All Hail Mother Gaia

All Hail Mother Gaia
Vol: 163 Issue: 22 Wednesday, April 22, 2015

The first Earth Day celebration was conceived by then U.S. Sen. Gaylord Nelson and held in 1970 as a ”symbol of environmental responsibility and stewardship”.

What is interesting is the universal recognition — in this generation — that the Earth is in trouble. Everybody, regardless of their religious views — or lack thereof — can see the handwriting on the wall — even if they refuse to admit it was written in advance.

For the most part, the proponents of Earth Day are pagans who would scoff at the idea of a Creator God, preferring ‘Mother Gaia’ instead. While they laugh at the idea of a living God, the concept of a living, intelligent, planet seems perfectly rational to them.

“Earth Day” founder Senator Nelso explained, “When I first conceived of Earth Day, a global holiday to celebrate the wonder of life on our planet, I thought long and hard about the day on which it should fall. It must be meaningful. One that might be accepted universally for all of humankind. What could be more appropriate than the first moment of Spring, when day and night are equal around the world and hearts and minds can join together with thoughts of harmony and Earth’s rejuvenation.

Senator Nelson adds, “Just as a single prayer can be significant, how much more so when hundreds, thousands, millions of people throughout the world join in peaceful thoughts and prayers to nurture neighbor and nature.”

Former Vice President Al Gore in his book, ‘Earth in the Balance’ wrote what he called the ‘Gaia Hypothesis’ using quotes from an ancient Hindu dictum: “The earth is our mother, and we are all her children.” He quotes from the gurus of Sikhism who claim that the “Earth teaches us patience, love; Air teaches us mobility, liberty; Fire teaches us warmth, courage; Sky teaches us equality, broad-mindedness; Water teaches us purity, cleanliness.”

He quotes from Baha’i that teaches that, “Man is organic with the world. His inner life molds the environment and is itself deeply affected by it.” And he quotes from James Lovelock, the originator of the Gaia hypothesis.

Gore wrote in his book that the root problem in Western civilization is that “we lost our feeling of connectedness to the rest of nature.”

Near the end of his book, he offers an answer to this alienation by quoting from a prayer of the Onondaga tribe in upstate New York.

Assessment:

A single prayer CAN be significant, if it is addressed to God, but Nelson’s vision is of the prayers of millions addressed to the god of this world, just as Christian Southen Baptist Al Gore preaches any god will do.

Addressing a prayer to a mythical earth god in the expectations it will be answered is like addressing a letter with no return address to ‘Fred’ and dropping in a mail box, expecting it to be delivered to the correct Fred. And then expecting Fred, who doesn’t know you, to grant your request.

The results of praying to the earth are more obvious to the pagan earth worshippers than they are to the rest of us — they pray and pray, and the planet’s ecology gets worse and worse. You’d think they’d get the hint. Either Gaia isn’t listening, she doesn’t care, or — maybe, just maybe, GAIA IS A BIG ROCK FLOATING IN SPACE.

Because, according to the high priests of the god of this world, the planet isn’t healing itself, it is falling apart. That is the reason for Earth Day –to give Gaia a big hint that we’d like her to fix things, or, if Gaia won’t, (or CAN’T) then maybe everybody can meet together on Earth Day and give her a hand. (After all, the Earth doesn’t have any hands of its own)

According to guys like Al Gore, the earth is billions of years old, and man has been here for millions of years. Al Gore has been around for a bit over a half-century.

When Al Gore’s dad was born, the air was clean, the water was clean, the environment was largely unspoiled and few people thought about praying to the planet to please grow more trees so we don’t run out of oxygen. Thus had it been,(using Al Gore’s timetable), for millions of years.

(Amazing what a difference a half-century can make.)

So Earth Day is the day when millions of people will all come together, hold hands, sing ‘Kumbayah’, share a universal Coke and pray TO THE PLANET for the protection of the environment. They deny the God of Scripture, but embrace the god of this world, while giving him credit for God’s handiwork.

The skeptics can argue that they don’t believe in God, but Earth Day proves the opposite. They just prefer a god of their own design, one more in keeping with their own worldview.

Indeed, the Apostle Paul makes that exact point:

“Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse: Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened.”

(God is dead, but the EARTH is alive — and worthy of prayer and worship?)

“Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools, And changed the glory of the uncorruptible God into an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts, to dishonour their own bodies between themselves: Who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshipped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed for ever. Amen.” (Romans 1:19-25)

Originally Published: April 22, 2004

Featured Commentary: The Right Stuff ~ Lea Sylvester

Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots

Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots
Vol: 163 Issue: 21 Tuesday, April 21, 2015

Pretty much every time I publish a column in which I note that the Bible is silent insofar as any mention of a fifth, overarching superpower resembling America, I get a flood of emails telling me where I went wrong.

Invariably, they identify the entity called Mystery Babylon, Mother of Harlots as the United States of America. One reader emailed yesterday, saying;

“O come on!! America is talked about in the Bible, New York city gets nuked (Revelation 17 &18). How else did you think the anti-christ takes over the world economy,w/ his new system..the mark of the beast to buy & sell.

One key to this (there are many) is Rev: 18 verse 11 &12. The seventh and eighth have not risen to power but in Revelation 13 it explains a little about them and the mark of the beast. Please open your eyes it’s all so plain to see!”

The problem here is one of wishful thinking. I would very much like to find evidence of America in the Scriptures for the last days, since I am in America and these ARE the last days. If America plays no role in the Tribulation, and we can see the Tribulation just over the horizon, then logic dictates something happens to America before it begins.

Since, on this side of the Tribulation, America is the world’s undisputed superpower, making it ‘go away’ (as the Bible indicates that it must) suggests that ‘somethng’ is ALSO sitting just over the horizon, somewhere before the kickoff to the Tribulation Period. And it must be pretty bad.

For that reason, I wish my correspondent was right; I wish it was, ‘all so plain to see’ America in the end times scenario.

What IS plain to see is that America ISN’T Babylon the Great.

Assessment:

Insofar as Mystery Babylon is concerned, the Scriptures identify it as Rome. An examination of relevant passages lend themselves to no other defensible conclusion:

“And the angel said unto me, Wherefore didst thou marvel? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast that carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. ” (Revelation 17:7)

That is the political ‘beast’ first described by the Prophet Daniel and identified in Daniel 9:26 as the ‘prince of the [Roman] people’ who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in AD 70.

