============

Now the Lefties are projecting their own violence on the Right and believing fabricated stories.

So now we're getting lies about who is perpetrating the violence.  The evidence is out there in plenty of video reports that it's anti-Trumpers who are protesting and anti-Trumpers trashing things, attacking the police and lone Trump supporters;  but without any evidence at all there are some claiming there are pro-Trump people doing these things.  Such as at EvC forum, which is supposedly about the evolution-creation debates but interestingly is almost solidly Leftist.  We could wonder why that is the case, but anyway that's where one of the leftist scientists has made this false accusation of Trump supporters. 

The Left accuses us falsely of racism, xenophobia, homophobia, fascism, being "haters" and now violence, most of which describe the Left and not the Right.  I'm sure there are some on both sides that fit all those labels, but it's the Left as a whole that is actually characterized by most of them and not the Right. 

That poster should apologize.  I won't hold my breath. 

I found this report on similar false accusations -- it's a right-wing source so he'll ignore it despite its evident credibility. 

Later: There's more to that post I should have commented on:

We are already seeing violence and threatened violence against minorities around the country. In schools bullies and the children of bigots feel empowered to terrorize anyone they don't like.

This is exactly the kind of behavior that enabled the nazi rise to power. A few assassinations of the press by the "2nd amendment folks" as Trump calls them and the press will stop reporting on the abuses of power.

What a bunch of paranoid hate speech. They usually accuse the Right of such paranoia. Just as the violence and threatened violence he's attributing to the Right is actually being perpetrated by the Left as we speak.  It's the Leftist desire to shut up people who disagree with them that is the Nazi style terrorism that is ACTUALLY occurring.  Trump supporters are the ones getting beaten up.  The press isn't reporting on Rightist abuses of power because the abuse is being done by the Left, and most of it is reported on the non-mainstream media.  Infowars had a team out covering the Austin protest for instance.  It wasn't violent -- oh, except that one marcher did kick one of the Infowars guys who was interviewing people.  

===========================
Geraldo Rivera being interviewed at Fox News made the point that the violent protests are trashing businesses in cities that went for Hillary, very likely businesses that belong to her supporters.  He said they should be put in jail.  They should.  Is that going to happen?

Somebody at Fox, it might have been Geraldo on the same show, said there has been at least one incident of white supremacist craziness at a school, of labeling fountains separately for blacks and whites.  It doesn't sound like it was violent, just crazy.  So there are your racists.   

Have we already degenerated to a third world nation ruled by violence?

I'm  waiting for someone on the Left to denounce the protests.  Hillary?  Obama?  Anybody?  There have been incidents of whites being singled out and beaten for their support of Trump, a gang against a lone victim.  It's become dangerous in America to cast a vote for the candidate of your choice?  This is America? 

A large percentage of blacks and Hispanics also voted for Trump, but the propaganda -- RACIST propaganda by the way -- is aimed at whites.  A high school girl was attacked by a fellow student, a girl, race unknown, at least to me, for giving her opinion in favor of Trump on social media.  The assailant asked her if she hates Mexicans;  she said No;  the assailant then said You're for Trump, you hate Mexicans and hit her.  This is the insane logic that has been pumped into people's heads on the Left.  It's "hate speech" isn't it? 

Shouldn't those whose lying rhetoric has provoked this violence be prosecuted for it?

Post-election blues: Wrongheaded protests, and Will Trump renege on some of his promises?

How sad all these protests are.  Protesting the legitimately elected views of the other half of the population as if they have the right to take away our genuine victory.  Trump won despite some rigging of the election in some locations, too, which was reported on Infowars as it occurred.  It probably only accounted for tens of thousands in the end, maybe hundreds, perhaps thanks to the vigilance of those who were expecting it to occur and watching for it.  This was a genuine fair election of Trump.  The protestors are expressing an anti-American denial of free speech to their opponents, which fits with the fact that their numbers include open Communists.

