One Man's Work Toward Improving Education for Poor Black Kids

A little late but let me wish everyone a Happy Memorial Day. Hope it was. Hope everybody got some patriotic inspiration as well as barbecue and potato salad. I didn't do anything myself which is why i forgot. ==================================

This post is for celebrating and hearing from another of those smart sane (conservative of course) black people I keep discovering these days. This is educator Ian Rowe who puts his mind to the problem of educating poor kids toward realizing the American dream. He claims not to represent one particular side of the political divide but he certainly espouses strong conservative values and has a great appreciation of the founding principles of America. This link is to a talk he gave for Hillsdale College:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iUlIMzWWmE&t=286s

And here's an interview of him by Glenn Loury in which he talks about a specific project of his of building a school in the Bronx for boys, to provide a high-level education to poor black kids. Some of it reminds me of the essay by Dorothyt Sayers that inspired the foundinag of at least one Christian school I know of, "Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning" in which she advocates the methods of ancient Greek education. Rowe and Loury are both connected with the 1776 Project of the Woodson Center, Robert Woodson being another of my recent discoveries of black people who are making the kind of difference I think needs to be made for the good of all of us and the nation itself. The name of the project points of course to the priority of American foundinjg principles, and at least in its inception to countering the execrable evil false 1619 Project (my own opihnion of course).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teLs4FL--hA

I think I get more hope for saving America from these conservative black voices than from any other source these days. Of course there are other important conservaqtive voices, but the way these guys have recognized and embraced the founding principle of America as THE source of success and prosperity for everyone, transcending even the suffering of racism, is particularly heartening.

Thomas Jefferson's Warnings on Today's Leftist Immigration Policies

The following quotes from Thomas Jefferson are from a website I'm not familiar with, titled The Progressive Conservative, which to my mind is a wacko oxymoron. To describe a political position, the term "progressive" was consciously chosen as a way to obscure the Communist agenda it was intended to represent. There must be a huge number of people who identify with it today who have no idea what they are supporting. What on earth it means on this website I don't know. I'm reproducing part of this article because I appreciate its point of view. And by the way, they also quote Jefferson saying some things about immigration that the Left would embrace, but since they go on to counter it with the following I didn't quote that part. It's there if you want to look it up.

https://www.proconservative.net/PCVol5Is272FarrellImmigrationInsecurity.shtml

In his Notes on the State of Virginia (1787), Jefferson reflects:

"It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize as much as possi- ble in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent. "Every species of government has its specific principles. Ours perhaps are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English Constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of abso- lute monarchies. Yet from such we are to expect the greatest number of emi- grants." (3)

Jefferson warns, nearly prophetically:

"They will bring with them the principles of the governments they leave, imbibed in their early youth; or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an un- bounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In pro- portion to their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, in- coherent, distracted mass.

Why Do Ordinary Liberals Support the Destruction of America? Andy Ngo on Antifa and BLM.

Is it ignorance, thanks to the organized propaganda and censorship of the truth, along with the undermining of American education over the last half century or so, or do they actually hate the principles on which the nation was founded?

Journalist Andy Ngo has studied Antifa and written the book "Unmasked" about them:
https://www.amazon.com/s?k=andy+ngo+unmasked&i=stripbooks&crid=1EM0LWNI80EXD&sprefix=Andy+Ngo+%2Caps%2C225&ref=nb_sb_ss_ts-doa-p_2_9

He shows that they operate under a false image, that they are out to destroy America, their background is Communism, and that their success at continuing to destroy the cities they have targeted for over a year now, is due to the support of everyday liberals. He lays out his experience and conclusions in a talk he gave at Hillsdale College this month:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yziRK7j0Zpw
He sees no way to stop them because of the support they get so he offers no hope of ending the violence.

The whole anti-racism and anti-fascism explanation is based on lies. Why don't those on the left see this? Why don't they see what Antifa and BLM really are? Why don't they see that what they are destroying is America itself? Or is that OK with them?

The Destructive Effects of the Modern Bible Versions

According to Wikipedia there are 450 English translations of the Bible. Their number includes versions in premodern English as well as those most in use today. The modern versions are based on the work of Westcott and Hort that came out of the last Church-convened reviving committee in 1881. Again according to Wikipedia, the most popular version among scholars today is the New Revised Version based on that work. Most Bibles in use today are based on the Critical Text which indludes readings from the Greek manuscripts Westcott and Hort introduced to the revising committee. There are usually some dozen or so translations listed wherever you go online to look up a passage from scripture. There may be many more modern versions than that but at least a dozen are popular.

There has been a big controversy for decades about the Greek manuscripts that underlie the modern versions, splitting the English-speaking Christian world into the KJV-Only camp versus those who accept the work of the revising committee. The KJV-Only group argue that the new Greek manuscripts are not genuine, but the scholars have prevailed in most of the churches, accepting the judgment of Westcott and Hort. My own attempt to understand the controversy put me on the side of the KJV-Only camp, but not completely since some of them tend to a sort of superstitious belief in the divine source of that English version. I came to the view that the KJV should be updated to keep up with changing English usage, which means I don't regard it as divinely ordained, but that the Greek manuscripts that underlie it ARE divinely ordained.

The view I find most persuasive is that of Dean John William Burgon who wrote extensively against the work of the 1881 revising committee. He objected both to the new Greek manuscripts and to the committee's translation which he dismissed for its "schoolboy" level understanding of Greek. He regarded the Greek manuscripts Westcott and Hort brought into the new revision as the work of heretics in the early Church, which he said was known by the Church before Westcott and Hort legitimized them and based their revision on them.

Since then more information suggestzs that those manuscripts may have been later forgeries. In any case they are in oddly pristine condition which suggests that they didn't undergo the wear and tear of use that has left most Greek manuscripts as well as older translations in fragments no older than the tenth century. (If I'm remembering correctly, Chris Pinto's documentaries "Tares Among the Wheat" and particularly "Bridge to Babylon" present evidence against the legitimacy of the manuscripts).

The worst effect of the legitimizing of those manuscrupts comes from the fact that they leave out some well-knownn passages, so that accepting them as the authentic originals discredits the King James version which includes those pasages, and all others based on the earlier Greek textual tradition known as the Received Text or Textus Receptus. Westcott and Hort made up a theory without any evidence whatever that the early Church had added in those passages that are not found in their favored manuscriptus but are found in the manuscripts that underlie the King James. That argument of course destroys the authenticity of the King James, and calls into question the inerrancy of the Bible.

Some try to argue for Bible inerrancy despite the destructive effects of Westcott and Hort's theory, and most of the modern versions incorporate the passages missing from their new manuscripts just because they are so well known, which of course anyone with a logical mind knows is deceitful. Yet most of the churches accdept the new versions as legitimate.

Burgon also objected to the English translation produced by the revising commnittee of 1881 as bad Enghlish based on worse Greek. Of course I have no way of judging this, at least not the Greek, but Burgon is clearly an eminent scholar and to my mind far more convincing than his opponents. And of course my own reaction to the English doesn't carry any weight, but I do enormously appreciate Burgon's criticism of one particular element of the translation: Westcott and Hort render the "aorist" tense in Greek into a klutzy aping of it in English rather than into correct English usage. That is, the Greek has this special tense called the "aorist" which conveys an ongoing action, wheras English puts ongoing action in the simple past tense.

For instance, take a phrase like "Jesus taught the people" which implies an ongoing action in English, while the Greek puts it in the aorist tense because that's how the Greek language conveys ongoing action. Westcott and Hort translate it "Jesus was teaching the people" instead of the simple "taught the people." I remember hearing a very popular Bible translation lauded for its accuracy because of this rendering of the aorist tense, whereas Burgon calls it bad English. English doesn't need this aorist tense. We know when it implies ongoing action as opposed to a one-time past action, and in the rare situations where it isn't clear THEN we can use the other form but it's rarely needed. Westcott and Hort use this klutzy phrasing so often I can hardly stand to listen to some versions being read out loud by the teachers who use them. I'm no linguist of course but it grates on me. It's lousy English and when I saw that Burgon objected to it I was enormously grateful.

They brought heretical Greek manuscripts into our Bible, they threw a monkey wrench into Biblical inerrancy and they contributed to the debasement of the English language. What's not to like? The destructive effect of the modern Bibles based on the 1881 revision should be classed up there with the destructive effect of the Liberal Theology that came out of Tubingen, Germany, also in the 19th cemtury, and the Marxist attack on Western Civilization and the Darwinian attack on the Bible. The 19th century seems to have been the devil's playground, and after it all went through the intensification of the sixties it's brought us to the mess we're in today. .

But I digress. Sort of . The conlusion I came to about the Bible versions is that the KJV is the only legitimate Bible we have these days. Yes I agree it could use some updating but even so any updating needs to be done by men of the caliber of the KJV translators of 1611 and I don't think that's possible today. It also needs to be done under the auspinces of the Church and not by commerciqal interests as so many of the modern versions were done, and not by any self-appointed individual or group. Even a Church appointed committee can get it wrong though, which is certainly evidenced by the work of the committee of 1881 that included at least one heretic and was was manipulated by Westcott and Hort. We're probably better off leaving the KJV alone for now.