Political Rome collapsed in the 5th century, but its political influence remained, carried on through the papal church headquarted in Rome. That isn’t ‘anti-Catholic bashing’ it is secular history.

During the height of its power, no European king could take his throne without Papal approval. Those who dared defy the Pope’s power faced the Pope’s armies.

The power of the papacy waned, but continued to directly influence European politics until the mid-part of the 20th century, when that power began to shift away from religious Rome and back toward the political center, codified by the 1957 treaty of Rome.

As a continuous power, one could argue that Rome was, then wasn’t, yet is.

But one could NOT argue credibly that Rome’s influence ever ceased to be felt throughout the history of the Church Age.

“The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is.”

The modern city of Rome is famed throughout the world as the ‘City on the Seven Hills’.

Of ‘Mystery Babylon the Great, the Mother of Harlots and the abominations of the earth’, the revealing angel tells us this:

“And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.” (Revelation 17:7-10)

Speaking of the antichrist, he is identified with Rome in the next verse as,

“And the beast that was, and is not, even he is the eighth, and is of the seven, and goeth into perdition.”

Speaking of the Mother of Harlots situated on ‘seven mountains’ the angel says;

“the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.” (Revelation 17:18)

In John’s day, and in the centuries that have passed since, no other city could have been said to have reigned over the kings of the earth EXCEPT Rome.

Revelation Chapter 13 makes it clear that the government of the antichrist is both political, and religious. There are two beasts of Revelation 13 — the first is the political beast, the one we call the antichrist, who appears in 13:1 and a second beast, called the False Prophet, who makes his appearance in verse 11.

The Babylon depicted in Revelation 17 is the religious system of antichrist, which is headquartered on the ‘city on the seven mountains’ The Babylon of Revelation 18 encompasses both the religious and political systems, as embodied by the literal city.

Revelation 18:3 refers to the religious Rome that existed between the fall of the Roman Empire and the mid 20th century. That is a reference to the religious, rather than secular, is confirmed by the next verse, which says, “Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues.” (4)

If this is a reference to America, or any political entity, what sense does THAT make? How does one ‘come out of America’? Move? Where? The Bible doesn’t say, so why bring it up?

Because one CAN ‘come out’ of a religion, and since God frames it by saying, “that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues,” the context makes it clear He is referring to a religious system, not a political city.

Those who equate Babylon to America point to Revelation 18:9;

“And the kings of the earth, who have committed fornication and lived deliciously with her, shall bewail her, and lament for her, when they shall see the smoke of her burning,” arguing this must be New York City because “all the company in ships, and sailors, and as many as trade by sea, stood afar off, And cried when they saw the smoke of her burning, saying, What city is like unto this great city!”

It MUST be New York City, because it is a ‘great city’ whose burning can be witnessed from sea, they argue. It MUST be America because America is the great whore who produces most of the porn, consumes most of the cocaine, and is the richest country the world has ever known.

America has existed 226 years. It has been a superpower for 45 years and the world’s premiere superpower for 15 years. Rome’s power has continued to influence global politics and religion without interruption for the last two thousand years.

In additon, Mystery Babylon is called a ‘mystery’ to denote the spiritual nature of the political system. It is a reincarnation of the Babylonish counterfeit system of Nimrod, Semiramus and Tammuz — essentially a goddess cult with a father god figure and a child god figure. America acknowleges only a generic ‘God’.

The city ‘Babylon’ that is destroyed in Revelation 18 gives another important proof that Babylon can’t be America.

The Roman colliseums were filled with captives from the known world fighting as gladiators. When the gladiator games ended, then the slaughter of the Christians would begin. The Apostle Paul was martyred in Rome.

“And in her was found the blood of prophets, and of saints, and of all that were slain upon the earth.” (18:24)

One can argue America is no less blood-soaked, but one can hardly characterize America’s ‘victims’ as ‘prophets’ or ‘saints’. (Mostly they were Indians, Mexicans and African blacks taken as slaves)

The Bible says there are four spheres of world power in the last days. Gog-Magog, the revived Roman Empire of antichrist, the Kings of the East and the Kings of the South. Since there is no reference to America, one person’s guess is as good as another’s as to where she might have gone.

Rome played a central role in the history of civilization from John’s day until this very moment. It is about twelve miles from Rome to the coast of the Meditterranean Sea.

Occam’s razor is a logical principle attributed to the mediaeval philosopher William of Occam (or Ockham). His principle of logic states that one should not make more assumptions than the minimum needed.

Put more simply, Occam’s Razor dictates the most obvious answer to a given question is usually the correct one. America doesn’t sit on seven hills. It hasn’t exerted continuous global influence throughout Church history.

And America isn’t drunken with the blood of the martyrs. One can’t say the same about Rome in either its secular political or religious incarnations.

I wish it WERE so simple.

Originally Published: September 15, 2004

Featured Commentary: Snakes and Stones ~ Wendy Wippel

Some ”Choice”

Some ”Choice”
Vol: 163 Issue: 20 Monday, April 20, 2015

Many Americans defend “choice” by denying that they are ”pro-abortion.” They claim that they are actually ”personally opposed” to abortion but don’t believe they have the right to take that ”choice” away from others.

This, for example is John Kerry’s position on abortion. Kerry said that he personally believes ‘life begins at conception’ but supports ‘a woman’s right to choose.’

Like all abortion supporters, he never finishes the sentence . . . ‘a woman’s right to choose — to KILL HER BABY!’

That abortion is an American holocaust of mind-bending proportions is no secret. Since 1973, at least fifty million Americans were destroyed in the womb by legalized abortions. Last year, the numbers reached 4,400 abortions per day — that’s 1.6 million per year.

Although the pro-abortion lobby claims abortions must be legal to protect the health of the mother, or in cases of rape or incest, statistics show that 99% of all American abortions were performed as a matter of the mother’s convenience.

Of the women having abortions, 79.4% are unmarried, 26.6% are teenagers, and 20% are “repeat customers”.

In a nutshell, abortion is the ‘choice’ to brutally, painfully, murder and dismember a human being in the womb. THAT is the ‘choice’ that well-meaning, but brainwashed Americans (even some American Christians) are reluctant to take away from others.

