The wonderful world of religious pluralism

I believe in freedom of religion but that doesn’t mean that I believe all religions or religious views are equal. In America the old pagan view of religious pluralism has become very popular, and since the government has inserted atheism as the default religion into the school system, we’ve seen a resurgence of a animistic view of forest management as well as a high minded lofty of view of all religions, It has become the height of bigotry to consider a religion to be false. Judaism had been around for well over 1200 years before Mohammad was born and Christianity for 600 years. Mohammad brought forth the Koran, some of which follows the Old Testament, but often what it says is closer to Jewish commentaries on the OT. Instead of the blessing going to Isaac of the Jewish people, he decided it went to Ishmael of the Arab tribes. And instead of Jesus dying on the cross for the sins of the world and resurrecting, Mohammad said Jesus simply appeared to die, but not really. Mohammad then picked up the sword and began to attack the Jewish and Christian people from whom he had borrowed his new form of theism. Naturally, many Jews and Christians find that to be a false religion. But the pluralistic view of religion and morals has such a grip on many Americans that no matter what the Islamic religion teaches or its people do, It’s impossible for them to draw such a conclusion, no matter how accurate it may be. After all, in an atheistic world, there can’t be a wrong or right religion. And thus there is no real evil in the world. I’m going to suggest that that view is in collision with reality. And we’re seeing the same results from governments which adopt that pluralistic view in foreign policy as we saw when the USFS adopted the animistic view of forest management. In the woods we see wasted timber profits, job loss, overgrowth, diseased and bug infested dying forests, and burned to a crisp forest land. In foreign policy we have witnessed Islamic implosion because we refuse to recognize and deal with a false and intimidating religion as it is. Instead of telling them what a wonderful religion they have as Obama did in Cairo, we should be telling them to pursue the original Jewish holy books and Christian New Testament, and consider following the original Jewish religion, or if they think the OT points to Jesus as the Jewish Messiah, than to follow Christ. But not to follow Marxist/atheism which has proven to be even bloodier than Islam, and not continue in Islam which has left them in darkness for centuries. We might consider returning to those roots ourselves if for no other reason that what were doing right now ain’t working.

Have a great day, and an even better Thanksgiving!

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The early southern Democratic interpretation of the Constitution and the founders, and Bernie Sander’s view

Were our founders racists?

“The inconsistency of the institution of domestic slavery with the principles of the Declaration of Independence was seen and lamented by all the southern patriots of the Revolution; by no one with deeper and more unalterable conviction than by the author of the Declaration himself.” John Quincy Adams, (1)

“I would most ardently wish to become a member of it [the anti-slavery society] and . . . I can safely promise them that neither my tongue, nor my pen, nor purse shall be wanting to promote the abolition of what to me appears so inconsistent with humanity and Christianity. . .” William Livingston, signer of the Constitution and Governor of New Jersey in letter to John Jay, the first Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court and President of the Continental Congress

Were the founders racists? “…since the founders almost to a man spoke openly against the slave trade and many were members of abolitionist societies, as well as actively petitioned England to stop sending African slaves to the colonies, and made other legislative efforts to end or limit the trade; they can hardly be called racists. In contrast, how many Democratic leaders have spoken out against the horrors of abortion? Or supported legislation against it or even to limit it?” Just as the arguments in favor of slavery and supporting abortion are almost identical, so is the pro-abortion stance of the Democratic Party in sync with its historical stance in favor of the institute of slavery over a hundred and fifty years ago.

However, Bernie Sanders in a recent speech at Liberty University made the outright claim, not merely a guarded accusation, that the early founders were racist and that the American nation was founded on racist principals.
In doing so he repeats the claims of early democratic defenders of the slave trade that since the constitution or its preamble had no direct mention or prohibition against slavery, the forefathers never mentioned it, and therefore must have supported it. The trouble is, the founders did mention it, often. In fact, in his first draft of the Declaration of Independence, Jefferson had a rant against slavery and the fact that the British and King George repeatedly knocked down every attempt the colonies made to knock down or limit the slave trade in their colonies. And that included Virginia. In his first draft Jefferson wrote;

“He [King George III] has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere. . . . Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or restrain this execrable commerce.” The Life and Selected Writings of Thomas Jefferson, Adrienne Koch and William Peden, eds. (New York: Random House, 1944)

Before American independence, Benjamin Franklin said;