What's sad is the brainwashing the Hillary supporters are laboring under.  The protestors are mostly kids.  They certainly didn't get their notions from years of experience and deep study;  they had to get it from propaganda in the universities.  They have no sense of history at all, they swallow whatever they've heard in the lecture hall, basically the whole Politically Correct pack of lies:  Trump is a racist, a xenophobe and so on . They fear a loss of rights that has been trumped up out of nothing.  Trump was actually supported by an LGBT group but they believe LGBT's are going to be threatened while walking down the street.  Where are they getting these lies?  (If anybody should worry because of Trump's views of LGBT, it could be us Christians, because it doesn't look to me like he's going to do anything to protect us against the gay marriage law that threatens to destroy Christian businesses.)

They buy the lie that preventing illegal immigration is about racism rather than a rational assessment of security risks, even overlooking that for starters illegality is illegality.  They buy the lie that a need to carefully check the background of Muslims who want to come into the country is racism.    Do they even know that there are millions of Christians among the Syrian refugees that we could accept because we know there is no danger from admitting them, but that we are being politically manipulated to accept only Muslims instead?  There is no racial issue here;  there is only reasonable concern for the nation's security.  But of course they don't know that because the propaganda is aimed at destroying America, there is no rational basis for any of it.

We need a massive education program in this country to counter the brainwashing in the universities.  ALL of us need it.  I've learned enough over the last decade or so to realize that I still need to know a lot more than I do. 

But besides all that I'm also now wondering and even worrying if Trump will remain the purist he seemed to be during the primaries.  Is he going to compromise now?  Is he going to accept RINOs into his administration?   I've heard some of Ron Paul's comments on the election and he warns about such eventualities.  He mentioned how Reagan didn't keep his promise to cut spending for instance, but that in fact spending increased in his administration even beyond the excesses of the Democrats.

But it was God who gave us the victory so far and it's God we have to keep appealing to if we want to ensure its continuing benefits.  In the Name of Jesus Christ.

O Happy Day!

Thank You, Lord, for saving the nation from a Hillary Presidency and giving us a man who knows the difference between good and evil, whose heart is in the right place, who loves this country.  Keep us praying, though, because the forces of evil aren't going away.  Now more than ever we need God's protection.

IINFOWARS.COM a great place to listen to Election Day coverage.

Of course I'm a total right-wing idiot, nut, whatever, and as such I recommend for coverage of this biggest day in a long long time and maybe ever, Alex Jones' "Emergency Election Historic 52 Hour Live Election 2016 Coverage -- go to Infowars.com/show.  So far a lot of good total right-wing idiot/nut commentary.  The best. 

Politically Correct RINO in the NYT attacks the Trump candidacy and his supporters.

I saw this post at EvC this morning quoting from an opinion piece in the NYT, Is There Life After Trump? about the terrible condition of the Republican Party as embodied in the Trump candidacy, and feel I must try to answer it.  The author was misidentified in the post as Paul Krugman, though in reality he's Peter Wehner*, a self-identified Republican who thinks

The 2016 presidential campaign has revealed dark and disturbing things about not only Donald J. Trump but also the party that nominated him.

and

The forces that propelled Mr. Trump’s rise need to be confronted and defeated. It won’t be easy, given that tens of millions of Americans will vote for him and believe deeply in him. But if these forces are not defeated, what happened this year will be replicated in one form or another, and the Republican Party will continue to inflict great harm on our republic.

And what are those forces?  He lists three, the first being  "anti-intellectualism," which he sees as embodied in the party's embrace of Sarah Palin; then "political recklessness," or "unceasing combativeness, intemperance and a deep hostility toward compromise and temperamental moderation," exemplified by the government shutdown of a few years ago, and by the belief that Barack Obama was not born in America, which he calls a"crazed, racist, conspiracy theory."  .  And the third is "appealing to nativism and xenophobia" which is how he characterizes Trump's presentation of the problem of illegal immigration"-- "Demonizing people of other races, cultures and faiths..."

Republicans need to wrestle with more fundamental questions first: Will their party choose as its leaders people who respect democratic institutions and traditions, or not; who conceive of America as a welcoming society or as one that is racially and religiously closed; who are committed to helping or exploiting the weak and vulnerable; who admire or oppose tyrants; who respect truth or view it in purely utilitarian ways; who abhor ignorance or embrace it? Will Republicans gravitate toward leaders who have authoritarian tendencies, who incite violence in their followers, and whose personalities are vindictive, cruel and disordered?