But frame the argument differently, and abortion would be outlawed by popular demand within hours.

Abortion ‘rights’ arise from the concepts of ‘states rights’ and ‘government neutrality’ — concepts that, under any other circumstances, are anathema to the liberal left.

‘States’ Rights’ advocates in fact once embraced the classic ‘pro-choice’ position: In the period leading up to the Civil War, ‘States Rights’ advocates argued that if abolitionists didn’t like slavery, their remedy was to not buy blacks.

They were infuriated at the idea that “n—— lovers” might be permitted to shove their racial morality down the throats of property owners who were only trying to defend their constitutional rights.

Whether the “choice” to victimize others is defined in terms of race, age, gender, or any other specious criterion, the concept of governmental “neutrality” on genocide is an intellectually dishonest myth.

Those who reject the applicability of this argument with regard to abortion generally do so because they don’t believe unborn babies are “persons.” But that is just what racists said about blacks.

Those who defend ‘choice’ by advocating government ‘neutrality’ on abortion should consider whether government ‘neutrality’ on race would really be ‘neutral.’

Consider: if the government suddenly withdrew legal protections for African Americans, would the government be ‘staying out of race’ or would it be taking the side of those who think the personhood of African Americans should be a matter of ‘personal choice?’

(Blacks were chosen for this example because of the historical application that is unique to the US. It applies equally to any other minority. Ask the Jews)

Try and picture the liberal lobbyists advocating the removal of ‘personhood’ status from, say, a convicted pedophile who preys on little kids. If killing a pedophile on the street were a matter of personal ‘choice’ — there wouldn’t BE any repeat offenders. He wouldn’t make it past the prison’s main gate.

Which is EXACTLY why the ACLU would be all over such an effort in a heartbeat — to protect the pedophile’s Constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Assessment:

Why would anyone take so heartless and intellectually dishonest a position as to accept the murder an unborn human being as a matter of ‘choice’?

In any other application imaginable, the very same lobbyists would be screaming ‘abolition!’ as loudly today as they did in 1860.

Those who promote abortion frame it in terms of ‘right-wing Christians’ vs. everybody else. The first association that comes to mind when one hears the phrase ‘pro-life movement’ are images of abortion protesters marching carrying signs saying “John 3:16”.

Prior to the advent of the modern use of double-speak, the phrase ‘pro-life movement’ would immediately be associated with the question; “There’s an ANTI-life movement?”

In point of fact, there are few ‘religions’ more ACCEPTING of abortion double-speak than mainstream Christianity. John Kerry is a Roman Catholic who supports abortion and enjoys wide-spread Catholic support. Judging from my emails, many other Christians also support John Kerry, despite his pro-abortion platform.

One lady emailed me and tore a strip off me for not being ‘Christian’ about John Kerry, etc., etc. before telling me that she was a Christian who supported his candidacy. I emailed her back and asked her what her position was on abortion?

She replied that I was asking her a trick question and not to email her further.

But this isn’t about John Kerry — he is merely a relevant example. It’s about how our advanced society can support killing our own kind, knowing all that we know, medically speaking.

The Bible forbids abortion. It identifies the child in the womb as being a person. John the Baptist recognized Jesus while both were still in the womb.

In Job 3:3, Job curses the day of his birth. “Let the day perish wherein I was born, and the night which said, ‘A man-child is conceived’.”

The Bible teaches coherency between the individual born and the individual conceived. Job traced his personal history back beyond his birth to the very night of his conception.

Furthermore, Job described his conception in personal terms. Apparently, Job felt that the unborn child was just that — an unborn child. There is no abstract language for the “products of conception.” Instead, we uncover concrete language of humanity. We are ALL the products of conception.

Passages in Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Luke record “a special event — the birth of a prophet.” While God had ordained these men, but this does not mean that their lives were more important than others.

God has a divine plan for everyone, and prophets are no more valued than judges, kings, or tax-collectors: “God shows personal favoritism to no man” (Galatians 2:6).

The stories recorded in the Bible are recorded for a reason. They are written so that we can apply them to our own circumstances. If God was involved in David’s life in the womb, He was involved in mine. If God protected Isaiah, He will protect me.

In all these verses we see that God places equal value on human life (by His involvement) at all stages, including prenatal life. As His creatures, we are defined by God. If this is true, then our personhood depends on Him, and we can see that in His opinion it begins at conception.

On the other hand, there is no biblical evidence of any kind that God places a lesser value on the life of the unborn child. We were ALL unborn children when Jesus went to the Cross for us.

Yet abortion is framed in terms of religion, not humanity, by the very humanists who eschew God in favor of the supremacy of man. To prove it, they are willing to conduct human sacrifices, while shaking their fists at God in defiance.

Tertullian wrote in the 3rd century (190-220 AD); “It does not matter whether you take away a life that is born, or destroy one that is coming to the birth. In both instances, destruction is murder” (Apology, 9.4)

Hence, ‘pro-life’ is framed as the exclusive domain of right wing Christians. But remove God from the equation, and abortion becomes a simple, biological equation that any idiot can figure out without a slide rule.

“If I was born, I was born alive from a womb where I must have already been alive in order to be born in the first place.” How hard is that to grasp?

Virtually every religion — and not just Judeo-Christianity — prohibits abortion, from the Buddhists to the Muslims. And there are many atheists and agnostics who are smart enough to figure out that they were once a fetus as well.

But those blinded by the pro-abortion lobby are generally those already at odds with God, the Bible and Christianity, including some mainstream religions. (The PCUSA comes to mind)

Supporting abortion is an act of mindless rebellion that is only palatable when framed in terms of religion vs. antireligion — few ever discuss it in terms of what it really is. They can’t.

There is nothing more natural than the affection between mother and child. Even in nature, most mammals will defend their young to their own deaths from predators.

In this generation, we know almost everything there is to know about the miracle of birth. We can even replicate it by cloning. We know more than ever about the unborn baby. We can take pictures of it in the womb. We can tell when it first responds to outside stimuli.

Tests have been conducted that show that the baby can recognize its mother’s voice while still in the womb, and in some cases, even the father’s. Babies in the womb jump when startled, react to changes in heat and cold and even exhibit emotional responses.

We KNOW all that. For certain. The very fact abortion is the subject of debate in this generation is concrete evidence of what Paul described as the perilous times of the last days.