“A disposition to abolish slavery prevails in North America, that many of Pennsylvanians have set their slaves at liberty, and that even the Virginia Assembly have petitioned the King for permission to make a law for preventing the importation of more into that colony. This request, however, will probably not be granted as their former laws of that kind have always been repealed” Benjamin Franklin, The Works of Benjamin Franklin, Jared Sparks, ed. (Boston: Tappan, Whittemore, and Mason, 1839), Vol. VIII, p. 42, to the Rev. Dean Woodward on April 10, 1773

Dozens of the signers of the Constitution were members of Abolitionist societies, hardly a racist stance. I mean, you wonder, do progressives like Sanders ever do their homework and question what they were taught in their liberal college educations? It appears they are incapable of independent thought or research. And Abe Lincoln and many others felt that the fact that the Declaration of Independence said all people were endowed by their Creator with “inalienable rights to life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness” excluded slave keeping from being a lawful enterprise. Same thing today, most democrats read the constitution and claim it gives no protection to the unborn because it never explicitly mentions or condemns abortion…Really?

So the Democratic Party has at least been consistent in how most of them interpret the bible and constitution, and obviously how you interpret scripture and what you believe about where we came from, does matter. But since the founders almost to a man spoke openly against the slave trade and were members of abolitionist societies, as well as actively petitioned England to stop sending African slaves to the colonies and made other legislative efforts to end the trade; they can hardly be called racists. Again I ask how many Democratic leaders have spoken out against abortion or showed concern for the rights of unborn human babies? Or supported legislation against it or even to limit it? Bernie Sanders is just following the track of previous socialists in criticizing the pre-existing government of a nation and its founders. Socialists did the same thing in Russia and China and a half a dozen other nations. Some of the criticisms may have been accurate, but take a good look at what followed; in Russia they got rid of a czar and they put in Stalin, in China they overthrew Chinese warlords and put Mao in place. Not a big step for individual freedom or economic prosperity. And religious liberty and freedom of thought were crushed. Sanders is free to rant but he should at least make some effort to refrain from outright misrepresentation of his target. But what do you expect from an old white socialist?

“This however has been known to be the great temper of mankind, that they have accordingly labored in all ages, to wrest from the populace the knowledge of their rights… I say rights, for such they have, undoubtedly, antecedent to all earthly government; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe.”
John Adams, The Works of John Adams, Charles Francis Adams, editor (Boston: Charles C. Little and James Brown, 1851), Vol. III, p. 449, “A Dissertation on the Canon and Feudal Law.”

1) An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport, at Their Request, on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1837 (Newburyport: Charles Whipple, 1837), p. 50

A far more comprehensive article can be found in issues and articles, the slave trade and the founders, at or com. I’ll post the link when I’m in town. Well worth the read

If the link doesn’t work just type in The Bible, Slavery, and America’s Founders in the search bar in the issues and articles area

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

“If it feels good; do it” The Original argument for our Modern Apostasy

Below are two concepts of liberty, one from one of our Puritan founders, and the other a motto from our sixites enlightenment. The first is by John Winthrop;

“There is a twofold liberty, natural (I mean as our nature is now corrupt) and civil or federal. The first is held in common by man with the beasts and other creatures. By this, man, as he stands in relation to other men, has liberty to do what he wants; it is a liberty to do evil or good. This liberty is incompatible with and inconsistent with authority and cannot endure the least restraint of the most just authority. The exercise and maintenance of this liberty makes men grow more evil, and in time to be worse than brute beasts…This is that great enemy of truth and peace…which all the ordinances of God are bent against, to restrain and subdue it.
The other kind of liberty, the kind I call civil or federal, may also be termed moral, in reference to the covenant between God and man, in the moral law, and in the public covenants and constitutions among men. This liberty is the proper purpose and object of authority, and cannot subsist without it, and is a liberty to do that which is good, just and honest. This liberty you are to stand by, and be willing to hazard for not only your goods, but your lives, if need be. Whatever crosses this is not Authority, but a distemper of it. This liberty is maintained and exercised by way of submission to authority, and it is the same kind of liberty where with Christ has made us free.” Winthrop, John, in Cotton Mather’s Magnalia Christi American, vol. II, p. 13

The second, the ruling philosophy of modern enlightened America;
“If it feels. good, do it!”

Don’t let the blathering academic fool you, that is right where we are at. The newpapers were headlined with the “God is Dead’ line and all hedonism broke out. Since then they have contrived dozens of nuanced reasons to support the shift we made as a society. Slight difference between the two. One philosphy created the most successful and safest society on earth. The other tore it down.