There's also the problem of having different translations at all. I know some people say it's only the underlying text that's the problem, a translation is just a translation, no big deal. But I think it is. Once you've learned a passage from the KJV, say a familiar psalm, it is jarring to hear it from a different translqation. Even if the words have the same meaning there's a kind of violence in hearing a different set of words. And if it is also a bad translation, which to my ear is the case with even the most popular translation from the Westcott and Hort family --which I wouldn't have the nerve to say if Burgon hadn't already said it, but it's a sort of violence to the body of Christ to hear in other words something that is as familiar as a loved psalm.

Guess I can say what I like out here in the cyber gulag, nobody needs to take me seriously. But it feels good to get it said. If it pleases God may He get any glory.

Are UFOs to Provide the World's Explanation for the Rapture?

Jan Markell and her May 28 radio show guest think it's a strong possibliity. When the Church is Raptured an explanation will be needed. There will be "Christians" left behind who won't want to believe those who were taken were the true Church so they'll look for some other explanation. The world in general isn't going to want to credit the Bible or Christianity with anything either. The upcoming release of government documents (June 1 according to Markell) and the recent upsurge of interest in UFOs or UAPs (Unidentified Aerial Phenomena) may provide the Likely Story.

hhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BgTWYMJCvs4&t=1273s

The program covers other facets of the End Times scenario, The Great Reset being the plan that fits the Great Tribulation prophecies. They talk about UFOs about ten minutes in. The theme of the show is that all the elements of the End Times prophecies are coming together rather dramatically these days. The renewed attacks on Israel by Hamas and the Palestinians are one element. the release of classified documents about UFOs seems to fit in as a likely propaganda tool for explaining away the Rapture. The rapture is to be the initiating event of the seven-year Tribulation period or the Seventieth Week of the Seventy Weeks prophecy of the Book of Daniel, leading up to the return of Jesus Christ.

A Great Delusion is to grip the Earth. Not that this sort of delusion is anything new, most of the world is already well primed for it by the materialist mindset. The revelation that the US government regards the UFO phenomena as real physical phenomena should establish the idea of extraterrestrials in the public mind, though in reality it's most certainly a demonic deception. The ET explanation will no doubt prevail. In a world that rejects the supernatural and explains everything in physical terms what else could it be? Evolutionary Theory that reduces humanity to primary physicality for instance is a well established major path to the end times delusion.

Some eyes will be opened, may they be yours. Others will only close tighter.

Saving America Part 8: Protests Against Critical Race Theory

UPDATE: Dave Rubin interviews Christopher Rufo, history of th growth of CRT. Rufo sees the only solution as liberals joining with the conservatives on thus issue.:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fbCmbLsW0r8

Tucker Carlson interviews Chantal Cooper, a mother who protested CRT at Louden County school board:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WJjnpjJnb9E

Charlie Kirk explains the origins of Critical Race Theory in Marxism, specifically Cultural marxism, Herbert Marcuse of the Frankfurt School where Political Correctness started its destructive march through American society.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=36js0wIiulM

Carol Swain interviews Beth Freeley of the Woodson Center on how she got involved in protesting Criticial Race Theory:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vzZ26aXYw64&t=3s

PragerU discussion about how parents are protesting Critical Race Theory indoctrination, history of the indoctrination in hating America and causing racial conflict where it had been overcome

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U7rFKsNibic
\
This is just a few videos at You Tube that come up when you search on "critical Race Theory" or "Parents Against Critical Race Theory." Glenn Loury and John McWhorter have videos discussing it too. "Glenn Loury Critical Race Theory" will bring up a whole page of similar discussions. I'm glad to see there are so many people getting involved in protesting this evil Marxist Anti-American doctrine.

When Supposed Myth Is Revealed to Be Real Reality: Christian Conversion

The world is going mad, coming unglued. Very distressing. All on the Left too. Really. All the destruction is on the Left. The Right is sort of addled, yet has the right perspective wherever it hasn't capitulated, if only it could be implemented. If only the forces of evil were not in charge. . The Left pushes every kind of dangerous irrational policy, destructive economic policy, destructive social agenda, racism, divisive rhetoric. It supports the wrong side in the Israel-Palestinian conflict. It has all the wrong theories about everything and its theories promote violence and social disintegration. I do what I can to fight it all. But mostly it's like being bound and gagged and forced to watch everything go to pieces without being able to do anything about it. While the destroyers call you crazy. It ties knots in my stomach, neck, shoulders, causes shortness of breath. So I sometimes have to flee it.

Today I'm fleeing from the madness of the world into a thicket of thoughts off an interview of Stephen Fry by Jordan Peterson, An Atheist in the Realm of Myth. Fry is the atheist while Peterson is attracted to Christianity from a philosophical or psychological viewpoint.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFFSKedy9f4

Both reject the claim that Christianity is about reality, regarding it as a myth.

It's the oddest thing how they take reality, real reality, real history, and mythify it. I often think of Marxism and Darwinism as reifying mental constructs, meaning they treat as facts, as reality, ideas that have only an illusory connection with reality, and mythifying is the other way around, turning a reality into a myth, a mental construct. Jesus is a myth according to Fry. He says he likes some of the expressions of this myth in the Anglican Church nevertheless. And Peterson gives myth quite a high status as a human expression although he never allows it to becomne real.

For those of us who were converted as adults it was more or less myth before that too, even if we didn't elaborate it as myth. We didn't believe it, that is, until we believed it, and when you believe it what you believe is that it is reality. Real historical reality. It's often a soul-shattering event. C.S. Lewis said he came to it "kicking and screaming" but once he knew it was real there was no going back. He knew of all the religious myths of a dying god who came back to life, but one day knew that one time the story was real. "Rum thing" he said, seems it really did happen once.

I also think of fairly recent convert Rosaria Butterfield, who had been a lesbian professor of English at Syracuse University when she got to know a local pastor and his wife who became friends. Over the next few years in which she continued to dispute their Christian belief she eventually came to believe it herself, believed it, that is, to be true, to be truly true, to be real reality. The change in her life it brought about she described as akin to a "train wreck or an alien abduction."

I remember the moment I believed in the reality of God, not yet the Christian revelation but the reality of an omniscient omnipresent omnipotent God to whom I imputed what little I remembered of my childhood expreince of church. I stood riveted to the floor of the bookstore where some books by Hindu gurus had persuaded me. Just getting my feet to move was a problem, and nothing in my life was the same after that. It took me some months of reading books about every kind of religion to disabuse me of the Hindu version, which I'd garbled up with my childhood memories anyway, and any idea that all religions are about the same God. when it started looking like the truth was actually with Jerry Falwell I went through my own experience of kicking and screaming. Seems we have to undergo a humbling that breaks down some prejudices, requires giving up our favorite sins, before we'll fit through the narrow gate. In the end I came to recognize the biblical revelation as the real reality and I've never looked back.

Once you know it is reality, all those who treat it as myth are seen to be sadly deceived, all the speculations of the philosophers collapse like a popped baloon. Coming to believe the Bible is like stepping over a threshold into a brand new universe, a universe that is coherent, makes sense, unlike the one we live in when all we have is speculations about it.

I hope, of course, that Peterson and Fry will both come to be saved by Christ.

Got a bunch more thoughts from this interview, but that's enough for now.

Brief Bleat About Confused Evolutionists: Gain of Function Has Nothing to Do with the Theory of Evolution

No, you do not "have to have an evolutionary perspective" to understand gain-of-function. Gain of function occurs in the present. It can occur naturally through the high mutation rate of viruses or it can be manufactured in the lab by gene editing. or inserting genetic material into a virus. As usual those who believe you need to think like an evolutionist to understqand this just don't understand anything at all about the debate.

Mutations go on all the time. They are usually deleterious to the host organism, occasionally they enhance its function, very rarely in most cases but occasionally. Evolutionists think this is a normal process. Creationists know it's a disease process, but either way it occurs in the present and there is nothing about it whatsoever that has anything to do with the Theory of Evolution. Even assuming mutations are normal, which I don't, but even qassuming it, all they produce is a variation in the organism at best, a variation in a particular function, a gain in that function in this case. They don't produce anything actually new, and most organisms have the genetic means for variation built in.

I'm sure I only have the most minimal understanding of these processes myself, but I think I get the gist of it right enough. Gain of function in a virus just means that a particular mutation, or a piece of DNA inserted into a virus can increase its viral properties, such as to make it more deadly. Normal everyday genetic process. NOT evolution in the sense of the ToE. But evolutoinists automatically insert their theory into the discussion without warrant and without considering any other possibility. Yes it's an assumption, nothing about the ToE is provable and there's plenty that disproves it to anyone who exercises the brainpower to grasp the point. All the porocesses they automatically impute to the ToE are normal everyday functions of organisms understood to have been Created as idependent Kinds. Mutationsw are disease processes due to the Fall, and if this weren't a fallen world nobody would be trying to enhance a virus anyway. Sheesh!