Paul described a society ‘without natural affection’. (1st Timothy 3:23)

And, knowing ALL that we know in this modern era, whether or not killing our unborn is right or wrong is STILL a subject of a political debate wherein ‘natural affection’ is the exclusive domain of the ‘right wing Christian’.

Questions?

Originally Published: September 5, 2004

Featured Commentary: Face like the Sun ~ Pete Garcia

Was the Earth formed ‘in a day’?

Was the Earth formed ‘in a day’?
Vol: 163 Issue: 18 Saturday, April 18, 2015

According to the Bible, in the beginning, the earth was without form and void. According to Holy Writ, God created the earth in a day. On the third day, He separated the waters and the dry land, and brought forth grass, ‘herb yielding seed’, fruit trees, etc.

Among Bible believers, the only issue of any dispute is the length of a ‘day’. Is it a standard, 24 hour day? Or is it a thousand years, as Psalms 90:4 and 2 Peter 3:8 certainly seem to indicate? But as to the creation of the earth by a sovereign act of God, there is no dispute.

Within the scientific community, there is a well-meaning effort to understand the universe apart from the existence of God.

Science generally views the universe as a cosmic accident. The existence of the earth’s atmosphere, water, etc., and the evolution of mankind from a primordial soup is simply a happy coincidence.

Following this logic, science has developed the Big Bang Theory, the Reverse Big Bang Theory, the theory the universe is expanding, the theory the universe is contracting, quantum physics, quantum mechanics, evolution, punctuated evolution, ‘sudden appearance’ and dozens of other conflicting ‘theories’ but through it all, secular science has a faith in itself that, if directed toward God, truly could move mountains.

According to most secular science models, the earth was at one time a hot, molten mass that slowly cooled down over millions of years. It wasn’t created in a day, or even in a thousand years, science insists.

So strong is the faith of secular science in itself that when presented with contradictory evidence it is simply ignored.

Robert Gentry of Knoxville, Tennessee, does amazing research on radio-polonium halos in granite rock. Polonium is a rare element that is radioactive; it breaks down or decays like uranium. But polonium only lasts a few minutes.

As it breaks down, it sends off little particles that fly a certain distance. An analogy would be a hand-grenade exploding under water that produces a sphere of fragments in the water that only lasts a fraction of a second before it collapses.

Different elements have fragments that fly different distances, each radioactive element has a particular “signature” (how big a circle it can make in the rock as it decays like a more powerful hand grenade would produce a bigger sphere in the water).

Radio-active polonium, when it decays in a solid rock, makes a perfect sphere as it decays because all its fragments fly about the same distance from the center.

If it decays in solid rock, the circle is preserved. But if it decays in a hot molten rock, the circle disappears. All over the world radio-polonium halos exist in granite, indicating the earth was never a hot, molten mass.

The half-life of the polonium halo of just a few seconds also argues strongly in favor of an abrupt creation of the earth, so there is little scientific discussion about what the polonium halo might actually mean to all the contradictory theories out there.

Gentry’s research was published in many major science magazines until someone realized that it was proving the big bang theory to be a big dud.

The censorship of his valuable material by mainstream science magazines is incredible but predictable. Evolution is a very carefully protected state religion in this humanist world today.

Scientific discoveries that lend themselves to the argument that the universe was created tend to get little or no coverage.

I wasn’t surprised to find a report in the Seattle Post Intelligencer that didn’t make a big splash on the wire services.

University of Washington astrophysicist Tom Quinn works on NASA’s astrobiology project. That’s a relatively new NASA effort aimed at understanding how planets evolve and, in the case of earth, give rise to life.

While conventional science believes that giant planets like Jupiter take more than a million years to form, Quinn says it may happen in as little as a few hundred years.

(But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. [2 Peter 3:8] A few hundred years is just about right, according to the Genesis model)

The standard model of planetary evolution in the universe assumes that these giant gas planets are rare and take at least a million years to form as they orbit around their star. The planets form by collecting a star’s gas and dust through gravitational accretion.

Quinn, along with team leader Lucio Mayer at the University of Zurich and others, plugged astronomical observations and the existing body of knowledge on planetary formation into a sophisticated, computerized mathematical model simulating the “fluid dynamics” of protoplanetary evolution.

What they found surprised them. “We have this prejudice that planet formation has to take a long time, but now it looks like if the gas giant planet doesn’t form relatively quickly it won’t form at all,” Quinn said.

If planet formation goes too slowly, he said, the gas and dust burns off and does not accumulate.

Giant gas planets like Jupiter form moons, and some of their moons, such as Jupiter’s Europa, have water.

“These terrestrial planets like Earth will form as dry planets,” Quinn said. “You need those gas giants in the outer solar system to fling in the volatile materials if you’re going to get water on Earth-like planets.”

The formation of a solar system is a violent event.

As the planets cool, the gas and dust thrown off from larger planets are attracted by gravity to planets like Earth.

It’s too much of a stretch, he said, to argue from their mathematical model of giant planets that more Earth-like planets must also exist.

But it certainly doesn’t hurt the argument, he added.

“It just shows that there’s still a lot of fundamental knowledge about the planets that we don’t understand yet,” Quinn said.

One would have to agree with Dr. Quinn, but the reason that fundamental knowledge eludes him is because he is looking in the wrong place.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned,” Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 2:14.

Further, Paul explains, “For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness.” (1 Corinthians 3:19)

Science, by its defiant opposition to the things of God, inadvertently prove the validity of the Biblical model by that often unreasoning and unreasonable opposition.

If science, as a social institution and professional community, were truly interested in uncovering the truth, why would Dr. Quinn or Dr. Gentry or any other scientist whose discoveries favor the Creation model get so little funding and attention?

The answer is simple enough. Recognizing evidence pointing the existence of God would mean further research that might inadvertently ‘prove’ the existence of God. As it stands, the absence of evidence isn’t evidence of absence, and nobody can disprove a negative.

As an object of scientific neutrality, then, God must, by default, be assumed to exist unless there is evidence to the contrary. So the ‘evidence’ (in the form of steadily discredited theories) ‘disproving’ God gets all the attention.

Why is that, do you suppose? Well, for one thing, once the existence of God is posited as a scientific reality, a decision is immediately forced.