Have a great day

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Strike 3 for US supreme court

Well, we have gotten there; we have arrived at the culture described in Paul’s book of Romans, his human sociology or anthropology 101. We have rejected the standards of the ultimate authority and replaced them with our own, based on the belief that there isn’t any ultimate authority, thus no absolute standards beyond our own making. Starting in 1963 our government ruled out the exercise of prayer in our schools, in 1973 it violated the right to life of unborn humans, and even those that survive the abortion. Today our supreme court gave our nation’s official approval to the practice of sodomy, a name itself derived from the history of Sodom and Gomorrah. And it did this despite the fact that 50% of the men who practice sodomy will be infected by HIV before they are 50. On the bright side it did this despite the fact that many states by popular vote had decided not to give their sanction to the practice of same-sex behavior through marriage. None the less these votes have been over-ruled. A sad day for a nation founded by Puritans who left England because of the decadent behavior there, to found a society that would conform itself to an authority greater than themselves- that of our Creator. However- as Oliver Cromwell said, and whose words are engraved on his tomb- “Christ not man is King.” The world was created, it didn’t form itself and the universe’s Creator is still on his throne.

Romans ch.1

” Paul, a bond-servant of Christ Jesus, called as an apostle, set apart for the gospel of God, 2 which He promised beforehand through His prophets in the holy Scriptures, 3 concerning His Son, who was born of a descendant of David according to the flesh, 4 who was declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord,..For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. 21 For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened. 22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures.
24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever . Amen.
26 For this reason God gave them over to degrading passions; for their women exchanged the natural function for that which is unnatural , 27 and in the same way also the men abandoned the natural function of the woman and burned in their desire toward one another, men with men committing indecent acts and receiving in their own persons the due penalty of their error. And just as they did not see fit to acknowledge God any longer, God gave them over to a depraved mind, to do those things which are not proper, 29 being filled with all unrighteousness, wickedness, greed, evil; full of envy, murder, strife, deceit, malice; they are gossips, 30 slanderers, haters of God, insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, 31 without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful; 32 and although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Short Excerpt of An Oration Delivered Before the Inhabitants of the Town of Newburyport, at their request, on the Sixty-First Anniversary of the Declaration of Independence, July 4th, 1837. By John Quincy Adams

” The Declaration of Independence cast off all the shackles of this dependency. The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent Nation of Christians, recognizing the general principles of the European law of nations.”

“…Thirdly, the Declaration of Independence announced the One People, assuming their station among the powers of the earth, as a civilized, religious, and Christian People, – acknowledging themselves bound by the obligations, and claiming the rights, to which they were entitled by the laws of Nature and of Nature’s God.

They had formed a subordinate portion of an European Christian nation, in the condition of Colonies. The laws of social intercourse between sovereign communities constitute the laws of nations, all derived from three sources: – the laws of nature, or in other words the dictates of justice; usages, sanctioned by custom; and treaties, or national covenants. Superadded to these, the Christian nations, between themselves, admit, with various latitudes of interpretation, and little consistency of practice, the laws of humanity and mutual benevolence taught in the gospel of Christ. The European Colonies in America had all been settled by Christian nations; and the first of them, settled before the reformation of Luther, had sought their justification for taking possession of lands inhabited by men of another race, in a grant of authority from the successor of Saint Peter at Rome, for converting the natives of the country to the Christian code of religion and morals. After the reformation, the kings of England, substituting themselves in the place of the Roman Pontiff, as heads of the Church, granted charters for the same benevolent purposes; and as these colonial establishments successively arose, worldly purposes, the spirit of adventure, and religious persecution took their place, together with the conversion of the heathen, among the motives for the European establishments in this Western Hemisphere. Hence had arisen among the colonizing nations, a customary law, under which the commerce of all colonial settlements was confined exclusively to the metropolis or mother country. The Declaration of Independence cast off all the shackles of this dependency. The United States of America were no longer Colonies. They were an independent Nation of Christians, recognizing the general principles of the European law of nations.”…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | 2 Comments

Obama; the Moral relativist vs the Jewish Creator

“I can’t imagine my god would allow some little Hindu kid in India who never interacts with the Christian faith to somehow burn for all eternity…”Barack Obama: The 2004 “God Factor” Interview Transcript