UFOs and Other Popular Demonic Delusions

OK I've got to write about this. A report has come out or is coming out about government information that takes UFO phenomena seriously. Meaning considers it to be real, although nobody is clear about exactly what it is.

Here's a CNN report on it

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/17/politics/ufo-pentagon-explainer/index.html

On a radio talk show I heard earlier the general idea was that these objects, which have been photographed, are considered to be tecnnologically extremely advanced. They move at incredible speeds, they turn on a dime, they don't seem to have any known form of propulsion or acceleration and deceleration, they just suddenly zip a huge distance at a phyiscally impossible rate of speed, suddenly change direction without slowing down, and so on. This is a technology far beyond anything known today and if it belongs to an enemy of the US, say to China, it represents a great security risk.

It's a subject that provokes a lot of nervous giggling, even some by the reporter at CNN, but a lot more in the radio discussion I heard earlier. Well, it's a prime "woo" topic. You don't hear it discussed seriously very often -- unless of course you listen to Coast to Coast radio where everything paranormal and every kind of Woo is taken very seriously indeed Most of it creeps me out so much I can't listen. But I also think they are completely wrong about just about everything they say, at least what I've heard so far. Just as I think they are wrong about UFOs. And I don't mean wrong the way the usual debunkery finds it wrong.

That is, the evidence now is good enough to establish that whatever these phenomena are, they are quite real. They are actually visible objects that actually move as described. The people who have witnessed them are not hallucinating, they are really seeing what they say they are seeing.

But I don't think any of thisis about extraterrestrials or anything to do with national security in the usual sense, or anything to do with technology at all. What I think about it is maybe best introduced through the work of UFO expert Jacques vallee. Back in the nineties I read a book of his in which he lays out his theory about the phenomena.

From Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacques_Vall%C3%A9e#Interpretation_of_the_UFO_evidence

Interpretation of the UFO evidence
Vallée proposes that there is a genuine UFO phenomenon, partly associated with a form of non-human consciousness that manipulates space and time. The phenomenon has been active throughout human history, and seems to masquerade in various forms to different cultures. In his opinion, the intelligence behind the phenomenon attempts social manipulation by using deception on the humans with whom they interact.
\
Vallée also proposes that a secondary aspect of the UFO phenomenon involves human manipulation by humans. Witnesses of UFO phenomena undergo a manipulative and staged spectacle, meant to alter their belief system, and eventually, influence human society by suggesting alien intervention from outer space. The ultimate motivation for this deception is probably a projected major change of human society, the breaking down of old belief systems and the implementation of new ones. Vallée states that the evidence, if carefully analyzed, suggests an underlying plan for the deception of mankind by means of unknown, highly advanced methods. Vallée states that it is highly unlikely that governments actually conceal alien evidence, as the popular myth suggests. Rather, it is much more likely that that is exactly what the manipulators want us to believe. Vallée feels the entire subject of UFOs is mystified by charlatans and science fiction. He advocates a stronger and more serious involvement of science in the UFO research and debate.[11] Only this can reveal the true nature of the UFO phenomenon

Vallee's analysis is quite remarkable it seems to me. All that reads like an amazingly accurate description of demonic activity and especially demonic motivation, although Vallee is not a Christian. Of course it appears that few take him seriously. Of course The delusions he believes are manipulated by the beings who produce these phenomena are the ones people believe. Truth hardly ever stands a chance in today's world anyway.

Understanding all this to be the product of demonic activity is of course from the Bible. What Vallee did was analyze the reports and describe demonic activity without believing in the biblical revelation, and perhaps he would reject the biblical interpretation. But deceiving humanity is certainly exactly what the demons/devils/fallen angels want to do. They teach demonic doctrines by many means, and the main theme of all their teachings is either denial of God or misinformation about God. You will certainly not hear the gospel from a demonic source, and often you will hear the gospel ridiculed or denied. Many books have been inspired by demons, all weaving otherworldly tales and purpoting to teach humanity how to live our lives, and teaching in particular that the biblical accounts are false. Gosh I wonder why they'd want to lie about something like that?

I know there are many but I probably won't be able to think of more than a few/ The Seth books are one I remember from the sixties. Also A Course in Miracles which Oprah Winfrey made popular some years ago; Urantia; and as I recall even Harry Potter was inspired by some otherworldly source according to its author.

But books and UFOs aren't the only ways demons interact with humanity to deceive us. Some rock stars have claimed satanic inspiration (Film source: "They Sold Their Souls for Rock and Roll"). Edgar Cayce, known as a healer in the thirties and forties as I recall, had a demonic helper, a "spirit guide" as they are called today. William Branham, a Christian Pentecostal preacher and "prophet" had an "angel" who followed him around. Oneness Pentecostalism, which was Branham's denomination, denies the Trinity, which of course the demons are happy to teach, anything to counter orthodox Christianity makes them happy. Although human fallenness is sufficient to invent doctrines that oppose biblical truth, there is no doubt some demonic influence in big movements like pentecostalism and the charismatic churches, especially wherever you see paranormal or supernatural phenomena on display, such as where people fall down when touched by a healer or other leader. Kathryn Kuhlman, Benny Hinn for instance. and I've mentioned a "prophet" I found at You tube whose prophecies are empty and her imagery is unbliblical.

Mohammed received the Koran from an angel he called "Gabriel," clearly a demon because the true Gabriel was a servant of the gospel which Islam denies. Mohammed's aunt even said he was demon-possessed. Joseph Smith, founder of Mormonism, had an "angel" called "Moroni, and he taught that orthodox Christianity is false, the theme so dear to the hearts of the demons. It isn't necessarily demonic if it debunks Christianity since of course as I said fallenness is capable of that without any help, but when an "angel" is mentioned there's little doubt of the source.

Carl Jung had two "spirit guides" though I think he called them something else. So the fallen angels don't confine themselves to science fiction but teach pscyhology. Marx was a satanist and it should be obvious that his writings are designed to destroy western civilization. In fact the Marxistsy actually say so.

always, one way or another, directly or indirectly, demonic productions, whether false religions or pseudopsychologies or spiritual pretences, all deny the biblical account, alwys the biblial account, not other religions, just the biblical relition. they're kind of fixated on it. Kind of suggests maybe it's the truth and they are willing to put in prodigious work to discreit it? Teachings more or less related to the UFO phenomena discredit it by claiming human beings were created by alien beings and that sort of thing. The very idea of extraterrestrials, living creatures from other parts of the universe, is an implicit contradiction of the biblical message. Redeemed human beings are destined to replace the fallen angels, bringing God's righeousness where they bring corruption and lies. There's the motivation to deceive us and prevent people from being saved by the gospel of Christ.

It may be, as Watchman Nee says in his book Soul Power, that some people possess a distorted and partial remnant of mental powers originally possessed by Adam and Eve but lost at the Fall, which may account for some paranormal phenomena. But sinbce these powers would be broken at best and subject to manipulation by demons, it would be dangerous to exercise such powers. Cedrtainly untrustworthy in this fallen world. But most paranormal and supernatural phenomena must come from the fallen angels or demons. They have invented a multitude of explanations themselves for all these things that unfortunately persuade some people. Just listen to Coast to Coast radio show some time. It's all stuff manufactured by the demons to deceive humanity, just as Vallee concluded the UFO creatures are motivated to do.

The only truth in this fallen world is the revelation of God Himself, the Bible. Whatever tries to discredit it is either from fallen human nature or from the fallen angels.

How We Lost America Part 2. The Abomination Which Is Our National Cathedral

Ealier this morning I decided to check out the website of the National Cathedral in Washington. I suppose I wanted to find out just how bad it is since I know it's Episcopalian, which is a denomination that has gone libersal, and has held ecumenical prayer meetings which are certqainly an offense to God. I've mentioned the National Cathedral from time to time as the place where George Bush held a prayer meeting for the nation after 9/11 which included a Roman Catholic priest and a Muslim Imam and I forget who else. I cringed at that at the time because prayers that are shared among false religions are not going to bring God's blessomgs on the nation but very likely bring God's curses down on us. The attack on the World Trade Center was God's judgment on the nation, at the very least it was a warning of worse njudgments to come. The appropriate response was indeed prayer, but prayer centered on repentance for the sins of the nation that had brought God's wrath on us. I don't remember what they prayed that day because I was so appalled at the fact that they would think God could bless prayers to other gods besides Himself.

Isaiah 42:8 I am [Jehovah, I AM that I AM]: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.

This theme runs throughout the Bible. It is stated already in the Ten Commandments:

Exodus 20:3 Thou shalt have no other gods before me.

going on from there to the commnand against making graven images and against bowing down and worshipping them.

In 1 Samuel 4:1-4 we get a dramatic picture of this when after the Philistines had captured the ark of the covenant from Israel they put it next to their god Dagon. The next day they found the statue of Dagon on its face before the ark and restored him to his place. The morning after that they found Dagon on the floor again, this time with his head and hands cut off by the threshold of the building.