By the time I got through the piece my head was swimming with the familiar terms of Political Correctness.  What does "respect democratic institutions and traditions" mean?  Unfortunately it is likely to be a euphemism for PC business as usual.  What does being a "welcoming society" mean?  Obviously in this context it means allowing America to be overrun by people who include some who would like to destroy us.  Authoritarian?  Violence?  Vindictive, cruel and disordered?  Wow what a litany of PC accusations.  If there's one thing a Republican should not be, it's Politically Correct.  A Republican should be a critic of Political Correctness.  But instead this writer indicts Trump and his followers for all the bogus attitudes invented by Cultural Marxism to discredit anyone who has a traditional view of America.  How is this man a Republican?  He slings around the terminology of he Leftist/ Marxist hatred of traditional America:  Racist, xenophobic, authoritarian. 

His attitudes are exactly "the forces that propelled Trump to his candidacy" and if only he recognized this I'd agree that these forces do indeed need to be "confronted and defeated."  The forces HE identifies are most likely best explained as the effects of the leftist manipulations and propaganda that have left conservative Republicans without a meaningful voice.  Trump for better or worse is our answer to the Leftist forces that have sought for decades to destroy traditional America and largely succeeded.  This RINO seems to be blind to all that, to the crying need for such a voice, flawed though the package be in which it has come to us. 

Trump's crudeness makes me cringe.  It's even led me to consider not voting for him.  But when I read a piece like this I know why it is important to defend him.  He's the ONLY one, among what at first looked like a pretty good array of conservative Republicans running for the Presidency, who spoke our own thoughts about what America is supposed to be and spoke against the political correctness that has been killing us for decades.  The others waffled and compromised where Trump told it like it is.  His personality is far from what we'd like to see in the Presidency, but his political views are exactly what we, at least half of the population, have been hoping for increasingly over all those decades.  I'd pretty much given up, accepting that we are on the downward spiral to the transformation by corruption and subterfuge and propaganda into a Marxist entity that can fit right in to the global vision being engineered behind the scenes, and then Trump came along echoing our own very thoughts, an amazing reversal to the downward trend.  And "Republicans" want to shut him up. 

This RINO even accuses the Trump faction of "violence."  WHAT violence?  Does he mean the leftist plants that have infiltrated Trump rallies and provoked retaliation?  And birtherism.  I have not seen evidence that proves it wrong, but there's plenty that supports the view that Obama was born in Kenya.  All I've seen against the idea is the kind of ridicule this writer heaps on it, along with some highly questionable bits of supposed evidence, but not real evidence. Obama was a "foreign student" in America when the mailman talked to him about how he was going to become President of the US some day.  Has that been discredited?  Not that I know of.  Have his Kenyan grandmother's words about seeing him when he was born there been discredited?  Not that I know of.  We've all just capitulated to the nasty accusations of "conspiracy theory" and "crazed racism" and shut up about it, we haven't abandoned the idea because it has never been truly shown to be wrong.  NOT because we're "crazed racists" but because IT HASN'T BEEN TRULY SHOWN TO BE WRONG.

 What are the forces that propelled Trump to his current position?  LEFTIST MARXIST PROPAGANDA AGAINST AMERICA.  Leftist Marxist accusations of racism and the like against anybody who wants to protect America against cultural influences that would permanently change its character.  Europe has been just about brought to its knees by political correctness that allows the barbarian Muslim "refugees" to rape its women and wreak destruction of its once-civilized societies, which eventually will make Europe just as barbarian and Muslim as the countries they came from.  Oh but this is just racism and xenophobia, isn't it? 

Again, a Christian ought to know why, and it's because they abandoned the God that made them civilized in the first place;  and that's the case in America too.  If we get Hillary that will be the reason why. 

Trump doesn't have the personality we'd like to see in the role of savior of the nation, but he has the vision of America we want to prevail.  I for one have to vote for that vision, and pray that strong advisers will rise to keep him on track.

===================
*I looked up Peter Wehner and find him described as a solid conservative and Christian, which makes his denunciations of Republicans who support Trump especially puzzling.  How can he be so blind to the actual reasons for Trump's popularity, I mean the LEGITIMATE IMPORTANT reasons?  How can he lob so many PC accusations against him and his followers?  He sounds like a leftist in this article no matter what his credentials and associations that should suggest otherwise. 
===================

I have one more comment I want to make on an opinion I saw at EvC today about how Christians who are supporting Trump have no genuinely Christian reasons for doing so.