If there IS a God, then what? Clearly, it becomes choice time, and many would prefer to remain comfortable with their unbelief and therefore unaccountable to a Supreme Judge.

To accept the existence of God as a scientific fact means accepting the indictment of humanity and the acceptance of the existence of eternal consequences for sin.

The world system does not respond well to criticism of its’ operation, since it takes its cue from the prince of the power of the air, whose desire to be worshipped above all else is jealously protected by the secular scientific community.

That is not to say that all scientists are demoniacs or evil in the standard understanding of the term. They are just part of the rest of unregenerate humanity, seeking its own path to redemption, rebelliously denying their need for a Saviour by rebelliously denying any accountablity before a Living God.

Paul, writing under the inspiration of God, knew that the two worldviews would clash. He cautioned Timothy, “O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:” [2 Timothy 6:20]

Every day we discover something new for which science has to find an alternative explanation apart from God. It is quite a job. It was recently discovered, for example, that dogs are genetically predisposed to need human companionship.

Science is seeking a way to understand how that curious bit of genetic information got written there in the first place. The concept of a living, compassionate, intelligent God programming that information for the express purpose of making our human existence that much more bearable never entered the equation.

Instead, conventional scientific wisdom concludes ancient man inadvertently programmed that information at the genetic level himself through an unprovable tens of thousands of years of dog breeding. Does that make ANY sense at all?

We are living in the last days; a time of explosive knowledge. The prophet Daniel’s vision of the last days, recorded in the Book of Daniel, so terrified him that he demanded an explanation of what it all meant.

The revealing angel told him to “shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.” [Daniel 12:4]

When Daniel persisted, the angel rebuked him, saying, “Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end.” [Daniel 12:9]

The unsealing of the Books of Daniel and Revelation in this generation was accomplished mostly through the agency of scientific discoveries during the last half of the 20th century, beginning with the invention by Bell Labs of the transistor chip in 1948 that made possible the Computer Age.

While science seeks ways to invalidate God, it continues to inadvertently prove His existence, forcing an immediate effort to cover up the evidence lest it raise to many questions.

The words are unsealed, this is the time of the end. Knowledge increases on an exponential level. Moore’s Law dictates the doubling of computer processing speed, and consequently, the capacity for human knowledge, every eighteen months.

Will you trust science, with its ever-changing face and sea of contradictory revelations and theories? Or will you trust Jesus, the Creator of all things, including scientific law (and scientists, whether they believe it now or not)?

Because the Bible is true, and man is by nature a sinner in need of salvation, God Himself stepped out of space and time and took on human form. He lived the sinless life I should have, and paid the penalty for my sin (and yours) at Calvary’s Cross.

Jesus said, ‘it is finished’ Scripture says, translating from the Greek word ‘tetelestai’ meaning ‘paid in full’. By this act, Jesus procured a Pardon with your name on it.

All you need do is ask for it. Trust Jesus for your salvation, surrender to Him, and let Him make the changes in your life He sees fit.

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:” Ephesians 2:8 says. God extends the grace and grants the gift of saving faith. Just ask.

You needn’t clean up — that’s a myth. Jesus said ‘whosoever will’ may come unto Him. There is an old hymn that says, “Just as I am, without one plea, but that my God has died for me”.

Salvation is not a performance issue, but rather is one of trust. The burden of performance is placed on the same Shoulders that procured the Pardon.

“Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:” {Phillipians 1:6]

All the scientific evidence says we’re running out of time. On this point, science and Scripture agree, although for different reasons.

“I call heaven and earth to record this day against you, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and cursing: therefore choose life, that both thou and thy seed may live:” [Deuteronomy 30:19]

Don’t let the sun go down on your sin. There is a way out set before you. Choose life, and live.

Originally Published: November 29, 2002

Nineteen Eighty-Four

Nineteen Eighty-Four
Vol: 163 Issue: 17 Friday, April 17, 2015

In that seminal year of 1948, the year that Israel declared independence, the year the UN GATT Treaty created a global economy, the year the Benelux Treaty set the EU in motion, George Orwell made literary history with his novel, ”1984”.

Orwell’s novel revolved around Winston Smith, an intellectual employed by the Ministry of Truth in a totalitarian dictatorship on the fictional country of Oceania.

Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” was an instrument of propaganda charged with rewriting history to support Oceania’s dictator, “Big Brother.”

Orwell’s novel gave society the phrase “Doublespeak” as exemplified in Big Brother’s Three Slogans; “War is Peace; Freedom is Slavery; and, Ignorance is Strength.”

(Orwell actually coined the words “doublethink’ and ‘newspeak’ — words that, once released from the world of fiction, entered reality as ‘doublespeak’).

The novel’s impact also introduced the adjective, “Orwellian” into the English language as a modifier for the word, ‘propaganda’ and “Orwellian Doublespeak” became part of America’s political lexicon.

An example of Orwellian Doublespeak as it would apply to modern politics is found in the mantra of the American Left; “We Support the Troops, But Oppose the War.”

What made Orwell’s book so fascinating was the premise that the citizens of Oceania fully understood and accepted the concepts of doublethink and newspeak for what they were; lies that became truth based on who was speaking them.

Throughout the novel, Oceania is at war with one of the other two existing superpowers, Eastasia and Eurasia.

At one point, Oceania switches alliances without notice, as a public speaker changes the names of the enemy and ally mid-sentence.

In 1948, Orwell’s novel was a disturbing work of fiction. By 1984, it had earned a reputation as a ‘cautionary tale’.

In 2015, we still don’t have a Big Brother. But ‘doublethink’ and ‘newspeak’ are not just part of our lexicon in 2015.

They are part of our daily information processing apparatus.

Assessment:

Advertising is a prime example of ‘doublespeak’ in action. George Orwell comes to mind every time a drug commercial airs that promises to cure some minor condition.

Provided, of course, that you aren’t worried about blurred vision, heart palpitations, anal leakage, male pattern baldness, uneven tire wear, sudden heart attack, uncontrolled bleeding or perhaps, death.

(Or that unmentionable (but evidently not) condition that, if it lasts more than four hours, requires emergency medical treatment.)

People are driving their doctors crazy asking them if some drug represented by old people wearing body suits while surrounded by long, flowing blue curtains, or standing alone on top of a mountain, or, even more baffling, wearing outfits that make them look like a suicide cult about to jump into an angry, rocky surf, is “right for them”.