Do they not know, these "Christians," that we wroship the same God who would not have Dagon beside Him? Do they not know that Islam does not worship the same God? Their God does not have the same attributes, has no Son, and has a different name; he is not the God of the Bible. Do they not know that the Roman Church has removed the commandment against worshiping graven images because they advocate worshipping graven images? They worship images of the "saints" and of "the virgin Mary" and many worshippers certainly do bow down to them, may even lie prostrate on the floor before them. At Medjugorje which was the scene of one of the apparitions of "Mary" people walked on their knees around a statue of Mary. At least two Popes dedicated themselves to the service of "Mary." This is having "other gods before Me."

God will not tolerate prayers from worshippers of the false gods alongside Himself, and you'd think anyone who calls himself a Christian and presumably knows the Bible as God's word would know this to be a huge offense to God.

Such ecumenical services on behalf of the nation can only bring judgments on the nation. Islam has only grown in prestige since the attack on the WTC, certainly a sign of God's judgment against us, and the growth of more and more evil anti-American politics must unfortunately be understood in the same light. We pray for the power to return to the original conception of America and overthrow the Marxist lies that have been destroying the nation, but is it happening? Don't the liars have the upper hand? Aren't we oddly paralyzed in our efforts to counter them?

The website of the National Cathedral exhibits a lot of New Agey mush about experiences and transformations,listening to one another and loving one another, some of it derived from the gothic beauty of the cathedral itself, hardly any of it derived from scripture, except for a verse or two here and there about love of course. They make much of feelings in themselves, "awe" and "reverence" for instance, utterly divorced from any object of the awe and reverence. Listening to one another is a good thing I suppose, but I'd be happier to hear about a dedication to listening to God. But God, and certainly Jesus, seems to be relegated to a sort of psychological state or at least subordinated to it. I wonder what they do with the passages about fear of God. Not that I wonder a whole lot.

They have ordained female ministers which is a violation of the biblical requirement for a Christian church, and one of them opened her sermon by asking "the circle of love" nt to open their hearts, and "the circle of healing" and the circle of something else, --oh, wisdom -- to bestow their virtues on the congregation, even to grant "new life in God." She didn't ask God himself for anything, nor Jesus, but these "circles" of this or that. What is the source of this utterly unbiblical nonsense? I didn't spend a lot of time there but there was no menttion whatever of the gospel of salvation through the death of Christ. The messages were not focused on God or the Bible but on feelings of a supposedly spiritual sort induced by the architecture of the building or on human relationships. A nave full of yoga practitioners was mentioned. Oh and somebody referenced gnosticism as his or her inspiration, a heresy of the eary church denounced particularly by the apostle John in the New Testament..

There seems to be no ground whatever for regarding this institution as Christian.

It's hard to know how much weight to give this "church" as a national symbol but too much I'm afraid. It stands as a symbol of the nation's religious underpinnings just by its location and its title and its occasional use in times of a national emergency such as 9/11.

Dare I suggest that the sins of the nation are at least encapsulated in this symbol? If Jesus regards it as a Christian church at all it's hard to imagine He could do anything but cleanse it with a whip as He did the temple in Jerusalem, casting out the blasphemers. In essence we've got a statue of Dagon standing in the place of God.

I AM suggesting that it's hopeless to think we can do much to bring America back to sanity and its political grounding in the liberty and justice on which it was originally conceived if we allow such a false image of Christianity to represent us. This is just one of many problems in the churches of course, even the best churches really, and a lot of cleansing is needed across the board. All that should make it only too clear why we have not had revival, and will not have revival until it is dealt with.

So much less is there any hope of saving America politically from what looks like its inevitable destruction by a Communist takeover fueled by lies and all kinds of evils.

WAR BY THE WORD OF GOD

FOR THE WEAPONS OF OUR WARFARE ARE NOT CARNAL BUT MIGHTY THROUGH GOD TO THE PULLING DOWN OF STRONGHOLDS AND EVERY HIGH THING THAT EXALTS ITSELF ABOVE THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD.

2 Corinthians 10:4

That's our marching orders.

"News" that's Really Lying Provocative Propaganda for the Left is One of the Evils We Need to Stand Up To.

Speaking of standing up to evil powers, one of the headlin3es that greeted me yesterday created the usual helpless feeling of being cornered by lies we have no way of countering. It happens all the time, it was rampant in the Trump years but it hasn't stopped. Why the media want to destroy this country I'm not sure, I suppose they are duped by Communism same as so many others are these days and suppose themselvewas to be righteous instead of supporters of mayhem and murder.

Anyway the headline that punched me in the stomach this time was

Gohmert downplays January 6 riot in speech from the House floor, falsely claiming 'no evidence' of armed insurrection.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/gohmert-downplays-january-6-riot-in-speech-from-the-house-floor-falsely-claiming-no-evidence-of-armed-insurrection/ar-BB1gK2A1?ocid=msedgntp

"Falsely claiming" is the evil evil addition to what should be a simple statement of what Gohmert said and nothing more, if there were any such thing as honest objective reporting going on. But of course there isn't these days, we get headlines and stories all the time that pretend to objectivity but are really leftwing -- oh yes it is always leftwing -- opinion. Propaganda. We don't get to condsider what Gohmert said on our own, as intelligent human beings. we must be fed the Communist interpretation of what he said. We must be made to understand that what he said was false because that's the only line the leftwing will allow. And it's discouraging to think that there must be a lot of people who take it straight and that's why they know they can get away with it.

So I read the CNN story to find out what he said and why it's false. He was objecting to the media narrative that the entry into the Capitol building on January 6 was an "armed insurrection" and CNN won't let him make this objection cuz they want to paint a picture of an evil right wing insurrection fomented by Donald Trump. But if you read the story all they are saying is that ONE of the participants was "either carrying or had access to" a firearm. Golly Gosh, EITHER carrying or had access to and they don't knbow which. Does ONE participant maybe possibly carrying but not using, or merely having access to, a firearm, constitute an "armed insurrection?" Well, idiotically, insanely, they want their readers to think so and apparently think their readers are stupid enough to accept such a ridiculous statement. Also apparently some were "armed" with other kinds of "weapons" although oddly these "weapons" were not described. Surely even the average liberal out there can see through this craziness

I don't know how to judge the January 6th event myself but I know when all I'm getting is leftwing spin that prevents me from finding out what really happened. Even from CNN's article it's clear this was no "armede insurrection" for pete's sake. Oh I see farther down the page that they list a baseball bat, a chemical spray, and a knife? as other weapons found on a few people. But remember that onlyh one personwas killed by the violence itself, and that was a woman shot to death by the police as she climbed through a window. A polieman who died died of a heart attack or something like that though for a while the media tried to pin i t on the "violence." Anyway if this was an armed insurrection it was the most inept armed insurrection in the history of the world.

Also it had absolutely nothing to do with anything Trump did or said on that day. It was planned in advance and Trump hadn't even finished his speech when the first people entered the Capitol buliding. Also he said nothing in the slightest bit provocative. He mentioned the plans some had to peacefully protect in front ot fht eCapitol, that's all, and this constant line about how he caused the event is just lying propaganda, which i guess those on the left believe because, well, those on the left believe what the leftwing media tell them. Sad to say.

And that brings me to Liz Cheney. Sigh. She talkk a solid conservative line until she gets to her recent refrain about how the Republican Party has to give up on Trump because they must be a party of the truth. And her idea of how it isn't currently a party of truth is based totally on Trump's continuing belief that the election was unfair, and that he was responsible for the "insurrectioN" on January 6th.

Well, that second accusation is a complete lie. Does she believe it? I guess she must but I can't see how she talked herself into it. And concerning the election she seems to think Trump is the source of the allegations of fraud. But all that came from witnesses to the fraud. I don't know if I even heard Trump mention it until later, but I did hear many many witnesses on many news programs destcribe many kinds of fraud, some small scale but some big enough to raise serious questions about its effect on the election, such as truckloads of ballots delivered in the dead of night. For the courts to refuse to consider the evidence so that we could finally find out whether the election was affected or not is in my opinion some kind of crime.

All kinds of evil we need to stand up to these days. All kinds of drime, much of it actually treasonous. all of it coming from the Left.

Studies of Ivermectin Used for Prevention of COVID-19

My favorite liberal couple who do the Dark Horse Podcast once a week discussed studies of Ivermectin this week, among other things. Sometimes what they discuss doesn't interest me, but this one does. I started watching them last year because they were talking about the rioting in downtown Portland, and they still do from time to time but not in this podcast. They sometimes drive me crazy being liberals and evolutionists but their liberalism is mostly of the classical sort and not the current perniciously Marxist sort, they are honest observers too, and while their allegiance to evolution causes me a lot of painful eyerolling there's usually enough of what I appreciate about them to balance that out. \

Anyway, from about 26:oo they are discussing studies of Ivermectin mostly as a prophylaxis or preventative against the virus rather than a treatment:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxTODvTNHlw

Although I still accept what Dr. Zelenko and many others (Drs. Harvey Risch, Simone Gold, Daniel Wohlgelernter among others) have said about the efficacy of Hydroxychloroquine for treating the virus in the early days of infection, for some time I've been convinced that Ivermectin is even better at both prevention and treatment than HCQ.

HCQ is to be taken with zinc because it works as an ionophore to get zinc into the cells where it is the zinc that does the antiviral work by interfering with replication; whereas Ivermectin works in some other way that's not clear to me yet, something to do with interfering with the spike protein the vurus manufactures. (That is discussed on this podcast but I'm adding the information about HCQ from other sources I've mentioned before.) Both are used with an antibiotic, HCQ usually with Azithromycin, which Dr. Zelenko explained as a treatment for the lung infection that is a part of infection with COVID-19. Maybe that's the same reason the antibiotic Doxycycline is used with Ivermectin but I don't see why it would be used before a person actually has the virus. Anyway there's more to understand about all this, but Ivermectin looks like the best way to go for anyone who has not yet had the virus, both as preventative and as treatment in the early days of infection if it occurs.

Bret and Heather, the podcast couple, also discuss the political issues involved in this which are depressing in the extreme. That is, ivermectin was known to be both safe and effective for COVID long before the vaccines came out, and that being the case there was no justification whatever for the emergency use authorization for the vaccines since Ivermectin effectively prevents and treats the virus. This has bothered me for months already in relation to HCQ which was banned last year although it was known -- KNOWN -- to cure the virus if used in the first week of infection with COVID. This was said over and over and over by doctor after doctor after doctor, starting with Zelenko and including at least the other three I mention above but manyh more than that. As Bret and Heather point out, withholidng an effective drug is criminal. As many others have been saying for a year now, it's a crime against humanityh. This applies to the banning of HCQ as well as to Ivermectin which is also discouraged. As the number of COVID deaths rose while HCQ was banned I just felt sick and helpless. This ban was killing people. Dr. Zelenko called the AMA the American Murder Association for banning HCQ. It's the same thing with Ivermectin, with ANY effective treatment and they've had both of these all along. The evidence of safety was known for botht over decades, and its efficacy had lots of evidence from indepencndent doctors, but they excused theirmurder by demanding trials that couldn't be done in the time allotted while the trials already done were sufficient to justify its use. And of course this kind of informqation is censored by nonmedical keepers of social media too. It's hard to avoid some pretty horrifying conclusions from all this.

What should happen is that all the medical personnel who have let themselves be politically intimidated into withholding effective treament should mount a huge protest en masse, defy the orders en masse, get hold of the effective drugs and administer them accordeing to the known protocols. It would have to be "en masse" because it would be less likely that large numbers would be fired. HOWEVER, what we need these days is GUTS to stand up against the evil powers.

Baa! ! (The Only Wool Here is Being Pulled Over Our Eyes By the Evolutionists)

Well, I feel another bleat coming on this morning. Yeah, they chide us for supposedly not understanding what the term "theory" means in scientific circles. Cuz we like to complain that evolution is "only a theory." A Theory, you know, is as good as a fact, you know, don't we call it The Theory of Relativity for instance, or The Theory of Gravity? Of course they perfectly well know the point we are trying to make, they just prefer to obscure it and sticking to pedantic definitions is one way to do that.

If "theory" isn't acceptable, "hypothesis" isn't going to do it either. The point is that the whole conceptual edifice of the Theory of Evolution is a house of cards, nothing but a mental contruct, a castle in the air, with no reality supporting it. They think they have evidence. They don't. What they claim for evidence is actually evidence for the Creationist view, they've merely co-opted it, appropriated it to their own belief system. They sprinkle their biological observations, which are in themselves usually quite sound, with evolutionistic assumptions that have no inherent relation to the subject matter.

So such and such a feature of a particular creature was "evolved" to do whatever it does. The term is tacked on, it's assumed, but in reality the feature was built into the creature's genome already all the way back at the Creation, and emerged in the normal course of the shuffling done by sexual recombination. Either that or it's part of the Body Plan that's fixed in the genome, goes back to the Creation and defines the creature and doesn't get shuffled.

I guess there's no point in reiterating what i've already said a million times about this. Or maybe there is but I'm not up to it at the moment. You'd think all those formidable IQ points that are bestowed upon the nonscience of evolution could finally figure out that they are simply lost in the thicket of an elaborate mental virtual reality. It doesn't exist.

Bleat.

The Blathering Blogger Blathers On Into the Void ISaving America Part 7?)

Well lessee, they're destroying the economy. Soon things will be so outrageously expensive ... well it's hard to imagine just how bad it could get but very very bad for sure. They are flooding the country with illegals, they are bringing back "refugees" who are America-haters, they are lying about the rioting going on in major cities and allowing it to happen by preventing the police from stopping it; they areare silencing those who have known how to cure COVID for a year now and promoting vaccines that may kill a bunch of us; they are silencing truth and sanity and promoting tyranny and oppression and divisive politics, they are supporting terrorists against Israel, they are arming nations that are enemies of the West, they are forcing normal children to pretend there are more than two sexes. Lessee, how much worse can it get?

Again, though, I have to remind myself that this must all be God's judgment on the nation. We pushed Him out so now He's abandoned us to the most outrageous evil stupidities the fallen human race is capable of. Well maybe not quite that bad yet. I guess it could be worse. Looks like it will get there soon enough.

Only a Christian can know that God's judgment is at work. Unbelievers think it's only human error or human malice, if they see anything wrong at all, and if if they see it they'll blame it on the wrong people too because we've finally reached that point in human history when it's about as bad as it can get. If we aren't at the very door of the Great Tribulation I hate to think how bad it will have to get before we are. Not "we" of course since I expect to escape it in the Rapture.

There was a time though when even unbelievers were immersed in the biblical worldview and understood the basics about the Fall and redemption and talked in tbose terms. Marxism. at ;east Cultural Marxism, and Postmodernism have so corrupted people now that we can hardly have a conversation between the two worldviews at all the starting assumptions are so at odds.

God promised to save Sodom if there were even a few rightoues people left in it, so we know that He would save us on the same principle. We don't depend, that is, on the great number of unbelievers to join us in saving the country and that's a great blessing. So if He isn'[t listening to us it has to be because we believers aren't meeting His conditions.

He isn't hearing our prayers for revival. Even if, say, Mark Levin came up with a solid plan to bring us back to sanity why would He bless that either? The WTC was destroyed by Islamic jihadists but contrary to what would seem to make sense, instead of our being able to defeat them they are if anything gaining ground in this country since then. This can only be because 9/11 didn't succeed at being the wake-up call it should have been, a call to national repentance. Although I don't think Jonathan Cahn's prophetic message about the correspondence between our response to 9/11 and Israel's response to the invasion of her enemies as described in Isaiah 9/11 was needed to make the point, still it DOES make that point on top of what we should already have known anyway: If God gives us a warning through our enemies, causes destruction in our cities, and we ignore Him, saying "You can't do this to us, we'll just r4ebuild bigger and better" (Anybody noticed that the slogan of the Great Reset project -- :\"Build Back Better" -- is essentially the same message? And note that an attack on the WTC isn't just a warning to America but to the world -- It's the WORLD Trade Center ya know. so the WEF Great Reset is founding itself on the same defiance of God described in Isaiah 9:11.) Anyway that being the response of the US and the world itself we can't expect God to hold back His judgments against us.

This is all too much "woo" for the fallen mind of course. But the problem is it's even too much woo for some believers, or too "exclusive" for them more precisely I suppose, they are so theologically weak in these postmodern days. Too many have, succeumbed to much of the propaganda that relegates biblcal Christianity to being merely one among many ways to God so the fact that Jesus is the only way isn't even upheld by some appalling number of us. If they even are of "us."

I know I'm rambling on and nobody is listening anyway since Google did whatever they did to keep people from finding my blogs. I don't know why they bothered, I wasn't getting more than a few hundred people anyway. But now hardly any, probably just the Google gestapo looking in from time to time. So maybe I don't try hard enough under the circumstances. Still, I believe God got me going on these blogs and He has His reasons.

Yes I think He wanted me to write about the head covering if nothihng else. And the way I kept stumbling onto information about the Antichrist even when I wasn't pursuing that topic had to come from Him. So He'll do with it whatever He wants to do. I write because I'm driven to write, so I thank Him for the opportunity. Thank You Lord. May any glory be Yours. Even if one person gets something out of it...? '.

Saving America Part 6: The Impossible Dream of Recovery: Prayer, Repentance, Reeducation, Biblical Foundations

Chris Pinto's documentary, The True Christian History of America to my mind succeeded in establishing that Christian history beyond anything I had thought. I knew the country was originally settled by Christians with a solid Christian worldview, that the Mayflower Compact was a Christian conception, that here and there we see court judgments that affirm the Christian nature of America, and that the population was predominantly Christian even into the 20th Century. The book "The Light and the Glory" written back in the seventies painted a very strong Christian portrait of the nation through the writings of the founding generation, but somehow its arguments didn't make the case for me the way Pinto's film seems to. In fact Pinto's first documentary films about America managed to undo any idea of America's Christian character by tracing the pagan influences involved in it as well as the decidedly NONChristian thinking of Washington, Adams, Jerfferson and Franklin (The Hidden Faith of the Founding Fathers for instance). That kind of blew The Light and the Glory out of the water for me, although I was aware nevertheless that there was a great Christian influence in the country that was getting buried by too much emphasis on the nonChristian side of it. The Light and the Glory left itself open to such treatment, however, by focusing only on the Christian elements and ignoring the other side of it.

But with this latest film Pinto has not only restored the Christian character of the country, but shown the Christian inspiration behind the governing principles in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitujtion. The film traces the principles of liberty and justice that are the bedrock of our Constitutionaql Republic back to their origins in Christian thought. Phrases you thought were invented in relation jto America turn out to go back centuries, to Christiaqn leaders in Europe, and especially in England.

It is always a mistake in a fallen world to make too much of the personalities of those who have contributed great ideas to the benefit of humanity. People have all kinds of moral failings and yet can produce valuable concepts for the formation of a great nation. Thomas Jefferson rejected the supernatural and was no Christian but nevertheless made use of the Christian-inspired concepts of freedom and justice in what became foundational to America. Although John Adams was a Unitarian he made strong statements affirming the Christian worldview as essential to the character of the new nation. Even Thomas Paine who was personlly an atheist contributed a biblical framework in his "Common Sense" pamphlet that had such a strong influence on the American Revolution. Later he revealed his personal opposition to those biblical principles. This is shown in Pinto's film.

And of course many of them held slaves, in a time when it was a common practice all over the world (and still is outside of the West). The fact that they made provision for freeing their slaves and strongly opposed the practice (it was opposed on the basis of biblical Christian principles) is unfortunately lost on today's small-minded ideologues. God help us with these vicious mental midgets in charge of the nation today.

I'll say again, however, that it is our own fault since we've failed to oppose the treasonous workings of the Marxist America-haters. We're good at verbalizing the problem, lousy at doing anything about it. However, it's also true I think that we haven't had the right knowledge to support us, and I do think that Pinto's film could set us on the right track. The Christian nature of America is in those principles spelled out down the centuries as the film shows, it is not in personaliites, character flaws or personal qualities of any kind, it is in the intellectual heritage itself based on the Bible.

There are of course many unbelievers who love America and appreciate the principles of liberty and justice that have made America great, who see the danger of losing the great American experiment in the current political zeitgeist and strive to their utmost to find a way back. Although some of them might acknowledge that Christianity played some part in its formation, some would deny it altogether, and if we have any hope at all of restorng the nation we need to educate everybody out of that misonception. So many things we need to do, somehow float a massive education project needed at a time when censorship of the truth prevails, reform the churches, succeed at convincng God to give us reival.... That's why I think we've lost America and will never be able to recover her. Still, even in the teeth of such impossibilities I keep hoping I'm wrong. God is, after all, the God of the Impossible.

Speaking of passionate patriotic unbelievers, I suspect that some of the books Mark Levin has written would be very useful for the reeducation project that is so necessary. Although I probably won't be able to read it because my eyes are getting so bad, I did order his latest, American Marxism, which will be out in July. He wants to save the nation as much as I do, I hope he has a plan we can use. His books have great subjects and great titles, like Liberty and tyranny that sound like they would do well as a platform for a reeducation project in what Amrica is all about, wish I were still able to read long volumes like that.

. Speaking of what America is all about, it was a jarring experience, though illuminating. to find out that the MAGA slogan was felt as "a poke in the eye" to some who haven't had it so great in America, particularly blacks. Hearing that, I finally understood the otherwise incomprehensible hatred of that slogan, and was appalled at the narrowness that makes such an equation. That notion alone accounts for much of the Great Political Divide that's taken over the country in the last few decades.In this age of Marxist anti-Americanism everything is now about people, oppressor and oppressed class warfare that pits groups against each other, completely undoing the work of centuries toward a genuine equality. America had just about eradicated racism, cedrtainly at least institutional or systemic racism (the statistics are there only the left never hears about them), but now it's being made into the main problem in the country, just out of the blue because it makes for good political divisiveness to bring it down, the only possible reason snce it had been so effectively done away with there is no other excuse. Now we're actually getting real racism in the targeting of the white race as peculiarly evil. TAhe most evil propaganda ever concocted, and extremely dangerous. It reminds me of the propaganda campaign against the Tutsits that eventually provoked the Hutus into slaughtering them, a Catholic bishop on the radio demeaning them with such epithetcs as "cockroaches." Like how the Nazis propagandized against the Jews. Propaganda is the weapon of the fascistic mind. And this version we have now is conjured up out of Cultural Marxism with the Marxist agenda to destroy civilization and bring in their trannical form of government. They silence the voices of truth, they try to do away with the means of protecting people and property, they put good for evil and evil for good and so far they've been getting away with it.

What makes America great IN SPITE OF FALLEN HUMAN NATURE, is the principles of our founding, concepts of liberty and justice for all hammered out over centuries, grounded in a Biblical worldview. Keeping selfish fallen human nature from turning into tyranny was the motivation for designing American institutions to minimize its influence. Checks and balances among the branches of governement for instance were one protection against tyranny. They are trying to take that away now and establish a one-party rule .So they would remove this fundamental wisdom of America's vision and create a tyranny to end all tyrannies. Utopias always either disintegrate or lead to tryanny. Ignorance of the wisdom of the American vision is at least one reason this is happening here now. The fallen nature has been made the standard and God help us all. The main political tactic on the left today is intimidation by character assassination, as far as you can get from the American vision. Rule by Law is supposed to eliminate dependence on any particular human being or party or ideology, because they are inherently untrustworthy. It takes vigilance to maintain a government based on law and principle and now that the forces of evil have gained the upper hand we aren't going to be getting any benevolent dictators, we're going to get the most destrucrtive ideology ever invented to rule over us.

To take MAGA as "a poke in the eye" to anyone is to show a terrible ignorance of what America is all about. MAGA simply recognized that we'd come a long way based on our American principles, were a power in the world for good, had finally done away with the grossest forms of inequality which are endemic to fallen human nature, practiced a capitalism that brought the greatest prosperity to the greatest number. and really did allow for liberty of its citizens. MAGA was the statement of the opposition to the anti-American Marxist wrecking ball that was already doing its damage. The wrecking ball seems to have a lot of friends so they killed MAGA and all those American gains are what they are now taking away from us as fast as they can lest another MAGA come along. And it's our own fault.

God help us. God have mercy.

How We Lost America

At the end of his film on the Christian History of America, Chris Pinto quotes American founder Samuel Adams from a speech he made just before signing the Declaration of Independence, that now would commence "the reign of Political Protestantism."

That's what it should have been, and to a large extent it was, but even from the beginning there were the seeds of its destruction planted, in the Deistic mentality of some of the founding generation, and even in the documents that should have guaranteed the reign of Political Protestantism, as over time they became subject to the misinterpretations and manipulations of the fallen mindset.

In this fallen world it takes extraordinary dedication to preserve the Christian worldview because it is not natural to fallen humanity. All revivals deteriorate, at least because we get complacent and forget to work to preserve them. Then we get dull and don't even recognize when God's principles are twisted into their opposite. When the First Amendment becomes a protection for pornography and for pagan religions including even Satanism, and Constitutional rights and freedoms are claimed for the murder of unborn babies and Gay Marriage, it ought to be apparent to anyone who has even a vague understanding of the spirit of the original that it has been twisted and turned on its head. When our rights and freedoms are extended to our enemies against us how do we get back to their true meaning?


Perhaps we can't. Perhaps it's all downhill now.

Jonathan Cahn gives a stirring message to President Biden about his support for godless policies, and says only revival will save us now. Of course he's right, and many Christians pray fervently for revival. Yet it isn't happening. I've given my opinmion about why not and what it would take to make it possible, and there are probably other reasons I'm missing. But it doesn't look promising at all. It looks like downhill it is.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hrCtoQUXnmc

Recently I've been watching The Truth Project for the second time. It's at You Tube, a series of talks by Del Tackett put out by Focus on the Family, that does a good job of spelling out the opposition between the Christian worldview and the worldview of fallen humanity. It shows how the fallen mentality has been taking over. Yes it does look like it's all downhill now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cm_D9Vva_Q0

COVID Politics, COVID Vaccination Politics

Laura Ingraham interviews Dr. Paul Alexander about his reasons children should not get the COVID vaccination:

https://rumble.com/vgs2gn-former-hhs-covid-advisor-dr.-paul-alexander-do-not-give-covid-shots-to-chil.html

Tucker Carlson interviews Dr. Peter McCullough about doctors' refusal to give COVID patients the potentially lifesavking drugs HCQ or ivermectin:

https://rumble.com/vgqayr-something-is-up.-therapeutic-nihlism-is-worldwide.html

Prophecies, Visions and Dreams: Empty Distractions

Our modern "prophets" who have visions and dreams don't seem to ubject them to much critical scrutiny. I suspect that most of these "prophecies" are simply irrelevant or superfluous or just plain meaningless. A dream about almost being scammed by an evil person doesn't require a dream to teach us not to trust everybody. Perhaps the individual could benefit from that kind of reminder but as a message to the body of Christ we have plenty of warning in scripture against evil seducers.

And what could possibly be the importance of the message that "God is going to save" a prominent public figure? If it were true why would it benefit us to know it in advance? If it happens Christians will certainly rejoice, but beyond that it's not a message we need to hear. And it's probably false but will we ever find out?

Many such "prophecies" are empty of meaning like this, either "messages" we don't need because we have better versions of them in the Bible, or messages we don't need because, well, we don't need them, they are utterly irrelevant to the life of the body of Christ. There are an awful lot of these "prophets" these days, prophesying empty nonsense which is at best a distraction from the Christian life we should be leading.

I just saw a video by Jonathan Cahn about a different prophecy than the one in The Harbinger. In this one he points out correspondences he's found between King Ahab and Bill Clinton. I gather there are more such correspondences than he described in this video that he'll get to in another video.

Again, even if these correspondences were true what would be the point of our knowing them? I defended Cahn's original discovery of correspondences between events in Isaiah 9 and events in New York City connected with the attack on the WTC. They were pretty uncanny corespondences and the message is clear: Israel didn't take God's warning of judgment through the destruction of their trees and bulidings and America didn't take God's warning in the attack on the WTC.

But I already knew the attack on the WTC was God's judgment, at least a warning of greater judgment to come, and it's qjuite apparent that the nation did not take it that way and did not repent, just as Israel didn't as reported in Isaiah 9. So now I'm thinking that despite the uncanniness of the correspondences they are ultimately meaningless. We know all we need to know from the scriptures and the prophetic imagery added nothing. And that earlier prophetic message was uncanny, in a way this current one probably isn't because this one has way too many variables, most of which probably show no similarities whatever. In any case, as with most of today's prophecies, this one hits me as empty, a distraction. God gave prophecies in the Bible to warn His people, or comfort them. We have the scripture which is ample warning and ample comfort in every possible situation. The prophecies, even if true, are redundant and unnecessary. That's not how God works

Cahn and other "prophets" nevertheless do often give sound biblical messages apart from their prophecies. It's a puzzle that they fall for their own visions.

The Reality of Demons

We know, he said, that there are no witches. Witches don't exist, we know they are not real. This as said by Glenn Loury, whose podcasts I enjoy. He's an intellectual, a thinker, he's good at it, I like most of what he has to say too. I suppose I might have guessed that he held this opinion, but hearing him say it provoked, oh dear, another blog post.

It's only what everybody with any claim to rationality thinks of course, so goes the conceit. I used to think it myself, before I became a Christian. What changed my mind was having actual experiences of the supernatural demonic world. This was in the couple of years leading up to my becoming a Christian, when I was dabbling in the occult and discovered its reality in some rather scary ways. The Bible mentions witches and sorcerers and describes Jesus setting people free of demons that had possessed them, so many people believe in such things on faith because they believe in the Bible. although without any personal experience. "Faith is the evidence of things unseen" says scripture, and after all, believing the gospel of salvation through Christ's death on the cross is believing in the supernatural, so believing in angels and demons naturally follows.

But sometimes I wish someone like Loury would get his arrogant certainty overtorned by the appearance of an actual demon. Would it be wrong to make that a prayer, Lord? I don't want to scare the man, I just want him to know that he's wrong. Hm, I do pray it Lord, I think the more we all know about the reality the better, especially these days when the ARapture followed by the Tribulation period seems to be about to burst upon the world any minute.

Oh yes witches exist. Witches are people who have learned something about how to manipulate supernatural power. Today's witches may be naive, think they are dealing with impersonal forces in the universe and don't know they are dealing with demons who are the source of such powers. They may think they are using such powers for good, to help humanity, and don't know that they are the tools of the demons rather than the other wayh around, and that demons are malevolent beings. There have always been witches who know what they are dealing with too, though, and some for evil rther than good, such as Alister Crowley. Also, Shamans are people who consciously work with demons.

So perhaps it comes down to the question of the reality of demons. Below is a list off the top of my head of some exmples of demonic activity that I suppose will all be denied by the self-proclaimed Rational People, but might be helpful for some others. (I'm thinking of the people who know it's all real but have nonbibiical ideas about what it's all about, such as tghe spooky late-night radio show "Coast to Coast" where all sorts of paranormal phenomena are discussed and taken seriously, including witches, but in fanciful ways the demons themselves must be teaching them.) Anyway, here's my quick list. There may be different kinds of supernatural beings but all the Bible mentions are angels and fallen angels or demons so I stick to that.

Hamlet didn't really talk to his dead father, he was talking with a demon impersonation of his father.
Ghosts are demonic impersonationsof dad people, perhaps people they had actually possessed in life.
UFO phenomena are the work of demons
The apparitions of Mary are demonic impersonations.
High ranking demons or Satah himself may impersonate jesus Christ.
"Prophets" today who have visions of Christ are being deceived by demons.
People who don't believe in demons or wtchcraft think the Harry Potter stories are harmless fiction The demons may do as much damage through people who deny their existence as through those who believe in them because such people promote such things as the Harry Potter series that can seduce children into dabbling with the occult.

Some Recent Discussions of the Problems with the Vaccines (UPDATE, removed one)

UPDATE: When I posted this I hadnt heard the whole first discussion by Dr.T and Dr. P and now that I have I find it going off into some -- odd? -- nutty? -- territory. So I've taken it down. For all I know there's something to what they are talking about but I think there are better sources so I've taken it down. It's called Critically Thinking, on April 30, if anyone wants to go find it.

Also want to mention Tucker Carlson's discussion of the problems with the vaccines.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-how-many-americans-have-died-after-taking-the-covid-vaccine

and Chris Pinto's hour-long show on the topic from a couple weeks ago:

http://www.noiseofthunderradio.com/noise-of-thunder-radio-show/2021/4/20/notr-vaccines-world-health-organization-the-un-42021.html

Saving America Part 5: It Starts with the Church. WE NEED TO THROW OUT THE TROJAN HORSE OF THE MODERN BIBLE VERSIONS

In my opinion Chris Pinto's documentary the True Christian History of America could be used as a platform for launching some needed educaton in the historical origins of our American form of government. Through quotes from major figures in European history he shows that the concept of liberty that is embodied in our founding documents was developed over centuries of experience of the tyranny of kings and Popes and that its foundation is the Bible. It shows clearly that the right to perosnal freedom and the right to overthrow tyrants were given powerful voice by Christians down the centuries and that contrary to popular propaganda none of it comes from any nonChristian source. In quieter political times we could perhaps organize study groups to educate us ignorant Americans in principles that have been kept from us so that in a liesurely manner we could familiarize ourselves with them, principles tht have become alien to us, and perhaps think it all through to political decisions based on it and reclaim much of what has been lost.

But it comes right at the point where we may have finally completelyh lost our true America, when there is no way left to reclaim it. Sometimes we hear drastic solutions like civil war but they fizzle out rapidly under the sheer practical impossibility of it, not to mention that such an effort would be doomed to failure unless we'd truly learned what we are fighting for and I think this film makes it painfully clear how little most of us understand what we would need to understand to do it right. It's founded on solid Protestantism for one thing and few of our churches embody that Protestant spirit any more, let alone the culture at large. I happened to hear a bit of a radio talk show on the weekend in which a caller into the show spent his time reading from the Declaration of Independence, of course implying that we are at the point where we again face a tyrannical government which calls for a righteous severing of ties with it. The host of the show pointed out that since half the population voted for this tyrannical govennment the circumstances put such an undertaking out of the question.

So for many reasons we're in a hopeless position. But God is in charge and I keep being driven back to what I think is the real core of the matter, which is that we, Christians I mean, are out of favor with God and that's the reason the situation is hopeless. We could possibly push back the encroaching evils in this country if the churches first sought repentance from sins and errors, many of which aren't even suspected.

Such as the head covering. Repentance is a main part of Christian prayer for revival and it was highlighted at the big prayer gathering in Washington D C last year, but what good does it do if we are not repenting of what we should be repenting of? Oh I'm sure some of the concerns are rightly identified, but if for instance the abandonemnet of the head covering is a cause of much of our backsliding you can be sure nobody is praying about that. And it would be resisted if someone brought it up.

I also have to mention here that Jonathan Cahn who led that big gathering has participated in national prayer breakfasts which include nonChristians, and I'm sure he's just one of many who join in and don't call out that major affront to God. Our National Cathedral which was originally Protestant now welcomes other religions too. You think God is going to bless us when we pray with the priests of Baal and Dagon? Our illustrious Protestant Christian foundationss are mightily betrayed in our modern ecumenical mindset, there's no hope of reclaiming them unless the temple is cleansed.

Reinstate the head covering, throw out the idol worshippers and that would be a good start. The very thought implies a strengthening of the churches it's normally hard to imagine and I can hardly imagine it even as I describe it, might as well be asking for the miracujlous moving of mountains.

Another big problem that isn't seen as the problem it really is, and doesn't get included in discussions of doctrinal errors even by those who see it as a problem, is the effect of the modern Bible Versions in undermining biblical inerrancy, as well as contributing to a level of cacophony that creates confusion in the churches. We know that the Greek manuscripts Sinaiticus and Vaticanus were at least the work of heretics in the early centuries of the Church, according to J W Burgon, either that or possibly later forgeries. The acceptance of them as genuine has contributed to the denial of biblical inerrancy although some insist on inerrancy even in the teeth of their influence against it.

Since these manuscripts do not contain some passages that are familiar to us from the King James and other versions based on the manuscript tradition knosn as the Textus Receptus, their acceptance as genuine casts doubt on the revered Authorized Version and of logical necessity on biblical inerrancy despite efforts to hold onto it. Holding onto it can't logically be done. Either we recognize that the newly discovered manuscripts are not genuine or we give up on biblical inerrancy. It happens to be Chris Pinto, again, through his documentary series on the Bible, who has probably done the most to show the falseness of these manuscripts.

Yes America really was founded on Christian principles. I'm glad to see the evidence for this now , finally, even as it looks like we're in the middle of a Communist Revolution and may never be able to get back to it. Nevertheless I write in hope. God judges, He also revives. God is in charge

Saving America Part 4: Some community level helps

Alex Newman talks about how American schools degenerated from Bible-based Christian instruction to government schools without religion. He refers to a succession of influential atheist/secularists: Robert Owen of New Harmony experimental commune, Horace Mann, John Dewey. This is in the context of an interview by a couple of homeschooling mothers. These are all Christians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6erQhGDAN9s

Newman talks about the importance of phonics for teaching reading, and I just heard John McWhorter say he taught his daugher to read at the age of three and a half from a phonics book. I'd been thinking about the importance of phonics after hearing Newman, how it might be applied to the learning problems of poor kids in particular, and along came McWhorter to affirm its importance. I was taught phonics in first grade (you really want to learn the year? 1948) -- they called it "phonetics" at the time -- and as I later saw friends who had not been taught it unable to spell and stumbling over words I became an avid supporter of the method. English is a phonetic language. That is, our alphabet letters represent sounds, and learning to read is greatly enhanced by learning the rules that govern that relationship.

It's at 1;21:50 of the following discussion where McWhorter mentions the importance of phonics:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y5tY8vmddjs

And that is a great discussion for a lot of reasons that fit into this post. As usual McWhorter and Glenn Loury are discussing racial problems, specifically the ongoing problem of disparities between the academic performance and economic success of blacks and other populations, and how the Antiracist line is not helping them improve their situation.

Both of them offered their ideas of what might improve it. At 1:21:00 McWhorter says he thinks legalizing all drugs, aggressively promoting birth control, and improving education would turn around these communities in short order.

Loury had a list I like better. 1:17:45 -- Get the government to appropriate a small portion of the trillions they keep throwing down the garbage chute to minority communities "to boost the infrastructure of human development" through interventions that really would help. Say take ten billion ("chickenfeed" in today's budget) and give 100 million each to a hundred communities.

He mentioned having nurses visit new mothers to teach them how to care for their infants, pre-kindergarten education, and he said he'd even consider midnight basketball if it would stop the young men from killing each other by giving them something to do.

I appreciate that focus on practical suggestions. I tend to think in terms of volunteer work and the involvement of the churches, but with such practical ends in mind as well as bringing the gospel and the biblical perspective into the situation. The teenage gangs need men in their lives to mentor them in other interests as well as encourage personal responsibility. I gather literacy is probably a big problem so I picture volunteers spending time with people as they are welcome, to teach phonics and reading, and encourage reading to their children in particular. That's just a couple of thoughts out of many I could muse about. Ideally the people who offer the help should live in the community, whether they are already there, perhaps part of the local church, or decide to move there, perhaps open their homes to the neighborhood to get to know the people and their own view of what problems need addressing. Also, sure, focus on minorities, but I think poor white neighborhoods could benefit from the same sort of attention, working mainly from the residents' own ideas of what is needed.

Christians should have the lead in this sort of thing esepcially since it can be felt as a calling from God. Sure, government aid might be helpful but ordinary people who set their minds to it can accomplish a lot without government making rules about what should be done and how to do it or else. On the other hand, of course, not everybody can afford to put in effective time without extra means of support.

So much for my daydreams for now.

Saving America Part 3: It starts with the Church. WE'VE GOT TO GO BACK TO THE HEAD COVERING!

Saw the headline and had to listen. I like Todd Friel, I've watched quite a few of his Wretched Radio talks recently, and the headline to this one mentions the woman's head covering, one of my big topics. Well, I knew there was no point in expecting him to contradict the viewpoint of his own theological frame of reference. John MacArthur employs the usual false arguments against the literal head covering, so does Alistair Begg, so I know Friel isn't going to say anything different. It's going to be the same old totally misguided argument from culture. I might have wanted to be pleasantly surprised but I knew better than to expect it.

And sadly I was right. Always this sophistry about the head covering. Golly gosh, yeah sure it's God- ordained but it's shaped by culture. WAHAT is shaped by culture? Masculine and feminine expressions. Ay yi yi yi yi.

Why is this so difficult> Why why why? 1 Corinthians 11:2-16 is not about masculinity and femininity for starters, IT'S ABOUT HEADSHIP. HEADSHIP. HEADSHIP. It's about the HEAD, it's about authority, it is not about mjasculinity and femininity. It is about the headship of the man over the woman, and Christ over the man. THAT'S WHAT IT SAYS.

He starts from Paul's observation that women tend to wear their hair longer than men do. Why start there?: In the context of the passage it's one of what, four or five? arguments Paul makes FOR the head covering. This one is the least persuasive in my opinion, and when it is so frequently misread as prescriptive instead of merely descriptive, as in this case, I want to tear all my own hair out.

Some Pentecostals make the passage entirely about the long hair. In a discussion about this passage I had with some Pentecostals a woman told me her hair is so long she can sit on it, and she had grown it out to such a length because that is how she understands that passage.

But all Paul is saying is that we can see that women tend to wear their hair longer than men do. And from that observed fack he draws the conclusion that it is a sign that women know they are to have their heads covered. No, the hair is not the covering, if it were the fact that women do tend to wear it longer would suffice as the covering and Paul would not have had to write about the covering at all.

The logic of Paul's argument here is hard to follow but in the context of the whole passage it has to be understood to be another reason women need to wear a covering on their heads in the assembly. It makes no sense that he'd have written so much about headship only to answer it with the custom of long hair. The logic must be that since women naturally wear their hair long as a covering, it is one of the reasons for the additional head covering. In any case the rest of the passage makes it clear if this one argument isn't so clear.

The main argument in the passage is that because of the God-ordained order of headship women need to cover our heads as a recognition of that headship order. (Again if women normally wear their hair long that cannot be what he is advocating, there would be no reason to mention it at all).

No it is not about temple prostitution. Yes there were temple prostitutes in Corinth. If it's about wearing your hair long and women normally wore their hair long then again there would be no reason to exhort them to cover their heads so as not to be mistake for a temple prostitute. Any woman growing up in that culture would have known such a thing without needing to be told anyway. Good grief this is so ridiculous. Todd Friel, why didn't you just STOP AND THINK?

The man who caused all this confusion was a highly regarded Christian, but what he wrote about the head covering should be denounced effusively. I've written about it on the blog Hidden Glory, I'll only say here that the overall problrm with his essay is that he assumes from the beginning what he finally concludes. That plus thje fact that he's making up the whole cultural interpretation and the bigger fact that Paul is never ever talking about culture, he argues the whole point from God's Laws.

Here are a few of the best arguments for the head covering in my opinionj:

1. The fact that historically ALL Christians understood until the 20th Century that the passage rqejuires women to cover our heads, and it was not restricted to the assembly but women covered their heads most of the time TAKING IT FROM THIS PASSAGE.
2. The fact that we require men to remove their hats in the assembly, and the passage requires that of men, therefore it makes no sense NOT to require women to do the opposite and to cover our heads.
3. The passage is about THE HEAD, it is NOT about femininity and masculinity.

Good grief.

And I think the fact that this brief little piece of scri8pture is so mishandled to the effect that we disobey it has to mean the devil considers it a pretty important passage. If we disregard the Creation Ordinance to cover our heads we are very likely spiritually opening the door to all the other violations of God's ordinances which we see in the world and even in the churches today. Divorce, Gender Confusion, and every other abuse of sexuality that is bringing down wester civilixzation.

The conclusion being that if the churches saw this error and set out to correct it, requiring women to cover our heads in church just as we require men to uncover theirs, WE MIGHT MAKE SOME HEADWAY TO RECOVERING THE CULTURE.

GOOD GRIEF, CHURCH!!!!!!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHpTlKN25Kg -- Friel's coments on the head covering start at about 3:45 and run for about two minutes.