When you look at some of their core beliefs:
- Being anti-tax
- Being pro death penalty
- Being pro-war
- Being anti-gay
- Being pro-gun
How precisely are these Christian values in any way? The answer is they are not. Most of these knuckle-draggers don't even understand their own bible or have read it. They are just Pavlovian dogs salivating when someone says something they like. The 'ditto-heads' that make up Rush Limbaugh's audience is a great example.

The death penalty for murder is prescribed in the Bible, by God as He instructed Noah.
"Anti-gay" is a propaganda term.  The Bible defines homosexuality as sin along with all kinds of other sins, and it's same-sex marriage we particularly oppose because the Bible prescribes marriage only for a man and a woman.  These are definitely Christian concerns.

I don't know what the "anti-tax" accusation refers to.  Christians aren't anti-tax that I know of -- anti-EXCESSIVE tax perhaps, or anti taxes that are just stealing from some to give to others.  And I don't know what "pro-war" is supposed to hint at, but as for being "pro gun," Christian conservatives are strong defenders of the Second Amendment which isn't a specifically Christian concern but isn't a violation either.  I think it was Chris Pinto who recently pointed out that it was when the UK took away the people's guns back in the 90s that  Muslim gangs almost immediately started terrorizing the nation.  Oh, you didn't know that?

Praying for the nation and this election

God could give us Hillary because the nation is under judgment.  The only answer to judgment is confession and repentance.  Praying for revival is always good but not without confession and repentance.  I'd like to see a Christian leader make a call for this kind of prayer, similar to Kay Arthur's call for revival prayer a few years ago.  But although she had people praying across the nation revival didn't come.  There has to be a spirit of confession and repentance and then maybe God will give us revival.   We have to confess the errors as God shows them to us in our own churches but also the errors of the liberal churches, the "social justice" churches, the self-esteem "seeker-sensitive" churches, the Emergent Church, the seventh-day Adventists, and any other errors we can think of.   And we could use some powerful evangelists like George Whitefield. 

Even if a few prayed like this it could make a difference.  The prophet Daniel after all prayed on his own and confessed all the sins of Israel as his own.  Fasting to various degrees would help too.

Anyway I'm taking this as my own project for the next few days.

REASONS TO VOTE, AND TO VOTE FOR TRUMP

As I said in the previous post I believe I've been seriously remiss in not doing the necessary research to take a stand on this election.  I've been playing ostrich I think, and allowing the loud objections to Trump's character flaws to influence me into silence, even though I've expected I'd eventually vote for him.  Now I'm finally coming out strongly in support of him, late in the game though it is.

My impression is that the conservatives and Christians who are determined not to vote for Trump are taking this position mostly because of his personality or character and less on the issues he represents.  I think there are sometimes good reasons not to vote for either candidate in an election but I don't think this is a good reason.  If both candidates are pro-choice I'd probably have to vote for somebody else or refrain from voting, depending on other factors that would have to be extremely powerful to override this issue.  It's about the issues in other words.  Trump has said some crude and obnoxious things during this campaign, and it's taken me a while to get my perspective sorted out because of this, but the bottom line for me is that he's spoken louder and clearer in favor of issues that conservatives support than any other candidate, and that's what has to count more than anything else about him.  In fact I think I've been falling into a political correctness mentality by reacting against him for his character flaws.   

I probably have an ideal candidate in the back of my head that's not completely realized and hasn't spoken out much yet, but I think I can say a few things about him:  a person who wants to see American sovereignty strengthened against the tide of globalism, who wants to reinstate America's role as ally to the worthy, as strong helper of the weak, the America that rebuilt the cities we bombed in WWII for instance, the America that has sent food and aid where needed, rather than an America that is at the command of foreign corrupt and anti-American nations that want to steal from us to give to the poor of their choice.  Someone who is determined to oppose the leftist encouragement of illegal immigration against our laws.  Somebody who supports our Christian heritage because it is what made us great and prosperous and a good influence in the world.  Who therefore seeks to protect that heritage from aliens who would undermine or threaten it, such as jihad-minded Muslims.  My candidate would also see the nation's Christian heritage as solidly Protestant and seek to protect that as well, which would take into account that there are many conservative Catholics in the nation who share roughly the same vision, but that the Roman institution as such is contrary to the vision, and is in fact one of the strongest influences in encouraging illegal immigration of Catholics, but also others that threaten the fundamentally Protestant nature of America.  This candidate could not support gay marriage because it violates the Bible, and now that it is instituted has become an agent of persecution against Christians and needs to be restrained.  My candidate would support Israel against the Palestinians, understanding the true history of that region as a neverending Islamic manipulation against Israel, which hardly anybody but some Christians understand to be the truth.  This candidate has to understand the importance of the role of the Supreme Court in restoring America, and prepare to choose strong conservatives to fill vacancies. 

I'd like to see a massive campaign to educate Americans on our true history as well, to counter the tide of Marxism that has been undermining the nation.  The right candidate could encourage this. 

That's just a few thoughts that come to me.  Trump isn't perfect on any of these issues, particularly he needs to be educated, but he does lean in the right direction and with good advisers could make the difference he wants to make in restoring America's former greatness. 

In any case it's about the issues and not about his personality, and on the issues he's stronger in the conservative and Christian direction than any other candidate we've had in a long time.  Not to vote for him would be a big mistake in my opinion.

WHY CHRISTIANS SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR HILLARY. Clinton's Marxist background and indulgence in spiritism. Plus: See UPDATE

Well, I made up my mind to vote for Trump.  I agree with most of his positions and I agree with none of Hillary Clinton's positions, starting with Pro Choice.  Trump has waffled on that one but has said enough Pro Life to make him preferable.  Character should be important of course but if we're comparing them on character Trump actually comes off better than Hillary anyway. 

I just listened to a recent radio show of Jan Markell's Understanding the Times radio on which her guest was Eric Barger who has the website Take A Stand ministries.  The subject was two of Hillary's influences that should disqualify her absolutely from the consideration of Christians:  her Marxist background and her involvement in spiritism, specifically her "channeling of Eleanor Roosevelt."  I dabbled in the occult before I became a Christian, along with many other sins, but I've repented.  I also have lapses into sins of various kinds, including pondering the uncanny "truths" of some forms of occultic practice.  But I then repent again.  But Hillary hasn't shown any signs of repentance despite her claim to be a Christian.

And then there is her Marxist background.   Most of us have heard of her association with Saul Alinsky, but Barger shows us that she was also involved with radical Michael Lerner.  I found an article at his site that mentions her experiences with "Eleanor Roosevelt" but documents in some detail the influence of Michael Lerner.  It's odd but there are liberals who deny that either she or Obama is Marxist.  Are they ignorant, brainwashed, or pretending?  Obama was raised by a Marxist mother and had Bill Ayers as his Marxist mentor.  If Hillary is elected I think we can fairly suppose that it's due partly at least to the enormous naivete of the American population about the nature of America versus the nature of Marxism. 

Trump certainly has faults galore, but they aren't in an area that threatens the very nature of American institutions, and in fact most of his positions are consistent with the conservative view of America.  The Marxists did their work well, however, influencing the educational system bit by bit to undermine those institutions.  If Trump listens to good advisers maybe we can reclaim some of it.   If not, I'd still rather have his mistakes than hers.

Anyway, here's Eric Barger's article on Clinton's Marxism.

===========================

UPDATE:  

I've been remiss as a blogger during this election season.  The issues are really clear enough when you spend the time to think them through, avoiding the noisy but irrelevant media clamor about personalities..  

Here's an article by a pastor in Charisma magazine, not one of my favorite sources of information but the article is good:  Why many Christians are going to vote for Hillary despite her anti-Christian positions and a plea to vote for Trump instead.  Her support for late term abortion ought to curdle the blood of a Christian -- or any decent human being for that matter; her support for gay marriage which has already begun persecuting Christian businesses in this nation ought to horrify a Christian.  The political position is going to affect people in ways the candidate's character won't, and voting for Hillary's political positions is to vote for murder of babies and persecution of Christians and the continuing destruction of America by the left. 
.