It’s true that it certainly took some courage to speak on this subject as a person seeking political office. And it’s also true that the majority of politicians avoid speaking on unpopular biblical teachings like eternal punishment, not so much because they want to be vague, but because they are wary of directly attacking the straight forward teachings of the bible and Jesus himself, which are the basis of the Christian faith. The faith which itself was the basis for the formation of the nation. Thus many presidents, no matter what doubts or antagonism they had about scripture, felt that an attack on the scriptures would weaken the nation’s moral structure. Others, though not professing Christians per se, still had an instinctive fear of offending the deity and so were reluctant to hold forth. The interesting thing about Barack Obama is, he has professed his “Christian faith” more often than many modern presidents, and plays his personal savior card often, and yet unlike his predecessors, he has openly scoffed at the biblical Jesus on more issues than all previous presidents combined. Which is odd, if he actually believes that Jesus is the creator incarnate. In an earlier post we mentioned his insistence that “there are many paths” to heaven, once again ignoring the teachings of Jesus in Matthew 7:14; “Enter ye at the narrow gate, for wide is the gate and broad is the way that leads to destruction,” among many other verses.

But in all fairness, his talk of many paths to heaven, and the taking on of a more popular, broad and liberal attitude towards religion and mankind in general is nothing more than repeating the secular relativism which is taught on ten thousand college campuses across this country. However, the popularity of a view doesn’t guarantee its accuracy and we really can’t expect secular atheists to espouse a faith in eternal punishment. As we pointed out in a previous post, the idea that all religions are somehow equal is bizarre if just a little research is done, and as the president has proven to be more than a little incompetent in his treatment of history, he fails completely as a theologian.

His attack on Scripture and thus Scripture’s God is nothing new; he simply accuses God of being guilty of sending innocent people to unending fiery deaths in the lake of fire; and he reasons, if that is true, this god, the god of the bible, must be an unjust god and therefore not worthy of his title. However, in Revelation 20:13 it says; “The sea gave up the dead that were in it, and death and Hades gave up the dead that were in them, and each person was judged according to what they had done.” Again; “All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left,” Matthew 25:32, 33.   And in Revelation 21 it says;

“He will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death’ or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away… But the cowardly, the unbelieving, the vile, the murderers, the sexually immoral, those who practice magic arts, the idolaters and all liars—they will be consigned to the fiery lake of burning sulfur. This is the second death.”

No mention of innocent children there. The bible carefully avoids saying all babies go to heaven; can you imagine how that might work out in a world awash in abortion and infanticide? Ever looked at the stats of how many girl babies and others are killed in China and India alone? And in America abortions take place most often to remove the responsibility of the sexual union between those who view it as a mere vehicle for their own pleasure. In 2 Samuel 12:15-22 the story of David’s first born to Bathsheba is told. While the baby lingered between life and death David fasted and prayed, while lying upon the ground. But when the baby died David rose up and ate. When his servants asked him about his behavior, he said, “…he cannot come to me, but I shall go to him.” It appears that God accepts babies and doesn’t cast them into lakes of burning fire.

Both these verses on judgement, as countless others in scripture, talk of people being judged for what they have done. It’s just possible that the Creator of the universe knows more about judgement than we do.

Also, in the quote above Obama indicates he thinks that all religions and all cultures are somehow equal and innocent, no matter what their behavior, if they haven’t been handed a bible tract or been evangelized by a Christian missionary (which might explain why he is against evangelism). But Romans Ch.1, and indeed the entire history of the bible indicates that the knowledge of God is easily obtainable from nature itself, that all mankind came off of the ark ( as thousands of flood stories all over the world imply) and indeed, His basic moral laws are imbedded in their consciences’. The bible clearly indicates that contrary to popular thinking, men are not earnestly seeking the knowledge of God, but in reality are running from god. In fact, men are actually deliberately suppressing the truth of god. In such a world, innocent children don’t stay innocent very long. So biblically, the world is not the nice, neutral place that Obama and the relativists make it out to be. And even in the church there is a long history of replacing scriptural standards with interpretations that are more accommodating to us and our culture. Man is running from God.