Another, and much more relevant example is in American politics. The politicians provide the doublespeak and the electorate willingly learns newthink.

But in 2015, we call doublespeak ‘spin’ and the newthink emerges as a consequence of failing to wait until the spin cycle stops before attempting to interpret it all.

Hillary Clinton’s ‘spontaneous show of emotion’ in 2008 was widely credited with her victory in the New Hampshire primaries, for example.

It dominated the news. “Hillary Shows Emotion” was the headline of the day.

It made news because Hillary famously hides any emotion (except anger) — and has never welled up in public, or even discussed welling up in public, and there she was, in an ‘unguarded moment’ on the campaign trail, showing herself to be human.

What made less news was the fact that Hillary gave an interview to Access Hollywood defending her ‘spontaneous emotional moment’ the day before it happened!

See Brit Hume’s “Grapevine”

So, if she won New Hampshire based on a contrived emotional event, as is the widely-accepted conventional wisdom, why doesn’t anybody care?

Fox News called the pre-sob interview about the post-sob moment an ‘interesting coincidence.’ (I call it an Orwellian moment).

There was another Orwellian moment in Jerusalem in 2008 when President Bush announced his intention to push a Mideast treaty between Israel and the Palestinians even as he admitted that the Palestinian side has not met a single one of its prior obligations under the ‘Road Map’!

While standing side-by-side with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Bush acknowledged that Hamas was dedicated to Israel’s destruction, that Hamas was in control of Gaza, and that Hamas was elected in a democratic election.

The next day, while standing beside Mahmoud Abbas, who has no control over Gaza, no control over Hamas, has made no effort to disarm Hamas, as Palestinian rockets still rain down on Israel Bush called on Israel to fulfill it’s obligations under the Road Map, suggesting that tactic might “encourage the Palestinians to do the same.”

Fawzi Barhoum, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza, quickly dismissed Bush and Abbas’ hopeful comments.

“This meeting was for public relations only, it was an empty meeting without results, only more dreams and waste of time,” the Hamas spokesman said.

“The meeting focused on the so-called security topics which mean to act against the interests of the Palestinian majority and the resistance.”

Bush also openly admitted that he doesn’t know whether Abbas’ government can resolve the Palestinian division before the end of the year.

But that minor detail was swept under the rug in his next breath, in which he promised the Palestinians a state by year’s end, anyway.

In Orwell’s world in 1984, truth was whatever Big Brother and the Thought Police said it was.

In the real world in 2015, truth seems to be whatever people prefer to hear, facts notwithstanding.

“For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but after their own lusts shall they heap to themselves teachers, having itching ears; And they shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables. (2nd Timothy 4:3-4)

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh. ” (Luke 21:28)

Originally Published: January 10, 2008

Featured Commentary: The Rapture Trap? ~ Alf Cengia

The Logic of Anti-Semitism

The Logic of Anti-Semitism
Vol: 163 Issue: 16 Thursday, April 16, 2015

One of the most enduring mysteries of the ages is, to my mind, the phenomenon of anti-Semitism.

It doesn’t follow any logical pattern that could explain it — indeed, taken as a purely social phenomenon, it makes no sense whatever.

Anti-Semitism appears to be universal; it has existed in every generation, among every people, on every continent upon which the Jew has put his foot.

European anti-Semitism dates back to the days of the Roman Empire, but Jews have been the targets of discrimination and pogroms on every continent and virtually every nation on the earth.

There is no nation that can claim to be free of anti-Semitism, and at the same time, there is no nation that can credibly claim it was harmed by its indigenous Jewish population.

Although an infinitesimal fraction of the global population, Jews have been awarded a quarter of all the Nobel Prizes given in the 20th century for chemistry, economics, literature, peace, physics and medicine.

Even the nations of the Arab world could have peace with Israel for the asking. Yet there is no nation on earth more universally despised.

Some anti-Semites (those who admit to themselves that they are) will argue that the Jews are “Christ-killers” invariably citing Matthew 27:25 as their ‘proof text’.

“Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.”

That doesn’t explain anti-Semitism among non-Christians — in fact, it doesn’t even explain anti-Semitism among Christians.

The Jews who happened to be in the crowd self-pronounced the curse, but the entire nation wasn’t there — just the rabble.

In any case, it was Jesus Himself Who lifted that curse as soon as it was pronounced, saying,

“Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.” (Luke 23:34)

And, finally, it wasn’t Jews that drove the nails through His hands and feet, or thrust a spear through his side. Crucifixion was a Roman punishment, imposed by Roman decree, carried out by Roman executioners, not for crimes against Judaism, but for crimes against the Roman Empire.

If the charge of ‘Christ-killer’ applies to the Jews, logic would dictate it would apply equally to the Italians.

Finally, Christians understand that Jesus was not executed for crimes against the Jews, or for crimes against Rome: those were simply the legal justifications under prevailing law at the time.

There is no nation, tribe or individual human being on this earth that did not play an equal role in His Death — He came to atone for the sins of all mankind.

And for three raging, horrific hours, the cumulative sin of the entire human race was heaped upon Him. Every person who ever sinned shares equal guilt with the Roman soldier who actually drove the spikes in His Body.

No, the “Christ-killer” label is an excuse to explain the existence of anti-Semitism.

It is not a reason for its existence in the first place.

Assessment:

Neither is the current conflict between Israel and the Arabs sufficient reason to explain anti-Semitism. In the first place, it predates modern Israel by 25 centuries.

But leaving that aside, this is the Modern Age of Enlightenment and Israel was born out the ashes of, if not the first, certainly the most successful effort at destroying the Jewish race in history.

The pitiful survivors of Europe’s madness dragged themselves back to their ancient homeland, where in a single generation, they turned a desert wasteland back into a land flowing with milk and honey.

Of all the nations carved from the empires of history, there is no greater rags-to-riches story than that of Israel.

A truly representative democracy surrounded by a sea of brutal dictatorships, it should shine as a beacon of hope to oppressed peoples everywhere.

Israel should, by all existing standards, be as much a beneficiary of ‘historical guilt’ as are Native Americans or African Americans, or Australian aborigines or any other historically oppressed peoples.

No matter what identifiable, historically oppressed ethnic group one compares to the Jews, there is no common denominator.

In the first place, a Jew is a person of a particular faith but of no particular ethnic background, as well as being a person of a particular background with no particular religious faith.

Moreover, those who explain their anti-Semitism on religious grounds generally don’t believe in the Jewish God anyway.

Jewish anti-Semitism is a fundamental tenet of Islam, and is cited as the principle reason for both the global jihad against the West and for the Islamic world’s refusal to recognize Israel’s right to exist.

Despite this undeniable truth, the United Nations accepts every charge laid against Israel by the Islamic world, no matter how spurious.

At the same time, it routinely ignores open acts of war committed against the Jewish state by finding some moral equivalence between Israel’s refusal to commit suicide on demand and Islam’s refusal to recognize its right to exist.

Compare Israel’s ‘human rights violations’ — even the most transparently fictitious ones — to actual human rights violations ongoing in Islamic nations like the Sudan, or Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, or Syria’s Assad regime.

There are no mass graves in Israel. Yet more UN resolutions have been passed condemning Israel over the past sixty years than those passed against all the rest of nations of the world combined.

It defies logical explanation.

America has no more faithful or trusted an ally among all the nations of the world than it has in Israel. It is hard to imagine criticism emanating from Israel on a par with the kind of criticism routinely heaped on the US by its other close allies like Britain, France or even Canada.

And America has few enemies more virulent than the Palestinian terrorist groups like Hamas.

But the US is basing its entire peace process on creating a terrorist state on Israel’s borders. Never in international history has a nation been created while its people were engaged openly in a war of annihilation with the nation sponsoring its creation.

No other nation on the face the earth would even countenance being put in such a situation, let alone being forced into such a suicidal situation by its closest ally.

This, too, defies logical explanation.

Anti-Semitism cannot be explained by the secular history of the world. It really can’t even be explained by the religious history of the world. If there is an historical instance of Jewish oppression of Christianity to justify it, I can’t find it.

I can’t even find much of a case for the oppression of the Arabs by Jews — not even by modern Israel.

I visited Israel in 1992 just before the Oslo Agreement, including Bethlehem, Hebron, Jericho, Masada and the Dead Sea, now all part of the Palestinian Authority.

Not once did I hear a murmur of discontent. The Palestinians were thriving, tourist dollars were pouring in, roads were being built . . . if I were to visit today, I’d likely not come back alive.

Who or what turned it a war zone?

In 1993, Israel was prepared to turn the Palestinian Authority into the jewel of the Middle East. It would have stood as a testament to Israeli tolerance.

But the Palestinians couldn’t get beyond their blind hatred of the Jews, and as soon as the opportunity presented itself, they attacked. Why?

The rest of the world, particularly in the West, is neither blind nor stupid.

The Western diplomats who scold Israel for retaliating against unprovoked rocket attacks against civilian targets KNOW that they would react with far less restraint were they the ones on the receiving end of the rocket fire.

They KNOW that the war would end the second the Palestinians stopped attacking.

Yet they support the Palestinian right to launch unprovoked random attacks against Israeli targets and condemn Israel for pin-point retaliatory strikes aimed exclusively against the attackers as ‘disproportionate.’ Why?

Why does the world hate the Jews? What have the Jews ever done to the world?

They survived — not as Israelis, but as Jews. The world would have no problem with a secular Israel. Or with a Muslim Israel. What it cannot countenance is a JEWISH Israel. It cannot even explain why.

Both the world’s dominant religions, Christianity and Islam, are rooted in Judaism. Islam claims it descended from the Jewish patriarch, Abraham, and Christianity was founded in Jerusalem by a 1st century Jewish itinerant preacher.

Neither faith would exist without Judaism, and neither faith COULD exist without the continued existence of the Jews. Since both faiths were born out of Judaism, both would crumble without it.

You can’t pull a foundation from under a building and expect the ediface to continue to stand. That is simply logical. If Judaism is rooted in a false theology, so is Islam and Christianity.

Why would Christians or Muslims knowingly fight against their own God?

So global anti-Semitism doesn’t make logical sense politically, economically, socially or religiously. Yet it continues to thrive, despite its self-destructive nature.

There is but one logical explanation for anti-Semitism, and that explanation is spiritual. The Bible says that Satan is the god of this world, and that it is his goal to be worshiped as such.

The existence of Israel is a constant reminder to the god of this world that his days are numbered. His goal is to eradicate all traces of God from the face of the earth.

And standing in his way is the Jewish state of Israel. The Bible also says that the Jews are the Chosen People of God and that they will not only endure as a people to serve as God’s ‘ensign to the nations’ that He exists, but that their existence is evidence of His ability to keep His word.

“Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts is His Name: If those ordinances depart from before Me, saith the LORD, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before Me for ever.” (Jeremiah 31:35-36)

For Satan to win, God’s Word must return to Him void. Israel’s destruction would accomplish that goal. That’s why the world hates Israel, even though it cannot explain why. Because by Israel’s very existence it is an offense to the god of this world.

Therefore, the big question, since Israel DOES exist, revolves around its RIGHT to exist.

No other explanation makes logical sense.

Originally Published: March 28, 2008

Featured Commentary: Rewriting the Biblical History ~ J.L. Robb

When ‘Patriot’ Is An Epithet

When ‘Patriot’ Is An Epithet
Vol: 163 Issue: 15 Wednesday, April 15, 2015

On April 19, 1993 the world watched in horror and disbelief as the so-called ‘Branch Davidian Compound’ burned to the ground, incinerating the seventy-six men, women and children holed up inside.

The “Branch Davidian” sect was born out of a 1955 schism that erupted within the Davidian Seventh Day Adventists, which was itself a 1930’s breakaway sect of the original 1860’s-era Seventh Day Adventists, born out of the “Great Disappointment” of 1844.

The “Great Disappointment” is so-called after the followers of William Miller.  William Miller predicted that the Rapture would occur before the end of 1843, based on the inte
http://www.omegaletter.com/admin/tinymce/themes/advanced/langs/en.js
http://www.omegaletter.com/admin/tinymce/themes/advanced/langs/en.js
rpretative principle he called the “day-year principle.”

When 1844 dawned and the Millerites were still there, Miller revised his calculations and predicted the Rapture would occur on April 18.   When that day came and went, Miller endorsed the calculations of one of his followers, Samuel S. Snow, who presented what became known to the Millerites as “seventh-month message” or the “true midnight cry”.

The actual date of the Rapture would be October 22, 1844, explaining why that marks the date of the “Great Disappointment.” The disappointed Millerites developed a doctrine, known as the “Pre-Advent Divine Investigative Judgment” that teaches that the judgment of God’s professed people began on October 22, 1844 when Christ entered the Holy of Holies in the heavenly sanctuary.

The post-1844 Millerites’ doctrine eventually formed the basis for the Seventh Day Adventists.  So the 1993 Branch Davidians were a cult that emerged from a 1930’s cult that emerged from a 1860’s cult that emerged from a 1840’s cult known as the Millerites.

Even compared to William Miller or Samuel Snow,  David Koresh was a nut.  And, according to the law enforcement authorities involved — whose word on this issue, I believe,  is about as unbiased as an MSNBC analysis of a Barack Obama promise,  Koresh’s group engaged in some pretty terrible practices.

I say all this because I don’t want to be accused of having some sense of Christian solidarity with David Koresh.   I don’t.  But by all accounts, until the standoff, the Branch Davidians were relatively harmless.

The shoot-out that began the standoff was over a misdemeanor warrant that could have been served on Koresh on any day he was in town.   The ATF elected to serve the warrant at the compound because they wanted to get a look inside to confirm rumors they heard about the cult’s practices.

Among the facts that unfolded was the fact that the religious rights afforded the Branch Davidians under the 1st Amendment were shredded by the ATF assault that predicated the siege that resulted in the fire that claimed 77 lives — in the service of a Class C misdemeanor warrant.

(The maximum penalty for a Class C misdemeanor conviction in Texas is a fine not to exceed $500.00)

The subsequent Justice Department investigation was a whitewash — the government justified the initial ATF assault based on the Davidian’s cult practices, which were, for good or ill, protected by the 1st Amendment.

The Waco Siege came only a year after the violent confrontation between the Weaver family and federal agents that left Weaver’s wife and fourteen year old son dead.

(Fourteen year old Sam Weaver was shot in the back by a US marshal as he fled their assault.  Weaver’s wife was shot in the face by an FBI sniper while she stood in the doorway nursing their 18 month old daughter.)

Law enforcement officials justified sending six armed US marshals to assault and arrest Weaver based on a misdemeanor failure to appear warrant.  The surviving Weavers later sued for wrongful death. The government settled rather than risk going before a jury.

Assessment:

It was shortly after the Waco Siege that something called “the Patriot Movement” started appearing in the headlines.  The name was coined to link together various state ‘militias’ — a catch-all name carefully linked to white supremacist groups with ‘Christian’ sounding names.

Gradually, the media and the Clinton administration started using the term ‘ patriot’ to describe the most outrageous fringe racial groups or religious cults they could find links to.

What caught my attention at the time wasn’t the fringe groups the government was highlighting so much as it was the way it demonized the concept of Constitutional patriotism. 

In April 1995 I was producing a three-part series for “This Week In Bible Prophecy” under the title, “If You’re Not Paranoid, It’s Because You’re Not Paying Attention.” 

The main argument we were advancing was that the so-called patriot movement had a point that the government failed to address — the Clinton administration trumped-up charges to justify military style assaults on two different occasions because it didn’t agree with either group’s religious beliefs.  

As I was interviewing Gary Kah for the third part of the series, the news flash came in that the Alfred P Murrah building in Oklahoma City was just blown up. The only two conspirators convicted of the crime both had ties to one of the various ‘patriot militias’ — and from that day forward, being labeled a ‘patriot’ is the equivalent to being a right wing extremist at best, and an incipient bomber at worst. 

(In any case, if the government ever labels you a ‘patriot’ it isn’t because you’re being considered for Grand Master of the 4th of July parade.  In fact, you won’t even have to read your mail — DHS will read it for you.)

A similar movement is beginning to come to the attention of the Obama administration.  Called the”Oath Keepers” they describe themselves as a “non-partisan” group of current and retired law enforcement and military personnel who vow to fulfill their oaths to the Constitution.

T
http://www.omegaletter.com/admin/tinymce/themes/advanced/langs/en.js
he group was founded by lawyer and former paratrooper Stewart Rhodes, who organized the group to prevent the government from using law enforcement and the military to impose a dictatorship in America. 

They promise to disobey orders they deem unlawful, including directives to disarm the American people and to blockade American cities to prevent them from being turned into ‘giant concentration camps.’ 

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a sort of ACLU for the NAACP, immediately began linking the Oath Keepers with Timothy McVeigh: 

In a July report titled “Return of the Militias,” the Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center singled out Oath Keepers as “a particularly worrisome example of the Patriot revival.”

“The Patriot movement, so named because its adherents believe the federal government has stepped on the constitutional ideals of the American Revolution, gained traction in the 1990s and has been closely linked to anti-government militia and white supremacist movements.”

“The movement is blamed for spawning Timothy McVeigh, who bombed a federal building in Oklahoma City in 1995, killing 168 people.” (Las Vegas Review Journal)

The founder of the group says he was motivated by the military using a small town in Iowa to train for dropping in by parachute and conducting door-to-door searches in Afghanistan and Iraq.  But it could also be used to declare martial law. 

According to the Southern Poverty Law Center, the militias are re-emerging partly because of racial animosity toward Obama.  Oath Keepers are now on the Law Center’s “Hate Watch” page. 

The Oath Keepers promise to keep their pledge, not by taking up arms against the government, but by refusing to turn them on their fellow citizens.   In the event they are ordered to violate their oath to defend the Constitution, they pledge to lay down their arms, not take them up. 

The government’s reaction to the Oath Keepers is to demonize them as racists, anti-government activists, and, worst of all,  patriots!  It’s the government that is paranoid — you can tell by how closely they are paying attention.  

What they are watching the closest is the thing that scares them the most.  

It isn’t al-Qaeda — they’ve practically surrendered there. It’s not Iran — we’re having tea with the Iranians this afternoon.   It isn’t the Russians or the Chinese or Venezuela and it certainly isn’t the Taliban.    

What scares the Department of Homeland Security the most. . .  are the dreaded American patriots.   That speaks volumes.  

“The wicked flee when no man pursueth: but the righteous are bold as a lion.” – Proverbs 28:1

Originally Published: October 19, 2009