And God does not view mankind as we do. In five thousand years of recorded history we see constant war, long histories of human sacrifice, infanticide, a total disregard for God’s strict but protective sexual standards, adultery, promiscuity, rape and the resultant diseases, the mistreatment of women, men, children and various races, and God must look upon every single abortion, act of infidelity, every work of pornography, etc. without end. And perhaps just as bad, are the scores of people who see themselves as unworthy of hell. Because they have rejected God’s standards, or have readjusted them to fit their own ideas or ethics, they are more self-pious than the most self-righteous Pharisee; being absolutely politically or culturally correct in every area; in their own eyes they are beyond reproach. But God has different standards, and if Christians can ignore the scriptures and the working of the Holy Spirit upon their consciences, how much more a hardened atheist who has tuned himself to every to every whim of his “enlightened” culture?

God does not see us as we see ourselves; He sees the reality we are so good at ignoring. We love to stand up in a classroom and say, “I would never judge a homosexual couple who are in love” God might ask, “Why not? You might save one or both of them from an early death from HIV. You might save his temporal life as well as his eternal.” But in doing so, you also place yourself at risk. It’s easier to play the chameleon game with the culture, than become a martyr. But remember, the lake of fire is full of the cowardly and the faithless; at least those that are outside of Christ and not hiding themselves in his mercy.

And the president belongs to a political party that has promoted the death of millions of babies in saline bath abortions and even endorsed post birth infanticide for those who survive the burning baths. A party that targets its enemies with the IRS, FBI, OSHA, ATF, FEC and almost every supposedly non-partisan government agency under his authority. As acting president he appears to have deliberately repeated many false statements, easily proven to be false, so it’s understandable why he would look askance on a lake of fire for all those who have grown comfortable at toying with the truth for their own ends.

Maybe God is evil, but I don’t think so. If he is evil we are in a world of trouble. But I have noticed that atheists and those like the president who hold atheist worldviews, seem to have no trouble following lesser gods. Having rejected the God of Scripture they have scrabbled behind human leaders who were beyond all doubt guilty of the most heinous crimes, tyrants like Stalin, Mao, Hitler and a dozen other ruthless atheist leaders.

But despite the claims of these lesser gods and their followers, the God of the bible is not a liar and he is not evil and is not a destroyer of innocent human babies; and a wealth of evidence exists that asserts both his goodness and that He is still on His throne. Obama may condemn innocent babies to saline baths and strip them of their humanity and thus their human rights with an appalling and arrogant ease, but God won’t. He is just and righteous. Don’t believe that? Well, you’ll just have to wait and see. The verdict on Obama is in- the verdict on the God of the bible, though he stands condemned by many, is still out. But it’s coming.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments

Obama’s god

Christ, not man, is King (from the grave of Oliver Cromwell at Westminster)

“What is sin?” Obama’s response? “Being out of alignment with my values.”

In an interview Obama gave back in a 2004, when asked, “What is sin?” Obama’s response? “Being out of alignment with my values.” Obama goes on to say: “So, I have a deep faith. So I draw from the Christian faith. On the other hand, I was born in Hawaii where already there are a lot of Eastern influences…And I’d say, probably I’ve drawn as much from Judaism as any other faith…So I’m rooted in the Christian tradition. I believe that there are many paths to the same place, and that is a belief that there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people”

When Christ came to earth in roughly 3 AD, the Hindus and many African tribes were burning their wives in their husband’s funeral pyres, in Gaul and Britain they had a vague memory of the creator and an active flood story, but they were sacrificing people to Satan and the druids were burning victims by the carload to get their way with the deities. In Central America they were sacrificing virgins routinely. in North America the people had a much stronger memory of the Creator, so they had less human sacrifice, but they had horrendous torture cults and still served multiple other deities. In Rome the emperor was worshiped as god. Which ones of these religions would president Obama have us believe were one of the many path ways to heaven?

So who is Obama’s god, his higher power? Outside of himself? None. He can pick and choose values and religious authority as the situation demands. Put all the religions in the blender and, Voila! They’re all the same. Obama will explain to you what’s right or wrong, no need to worry yourself over the source or details. His attitude of course is nothing new, I heard the same thing from hippies sitting around the fire smoking pot, “it’s all relative man…”, and from college professors constantly undermining the authority of scripture by claiming the “obvious” plurality of religion, by which they mean that all religions are equal, except of course, atheism.

We’ve come a long way, from this;

“The fundamental idea of Puritanism…was the supreme authority of the Scriptures brought to bear upon the conscience…the Puritan, whether narrow or broad, mistaken or enlightened, seemed to himself at least to be aiming not at singularity (uniqueness) but at obedience to that higher spiritual order prevailing in the Universe, which he recognized as being the mind of God, and therefore of more authority than the mere…requirements of man.”

quotes from

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment