Dr. Frederick Meekins's Posts - 12160 Social Network2024-03-29T00:46:42ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekinshttps://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1961417832?profile=RESIZE_48X48&width=48&height=48&crop=1%3A1https://12160.info/profiles/blog/feed?user=1pjd43p27fzs8&xn_auth=noHit & Run Commentary #137tag:12160.info,2022-07-01:2649739:BlogPost:22124902022-07-01T22:13:03.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A poll finds that 56% of Americans believe that the country is racist. Of Whites believing this, an additional poll should be taken to determine what number of these are willing to surrender their property, position, or profession to a minority having accomplished nothing more than having been born a minority.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Covid Liability Shield. That sounds like if you are mangled by a Plague cult elixir that you are not going…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A poll finds that 56% of Americans believe that the country is racist. Of Whites believing this, an additional poll should be taken to determine what number of these are willing to surrender their property, position, or profession to a minority having accomplished nothing more than having been born a minority.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Covid Liability Shield. That sounds like if you are mangled by a Plague cult elixir that you are not going to get a single cent.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Fraulein Bowser has decreed those traveling to and from the occupied capital territory must quarantine for 14 days. However, those doing so on essential business are not required to do so. It is claimed that regimes only impose plague edicts on the basis of science. As such, can it be explained how a non-sentient microbe is able to make a determination as to the nature of the ingress and egress related to a designed jurisdiction?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The Tea Party movement actually did consist of mothers, veterans, and grandparents. That didn't stop Congressional Democrats from badmouthing them up one side and down the other despite those particular activists not destroying a single piece of property.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">We were told we must believe the allegations against Judge Kavanaugh because of the reliability of FBI statistics. As such, does that mean we should believe the FBI regarding Communist infiltration of the Civil Rights and Anti-war movements in the 1960's?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Fascinating the ones jacked out of shape that Trump might deliver his nomination oration from the White House on the grounds that such would possibly be illegal, unethical, and dishonor the solemnity of “the People’s House” don’t seem to have much of a problem with mobs unilaterally tearing down statues, setting buildings ablaze, and looting retailers.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So if those holding parties can be subjected to having their utilities turned off, why shouldn’t those at this time not paying their rent or mortgages be evicted?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The purpose of the mainstream media is apparently not so much about conveying information but about directing the receivers of such messages towards a predetermined conclusion. For example, one regularly sees headlines about Coronavirus skeptics or those openly flouting the restrictions surrounding such contracting the Plague. So where are the headlines detailing the plight of those that rigorously abide by all of the guidelines promulgated by the regime but still nevertheless find themselves stricken? For if these restrictions have been handed down by the high priests of deified science as the assured way to survive this microbial onslaught, isn’t that more of an example of the proverbial man bites dog than someone sickened by deliberative carelessness?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">New York City has established checkpoints to force outsiders to quarantine for two weeks or to face fines of up to $10,000. So why is it acceptable to establish a perimeter surveillance largely based upon arbitrary executive fiat tracking actual Americans within their own country but an atrocity on the level of a war crime to enforce actual law at an international border or to build a wall there to facilitate the efficient implementation of such statutes?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In regards to a looming Cornoavirus vaccine, Fox News broadcaster Brian Kilmeade intoned that Americans just ought to go ahead and take the inoculation as soon as it is available. Does he intend to provide for the long term care of those permanently disabled as a result of an adverse reaction?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For daring to question the orthodoxy of the Plague Cult, Dr. Stella Immanuel is being discredited because of her unconventional beliefs regarding the implications of non-human intelligences. By such reasoning, does it then follow that Americans should refuse to go to a doctor of a Hindu background because of that religion’s tendency to ultimately deny the existence of differentiated physical reality?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In response to the destructive explosion in Beruit killing many and leaving even more homeless, foreign aide is being considered. But given the precarious state in which America finds itself, where exactly is this money supposed to come from? Just how much more will be seized from the taxpayer in the coming years to provide for a population that would just as easily like to see the United States brought to ruination or even destroyed?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Interesting that the one's condemning federal intervention to quell insurrections abetted by local authorities are now demanding a nationwide mask mandate.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So who exactly would impose a Biden national mask mandate? Wasn't it established in the case of Sheriff Joe Arpiao that it is constitutionally illegitimate and impermissible for local authorities to enforce federal laws, regulations or whatever one wants to call statutorily dubious decrees?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Interesting in their condemnation of "being pitted against one another", these Democratic ideologues aren't saying a tinkers flip about the violent insurrection looting and destroying property throughout America's cities.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Bloomberg says his favorite book as a child was “Johnny Tremain”. So that means he would view as heroic those that joined a guerilla war against the Biden regime?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Joe Biden says Trump is too angry. Unlike those the Democrats are unwilling to condemn, Trump did not loot property in American cities nor kick a motorist in the head.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Biden praising FDR for the New Deal. Some might argue that was when collectivist statism went full throttle.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Biden mentioning climate change. Interesting he didn’t mind orchestrating deals where his dimwit son Hunter earned a fortune from Ukrainian and Red Chinese fossil fuel companies.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Biden tossing a fit over the spread of Plague under Trump. Would have been worse had borders remained open to the extent Biden was calling for.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">“Generously strong.” That means seizing your funds and sending them overseas.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>The Study Of The History Of The End Of The World, Part 3tag:12160.info,2022-07-01:2649739:BlogPost:22126702022-07-01T22:12:07.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">With Augustinian theology elevated to the status of the defacto official position of the Roman Catholic Church, eschatology was downplayed in terms of an emphasized doctrine. However, that did not necessarily mean that assorted undershepherds followed this example dutifully. Rather, a number of subtle errors were introduced over the decades and centuries often from non-Biblical sources that not only undermined the credibility of the Christian faith but also…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">With Augustinian theology elevated to the status of the defacto official position of the Roman Catholic Church, eschatology was downplayed in terms of an emphasized doctrine. However, that did not necessarily mean that assorted undershepherds followed this example dutifully. Rather, a number of subtle errors were introduced over the decades and centuries often from non-Biblical sources that not only undermined the credibility of the Christian faith but also resulted in a degree of social confusion and even upheaval.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In popular consciousness, it is often assumed that what could be referred to as millennial madness began to pick up steam as the year 1000 approached. However, in the chapter titled “The Slumbering Apocalypse: Medieval Christianity”, Kyle argues that apocalyptic movements at this time were not so much tied to a pending date but rather often reflected concerns regarding invasions on the part of Huns, Magyars, and Muslims. Kyle writes, “...generations of medieval historians have examined a broader range of evidence. They concede that for decades before and after the year 1000, ordinary believers and some clergy feared the rise of the Antichrist. Still, there is no evidence that concerns about the Antichrist and the end time greatly increased at the time (45).” There certainly was not anything approaching the level of a mass panic. Kyle points out significant numbers of Europeans might not have even been aware of what year that it was in the same sense as a particular numerical chronology now pervades contemporary existence.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Most medieval millennial madness did not transpire actually until after the year 1100, well after the turn of a new millennium. A case could be made this came about as a result of concerns regarding the expansion of Islam at the time of the Crusades. On a cautionary note, it must also be observed that popular End Times thinking during the Middle Ages often incorporated aspects found nowhere in the pages of Scripture. The most prominent of these ideas could be traced back to a series of works referred to as <i>The Sibyline Oracles</i>.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In particular, <i>The Sibyline Oracles</i> foretold of a Christian emperor that would fight against the Antichrist in the final days (Kirsch, 154). Initially, it was predicted that this beneficent ruler would likely be Constantine. As time passed, other thinkers put forward their own contenders as to the identity of this utopian deliverer who could just as easily have been the Antichrist duping those having set aside their discernment to embrace this sort of speculation in the first place. Interestingly, Geoffrey of Monmouth in the History Of The Kings Of Britain through the literary device of Merlin (an individual fathered by an incubus to a human mother and who was not even considered a Christian in the first place) even convinced a number to believe that this king returning to usher in the Second Advent would be King Arthur himself.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The figure to really spark interest in the Apocalypse across medieval Europe was Joachim of Fiore. This Sicilian Cistercian formulated a philosophy of history based upon the Trinity, with time divided into three epochs each symbolizing a specific member of the triune Godhead. The Age of the Father spanned from the time of creation to the time of Christ. The Age of the Son began with the time of Christ up until Joachim's day. The Age of the Spirit would ultimately be a time of peace and spiritual renewal but would come about gradually, commencing with the establishment of monasticism commencing with Benedict of Narissa (Thompson, 65). The Second Age according to Joachim would end with the defeat of the Antichrist.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Of Joachim, Kyle writes, “Joachim was neither a revolutionary nor a millennialist in any strict sense...He envisioned a reformed and purified Christendom as the goal of this evolutionary process (48-49).” Joachim might have been willing for events to unfold at their own providential pace. However, others of a similar perspective did not necessarily possess the same degree of patience to simply observe the grand historical drama in reflective contemplation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Franciscans in particular found themselves drawn to Joachim's speculations, seeing themselves as the new breed of spiritual men that he had foretold. When the apocalypse predicted in 1260 calculated using Joachim's formula of forty-two generations from Adam to Christ did not transpire, Franciscans divided in part over the accuracy of this interpretative eschatological model. Those known as the Franciscan Spirituals dug in deeper, turning to mysticism and openly condemning as the Antichrist the popes that opposed them. Despite the attempts of the Papacy to eliminate the Franciscan Spirituals, their ideas lived on in the Beguines, the Beghards, and the Fraticelli (Kirsch, 146-149).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It is one thing for apocalyptic speculation to result in heated rhetoric strongly critiquing the established order. The concern rises to the next level when these ideas begin to manifest themselves in the form of physical violence. With the end expected by 1260, the famine and plague that erupted a couple of years prior to that date in Italy sparked a movement in anticipation in which a number of Joachimites took part that came to be known as the flagellants. The flagellants hoped to win divine favor before the pending judgment by beating themselves in imitation of the sufferings of Christ.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Another sect inspired by apocalyptic thinking that turned to violence were a faction of Hussites known as the Taborites. Jan Hus was a professor at the University of Prague that grew increasingly critical of the establishment church over time to the point that he eventually condemned the Pope as the Antichrist. The martyrdom of Hus only galvanized his followers into adopting an ideology far more radicalized than anything he had ever professed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Unlike the Hussites that despite their disagreement with the Church did not break with it or call for substantial social change, the Taborites started with the assumption that nothing in religion was to be considered true unless it could be found in the Bible. The group turned to violent revolution after the end members expected in 1420 did not materialize, prompting them to go on the offensive against those the sect deemed the enemies of God. A break away group from the Taborites known as the Adamites believed that they were living in the Millennium and as innocent as Adam and Eve. As such, members cavorted about buck naked and, yet still possessing a sin nature, fell into promiscuity as they conveniently believed all of the men owned all of the women (Kyle, 254).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Frederick Meekins</span> <br/><span class="normal" style="font-size: 14pt;"><a target="newwin" href="http://issacharbiblechurch.blogspot.com/">Is</a></span></p>
<hr width="100%" size="1" noshade="noshade"/><p><span class="normal" style="font-size: 14pt;"><i>Notes: </i></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Abanes, Richard. <i>End-Times Visions: The Doomsday Obsession</i>. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman and Holman Publishers, 1988.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Kirsch, Jonathan. <i>A History Of The End Of The World: How The Most Controversial Book In The Bible Changed The Course Of Western Civilization</i>. San Francisco, California: Harper Collins Publishers, 2006.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Kagan, Donald, Ozment, Steven and Turner, Frank. <i>The Western Heritage Since 1789 (Fourth Edition</i>). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1991.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Kyle, Richard. <i>The Last Days Are Here Again: A History Of The End Times</i>. Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Books, 1988. Hanover, New Hampshire: University Press of New England, 1996.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Ladd, George. <i>The Blessed Hope: A Biblical Study of The Second Advent and The Rapture</i>. Grand Rapids, Michigan: WM. B. Eerdmans Publishing, 1956.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Thompson, Damian. <i>The End Of Time: Faith and Fear in the Shadow of the Millennium</i>.</span></p>
<p></p>Scanners Set To Discernment: Highlight History Of The Contemporary UFO Phenomenatag:12160.info,2021-11-18:2649739:BlogPost:21778202021-11-18T00:01:53.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">When Christians approach the contemporary UFO and extraterrestrial phenomena, they would be best advised to keep two things in mind that are distinct yet interrelated. Firstly, irrespective of whether UFO's exist or not as an objective or verifiable phenomena, they do in terms of the minds of those that believe in them and draw from them an inspiration as a mechanism for understanding man's place in the broader universe. Secondly, if what those claiming to have…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">When Christians approach the contemporary UFO and extraterrestrial phenomena, they would be best advised to keep two things in mind that are distinct yet interrelated. Firstly, irrespective of whether UFO's exist or not as an objective or verifiable phenomena, they do in terms of the minds of those that believe in them and draw from them an inspiration as a mechanism for understanding man's place in the broader universe. Secondly, if what those claiming to have contact with does indeed have an existence apart from the internalized structures of perception and belief of those advocating the actuality of such beings, the Christian needs to provide some kind of explanation for them as well in terms of this faith's own comprehensive worldview if Christianity wishes to retain a place of socio-cultural credibility rather than to be regarded as a philosophical relic of the left behind past. The church cannot afford to ignore this issue as today we are already living with the consequences and repercussions of other issues that were allowed to fester by being ignored rather than grappled with head on.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Within their respective contexts, all religions and systems of belief posses at their core a mythology or historical events that the adherents hold to be true and around which subsequent doctrines are derived from or inspired by. For example, Christians view the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Jesus as the seminal event of their faith. Muslims trace the founding of their religion back to the revelation of the Koran to their prophet Muhammad. Likewise, though they may differ ultimately as to other details and implications (as could be said of any belief system with competing schools of thought and denominations), even casual observers of ufology and UFO movements know of certain key events sparking interest in the question of life from beyond the Earth and its repercussions for man’s place in the larger universe.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One of what is now one of the most prominent events looked to by even the most casual of ufological enthusiasts is the incident claimed to have occurred in Roswell, New Mexcio in July 1947. At that time, the military observed on radar over the course of several days an unidentified flying object. Following a thunderstorm, area rancher Mack Brazel went to check his holdings. During the survey, Brazel discovered a unique variety of metallic debris scattered across a sizable area and a trench several hundred feet in length gouged into the earth as if by some manner of impact.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Brazel talked over what he had seen with his neighbors, the Proctors, who suggested that he might have discovered a crashed UFO or a downed government project. As a result of this discussion, Brazel went into town to notify the sheriff. The sheriff in turn reported the incident to military intelligence officer Jesse Marcel.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It is unlikely public interest in this account and speculation about it would have continued to increase to this very day if not for a variety of circumstances surrounding the incident. On July 8, 1947, a press release was issued by the Public Information Office under the orders of the 509th Bomb Group at Roswell that the wreckage of a cashed disk had been retrieved. A second press release was issued the next day that the mysterious debris was actually nothing more than that of a weather balloon.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, as the years went by, those whose curiosity was roused by the incident could not let it rest as a case of the imagination initially getting ahead of the calmer, more rational explanation of what might have happened. There were simply too many circumstances surrounding the event that later bubbled into public view because those involved did not feel comfortable or even safe in revealing until the passage of time and a number of those involved were themselves nearing the point when they, shall we say, were about ready to leave this planet.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Even if nothing happened any more exotic or of cosmic ramification than the official explanation of a downed weather balloon, the way in which the government is accused of handling the situation must bear some of the responsibility for the legendary status this case has acquired. For example, mortician Glenn Dennis was contacted by base officials inquiring about obtaining small coffins. Upon taking these to the military hospital and visiting with a nurse on staff that he knew, Dennis claims he was threatened by military police and escorted from the premises. Even more disturbing, according to Dennis’ affidavit as posted online by the Burlington UFO & Paranormal Research Center, the nurse that is alleged to have drawn pictures of crash victims of a nonstandard human appearance was abruptly transferred to England a few days later.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">These two, however, were not the only ones to endure mistreatment less than forthright at the hands of those higher up the chain of command dealing with the aftermath of whatever it was that might have crashed. Brazel was escorted by military police to the offices of the <i>Roswell Daily Record</i> where he changed his story to that of having found the debris of a weather observation device earlier in June rather than during the period of July under question. It has been insinuated that, while in military custody for several days, Brazel was threatened with violence if he did not agree to alter his story.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In another intriguing incident, Major Marcel took along some of the debris to show General Ramey when he made his report to the Commanding Officer of the Eighth Air Force. Marcel placed the debris, which consisted of items such as shards of metal the thickness of tin foil and unbreakable I-beam structures that were three-eighths of an inch by one-fourth of an inch with indecipherable markings, on the General’s desk. To get a better idea of where the material had been gathered, Marcel and Ramey went to the map room down the hall. When the two returned, the contents Marcel had brought to show the general had already been taken and replaced by a weather balloon draped over the floor.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Though the Roswell incident may now be one of the public windows into the world of UFO’s and speculation into whether or not intelligent life other than and beyond our own might exist, it is by no means the only. In fact, if it was so, it might rather be an example of bureaucratic bungling rather than a conspiracy that has achieved interstellar proportions. However, it is because of the considerable number of occurrences transpiring around that time and ever since that has caused belief in the possibility of extraterrestrial life to grow from being a philosophical possibility embraced only by those of questionable mental stability or those educated beyond reasonable practicality into one of the common cultural assumptions at least assented to (not unlike belief in at least a nominal God) by overwhelming percentages of the population.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Synonymous with the term “UFO” or “unidentified flying object” is that of “flying saucer“. An interesting historical coincidence is that this particular way of categorizing this phenomena was coined nearly around the same time as the events at Roswell were transpiring.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The term was coined in reference to a sighting on June 24, 1947 when pilot Ken Arnold flying at 9200 feet spotted near Mt. Rainier, Washington a series of blue flashes, emanating from what he initially thought must have been a squadron of military fighter jets. However, thanks to his background in aviation, Arnold would conclude that the squadron was anything but conventional. He estimated that the craft were traveling well over 1500 miles per hour (Yenne, 27).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">After discussing the incident with friends in Yakima, by the time Arnold completed the next leg of his journey to Pendelton, Oregon, news of his encounter had spread so quickly that a throng of reporters had assembled to record Arnold’s account. When pressed for a description of what he had seen, Arnold replied that the objects looked "like a saucer would if you skipped it across the water (Larson, 26)." From there, the press shortened the phrase to "flying saucer", the description that has been with us ever since.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">These incidents no doubt rank among those that establish an awareness of UFO's in the mind of the general public. However, these merely represent the bubbling to the surface of a conceptual undercurrent that stretched back prior to those iconic incidents where man had to grapple with an understanding of the universe expanding as a result of advances in technology and where exactly he would look to provide context and meaning to this newly acquired awareness.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Skeptics might counter that, in a sense, people create their own reality. In this case, that would mean people encountered aliens because they wanted to or were at least suggestible to that possibility. One could not refute that in its entirety. For since at least the early 20th century, Americans have had a fascination with the possibility of extraterrestrial life that went beyond an afternoon's entertainment in the form of a movie, printed story, or broadcast drama. Even if most approached the topic with a rational maturity insisting that aliens were just creatures in comics and pulp magazines geared primarily towards children, there was one incident in particular where it was discovered that the clever in the media could prod the otherwise unsuspecting into becoming quite exercised as to the existence of life from beyond the Earth.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In 1938, Orson Welles staged a radio dramatization of the novel by H.G. Wells titled The <i>War Of The Worlds</i>. The story was adapted in the form of a news broadcast covering an alien invasion from Mars. Despite the proviso that the broadcast was a fictionalized dramatic presentation, a number either tuning in after the disclaimer or as a result of getting caught up in the compelling nature of the narrative were convinced that the Earth was actually under attack. A small-scale panic ensued. Some even barricaded themselves in their homes with guns drawn as a last line of defense to prevent any bug eyed monsters from inflicting harm.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Granted, the UFO phenomena has attracted considerable attention over the decades from those of questionable sanity or lacking in compliance to adherence to social norms and conformity. However, these incidents have also been witnessed and experienced by a number whose credentials and sobriety were beyond impeccability. Among these have ranked the frontline personnel of the United States armed forces. Before gaining the name that would make them a household word (“flying saucers”), UFO’s went by another moniker bestowed upon them by Allied pilots during World War II. Referred to as “foo fighters” by bomber crews, these mysterious lights would come startlingly close to the aircraft but were not necessarily thought to be any kind of ultrasecret German weapon since they never inflicted any harm (North, 294).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Though sightings would ebb and flow over time, they were more than a passing fad and would become a fixture of the public consciousness even if for a while on the periphery of respectability. Government authorities might have had a vested interest in publicly downplaying encounters with UFO’s. However, the institution charged with overseeing the nation’s safety would not have the opportunity to stick its head in the sand in the hopes that these objects would simply float away.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">When something unexplained happens in an out of the way place such as Roswell, New Mexico, the highly credentialed and esteemed in government office can cast aspersion and doubt on the credibility of those claiming to have witnessed such things. It is insinuated that, even if such individuals mean well, in terms of mental acuity and especially education such people do not necessarily make the most reliable of witnesses. However, it is much more difficult to level such allegations when these kinds of events literally take place on the doorstep and in the backyard (or at least over top of it) of some of the most powerful people in the country.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In July 1952 on two occasions that month, UFO’s entered Washington, DC airspace not far from and over the White House, Pentagon, and Capitol building. These objects were spotted on radar screens at both Washington National Airport and Andrews Air Force Base. These enigmas were estimated to be traveling at speeds of 100 to over 7,000 miles per hour, which, according to About.com UFO Guide Billy Booth, was beyond the technological capabilities of the time.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Such an objective threat to Washington DC and thus national security could not go unchallenged. A defensive response was required. Fighters were scrambled to investigate the objects. However, in a manner that almost seemed deliberately taunting if one were inclined to believe some kind of deliberative intelligence was behind the fast moving lights, the objects vanished from radar when approached by the jets only to reappear when the interceptors needed to return to base as a result of low fuel. The five disks departed by 5:30 AM.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Had that been the only incident, an official explanation of either meteorites or an atmospheric phenomena known as a temperature inversion where a denser layer of cold air becomes trapped under warmer air that bends radar waves capable of producing false images might have seemed plausible. However, the objects returned approximately a week later and were once again detected both visually and on radars at National Airport as well as Andrews Air Force Base. Once again, fighters were dispatched to investigate.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">During this encounter, however, the objects did not always uniformly flee from the jets giving chase. In one instance, a group of four turned and surrounded their pursuers in a gesture almost playfully flirtatious to convey how it felt to be the hunted rather than the hunter. The pilots’ pleas for instructions on how to handle this turn of events were met with silence on the part of the control tower. Fortunately, other than the likely need to change their underpants, no physical harm came to anyone involved as the lights then sped away.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The response of high government officials to this incident was classically textbook. To either calm public apprehension or lull the masses into a sense of complacency, the Air Force announced at a Pentagon press conference held July 29, 1952 that the sightings could be explained in terms of misidentified aerial phenomena such as shooting stars or temperature inversions causing false radar images. However, such a state of objective detachment hardly characterized the government’s response during the heat of the crisis. It has been claimed that the Truman White House was so worked up over the matter that pilots were ordered to shoot down any flying saucers that refused orders to land. Of this particular incident, Bill Yenne concludes in <i>UFO: Evaluating The Evidence</i>, “...the evidence shows that the Washington incidents are among the largest and strongest series of UFO sightings ever reported (80).”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Despite the credibility of a number of those coming forward with eyewitness reports, since these kinds of encounters run counter to what has been deemed normal particularly from a modernistic technocratic perspective, it can still be difficult to perceive of them as anything other than the flights of fancy or delusions of those deciding to step forward. If they were nothing more, then why has the federal government expended taxpayer resources on what could be called the “Extraterrestrial Question”?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One could argue that the extent of government involvement in extraterrestrial affairs is open to debate. Some that contend that the involvement is extensive probably could not legitimately verify their claims and it is not like the government would offer the kind of confirmation that would settle the issue once and for all. However, the researcher can utilize history as a guide as to what the government might be doing today.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Project Blue Book commenced in 1952 and ceased in 1970. The purpose of the program was to evaluate data collected regarding UFO's primarily for the purposes of determining whether these objects were a threat to national security. Of the over 12,000 reports collected by Project Blue Book, analysts concluded that the majority were misidentified aircraft or natural phenomena. However, nearly six percent of the total sightings defied explanation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Because the overwhelming majority of the cases investigated by Project Blue Book were resolved with perfectly terrestrial explanations, officials decreed that the program would officially conclude in January 1970. However, its findings issued in the Condon Report did not provide any explanation regarding the outstanding controversies. In fact, this division within the United States Air Force charged with shedding light on some of the most baffling mysteries of the twentieth century ended up raising a number of additional conundrums.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, it is argued that Project Blue Book did not so much simply gather intelligence dispassionately regarding UFO phenomena and issue a report with motivations primarily scientific in nature. Rather it has been accused that Blue Book was itself concealing evidence pertinent to any conclusion that would ultimately be reached. Granted, there has not yet been a decisive moment such as in the television series "V" where a number of alien craft appear overhead or land on the Mall in Washington DC with a little green man emerging and making the iconic request of "Take me to your leader." However, another kind of intervention might be of greater existential significance for the time being in the lives of those believing they have encountered non-human intelligences than the more traditional flying saucer described in classic UFO encounters. This is none other than the so-called "alien abductions".</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">More will be said about this phenomena in a later chapter since these traumatic encounters often play a significant role in shaping the worldviews of those whom perceived extraterrestrials hold a central place in their respective belief systems. However, in highlighting a number of iconic moments in this introductory chapter, attention for now will be focused on the case of Barney and Betty Hill. In 1961, married New Hampshire couple Betty and Barney Hill were on their way home from vacation in Canada. Both remember seeing a traveling light like a bright star that became progressively brighter as it hovered over the trees (Kettlekamp, 50).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Out of curiosity, the Hills parked to get a better look at the luminous anomaly, with Barney getting out of the vehicle for a closer examination with a pair of binoculars. Through the spyglasses, Mr. Hill ascertained what he perceived to be approximately five individuals walking around inside the object. As would be the reaction of most to such an encounter, Mr. Hill promptly returned to his vehicle in order to continue his journey home.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, that would not be the end of the Hills' encounter with the unexplained. As the couple proceeded down the highway, they heard noises similar to a tuning fork which caused them both to feel tingly and sleepy (Kettlekamp, 51). When the Hills emerged from their state of somnolent discombobulation, they were startled to discover that they were 35 miles farther south than when they had last noticed and could not account for the preceding two hours.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One might chalk up the entire episode to extreme fatigue and as a reason why to be extremely cautious about driving late at night when one is at less than one’s mental and physical optimum. However, it seemed the Hills were unable to shake off the effects of the experience or shrug it off as one of those life lessons learned. Both Barney and Betty were profoundly impacted. Barney developed a rash on his stomach and was plagued by chronic health problems following the incident. Betty was haunted thereafter by recurrent nightmares so intense that she eventually sought psychiatric counseling.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Evidence pointing towards an encounter went beyond symptoms that could possibly be explained as psychosomatic no matter how sincerely credible the Hills might have happened to be. Barney’s shoes were visibly scuffed. Even more bizarre, when a compass needle was placed over mysterious metallic spots in the trunk of their vehicle, the needle within the device would spin (Kettlekamp, 51). Unidentified objects were detected by the radar at Peasc Air Force Base around the time of the encounter as reported by the Hills.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, the Hills are remembered even more so for something that would add yet another level to the UFO phenomena, and in the minds of some shed light as to perhaps why these entities have allegedly traveled all the way to the planet earth as well as deepen that mystery all at the same time. Some insist that Barney and Betty Hill were abducted by non-human entities. Skeptics are often quick to conjecture that those claiming to have encounters --- especially to the point of claiming to be either victims of or in confederation with these beings from beyond the normal --- are desperately seeking attention. And that is certainly a concern to keep in mind. However, initially Barney and Betty Hill were not aware to the full extent of what may have taken place.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">As part of their therapeutic counseling, the Hills were separately placed under hypnosis. Their respective accounts, not given in the presence of or to the knowledge of the other, displayed a degree of similarity worthy of note. Not revealed previously, the Hills now insisted that, upon hearing the beeping tones, they were taken aboard the craft and each taken into a separate chamber. According to the account provided by the Hills, their abductors possessed a countenance eerily not quite human as the creatures lacked distinctive lips and seemed to communicate telepathically. The beings were particularly interested in the differences between Barney and Betty since they were an interracial couple and that Barney wore dentures while Betty’s teeth were natural.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Psychoanalysts and counselors might point out that the fact that these hypnotic trances brought out such details instead point to the stresses the Hills may have been under. For at that time such marriages were not that common and would be replete with a number of challenges that would be below the surface even if the love between the couple was strong enough to endure them. However, there was one aspect of what Betty recalled that would be difficult to fabricate or dissemble about.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">According to Betty, a needle was inserted into her naval as part of what her captors informed her was a pregnancy test. Today, such procedures are so commonplace that mention of them would not raise the eyebrows of a therapist transcribing this kind of testimony. However, Larry Kettlekamp points out in <i>UFO’s & ET’s: Are They Real?</i> that needle examinations like that described by Betty Hill were not conducted in 1961.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The chronicle detailed in this chapter should in no way be considered comprehensive. Rather, it has endeavored to list a number of highlights to suggest that accounts of contact with beings from beyond this earth or at least belief that one has had contact with beings from beyond this earth should not be dismissed outright as signs of questionable sanity. Those mentioned in these pages span the breadth of the ways of life found in contemporary America from the humblest of trailer park paupers all the way into the deepest corridors of power. In the chapters that follow, we will explore a number of belief systems that incorporate non-terrestrial intelligences as fundamental concepts into their perceptions of reality, how the concept of life from beyond the Earth is used to mold culture or society itself, and (most importantly) provide an Evangelical perspective to the perennial question if we human beings are alone in the cosmos.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Bibliography</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Booth, Billy. “1952: Washington DC Buzzed by UFO's.” About.com. 20 Oct. 2010.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Kettlekamp, Larry. <i>UFO's and ET's: Are They Real?</i>. New York: Harper Collins, 1996.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Larson, Bob. <i>UFO's And The Alien Agenda: Uncovering The Mystery Behind UFO's And The Paranormal</i>. Nashville: Tennessee: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1997.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">North, Gary. <i>Unholy Spirits: Occultism and New Age Humanism</i>. Fort Worth, Texas: Dominion Press, 1986.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Yenne, Bill. <i>UFO: Evaluating The Evidence.</i> New York: Gramercy Books, 2007.</span></p>
<p></p>Mohler Imposes Ethical Rigors God Does Nottag:12160.info,2021-09-18:2649739:BlogPost:21716042021-09-18T14:23:25.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">On the 10/2/14 episode of his Daily Briefing podcast, Albert Mohler began with the alert that marriage in America is in trouble.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But the theologian did not provide statistics regarding disturbingly high rates of divorce, shacking up, or out of wedlock births.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Instead he provided the number that 1 in 5 of adults over 25 had never been married.…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">On the 10/2/14 episode of his Daily Briefing podcast, Albert Mohler began with the alert that marriage in America is in trouble.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But the theologian did not provide statistics regarding disturbingly high rates of divorce, shacking up, or out of wedlock births.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Instead he provided the number that 1 in 5 of adults over 25 had never been married.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">That tells those contemplating such a naked statistic nothing necessarily regarding the moral status of those within that particular demographic under consideration.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Conservative Evangelicals such as Albert Mohler position themselves rhetorically that the Christian Bible is the only absolutely binding source of ethical authority.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Within the pages of the sacred text, both the benefits and drawbacks of both matrimonial states are detailed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The individual is free to select from these for themselves without it being accounted as sin against them.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Therefore, if sin is to be thought of as engaging in a practice either forbidden or not authorized by explicit divine command, by imposing his own preferences on the unmarried Christian, is now Mohler committing the more explicit sin by demanding something of the individual that even God Himself does not?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Conservative Protestants & Traditionalist Catholics Find Common Cause In Opposing Statist Tyrannytag:12160.info,2021-08-29:2649739:BlogPost:21698192021-08-29T01:42:31.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>An article published in the April 2012 issue of “In These Times” asks in its title “Will Catholic Bishops Be GOP Pawns?” and warns in the subtitle “The Church and Evangelicals are finding common ground”.</p>
<p>The author suggests that American Catholic leaders ought to concentrate more on promoting the cause of “economic justice” rather than upon so-called cultural issues that have been thrust to the forefront of the American civic dialog over the course of the past several decades dealing…</p>
<p>An article published in the April 2012 issue of “In These Times” asks in its title “Will Catholic Bishops Be GOP Pawns?” and warns in the subtitle “The Church and Evangelicals are finding common ground”.</p>
<p>The author suggests that American Catholic leaders ought to concentrate more on promoting the cause of “economic justice” rather than upon so-called cultural issues that have been thrust to the forefront of the American civic dialog over the course of the past several decades dealing with matters such as abortion and homosexuality.</p>
<p>But what the author fails to realize is that, in terms of Christian doctrine, the shared stance between conservative Evangelicals and traditionalist Catholics are more clearly spelled out in the pages of Scripture than something more nebulous such as “social or economic justice”.</p>
<p>For example, the Ten Commandments bluntly declare “Thou shalt not commit murder”. Murder is defined as the taking of an innocent human life.</p>
<p>Nefarious factions profiting from the practice, especially if they have seared their own consciences, might insist vociferously otherwise. But abortion is undeniably a form of murder.</p>
<p>Likewise, marriage is clearly defined in the pages of the Bible. The old adage derived from the Genesis account is that God did not make Adam and Steve, He made Adam and Eve.</p>
<p>Those preferring their Biblical exegesis with more of a distinction of solemnity are not left without textual support from the pages of Holy Writ. Mark 10:7-8 extols, “For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and the two will become one flesh.” Revelation does not say man and man or wife and wife.</p>
<p>If there are those that prefer living this way that want to go off and shack up together, that raises a whole other interpretative argument as to what good Christians ought to do if anything. However, those deliberately deciding to go off into such sin should not expect religious and social institutions to extend the same degree of cultural blessing as to those entering into sanctified matrimonial partnership. And this applies also to heterosexual couples living together without authorization of either clergy or state.</p>
<p>The issue of so-called economic and social justice is not quite as clear cut. It is pretty obvious whether or not an individual has been murdered and which relationships are not homosexual. However, there are various interpretations as to which policies will be the most effective at ameliorating the suffering of the poor.</p>
<p>It is not so much that American Protestants or Catholics of a more individualist or free market orientation want to increase the misery of the downtrodden or fail to comprehend the suffering that can be inflicted by excessively complicated institutions. It is precisely because religionists of a more distinctively Americanist perspective do understand profoundly threats posed by behemoth bureaucracies that those of such a worldview endeavor to limit power from whatever social sphere such intrusions might originate.</p>
<p>One aphorism, possibly attributable to Rush Limbaugh, posits that it is easy to be charitable with other people's money. While one may earn a good reputation for being concerned for the poor when calling for increased public spending, it isn't really going to crimp the lifestyle of elites calling for it if their taxes are increased should such policy proposals and rhetorical suggestions actually be put into practice.</p>
<p>Most levelheaded people, no doubt even a few American Roman Catholic bishops among them, have a hard time swallowing and complying with these exhortations to give more sacrificially when those higher up the ecclesiastical flow chart can't seem to keep straight the funds on the books of the Institute For The Works Of Religion also commonly referred to as the “Vatican Bank”. It has been argued that over $100 million has been embezzled from or laundered through the institution in a variety of scandals.</p>
<p>So should globalist planners --- both sacred or secular --- be successful in compelling regular people to surrender more of what we own, in all likelihood it will no more go to alleviate the suffering of the downtrodden than it already does.</p>
<p>There are certain universal truths that transcend traditional divisions within the broader Christian faith. Those redeemed by the Blood of the Lamb irrespective of on what side of this divide they stand must prioritize what transgressions of the moral law are more egregious than others.</p>
<p>By Frederick Meekins</p>Homeless Not Entitled To Home Ownershiptag:12160.info,2021-08-06:2649739:BlogPost:21672242021-08-06T13:45:08.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<div class="fauxcolumn-outer fauxcolumn-center-outer"><div class="cap-top"><div class="cap-right"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A social media meme insists, “In the U.S., vacant homes outnumber homeless people.”…</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="columns-inner"><div class="column-center-outer"><div class="column-center-inner"><div class="main section" id="main"><div class="widget Blog" id="Blog1"><div class="blog-posts hfeed"><div class="date-outer"><div class="date-posts"></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="fauxcolumn-outer fauxcolumn-center-outer"><div class="cap-top"><div class="cap-right"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A social media meme insists, “In the U.S., vacant homes outnumber homeless people.”</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="columns-inner"><div class="column-center-outer"><div class="column-center-inner"><div class="main section" id="main"><div class="widget Blog" id="Blog1"><div class="blog-posts hfeed"><div class="date-outer"><div class="date-posts"><div class="post-outer"><div class="post hentry uncustomized-post-template"><div class="post-body entry-content" id="post-body-561366254810152473"><div><div class="" dir="auto"><div class="ecm0bbzt hv4rvrfc e5nlhep0 dati1w0a" id="jsc_c_23"><div class="j83agx80 cbu4d94t ew0dbk1b irj2b8pg"><div class="qzhwtbm6 knvmm38d"><div class="kvgmc6g5 cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">And the point is? </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Shouldn't it also be asked why the person is homeless? </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A number of additional questions also need to be asked. </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, perhaps steps should be taken to assist the destitute in finding shelter. </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">However, does it therefore logically follow that they deserve to be given a home outright without having to earn it? </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A significant number of the homeless can't seem to master the basics of bodily hygiene. </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What makes you think they can handle the complexities of home upkeep? </span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">There is also the issue of definitions.</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Just because a home is vacant, that does not mean the home is not owned.</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If the owners of such domiciles want to make it part of their life's vocation to shelter the homeless, that is commendable.</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">However, shouldn't we be leery of a regulatory specter eager to compel property owners to surrender that which social engineers might consider excess or pressure homeowners to take on burdens and responsibilities they might not desire?</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, if non-resident owners are forced to quarter vagrants against their will (one might argue a violation of the spirit of the Third Amendment), when those unable to handle the stresses of home maintenance have either actively or passively allowed entropy to overtake a given structure, what party will step forward to rectify the damage?</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Idealists might sneer down their noses at reducing this ethical dilemma to what they dismiss as matters of economics and base legalities.</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">However, you can't really live inside a good intention and expect it to keep the wind or rain out, can you?</span></div>
<div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;"> </span></div>
</div>
<div class="o9v6fnle cxmmr5t8 oygrvhab hcukyx3x c1et5uql ii04i59q"><div dir="auto" style="text-align: start;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>Leftwing Religionists Applaud Godless Socialism But Not enough To Surrender Money Making Rackettag:12160.info,2021-07-11:2649739:BlogPost:21646182021-07-11T13:37:53.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Episode 41 of the Commonweal Magazine podcast addresses the topic of “White Churches & White Supremacy”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The discussion consists of this leftwing Catholic outfit interviewing Robert P. Jones, a Southern Baptist wracked with White guilt, about his book “White Too Long: The Legacy Of White Supremacy In Christian America".</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In the discussion, it is revealed that the title…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Episode 41 of the Commonweal Magazine podcast addresses the topic of “White Churches & White Supremacy”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The discussion consists of this leftwing Catholic outfit interviewing Robert P. Jones, a Southern Baptist wracked with White guilt, about his book “White Too Long: The Legacy Of White Supremacy In Christian America".</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In the discussion, it is revealed that the title is taken from a quote by writer James Baldwin.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Isn't that itself an act of cultural misappropriation?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If we are to buy into the premise that White Christians are guilty for deeds from the past deemed by Woketopians as racist on the part of organized religion, why shouldn't Baldwin and his contemporary acolytes be held responsible for the bloodshed, death, and destruction of property linked to the socialist ideology of which Baldwin was a proponent?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">And if the correspondents at Commonweal and Robert P. Jones want to invoke admiration for James Baldwin in their crusade against “White Christians”, don't they owe it to their readers to explain why they are downplaying or even concealing the ultimate conclusion of Baldwin's ratiocination that the concept of God should be abandoned altogether?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If Christians are to derive their social philosophy from thinkers that deny the existence of God, why are we to side with those advocating revolutionary upheaval over those such as Ayn Rand or Milton Friedman that advocated a more individualistic approach to life?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">After all, in a world without God, no set of ideas is ultimately superior to any other.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Could it be that, unlike Baldwin to the acclaim of critics, these propagandists do not have the creative wherewithal to continue their scam without what would be considered a crutch or opiate of the masses if they were being more philosophically honest about the worldview that it is that these alleged intellectuals actually profess?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Hit & Run Commentary #133tag:12160.info,2021-06-06:2649739:BlogPost:21598382021-06-06T13:13:34.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>It<span style="font-size: 14pt;">'s been said your first murder is always the hardest. So what is to stop this level of microdictatorship every time there is a flu or disease outbreak?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Does social distancing really prevent disease? Am not really that close to that many other human beings other than immediate family yet in the past still picked up colds and such mostly likely that did not originate with them.…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p>It<span style="font-size: 14pt;">'s been said your first murder is always the hardest. So what is to stop this level of microdictatorship every time there is a flu or disease outbreak?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Does social distancing really prevent disease? Am not really that close to that many other human beings other than immediate family yet in the past still picked up colds and such mostly likely that did not originate with them.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If we are to be subjected to public service announcements urging us not to touch our faces, how about some targeting certain demographics on the importance of wiping their rear ends properly and washing their hands afterwards?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It has been hypothesized that those that do not submit to a future coronavirus vaccine complete with bio-tracking capabilities could be prohibited from travel. But if such a vaccination really does provide immunity for those that take it, what does it matter regarding those that do not?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It has been suggested that even if risk of the Coronavirus subsided to a reasonable level, those over 55 should remain quarantined indefinitely. Will that be a personal choice or imposed by the state under threat of violence which is how any governmental edict or law is ultimately enforced? Will those with elderly in a long term care or even independent living facility be allowed to see them ever again? So would one’s 55th birthday become a ritual like the trip to Carousel in “Logan’s Run” or the episode of “Star Trek: The Next Generation” where a scientist had to abandon his work that would have saved his planet just because he had reached a certain age?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The remark was made on Fox News that once the initial Coronavirus lock down ends, the elderly should continue their social distancing while the rest of us move on. Wonder how long until this results in the elderly being excluded from society and then eventually eliminated preemptively against their will? The threat of this disease lurking in the background even if no one is actively suffering from it is going to be used to justify all sorts of cultural deprivations and infringements of liberties. Sort of like how those Japanese Americans had to be placed in those facilities for “their own good”. This would also be a good way to get many of the more doctrinally solid churches shuttered as well. Wonder how much property will end up being seized before it’s all over with to finance these Coronavirus relief programs.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Wonder how long, in the name of compassion of course, until the elderly are herded against their will into quarantine colonies where they will never again be allowed to see their loved ones?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So if the New York lock down applies particularly to those with underlying health issues, does that mean they are snooping through the medical files of those detained?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Cuomo says “social distancing is needed EVERYWHERE.” Does that include our bedrooms where it was once insisted what two consenting adults did was their own business?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In regards to the enforcement of social distancing decrees, are we to assume that law enforcement is so superhuman that they can estimate the difference between six feet and 5 feet 10 inches? If this is going to be the racket through which governments finance assorted plague relief efforts, the least that a citizenry subjected to such an intrusive degree of scrutiny deserves is for these assessments to be determined accurately rather than as a result of someone not having gotten their doughnut before hypoglycemia sets in.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Apparently a number of prisons are releasing convicts over fears of the Coronavirus spreading among the inmates and even to the staff. So why would it be acceptable to detain those accused of violating social distancing decrees (at this point can these even be considered actual laws) and possibly even those over 55 now daring to show their unmasked faces in public?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Ironic. The states now inclined to crack down the most vigorously against the Coronavirus in terms of imposing near police state conditions were the most lackadaisical in enforcing immigration laws that could have played a part in curtailing this plague.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It was remarked, “Tim LaHaye made millions of dollars with his 'Left Behind' series and his movies. Personally, I think that it is junk. Can it be explained to me why Tim LaHaye's prophecy works are to be condemned for a more literalistic interpretation of eschatological portions of Scripture yet this same online theologian is noticeably quiet or perhaps even accepting of Pat Robertson's prophetic announcements? Both of these ministers are Premillennial with works published teaching that the Tribulation period is to be understood as foretelling events that will take place. So why is Tim LaHaye to be condemned for having been a workman worthy of his hire? At least unlike Robertson, LaHaye's fortune would have been made for the most part from the actual selling of books and not begging for it through questionable broadcast tactics with those proceeds going in part to pay for race horses and his own private jet and Virginia Beach air landing strip. Unlike Mrs. Robertson, I bet Beverly LaHaye never had to fear being kicked to the curb in favor of a younger replacement had she been stricken with dementia.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As of late, a popular theme among Gospel Coalition type churches is that what we have does not belong to us but rather to God. Technically, that is true. However,, it is hoped that such conceptual repetition will make it easier to manipulate the pewfiller into more pliantly surrendering the targeted financial resources or even acceptance of compulsory income redistribution commonly referred to as increased taxation. But if we are to view ourselves as mere stewards rather than as owners, don’t we have an obligation to look to the needs of our own households just as rigorously so that we won’t be a burden upon God’s people.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In a prayer, a pastor lamented the divisive politics “polarizing our nation at this time.” So just how many more fundamental liberties are we obligated to surrender and compromise? Does the income that should be redistributed also include the accumulated wealth of the church and the pastor’s housing allowance? Or do the higher tax rates to be arrived at in the name of compromise just apply to the dimwitted saps filling the pews? Should the compromises also include the bill like the one being proposed in Virginia where religious schools would not be allowed to fire crossdressers? The pastor lamented that partisan politics is now linked to the message of Christianity. But wasn’t that initially the fault of progressives going out of their way to blatantly curtail the expression of religious liberty and traditional values to the extent that those holding to these could not help but come to the conclusion that the only viable alternative in this country was some degree of participation in the Republican Party?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Jim Bakker hawking 5 gallon survivalist buckets of pinto beans. No wonder some folks need so much toilet paper.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Given that Prince Charles contracted Coronavirus, wonder if his father Prince Phillip remained as keen on the prospect of plagues wiping out vast swaths of humanity.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Setting Ablaze Paraphernalia Of False Belief Not The Best Outreach Strategytag:12160.info,2021-05-15:2649739:BlogPost:21563132021-05-15T03:18:02.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In a video posted on Facebook, a legalistic evangelist set a flame of a pair of Mormon ceremonial undergarments. The evangelist claimed that the action was Biblically justified.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Acts 19:18-20 reads, “Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed their evil deeds. A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly.... In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In a video posted on Facebook, a legalistic evangelist set a flame of a pair of Mormon ceremonial undergarments. The evangelist claimed that the action was Biblically justified.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Acts 19:18-20 reads, “Many of those who believed now came and openly confessed their evil deeds. A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly.... In this way the word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">From the text, readers can deduce a couple of things. To set down such a decree regarding such requires the believer to look at both the context and content of the passage. Only then can a more definitive policy be put in place.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Because of this account, those figuratively on fire for God insist taking the flame to any doctrinally dubious object is not only permissible under Scripture but actually required.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">These items were not snatched by authorities out of the hands of those wanting to keep them.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Rather, it is emphasized that those bringing the occultic works forward for destruction were those once owning them that no longer wanted this dark influence in their lives.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Furthermore, what we see in the passage of Acts is an historical account of how a specific set of believers decided to implement a particular set of Christian principles.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Though in particular circumstances their example would be a noble one to emulate, the account is not presented as that of a command that must be adhered to in every circumstance where the Christian finds himself confronted by religious paraphernalia with which they are at doctrinal odds.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For others, it may simply be enough to dispose of the object if they are its owner without raising considerable hoopla or fanfare.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It is usually admonished that Christians hold to the principle that Paul is to serve as the Christian's example in terms of ministry. As such, though the customs and traditions of unbelievers troubled him, it is debatable whether or not he would be that deliberately abrasive in attempting to persuade in regards to matters of error and truth.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The approach used by Paul in dealing with competing belief systems is found in Acts 17:16-34. In this passage, the Apostle is disturbed by the amount of idolatry he sees around him in the city of Athens.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">To confront this distressing situation, Paul sets out to present the saving knowledge of Christ in those places in the foremost city of the Western world whose very name is synonymous with discussion and argumentation. In verse 17, we learn that Paul did not shy away from controversy as he took the Gospel into the very hearts of Mediterranean cultural life such as the synagogues, marketplaces, and forums.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">We are not privileged to have a comprehensive transcript of the exact dialog that took places in those learned circles. However, we are given a summary with quotes of what Paul talked about and the response of the Athenians to it.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Upon hearing Paul's message, a number of Epicureans and Stoics inquired, “What is this babbler trying to say?... He seems to be advocating foreign gods.” Scripture then clarifies, “They said this because Paul was preaching the good news about Jesus and the resurrection.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">From what the Holy Spirit decided to preserve of that encounter in the pages of redemptive history, one does not get the impression that all that much time was spent criticizing (at least in a condescending way) the shortcomings of Greco-Roman mythology. Instead, the Apostle to the Gentiles emphasized the distinctive particulars of the Christian faith.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">However, Paul's homiletical approach did not avoid the beliefs he hoped to persuade as to the error and insufficiency of. If anything, Paul actually utilized aspects of Classical thought to show how all truths that humans might deduce or stumble upon are ultimately God's truths.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">One might dispute this from the way in which Paul began his oration before the learned gathered on the Aereopagus. Paul pronounces in Acts 17:22, “Ye men of Athens, I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">From where we stand along history's unfolding drama, both the triumph of the Judeo-Christian tradition and the Scientific Revolution are behind us in terms of being events that have forever altered the way entire civilizations perceive reality.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As such, to our ears, to be labeled “too superstitious” sounds almost like an insult. However, a number of other versions translate the text as Paul commenting on the religious nature of the Athenian intellectual class. Irrespective of where numerous exegetes come down on this interpretative issue, from that point forward there is virtually no debate as to the approach Paul takes.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Those whose missiological approach consists of literally setting ablaze whatever paraphernalia offends their religious sensibilities would have had Paul rip to shreds the inconsistencies and shortcomings inherent to paganism in general and polytheism in particular. There is certainly Biblical precedent for such a strategy where, in Romans 1, Paul holds nothing back regarding how forsaking worship of the one true God to worship nature rather than nature's Creator leads to the most pronounced of carnal sins.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Yet in Acts 17, the Apostle shows that the message can be tailored to fit the nature of the audience addressed. Paul went about this by pointing out the commonalities between Biblical beliefs and Greek philosophy. In terms of apologetics, this phenomena is known as a point of contact.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Paul shares in Acts 17:23, “For as I passed by ... I found an altar with this inscription, 'To the unknown God'. Whom therefore ye ignorantly worship, him I declare unto you.” From that point, Paul proceeded to point out other commonalities between Judeo-Christian and Greek thought.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In verse 26, Paul declares, “And hath made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell upon the face of the earth, and hath determined the times before appointed and the bounds of their habitation...:” He emphasized that this simply wasn't the ramblings of a crazed Hebrew babbler Rather, as we are told in verse 28, “For in him (God) we live, and move, and have our being; as certain also of your own poets have said, 'For we are also his offspring.'.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As such, in his conclusion Paul does not ridicule the Greeks into capitulation and compliance. Instead Paul commends what the Greeks got right in their philosophy as a reflection of the law written across the heart as spelled out in Romans 2 as to what the Greeks ought to set aside of their pre-Christian thought as they come to Jesus in repentance.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The act of setting ablaze the revered and venerated object of a faith outside the parameters of Biblical Christianity is without question a very provocative act. Even if one opposes the faith, worldview, or creed that the object represents, only the most fanatic would fail or refuse to admit how such a deed does more to alienate rather than woo those one is taking such a course of action to gain the attention of.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, it is doubtful many Christians are convinced to the alleged doctrinal error within their own positions of faith when ACLU lawyers descend upon nativities across America and abscond with the ceramic baby Jesus.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Often many a Scripture verse is invoked to justify all kinds of shocking actions.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For once, it would be edifying to hear a minister of solid reputation to go out on a limb emphasizing those passages extolling individual conscience and determining for oneself those things not quite so clearly spelled out in stone.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Dogmatic Pluralism Results In Operational Intolerancetag:12160.info,2021-05-01:2649739:BlogPost:21548292021-05-01T02:46:19.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">An old adage contends that it is all fun and games until someone loses an eye. Something quite similar could be said regarding living by the “live and let live” philosophy espoused by many early twenty-first century relativists thinking they are too cool and hip to be stifled by any one religious creed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In a letter to the editor regarding an 4/27/2010 USA Today article analyzing the tendency of young adults not to be…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">An old adage contends that it is all fun and games until someone loses an eye. Something quite similar could be said regarding living by the “live and let live” philosophy espoused by many early twenty-first century relativists thinking they are too cool and hip to be stifled by any one religious creed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In a letter to the editor regarding an 4/27/2010 USA Today article analyzing the tendency of young adults not to be devoted to a particular faith, a respondent observed this trend is the result of being more educated than previous generations and “exposed to the realities of life in the twenty-first century.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">But rather than thinking for themselves, what may be taking place among the youth such as the letter's author is their indoctrination or brainwashing by those educators the young are spending record time around.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The correspondents on this topic claim to applaud and embrace an iconoclastic eclecticism. But in reality such souls do little more than parrot the notions expounded upon and bandied about the typical college lecture hall.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The author writes, “Who seriously believes that an infinite God, who created the vast complexities of the cosmos, can be understood by finite humanity, let alone be reduced to a statement of faith that's subject to the limits of human understanding?”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Some of humanity's greatest minds actually. It's actually a concept not all that difficult to get one's mind around.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The assumption that finite man cannot fully comprehend an infinite God is (to use a much maligned term) absolutely correct. Isaiah 55:8-9 says God's thoughts are not our thoughts.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, though we cannot fully know God, it does not follow that God cannot fully know man. Since the infinite is beyond the finite, it is not beyond the realm of the possible for the infinite to reveal of itself what it knows the finite is capable of comprehending of that which is beyond our meager understanding.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In the New Testament, God's only Begotten Son Jesus Christ took on human form by being born of a virgin so that He might dwell among us, die upon a cross for our sins, and rise from the dead so that we might have eternal life if we admit that we are sinners and accept His free gift of forgiveness and salvation. In essence, God condescended to our level so that we might know Him.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">When asked why evolution caught on as a theory of origins among the intelligentsia, a popular anecdote posits that Julian Huxley responded that Darwinism supported the sexual morays of that particular social class. Thus, all the grandiose proclamations against the dogmatism of the Almighty and the seeming existential nobility of the libertines ends up being a cover to sleep with whomever you want with the hopes of no regret the next morning.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One of the letters to the editor reads, “Beyond that is the nasty habit of many Christian fundamentalists to deny basic human rights to those who don't agree with them theologically.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">And what “basic human rights” might those be? Just about nowhere in the United States are “fundamentalist” Christians denying anyone the traditional rights such as freedoms of speech, creed or property where an ACLU media whore is not before a network news camera within a hour of such an alleged transgression transpiring.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">When articulated by a progressive, the phrase “Fundamentalist Christians denying basic human rights” is actually a euphemism for daring to stand in disagreement of the trend towards sodomite matrimony or refusing to enforce preferences for certain groups simply because they are favored minorities. If anything, Christian “fundamentalists” are the ones having their “basic rights” curtailed and infringed upon here at home in America and most certainly around the world.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One cannot name a single regime around the world today where the rulers hold to an explicit traditionalist Christianity that abuses its power by persecuting its population. If anything, Christians unwilling to give up and compromise these truths that they hold dear by refusing to participate in the rejection of moral absolutes are more likely to be the ones persecuted (ironically by the ones that whine the loudest about the church's curtailment of postmodernist understandings of human liberation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For examples, secularists and radical ecumenicalists applauded the decision on the part of the Department of Defense to disinvite Franklin Graham to the Pentagon's commemoration of the National Day of Prayer over his comments that Islam is an evil and wicked religion as evidenced by the 9/11 attacks and the treatment of woman in lands where that creed prevails.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For you see. Franklin Graham made the mistake of concluding that the First Amendment is something to live by rather than a abstraction to talk about in vague generalities. As Chesterton is credited with saying, the problem with the freedom of religion is that people end up discussing everything but religion.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It is of this fear of appearing impolite and offensively stepping on someone's toes in a manner that delicate psyches will never recover from that our society has come to such a screeching halt that it can become an act of considerable courage to simply state the obvious. And this is something the enemies of this great nation have learned readily.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, Eboo Patel, founder of the Interfaith Youth Core, in a 5/10/10 USA Today column titled “Graham's Anti-Mulsim Jabs Hurt Islam and America” applauded CAIR's public statement emphasizing the American value of “differing faiths united in shared support of our nation's founding principles” rather than the “message of intolerance that Graham advocates.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">But while CAIR puts forward a public face espousing tolerance and cooperation, the groups and individuals the organization supports behind the scenes advocate something else entirely. For example, CAIR has supported Islamic extremists such as Hamas who not only advocate a form of religious exclusiveness that goes far beyond anything advocated by Franklin Graham but also endorse violence against those with whom they disagree.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">An old country song admonishes that you've got to stand for something or you'll fall for anything. Should Americans continue down the path imposed by cultural agnosticism, the result will not be a relaxed, easygoing paradise. Rather, the result will be the establishment of a sociopolitical milieu where the deceptive will manipulate the weak to undermine the liberty of all Americans.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Hit & Run Commentary #132tag:12160.info,2021-04-04:2649739:BlogPost:21487542021-04-04T13:12:46.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>A Berkeley academic that no doubt fancies himself an advocate of diversity, multiculturalism, and moral relativism has proposed altering a variety of policies aimed at making the lives of those that dwell in rural areas uncomfortable. This is apparently punishment for individuals daring to exhibit the audacity to make life decisions on their own without first consulting ruling elites.</p>
<p>A pastor praised news of church members confessing sins to one another. So how does this work: “Just…</p>
<p>A Berkeley academic that no doubt fancies himself an advocate of diversity, multiculturalism, and moral relativism has proposed altering a variety of policies aimed at making the lives of those that dwell in rural areas uncomfortable. This is apparently punishment for individuals daring to exhibit the audacity to make life decisions on their own without first consulting ruling elites.</p>
<p>A pastor praised news of church members confessing sins to one another. So how does this work: “Just wanted you to know I thought your wife’s backside looked hot in that form-fitting skirt last week.”</p>
<p>In a sermon on money, a pastor asked is your money going to yourself or the poor? Is that the actual poor or those employed in nearly the same position that you have that squandered what they earned and then see what you have taken care of, getting jacked out of shape over the assistance that you are willing to give them as that does not consist of the prime cut of fresh meat that they wanted that you never treat yourself to and for refusing to pander to their demand your name is badmouthed market wide in the corporation that you both work for.</p>
<p>It was remarked in a sermon that the ones God really wants to use are the sexually broken and those “with a past” to accomplish His grand plan in the world. So youth should actually ignore what they have been taught about the standards regarding that area of life. Why bother doing what you are told if the leadership is going to hold that against you or prevent you from advancing beyond the pewfiller ranks?</p>
<p>In an article titled “The New Age Of Social Protest Music” published in the 2/17/20 issue of America Magazine, a pull out quote read, “In modern protest music, musicians often seem to be protesting not particular policies but polarization itself.” What that means is that what is being called for is the elimination of the very rights of free conscience and expression. For it is not those bent on comprehensive revolutionary transformation that will refrain from expressing their presuppositions with the utmost vehemence. Nor will they adopt more conservative positions for the sake of social unity.</p>
<p>How many times in a row does God need to be told that you need Him in a song? Apparently 13 times in one particular worship chorus.</p>
<p>A Bloomburg campaign commercial boasts that as a candidate he has never accepted any special interest money. Probably because traditionally he has been the special interest using his money to buy off other politicians.</p>
<p>Discernible hullabaloo has erupted over President Trump commuting the sentence of Rob Blagojevich. The former Governor of Illinois has served eight of a fourteen year sentence in large part for confirming the suspicion that appointments to prominent positions are often the result of “financial considerations”. In response, it has been insinuated that Trump grants these constitutional beneficences to those that he knows or to those with connections. So how is that much different than the other forty-some presidents to have wielded that power? Despite his legal shortcomings, unlike assorted subversives linked to the Weather Underground and Puerto Rican nationalists pardoned or having had their sentences commuted, at least what Blagojevich did cannot be linked to any terrorist violence.</p>
<p>An individual in an advertisement claims to be a former McDonald’s corporate chef. Isn’t such a position analogous to the chaplain at the Playboy Mansion?</p>
<p>Leftwing propagandist Chris Matthews has resigned from his position at MSNBC. The Drudge Report headline commemorating such reads, “Out of touch”. So by that categorization, there was really nothing wrong or inappropriate about what the notorious married drunkard said beyond the sentiments being unpopular at this time. By the standard articulated, he did nothing comparably worse than wearing bell bottoms at a time when skinny jeans would be the prevailing fashion. This has probably got to be an example of the extent to which relativists will go to maintain that absolute values do not exist while longing to maintain the protections provided by such.</p>
<p>A Bible church pastor said that the sin of Protestantism is failing to see that one does not have to see things the same way for there to be unity and a bond of peace. In the eyes of this minister, the Protestant tendency is to beat up on all other groups. Sort of like him berating Protestants that do not view the situation as he does? So the Roman Catholics at the time of the initial ecclesiastical split were noted for their “live and let live” approach to church affairs? To this day, that organizational edifice denies access to the sacraments unless one is in lockstep as to whom is the only legitimate show in town. If this pastor is so burdened regarding the fruits of schism, why doesn’t he go become a Roman Catholic? Or is what is preventing that the resultant cut in pay or social prestige given such would require him to pursue a less glamorous career in his eyes such as sales or manual labor?</p>
<p>So if Governor Andrew Cuomo can establish a National Guard perimeter around a New York jurisdiction, on what grounds does he get jacked out of shape at President Trump’s attempt at border support and protection?</p>
<p>Regarding these churches wanting to place unity above partisan politics. Are the liberals in the congregation going to keep their mouths shut as well regarding sociopolitical developments outside the church?</p>
<p>If it really is “self isolation” urged to combat the Plague, see what happens to you if you don’t comply.</p>
<p>It is understandable to get companies to be lenient in terms of sick leave during a period of mandatory voluntary self-isolation. However, in regards to coronavirus, why should patients be more exempt from insurance copayments arising from this affliction than any other diseases that they might need to be tested for?</p>
<p>Google is to oversee a website for coronavirus tests that are to be conducted in the parking lots of stores such as Walmart and Target. Nothing can possibly go wrong with allowing Cyberdine (Skynet) to collect this information at the sites also rumored to be potential FEMA command centers or detention facilities. What guarantee the collected samples will be used only for the diagnosis of illness and not to surreptitiously compile a government DNA database? This is also no doubt to serve as a test run for down the road a bit when the time comes to implement the Mark of the Beast.</p>
<p>Maybe if those crossing national borders from now on were subjected to more rigorous medical scrutiny, those residing within their own borders would not need to be subjected to such a draconian crack down. Or is this perhaps the reason why borders have been so lax in contemporary times in order to get us to the pointing of a looming police state? As Padme said in Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith: " So this is how liberty dies, to thunderous applause?"</p>
<p>by Frederick Meekins</p>Russell Moore Tirade Targets Wrong Youthtag:12160.info,2021-03-18:2649739:BlogPost:21452162021-03-18T12:57:42.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In an episode of his podcast, Russell Moore interviewed Senator Ben Sasse regarding how perpetual adolescence hurts the church.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One might immediately snap what's so wrong with that?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Nothing if by that one is referring to 25 year olds still on their parents' health insurance as authorized under Obamacare or having never worked a day in their lives by the same…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In an episode of his podcast, Russell Moore interviewed Senator Ben Sasse regarding how perpetual adolescence hurts the church.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One might immediately snap what's so wrong with that?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Nothing if by that one is referring to 25 year olds still on their parents' health insurance as authorized under Obamacare or having never worked a day in their lives by the same age.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, that is apparently not what this phrase is referring to when articulated by certain professional religionists.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Moore states in the opening of his remarks that, no matter how hard his 16 year old lads work in their grocery store jobs, it is nothing in comparison to Sasse's own sons bailing hay and birthing cattle.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">But doesn't Moore rank among this contemporary breed of Evangelical that condemns those that would retreat from concentrated areas of population, no doubt going so far as to call “racist” Whites preferring a more reclusive and less urban lifestyle?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Often what these religionists mean when they complain about “perpetual adolescence” is not being married off by the age of 23.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Perhaps Moore and Sasse's time would have been better spent condemning the perpetual welfare recipients that can't seem to keep their pants on and their legs together in terms of an unending litany of out of wedlock offspring where as in the case of potato chips many can't seem to stop at just one.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Pundit Condemning Capitol Kerfuffle Excuses More Destructive Outbreaks Of Violencetag:12160.info,2021-03-17:2649739:BlogPost:21451812021-03-17T03:24:55.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">On the 1/10/21 edition of America's News Headquarters on Fox News, pundit Jessica Tarlov decreed that, if you said that the election was fraudulent, you are complicit with what transpired at the Capitol during the Electoral College vote confirmation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The only ones guilty of the shocking vandalism are those that perpetrated such acts of violence.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Does Miss Tarlov really…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">On the 1/10/21 edition of America's News Headquarters on Fox News, pundit Jessica Tarlov decreed that, if you said that the election was fraudulent, you are complicit with what transpired at the Capitol during the Electoral College vote confirmation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The only ones guilty of the shocking vandalism are those that perpetrated such acts of violence.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Does Miss Tarlov really want to go the route of criminalizing thought?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For in the very next segment of the interview, Tarlov remarked that the riots earlier in the year occurred for a “very good reason”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So applying what amounted to a moral categorical imperative just moments prior that those articulating ideological sentiments that those of a less-refined sense of discernment are incapable of distinguishing from those committing crime, should Tarlov be punished for the property and lives destroyed by the likes of Antifa or Black Lives Matter?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">At the very least, should she be tossed in terms of her digital personage into a electronic version of the Phantom Zone not unlike President Trump for expressing a viewpoint deemed counter-conducive to what elites are extolling as the rudiments of a stable social order?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Plague Turns Thoroughgoing Relativists Into Fanatic Absolutiststag:12160.info,2021-03-07:2649739:BlogPost:21430762021-03-07T13:42:14.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">A public service announcement part of the New York Tough propaganda campaign insists that one does not wear a mask because it is the LAW but because it is the law of nature.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So what if the only reason an individual wears one is to avoid confrontation with the Barney Fife’s of law enforcement and retail security?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If the issue is not about obeying the law but rather…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">A public service announcement part of the New York Tough propaganda campaign insists that one does not wear a mask because it is the LAW but because it is the law of nature.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So what if the only reason an individual wears one is to avoid confrontation with the Barney Fife’s of law enforcement and retail security?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If the issue is not about obeying the law but rather philosophical agreement, why the threat of punishment for noncompliance?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Then there is the issue about the laws of nature.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Can it be explained what law of nature prevents a microorganism from floating through a gap in the fabric?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Is similar to a mosquito buzzing through a chain link fence.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It is stated in a PSA that concealing one’s countenance is not so much about preventing the spread of illness but rather about “showing respect”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">At the conclusion, it is revealed that this propaganda is being spewed by the State of New York.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">One of the foremost complaints of the sorts that deliberately make that jurisdiction’s primary metropolitan cesspool their place of residence is that the denizens of the much-maligned “fly over country” tend to impose a traditionalist morality upon others.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So if it is acceptable for the Cuomo regime to spread this message beyond the boundaries of the Empire State, perhaps the State of Florida needs to produce a similar spot extolling the virtues of individuality where each person should be allowed to decide for themselves whether or not a mask is the best way to address what we are repeatedly indoctrinated ad nauseam to the point of nausea is a public health crisis.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Church Chucking Out Flag Likely As Idolatrous Has No Issue With Black History Worshiptag:12160.info,2021-03-04:2649739:BlogPost:21419922021-03-04T03:58:55.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It might be one thing for a church to remove an American flag from its sanctuary on the grounds that nowhere in Scripture are congregations commanded to put on display in the house of the Lord a symbol of their earthly political or cultural loyalty.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So if national identity is something to be downplayed in an ecclesiastical environment in order to emphasize the unity of believers in Christ, don't turn around and…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It might be one thing for a church to remove an American flag from its sanctuary on the grounds that nowhere in Scripture are congregations commanded to put on display in the house of the Lord a symbol of their earthly political or cultural loyalty.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So if national identity is something to be downplayed in an ecclesiastical environment in order to emphasize the unity of believers in Christ, don't turn around and conduct a Black History worship service especially on Sunday morning.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For there is no more authorizing that in the pages of Scripture if a congregation is going to take such a hardline stance in opposition to Old Glory.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If the pastor of such a congregation is on the record as stating that his congregation is neither Black nor White but rather “diverse, does the congregation intend to also hold a White History worship service?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Or does the pastor's concept of diversity consist largely of badgering Whites such as when from the pulpit he justified support for Black Lives Matter, demanding that Whites because they are White surrender property to Blacks simply for being Black and participated in the town BLM protest march while wearing a shirt emblazoned with the church's logo?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Democrats In Uproar Over Rightwing Conspiracy Theories No Issue With Leftist Tyrannytag:12160.info,2021-02-16:2649739:BlogPost:21382562021-02-16T04:57:19.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Representative Marjory Greene has been removed from her committee assignments in the House of Representatives not so much for anything that she has done but rather because of what she believed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It was claimed that the so-called conspiracy theories she is accused of professing cannot be countenanced because of the “festering malignancy” of such ideas. Nothing similar was done to punish Raphael Warnock for questionable…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Representative Marjory Greene has been removed from her committee assignments in the House of Representatives not so much for anything that she has done but rather because of what she believed.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It was claimed that the so-called conspiracy theories she is accused of professing cannot be countenanced because of the “festering malignancy” of such ideas. Nothing similar was done to punish Raphael Warnock for questionable notions the pastor has peddled or lent support to over the years of his ministry.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, Warnock has downplayed the atrocities of Fidel Castro, calling the Cuban dictator’s legacy complex.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Yet it’s doubtful the Georgia radical would be that judicious in his assessment of the Trump presidency despite the administration having a significantly smaller body count in terms of citizens eliminated for merely expressing an ideology at variance with that preferred by regime functionaries.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Warnack is a bit more explicit in his admiration of the late theologian James Cone, whom Warack describes as his mentor and whom Warack eulogized at his funeral.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For those not as familiar with James Cone as they might be Fidel Castro, Cone is renowned as the developer of Black Liberation theology.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">As part of that interpretative school of thought, Cone equates Whites or “Whiteness” with Satan and/or the Antichrist.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">His acolytes will quibble that “Whiteness” is more about the way in which such people act rather than the people themselves.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Would a renowned theologian of the contemporary era be allowed to equate “Jewishness” or better yet “Blackishness” with the most vile works of evil and be permitted to retain their endowed chair or posh ministry position?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">More importantly, if the Biden Autarchy and the regime’s legislative allies in the People’s Assembly (also known as Congress in times before the assent of one party rule seemingly intent on squelching as much dissent as possible) say nothing in condemnation it must likely mean that these powerful institutions support these forms of tyranny and oppression perceived as originating from the left side of the political spectrum.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Collectivist Utopians Won't Stop With Social Media Suppressiontag:12160.info,2021-01-29:2649739:BlogPost:21349252021-01-29T04:08:42.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Utopians, especially of the…</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Utopians, especially of the revolutionary variety, are never satisfied.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">That is an undeniable truth of history.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">One only needs to read an account of Jacobin France, Nazi Germany, Bolshevist Russia, or Maoist China to draw such a conclusion.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In the future, one must ask, will Biden's America be added to that infamous list?</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It has been pointed out that one does not have an inherent constitutional right to social media.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Since those are private corporations viewed as individuals in the eyes of the law, to compel such would be to infringe upon its rights in a coercive manner.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Perhaps fair enough.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But it must be asked will the matter stop there in regards to those commodities or services that don't quite rise to the level of government but without which the individual's quality of life is profoundly hampered?</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, most electricity is provided through what is ultimately private enterprise.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So what if in the future an electric company does not like how its commodity is being utilized in pursuit of a perfectly legal but ideologically unacceptable values or agendas such as to light a church opposed to homosexual marriage marriage or that professed the belief in Christ alone is the only path to obtain a beatific afterlife?</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In the future, sophisticated computers and Artificial Intelligence will play a role in the way in which personal vehicles are piloted.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Should individuals known to express or even be suspected of harboring certain opinions have their ignition systems shut down entirely so as to inhibit their ability to travel in a manner not unlike the interlock system imposed upon drunk drivers?</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Don't laugh.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It has already been proposed that those at the Capitol Kerfuffle should be placed on the don't fly list without even having been convicted of a crime.</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">And who before this time thought steps would be taken to silence former presidents and seated senators who did not actually call for violence but rather whose words were not those preferred by the gatekeepers of the means of communication?</span></p>
<p style="font-family: Verdana, Arial, Geneva, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: black; font-size: medium; text-decoration: none; font-style: normal; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-weight: 400; letter-spacing: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: #ffffff;"><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>America As Whole As Worthy Of Protective Walls As Congresstag:12160.info,2021-01-17:2649739:BlogPost:21310142021-01-17T16:13:34.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p></p>
<p>Barriers at least seven feet high and said to be unscalable (walls if you will) have been erected around what allegedly objective journalists keep reminding viewers is “our beloved Capitol and symbol of democracy”.</p>
<p>This step was taken following the kerfuffle that though profoundly serious still resulted in less damage to property and human life than the other civil disturbances that have gone on nearly nonstop since about Memorial Day 2020.</p>
<p>If such security measures are…</p>
<p></p>
<p>Barriers at least seven feet high and said to be unscalable (walls if you will) have been erected around what allegedly objective journalists keep reminding viewers is “our beloved Capitol and symbol of democracy”.</p>
<p>This step was taken following the kerfuffle that though profoundly serious still resulted in less damage to property and human life than the other civil disturbances that have gone on nearly nonstop since about Memorial Day 2020.</p>
<p>If such security measures are the proper response to deter those initiating the violation of law and assorted forms of destruction, then why is a wall around the border not as appropriate?</p>
<p>For ought our country as a whole be just as beloved and a symbol of democracy an an edifice --- though awe inspiring as it might be --- is at its most basic still just a government building?</p>
<p>Such legislative halls are, after all, the places from which those such as the IRS and DMV that evoke no such warm sentimentalities derive their authority to make our lives more miserable and burdensome.</p>
<p>By Frederick Meekins</p>For What Other Reasons Can Civil Society Be Suspended?tag:12160.info,2021-01-09:2649739:BlogPost:21287712021-01-09T15:42:59.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Across America, governments are invoking the power to essentially suspend civil society when hospitals are occupied at a predetermined numerical threshold.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So why does the same sort of emergency intervention not apply in other situations where human life is at stake?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, if there are a certain number of auto accidents for a particular period should most forms of…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Across America, governments are invoking the power to essentially suspend civil society when hospitals are occupied at a predetermined numerical threshold.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So why does the same sort of emergency intervention not apply in other situations where human life is at stake?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, if there are a certain number of auto accidents for a particular period should most forms of vehicular travel be suspended for a spell?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Likewise, if the number of heart attacks and incidents of cardiac disease rise above a certain percentage in a jurisdiction, should most of the fast food establishments --- especially Starbucks --- in a given area be closed and supermarkets allowed only to sell an assortment of rudimentary vegetables?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If a particular number of domestic abuse incidents occurs, should liquor stores be closed until such an epidemic is gotten under control?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">And if a state's adolescent obesity rates rise above a certain level, should Internet and smarthphone access be switched off in order to get the youth probably spending a considerable amount of time on these devices active outdoors?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Overclass Cares Only For Its Owntag:12160.info,2021-01-08:2649739:BlogPost:21285212021-01-08T00:10:03.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Former President George W. Bush composed a powerful statement in condemnation of the Capitol Incursion.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Too bad he was not as swift and decisive in regards to the pillaging at the hands of Antifa and Black Lives Matter.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Of that he said it was not the time to lecture but rather to instead listen.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So why not extend the same…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Former President George W. Bush composed a powerful statement in condemnation of the Capitol Incursion.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Too bad he was not as swift and decisive in regards to the pillaging at the hands of Antifa and Black Lives Matter.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Of that he said it was not the time to lecture but rather to instead listen.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So why not extend the same courtesy to those enraged over alleged election improprieties?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Likewise, DC Mayor Muriel Bowser wants those rampaging on Capitol Hill charged with domestic terrorism.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Yet she was so enamored with Black Lives Matter that she unilaterally authorized street art essentially memorializing that protest movement and its revolutionary battlecry.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Statements such as these serve as evidence of just how warped the priorities of the overclass are.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">When it is private property, particularly of average Americans, that is destroyed, such deeds are downplayed as acts of vandalism barely worthy of law enforcement attention.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Yet when acts shockingly inexcusable yet nowhere near as destructive are committed in the presence of these exalted elites, the penalty rises to the level of that assessed against mass casualty incidents.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Medical Profession Needs To Stay In Its Designated Lanetag:12160.info,2021-01-01:2649739:BlogPost:21261192021-01-01T03:46:58.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A meme of a woman on a stretcher being put into an ambulance is captioned “Are You Taking Me To The Hospital?” “No ma'am. You need top medical experts. We're taking you to the comments section”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But neither should these "experts" be allowed to run roughshod over the rights of individuals.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Also, if the non-medical laymen is to refrain from remarking on medical…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">A meme of a woman on a stretcher being put into an ambulance is captioned “Are You Taking Me To The Hospital?” “No ma'am. You need top medical experts. We're taking you to the comments section”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But neither should these "experts" be allowed to run roughshod over the rights of individuals.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Also, if the non-medical laymen is to refrain from remarking on medical technicalities, how about medical professionals refrain from upending and destroying an entire social order in the name of a pestilence that while serious is likely not as deadly as propagandists have duped many into believing?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">When we are told to "follow the science", what we are also being given is an overwhelming dose of philosophy and policy prescription as well.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Maybe a growing number would not be as leery of medical professionals if the rules were not changed midstream like those scenes in the Hunger Games when it appeared the characters were beginning to get the upper hand.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Might also help if those threatening harsh penalties for disobeying the rules also abided by them as well with their lives and livelihoods brought to the brink of destruction like nearly everybody else.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">by Frederick Meekins</span></p>Have Yourself A Coronavirus Christmastag:12160.info,2020-12-22:2649739:BlogPost:21180932020-12-22T00:18:27.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In “The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe” by C.S. Lewis, one of the hardships Narnia suffers under is that it is always winter but never Christmas. Imposed upon the realm by the White Witch, the plot point serves as a powerful symbol of the extent to which despots are willing to suppress the basic joys of existence for the purposes of advancing their own agendas at the expense of those that they conspire to rule over.…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In “The Lion, The Witch, & The Wardrobe” by C.S. Lewis, one of the hardships Narnia suffers under is that it is always winter but never Christmas. Imposed upon the realm by the White Witch, the plot point serves as a powerful symbol of the extent to which despots are willing to suppress the basic joys of existence for the purposes of advancing their own agendas at the expense of those that they conspire to rule over.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For decades now, secularists along with those thinking they know how to organize the details of your life better than you do have conspired to impose any number of policies intended to disabuse the American people of their Christmas habits and more importantly the religious source from which such traditions stem. Fortunately, the nation has yet to fully yield to this particular assault against their liberties and most have at least been alerted regarding this threat arrayed against our own underlying Western culture.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Unfortunately, the agents of tyranny are seldom discouraged. Such operatives are always eager to try new strategies in the attempt to achieve their nefarious objectives.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Often the issue and policies are formulated in the following manner. A government authority forbids the erection of Christmas decorations or the holding of a holiday celebration on public property. But take heart, the discouraged yuletide reveler is admonished, you are perfectly free to commemorate these holidays in any way that you desire in the confines of your own home with whomever it is that you please.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">However, now with the Conornavirus Plague, there exists a pretext by which thoroughgoing statists are unabashed regarding the extent to which assorted government bureaucrats and agencies intend to intrude into the lives of average Americans to an even more unprecedented level.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, a number of jurisdictions have decreed the number of visitors that that will be allowed into your home, often limiting the number to ten guests. And what if you allow eleven to fourteen; does it somehow though off the occultc numerology or Masonic geometry?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If that means cutting off family members from the family during Thanksgiving or Christmas, then so be it. In the opening days of the New World Order or what is being called “The Great Reset”, the primary disease to be eradicated is not so much a virulent microorganism but rather the notion that you as a free individual should be able to decide for yourself the risks one is willing to take in a world fraught with any number of dangers.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Like the giddy urchins depicted in propaganda posters erected by dictatorships spanning the ideological spectrum, your joy is no longer to be derived from traditional notions of family or even personal relationships. Rather that satisfaction is to be derived from knowledge of your dutiful obedience to the regime even if that means those small pleasures that gave life much of its meaning are obliterated in pursuit of collectivist goals and agendas. After all, to paraphrase the motto of the Psi Corps from the drama “Babylon 5”, “The State is Mother. The State is Father.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Just as bad and perhaps even worse than the state telling you how many may enter into your domicile is its functionaries telling you which otherwise perfectly legal activities you may or may not engage in while ensconced within the four walls for which you will no doubt be required to pay increasingly crippling taxes on in the years to come in order to finance economic amelioration efforts to address conditions imposed by the state to not only address the virus but also manipulate the masses into embracing extensive authoritarian intrusion into their lives.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, the state of California views itself as so all-pervasive that, in an act of beneficence, permission has been granted for the occupants of structures (for at this point of existential regulation can one really be considered a “home owner” any longer) and their permitted guests to engage in the basic excretory functions in the confines of the domicile's designated facilities.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In a number of microtyrannies (a phenomena I foretold the pending of over a decade ago), the assembled are forbidden from singing or chanting. But it must be asked if the phrases articulated include “Black Lives Matter” or “This is what democracy looks like” (which apparently consists now of riotous mobs looting in the streets or assorted state functionaries imposing an increasing array of arbitrary restrictions in no way authorized by legislative law) does the edict still apply? After all, one of the main lesson learned in 2020 is that the rules promulgated by the technocratic elites do not have to be obeyed when countermanding them in violent protest advances the revolutionary conception of social justice advocated by the aspiring planetary administrators.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In the attempt to make these deprivations and impositions supposedly easier to bear, propaganda disseminated through various venues assures that “We are all in this together.” Nothing could be farther from the truth.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For example, throughout the 2020 presidential campaign, the rallies at which Trump devotees gathered to bask in their candidates stream of consciousness orations were condemned as “super spreader events” by the most thoroughgoing adherents of Harris/Bidenism. Yet as soon as the establishment media declared victory for the Democratic ticket, these partisans and their affiliated masses swarmed into the streets ignoring most CDC decrees that have been invoked for months to keep you away from cherished loved ones, recreational pursuits, and houses of worship and are still in place to prevent you from enjoying the simple pleasures of life most fully. Perennial media whore Charles Schummer was caught with his mask down until he realized a video camera was focused on his shenanigans.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In Washington DC, residents are discouraged from traveling outside the boundaries of the federal city and those coming into the district from jurisdictions characterized by high rates of Plague are threatened with demands to quarantine. Yet Mayor Muriel Bowser traveled to Biden's victory announcement in Wilmington, Delaware. This mere municipal functionary insisted such a pilgrimage was essential even though the office she holds is so insignificant that government there would probably operate more efficiently if it didn't even exist in the first place.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Relatedly, Mayor Lori Lightfoot of Chicago invoked what listeners of “The Sean Hannity Program” might recall as the Ariana Huffington Doctrine when that perennial airhead responded as to why she was riding around in private jets when the average American was obligated to flagellate themselves over their own use of automobiles and fossil fuels in that these aircraft were going there anyway. In a voice significantly less sultry than that of the flip-flopping Grecian pundit, Lightfoot excused her own frolicking amongst the Biden throng conspicuously failing to socially distance in that these celebrations would have taken place whether or not she participated. Mind you, Lightfoot's contempt for the Almighty runs so deep that in the name of the Coronavirus dictatorship that she blocked access to church buildings and threatened to tow the vehicles of assembled parishoners.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Throughout nearly every level of government across America, pronouncements have been issued threatening punishment ranging from punitive fines to outright jail time for citizens daring to decide for themselves what otherwise perfectly legal and inherently moral activities can take place in their own homes. Yet when the elected officials that ironically rank among the most strident in insisting upon unwavering obedience within their respective police state fiefdoms are caught violating their own restrictions, the errant such as California Governor Gavin Newson seem to think a rendition of Brenda Lee's “I'm Sorry” with Covid-specific lyrics ought to be enough.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">See if the articulation of such formulations of contriteness prove sufficient when law enforcement operatives are beating down your door to enforce edicts that technically don't even arise to the procedural specifics of law. These statements on the part of governors such as Gavin Newsom insinuate that the vanguards of the proletariat such as himself should be showered with celebratory gratitude for providing an incarnate example of exactly how we ought not to do in furtherance of the grand experiment of transformative revolution we now find ourselves thrust into.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">This holiday season your once-vibrant elderly loved ones will slip deeper into cognitive twilight locked away in their once mentally stimulating assisted living communities now likely not much different than a cross between a prison and a loony bin. Remember that as the governors yuck it up Etruscan vomitorium style ironically maskless and shoulder to shoulder in violation of social distancing decrees with the very hierarchs of the medical establishment bent on turning the nation into a pharmaceutical police state.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Biden Deserves No Reprieve From Trump Social Media Offensivetag:12160.info,2020-11-07:2649739:BlogPost:20789972020-11-07T14:23:39.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If Trump is compelled by election results to relinquish the Oval Office, the moment he steps out of the White House he should commence tweeting and podcasting in opposition to the shortcomings of the looming Biden regime.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For there will no doubt be many.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">There should be none of this “a former President remains quiet for a year” hooey.…</span></p>
<p></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If Trump is compelled by election results to relinquish the Oval Office, the moment he steps out of the White House he should commence tweeting and podcasting in opposition to the shortcomings of the looming Biden regime.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For there will no doubt be many.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">There should be none of this “a former President remains quiet for a year” hooey.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">That is nowhere required by the Constitution.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">It is a mere tradition.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The Democrats are the ones that have been threatening to undo any number of traditions in what will amount to little more than a third Obama term.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">For whom do you think it will be guiding a President that most days couldn’t make it from the basement up the stairs into the living room?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Do those respecting tradition conspire to pack the Supreme Court or abolish the Electoral College?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Inflicting those changes upon the nation would do more to upend America’s precarious political balance than an once-elected official returning to the status of private citizen speaking his mind ever could.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Religious Progressives Abet Dictatorial Agendastag:12160.info,2020-10-06:2649739:BlogPost:20536922020-10-06T23:12:26.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It could be argued that the United States of America holds an unique position in the world in that for the most part the nation's sociopolitical system attempts to balance the competing needs of both the group and the individual. This impressive feat is accomplished in part as a result of distinctive foundations such as a constitutional framework of government and the underlying moral assumptions shared by various interpretations of the Judeo-Christian…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It could be argued that the United States of America holds an unique position in the world in that for the most part the nation's sociopolitical system attempts to balance the competing needs of both the group and the individual. This impressive feat is accomplished in part as a result of distinctive foundations such as a constitutional framework of government and the underlying moral assumptions shared by various interpretations of the Judeo-Christian philosophical tradition.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Without these restraints, eventually this way of life so easily taken for granted would collapse in favor of tyranny or anarchy with it becoming increasingly difficult to tell such extremities apart. Startlingly, one does not have to expend too much time and effort to find influential voices advocating for the abolition of these safeguards. Often such thinkers do so from a perspective claiming to be religions in terms of its motivating orientation or at least on behalf of organizations having accumulated a significant percentage of the largess upon which they operate by appealing to that particular underlying behavioral motivation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, in the 12/30/12 edition of the New York Times, Georgetown University Professor of Constitutional Law Louis Michael Seidman published an essay titled “Let's Give Up On The Constitution”. In this analysis, an intellectual employed by a prominent Roman Catholic institution advocates abolishing the document upon which the foundations of the governing structures of the Republic rest because of the numerous instances throughout American history in which adherence to the strictures of the document proved too burdensome and in which deviation from proved the expeditious thing to do. Examples cited include Justice Robert Jackson's admission that the decision handed down in “Brown vs. Board of Education” was based on moral and political necessity rather than any explicitly constitutional provision and Franklin Roosevelt's presupposition that the Constitution was a declaration of aspirations rather than binding possibilities.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Louis Seidman remarks with the condescension endemic to the professorial class, “In the face of this long history of disobedience, it is hard to take seriously the claim of the Constitution's defenders that we would be reduced to a Hobbesian state of nature... Our sometimes flagrant disregard of the Constitution has not produced chaos or totalitarianism; on the contrary, it has helped to grow and prosper.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The Americans of Japanese, German, and Italian ancestry interred during World Wat II might argue otherwise. Therefore, invoking Roosevelt's admonition that the Constitution is only a set of suggestions rather than an obligation might not be that good of an idea after all.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In the remainder of his analysis, Professor Seidman attempts to assure the reader that what ensures the continuation of America's fundamental liberties and semi-functioning government (at least in comparison to what prevails in most other parts of the world) is not some piece of paper that would literally disintegrate if not kept under the strictest climate-controlled conditions. Rather, the proverbial American way of life is continued by what Professor Seidman categorizes as “entrenched institutions and habits of thought and, most important, that sense that we are one nation and work out our differences.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But without paper the Constitution to keep competing and disparate interests and factions in check within a clearly delineated framework, would what we enjoy as Americans endure for very long? As examples of what he suggests as viable political regimes that provide civilized structures without relying upon a formalized written constitution are the United Kingdom and New Zealand.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But while these countries might hold hours of endless fascination of the setting of many a BBC drama or picture postcards, are either really a place the average American would really want to live? To put it bluntly, the population of New Zealand is about as white as the sheep for which that pastured land is famous. Would that country be able to survive and endure if its population were as varied as the United States with sizable hordes refusing to abide by the values that make a viable society possible?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In terms of the diversity we are obligated to applaud as nothing but positive or face accusations of assorted thought crimes, the United Kingdom might be more akin to its sibling society in the United States. However, in many profound ways, in this regard Great Britain is nothing to be proud of or desire to emulate.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">There swarms from the Third World, like plagues of grasshoppers, eagerly consume the sustenance that is provided like none other. And like these ravenous insects, significant percentages of these migrants would rather destroy than preserve the bounty set before them.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, in Britain, instead of exhibiting a little respect and gratitude for being extended the privilege of even being allowed to reside in such a land to begin with, one Islamist of African origins murdered a member of that nation's military along the roadside and then proudly documented the act by testifying to the atrocity in a video while still soaked in the blood of his victim. Elsewhere in that same country, others sharing in this same particular so-called religion expect their hosts to accommodate their alien peculiarities rather than for the newcomers to tone these down as any polite guest might.. For example, a number practicing polygamy demanded that each wife be allowed entrance into the country where she is in turn granted additional welfare benefits for each new whelp she continues to push out at a rate that would probably exhaust a tribblbe (the fuzzy aliens from the original Star Trek that Bones McCoy pointed out were born pregnant).</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In both the United Kingdom and New Zealand, those daring to articulate perspectives against this sort of cultural subversion could be charged with assorted thought crimes on the grounds of racial or ethnic disparagement. That is because, unlike in America, the United Kingdom and New Zealand have not enshrined freedom of expression as a fundamental right in a constitution, the very thing Professor Seidman cavalierly suggests we abolish in favor of a proposed brave new world.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In his proposal, Professor Seidman even goes out of his way to address concerns raised by those shocked by what it is their discernment warns he is suggesting. He assures, “This is not to say that we should disobey all constitutional commands. Freedom of speech and religion, equal protection of the laws and ... against governmental deprivations of life, liberty, and property are important, whether or not they are in the Constitution. We should continue to follow those requirements out of respect, not obligation.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But if these are not protected by a constitution that exists somewhat to an extent beyond the whims of ordinary politics and expediency, who is to say such niceties should not be abolished or withheld from non-compliant segments of the population when doing so would be convenient. For example, is gay marriage any longer a “right” should fifty-one percent in a plebiscite or whatever other methods are utilized to determine these kinds of questions in a world where nothing is any longer set in concrete?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Professor Seidman continues, “Nor should we have a debate about, for instance, how long the president's term should last or whether Congress should consist of two houses. Some matters are better left settled, even if not in exactly the way we favor.” Once more, who is to say?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If there is no Constitution, by what authority does one impose the perspective that such things are hereby settled? You can no longer point to an article, section, or clause of the Constitution and say, “Look. It says so right there.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Professor Seidman's gentlemanly view of society might be barely functional in a world where most of the population adhere roughly to a similar set of values. However, such a Western world in general and an America in particular sadly no longer exists.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">There is now within our midst sizable Islamic populations that not only demand their right to practice their barbarous customs but also demand that the rest of us surrender to them as well or face overwhelming violence. And this is not the only movement seeking to remake America and to eliminate what little remains of that distinct way of life and cultural perspective.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For instance, no longer is it enough to allow those that derive their deepest carnal pleasures in ways most would be shocked by or not find so appealing to so do so off on their own. Now, under threat of financial ruination, we are forced to render compelled approval in ways that violate our own convictions and sensibilities.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">According to assorted accounts, Christian bakers have been forced to provide cakes for gay weddings when there were no doubt numerous others willing to provide such culinary services. Elsewhere, young girls have been forced to look on in horror in the locker or restroom as the person undressing there before them turns out that at the most basic level is still a man no matter how vehemently they attempt to deny nature's manifest construction.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Given that Professor Seidman is a professor of Constitutional Law, one would think that in calling for the elimination of the U.S. Constitution that he was essentially derailing his own gravy train as Georgetown University professors probably pull in a hefty salary and are esteemed as part of the nation's intellectual elite.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But even if scholarship in traditional constitutional studies were to become an extinct discipline, those such as Professor Seidman convined they are so much better than the rest of us will still think it will be their place to tell the rest of us what to do. However, it will simply no longer be from the standpoint of a traditional understanding of morality. This is evidenced by the “New Social Contract” called for by Evangelical Christian Progressive Jim Wallis.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In classical democratic theory, in a social contract both parties agree to fulfill a delineated number of obligations in order to receive a desired benefit. This is done from a perspective of self-interest as much or maybe even more so than to meet the desires or needs of the other party.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, no matter how much they claim otherwise and might even pitch in during a time of crisis, the generic big box retailer or even the so-called “mom and pop” shop down the street really don't care one way or the other whether your nutritional needs are being met. What they really care about and might even be willing to go out of their way to see that your dietary inclinations are satisfied fot is if you are willing to relent to the agreed upon price for the desired commodity.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Something similar could be said of the individuals and institutions involved in the so-called social contract. Under that theory, if parties feel that the terms are not being met, individuals are free to look elsewhere for the purposes of finding their fulfillment. For example, in a constitutional republic, individuals are free to change church affiliations or their religion entirely. In terms of government, citizens are theoretically free to either change their leaders through periodic elections or the parameters of governing structures through the amendment process.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Such is not necessarily the case regarding the idea of a covenant. For unlike the idea of a contract, the notion of a covenant often does not possess the same degree of personal self-interest. Covenant carries with it the idea of being imposed upon the individual from without by a greater power irrespective of the desire of the individual or that the individual is expected to fulfill certain obligations without expectations of benefit in return.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, a number of such covenants are detailed in the pages of the Bible. Foremost among these ranks the covenants between God and the Nation of Israel as promised to the Patriarch Abraham. Although he and his descendants were blessed as a result especially when by living in accordance with these stipulations, it was God that sought this people ought and laid out the terms with little room for negotiation.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But probably the kind of covenant most are most familiar with is none other than marriage. Though marriage is usually entered into voluntarily by the involved parties, in a context that honors the institution properly, it can only be exited under the strictest of conditions that would leave the party initially guilty of violating the binding terms profoundly sanctioned often to the verge of ruination. The notion of contract provides for a way out even if there is a penalty for invoking this particular provision.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In January 2013, planetary elites met at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland. One of the sessions convened was titled “The Moral Economy: From Social Contract To Social Covenant”. The purpose of the undertaking was to establish a framework that would foster “(1) the dignity of the human person, (2) the importance of the common good, which transcends individual interests, and (3) the need for stewardship of the planet and prosperity.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">What's so wrong with any of that, one might easily ask? After all, each of these things sounds noble almost to the point of being inspirational. The problem arises in regards as to how these are defined and who does the defining.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, one of the issues harped about the most by a variety of leftists ranging from the filthy slobs of the Occupy Movement all the way to Pope Francis is the need for income redistribution. So what if the technocrats overseeing the implementation of the social covenant decide to tackle that particular economic perplexity?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Most people are disturbed by the idea of their fellow man languishing in the deprivations of overwhelming poverty. But what if the overlords of the New Social Covenant decide that the way to address that is not by sustained acts of ongoing charity but rather through the forced confiscation of what you have earned with the seized resources supposedly directed towards those that really did not earn it but in reality much of it squandered by those administering such an unprecedented global effort. After all, the Pope has all that art work to upkeep there in the Vatican and assorted U.N. Functionaries like nothing better than to gather at posh resorts in the Swiss Alps or the French seaside to denounce reliance of the middle class upon automobiles while these elites fritter from conference to conference around the globe in private jets.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Those unable to expand their imaginations beyond the relatively comfortable reality that we at the moment are blessed to enjoy counter that should some sort of global authority move to seize what we have (beyond of course the increasingly exorbitant tax rates) concerned citizens can use their freedoms of speech and assembly to petition for the redress of their grievances and to raise overall awareness about policies that have expanded beyond the bounds of propriety. But does one need to be reminded that one of the very first liberties and freedoms curtailed by the social engineers of the technocratic elite is the very freedom of expression that was part of the Constitution that was abandoned earlier in this exposition as part of the reactionary past that was hindering the further development of the human species and society?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">In this pending new world order, the law will not be the only social institution manipulating and conditioning the inmates of the planetary panopticon from exercising what at one time were categorized as individual rights. For religion in general and what passes for Christianity in particular will be invoked in pursuit of this agenda.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The foundation of this perspective can be discerned in an editorial published in the July/August 2014 issue of Christianity Today titled, “It's about the common good, not just the individual good.” According to the piece, the basis of America is not the individual or even the family as the union of two distinct individuals and the children that might result from such couplings but rather the COMMUNITY.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But if it is the larger group that is imbued with those restrictions upon concentrations of authority known as rights, what will protect the individual when the individual is viewed as nothing more than a malfunctioning cog in the machine or diseased cell in the larger social organism that must be eliminated or his flourishing curtailed over justifications no greater than the COMMUNITY has declared thusly? The Christianity Today article, in particular, briefly examines the implications of this in regards to children. Unfortunately, however, this analysis is disturbingly superficial and shortsighted.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The Christianity Today article quotes favorably of a Robert Putnam (the same sociologist that categorizes you as some sort of deviant if you bowl by yourself) at Georgetown University, “Kids from working-class homes used to be 'our kids' he said, Now they are other people's kids, and we expect other people to solve their problems. But young people are our future. Their problems are ours.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The Christianity Today editorial realized that the remarks were speaking to the matter of inequality. In other words, the increasingly leftist Evangelical mouthpiece apparently has little problem in attempting to shame and manipulate you into forking over increasing percentages of what you have earned and saved. “What, you don't support the progressive income and inheritance taxes? Why do you hate children and refuse to do your part to usher in the revolutionary utopia?”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">One would hope that the current editors of that particular publication would retain enough of its founders' intellectual heritage to realize that there exists more to life than merely the physical building blocks. As the such, the phrase “our kids” when spoken in reference to any youngsters other than those you might share with your respective spouse or have adopted as one's own ought to send chills down the spine of any reflective discerning individual.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For if children are to be seen as “our children” in terms of being the children of a respective COMMUNITY apart from a few basic needs such as minimal food, shelter, and maybe healthcare, what is to prevent governing authorities from intervening to dictate what you can and cannot teach in terms of religious doctrine and morality? For example, do you believe that belief in Jesus Christ as the only Begotten Son of God and member of the Trinity is the one true faith?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Well, in the New World Order where the good and preferences of the group come before those of the individual, such an outdated understanding of the ultimate cannot be allowed even if you are an otherwise peaceful individual with no intentions of harming anyone in a traditional sense of that concept. For the assumption that a source of authority exists outside the uniformity of the group consensus is the seed from which all conflict generates forth.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The First Amendment is not the only one of the derided and denigrated constitutional liberties endangered by those out to impose the fundamental transformation of America advocated by President Obama and embraced by certain radicals in the name of errant theology. For if the First Amendment is the constitutional provision upon which our foundational liberties rest, then the Second Amendment is the constitutional provision that attempts to make sure that the robust liberties elaborated in the First Amendment continue to endure. For despite what even the National Rifle Association has been intimidated into repeating, the Second Amendment is about far more that guaranteeing the right to hunt and participate in shooting sports.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Rather, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to recognize and enshrine the idea that each citizen has a role to play in protecting life, liberty, and property against threats to these precious commodities originating from both within and without the borders of the United States. And yes, as the very last resort after all other alternatives have been exhausted, that may mean solemnly with deliberation and reluctance taking up arms against whatever form the threat may take on the most regrettable of occasions.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">But even more importantly, it is the Second rather than the First Amendment that actually serves as a barometer of the health of liberty and freedom throughout this land. For without a government and civil society that respects the right to keep and bear arms arms as described in the Second Amendment, the seemingly loftier protections of conviction and expression will not endure much longer. That is because a country or regime that refused to acknowledge the right to protect oneself will eventually not tolerate the right to think for oneself or in a manner not as directed by those holding power.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Even those claiming to view God as the highest authority cannot resist the temptation of the continuing centralization of power. This is evidenced in two 2013 issues of the Christian Century.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The editorial titled “Terror and Guns” examined the issue by comparing the three that lost their lives in the Boston Marathon Bombing to three that lost their lives that same day in acts of gun violence elsewhere across the nation. From that the editorial made the claim that 30,000 Americans are killed by guns each year compared to the seventeen Americans that lost their lives to acts of terrorism in 2012.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If such statistics are trustworthy, that certainly causes one to pause. But instead of making the case that the extensive national security and surveillance apparatus that these sorts of left-leaning publications condemn when applied to subversives of assorted revolutionary or radical perspectives be abolished, it is insinuated that a similarly heavy hand should be applied to the matter of gun crimes and even firearms ownership. The Christian Century writes, “Terrorist threats demand vigilance, and the government has responded by creating an extensive security and intelligence capability...Why can't the nation display the same kind of resolve when it comes to keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people?”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As evidence of this lamentation, editors of Christian Century write, “In the case of the Senate gun control bill, a majority of senators voted to strengthen background checks in people purchasing guns, but the 54-46 vote did not attain the 60 votes required in the Senate. Something is wrong with a process by which a minority can derail legislation that is supported by 90% of Americans.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Apparently the editors could not leave their analysis at that. These propagandists continued, “Many of the votes against background checks were cast by senators from small or sparsely populated states. Based on population the vote of a senator from Wyoming has 66 times more value than that of a senator from California. This kind of disparity in political power is not what the Founding Fathers had in mind.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">From that editorial, one would initially assume in terms of the issue emphasized on the surface that the concern would be a vast comprehensive national surveillance system that would determine who would be denied access to firearms. However, just as insidious is an underlying contempt for the structures of the Republic as envisioned by the framers of the Constitution.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For the United States of America does not consist solely of “We the people” merely as a singular mass or collective of individuals. Just as intrinsic to the understanding of this particular nation is “We the people” construed as fifty distinct jurisdictional entities known as states. From that particular vantage point, each of these is to be viewed as equal to the others in terms of the voice granted in the second body of the national legislature in determining the direction in terms of law and policy that will guide the nation as a comprehensive totality.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">From the statement in the Christian Century commentary complaining that the political weight of a Wyoming senator is skewered in that jurisdiction's favor over that of California with its vastly larger population, the logic would conclude that right and wrong are determined by nothing more than majority opinion. So if we are to apply that principle in regards to the regulation of firearms, the shouldn't the good liberals at propaganda outfits such as the Christian Century allow the principle to be applied to other cultural issues nearly as contentious as those surrounding the Second Amendment?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">For example, if most Americans were asked what they really believed without fear of retaliation on the part of the Thought Police, most would probably admit that they are not all that hip to the idea of gay marriage and certainly not open to the idea of transgenders especially men claiming that they are women as evidenced by their external endowments legally allowed to go into a public restroom where they can in close proximity to actual women and vulnerable children engage in some of life's most personal biological function as well as possibly seek these individuals out as victims to satisfy the most base of carnal impulses.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">If a few senators can disrupt the will of the people in regards to one area of life, why should a few jurists not even as directly accountable to the electorate as these disputed legislators be allowed to impose a perspective at even greater odds with decency and common sense. For is not the chanted slogan of the ethical Thunder Dome in which the nearly constant social conflict takes place that there are no absolutes?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As interesting is how the appeal to traditional moral authority is only valid when it can be buttressed to support the preferred sensibilities of the prevailing elites. This was quite evident in a second Christian Century editorial published about a similar topic on 2/6/13 titled “Of Guns and Neighbors.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The thesis of that broadside contends that individual rights are curtailed by the good of one's neighbor in Christian understanding. The editorial states, “In the biblical perspective, social issues are always framed primarily as questions of obligation, not of individual rights: not 'What do I get to do?' but 'What do we owe to God and neighbor?'.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">The editorial demonstrates how this reasoning is applied to the firearms debate by quoting Deuteronomy 22:8. The text reads, “When you build a new home, you shall make a parapet for your roof; otherwise you might have bloodguilt on your house , if anyone should fall from it.”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">So what other nuggets of jurisprudence derived from the Book of Deuteronomy interpreted through the prism of the principle that “social issues are always framed primarily as questions of obligation, not of individual rights...” is the Christian Century editorial board going to come out in favor of? No doubt this propaganda rag of mainline Protestantism of the Episcopal and Presbyterian Church, USA variety has come out in full blown support of gay marriage.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">Without question, it cannot be denied that the Old Testament legal books such as Deuteronomy explicitly opposed the homosexual lifestyle and by extension the agenda advocated by those most enthusiastically mired in these particular behaviors. Given the ethical standard called for by the Christian Century, is the publication now required to withdraw any support it might have articulated in favor of gay marriage? The editorial titled “Of Guns and Neighbors” just said ethics and morality are not determined by what we get out of something but rather upon what we owe our neighbor and, even more importantly, God.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">As such, if it can be deduced from these texts that God does not endorse unrestricted access to firearms (something that is not clearly spelled out in the texts), shouldn't we at least admit that the only relationship with physical pleasure being one of the foundational cornerstones that God looks favorably upon without condemnation or criticism is monogamous heterosexual marriage? Those claiming otherwise have ignored the explicit directives of the Biblical text to such an extent that we might as well toss it aside entirely in regards to other issues regarding assorted ideologues desire to render behavioral, legislative, or policy pronouncements.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">It is often assumed in Christian circles that the greatest threat to human liberty are often those that categorize themselves as atheist or agnostic in that their hostility towards God is outward and explicit. However, as has been emphasized in this analysis particularly in regards to the movement to either eliminate or comprehensively alter the understanding of America's most basic constitutional liberties, there are a number of voices claiming to be religious in nature utilizing the beliefs and principles derived from such for the purposes of manipulating those open to the perspectives of this particular social sphere into surrendering the sorts of protections not easily recoverable once they have been surrendered.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 14pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Hit & Run Commentary #129tag:12160.info,2020-07-12:2649739:BlogPost:20299702020-07-12T13:19:48.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Apparently women that don’t cook from scratch are failures for violating Biblical admonitions regarding taking care of their families because processed foods and preservatives are not mentioned in Scripture. Utilizing such logic, does that make one a failure as a man if you cannot get his woman to comply with this objective? More importantly, aren’t you a failure if you propagate your decree by any method other than the sort of parchments upon which the…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Apparently women that don’t cook from scratch are failures for violating Biblical admonitions regarding taking care of their families because processed foods and preservatives are not mentioned in Scripture. Utilizing such logic, does that make one a failure as a man if you cannot get his woman to comply with this objective? More importantly, aren’t you a failure if you propagate your decree by any method other than the sort of parchments upon which the original canonical texts were written upon? It is at this point where the condemnation starts rolling in for hashing out where such presuppositions end up.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">To keep the flames of racial animosity and resentment stoked, the Washington Post published a supplement 9/4/19 titled “Teaching Slavery”. An interesting fact contained within was that at one point in his life Ulysses S. Grant owned slaves. As such, shouldn’t all statues of him on public land and in parks be removed? And if Andrew Jackson must be removed from the twenty dollar bill over his shortcomings in terms of race relations to be replaced by Harriet Tubman, shouldn’t Grant be similarly removed from the $50 and replaced with someone like Frederick Douglas or Sojourner Truth?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">National Review has published an analysis titled “Walmart’s Retreat On Guns Means Woke Capitalism Is Here To Stay”. Ironic that those supporting this use of corporate policy to alter the ethical landscape by denying access to perfectly legal products used to rampage the most about the impropriety of someone imposing their morality upon someone else.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">An infant changing table was erected in the stall of a men’s room. On it was a warning reading, “Never leave children unattended.” Yet neither of these things were that worthy of note. What leapt out about the situation was that the warning was printed on the hygenic fixture in Braille. The blind of course need to change their children like anybody else. But are you going to tell me that they are going to run their hands all over the changing table in pursuit of that message?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Home school activist Kevin Swanson admonished believers not to grumble about persecution and tyranny. No doubt he would have also believed the wrought iron words on the camp gate “Work set you free”.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">So are these global warming brats going to surrender their posh lifestyles and pursue careers of subsistence agriculture rather than degrees in useless academic majors such as minority or gender studies?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Outrage has erupted over anyone that has responded to Greta Thunberg and her brand of Young Pioneers with anything other than abject acquiescence. WiIl similar condemnation be leveled at the pedagogues and propagandists that manipulated her into such a froth in the first place?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Outrage has erupted against those that have given anything but the benefit of the doubt to Young Pioneer Greta Thunberg. Yet these are no doubt the same ones that rhetorically called for the scalp of the Maga hat Catholic lad that did nothing more than look on with a perplexed smirk on his face as some American Indian beat a drum in his face like some sort of lunatic.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If at 16, Greta Thunberg is apparently too young to handle criticism of her call for planetary revolution and the upending of the contemporary socioeconomic system, why ought we to assume that those of the same age are capable of deciding matters of abortion and contraception for themselves?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If Greta Thunberg and her band of Young Pioneers are really all that concerned about pending environmental collapse, why did they nor prevent the unnecessary expenditure of fossil fuels by addressing Congress and the United Nations through virtual telepresence rather than by personal appearance?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If authorities across Europe punish Christian parents homeschooling their children over violating compulsory attendance laws, why aren’t the parents of Greta Thunberg as vigorously prosecuted for being even more neglectful for allowing her to miss academic instructional time in favor of subversive activism?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">If Comrade Thunberg is going to invoke autism as an excuse to deflect analysis of her policy proposals, what is so wrong with pointing out she has a mental illness? Doesn’t her sort constantly remind the general population of their neurological state when attempting to get their handouts denied everybody else and at times even why they should not be required to abide by the standards of conduct by which the remainder of us are expected to comport ourselves?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Outrage has erupted over a Michigan ruling deciding that faith-based adoption agencies can refuse to place children with gay prospective parents. Will those feigning concern over the civil liberties implications of such a verdict get as jacked out of shape over religious foster parents and assorted childcare providers forbidden from teaching the youth in their care as to what constitutes a morally proper family and carnal relations?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In criticizing the feminist criticism of the Joker film, Rush Limbaugh closed his morning update remarking in regards to comic book movies that these productions are signs that people need to grow up. What about himself? Limbaugh is the one that has had four wives, the latest nearly thirty years younger than himself. Limbaugh ridicules entertainment derived from comics. Yet he is on the record as being such a fan of the series 24 that there exists a photo of him just about playing tonsil hockey with the actress that portrayed the character Chloe when both appeared at a Heritage Foundation panel discussion examining the conservative fan base that developed surrounding that drama. Can it explained how Jack Bauer is any different than Batman or at least the Punisher?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Is Everybody Else Responsible To Maintain Your Health?tag:12160.info,2020-06-21:2649739:BlogPost:20264812020-06-21T15:14:00.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">At the Trump campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, attendees were allowed to decide for themselves whether or not they would wear a mask.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Medical establishment functionaries (many of which no one elected to office or not even employed as part of the civil service) issued numerous pronouncements decreeing that those deciding not to conceal their countenances in the proscribed manner were threatening the lives of those…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">At the Trump campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, attendees were allowed to decide for themselves whether or not they would wear a mask.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Medical establishment functionaries (many of which no one elected to office or not even employed as part of the civil service) issued numerous pronouncements decreeing that those deciding not to conceal their countenances in the proscribed manner were threatening the lives of those with compromised immune systems.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">But unlike a supermarket, one does not possess a compelling necessity to attend a political rally in order to continue one’s existence or maintain one’s quality of life.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">As such, so long the individual is fully cognizant that masks will not be required at a particular venue or event, doesn’t there come a point where the individual needs to shoulder some of the responsibility for their own healthcare maintenance rather than to pawn that obligation off on everybody else?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">After all, haven’t we been told for decades now that if you don’t want your mind or soul soiled by filthy media, then don’t tune into such productions?</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Likewise, if you are afraid of picking up a disease in a place that the purpose in being there is more of a pleasure than a necessity, perhaps you ought consider not going there in the first place.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>Christians For The Most Part Not Responsible For America's Messtag:12160.info,2020-06-03:2649739:BlogPost:20240382020-06-03T03:30:00.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>There is one thing that Americans will agree on and that is that the country is in a mess. The socio-economic situation totters on the brink of collapse with deficits and debts poised to consume in wholesale the total value of the nation's wealth. Upon hearing of trial verdicts or police actions not to their liking, like clockwork certain predictable segments of the population no longer simply utilize their constitutional rights to articulate their disagreement but instead like invading…</p>
<p>There is one thing that Americans will agree on and that is that the country is in a mess. The socio-economic situation totters on the brink of collapse with deficits and debts poised to consume in wholesale the total value of the nation's wealth. Upon hearing of trial verdicts or police actions not to their liking, like clockwork certain predictable segments of the population no longer simply utilize their constitutional rights to articulate their disagreement but instead like invading hordes loot and pillage their way through the inventories of merchants that had nothing whatsoever to do with the initial perceived miscarriage of justice. Elsewhere, parents and children reluctant about sharing facilities in which the most private of acts take place with members of the opposite of sex are accused of fomenting the most vile forms of bigotry.</p>
<p>Astonishingly, the elites of the mainstream media insist that the way to resolve this crisis is not by returning to at least the rudiments of the principles that usually lay the foundations of both personal success and cultural vitality. Instead, what such technocrats seem to counsel is how those still holding to that foundation are in large part responsible for the widespread decay. To such minds, the only way to restore a semblance of social tranquility is to for the most part eliminate the Judeo-Christian influence with an inordinate amount of that effort directed against the conservative Christian component.</p>
<p>The first step in neutralizing the Christian influence in order the bring about what Barack Obama categorized as a fundamental transformation of the American way of life is to coerce, cajole, and manipulate conservative believers across the various interpretations of Christianity into altering their foundational conceptions of the Afterlife. At the most basic, the faithful contend that those believing in Christ after enduring the struggles and vicissitudes of this world marred by sin will be welcomed into their reward of unending bliss in a perfect realm referred to as Heaven. Those having come to the end of their earthly lives without coming to faith in Jesus Christ will be punished in unending torment likened unto interminable darkness and fire understood to be Hell.</p>
<p>This approach is evident in a April 16, 2012 “Time Magazine” article by Jon Meacham titled “Heaven Can Wait: Why Rethinking The Hereafter Could Make The World A Better Place”. In his analysis, Meacham does not believe that the concept of Heaven should be taught necessarily as an objective doctrine that provides comfort to those realizing that whatever personal suffering with which they are afflicted is likely not to be resolved this side of the grave. Rather, the validity of the concept of the Afterlife is to be determined in terms of its temporal utility. In other words, what value can we (or rather the elites that run society) get from it now in terms of manipulating mere commoners into complying with prevailing ideologies and revolutionary fads.</p>
<p>Borrowing from the interpretation of Anglican Bishop and New Testament scholar N.T. Wright, Meacham writes, “What if Christianity is not about enduring this sinful, fallen world in search of a reward of eternal rest? What if the authors of the New Testament were actually talking about a bodily resurrection in which God brings together the heavens and the earth in a wholly new, wholly redeemed creation?” To most, this sounds a whole lot like a distinction without a difference.</p>
<p>Most that have studied the End Times know that there will indeed be a new Heaven and a new Earth with the likelihood of there being travel back and forth between the two. Those residing in what has traditionally been thought of as Heaven or the New Jerusalem that will be floating above the Earth sort of like a gigantic extraterrestrial mothership will most likely be believers that died prior to the Resurrection. On Earth will likely dwell those that, through the grace of God, survived the Great Tribulation or the descendants of such born during the Millennial reign of Christ with its focus upon Israel, a remnant of which will come to faith in Christ upon realizing the error of that nation's rejection of the Messiah inherent to systematized Judaism.</p>
<p>Of course many Christians are not aware of these truths. Hardly any theologies teach these things boldly with the exception of a handful of dispensational or premillennial theologians concentrated in Fundamentalist, Charismatic, or conservative Evangelical circles. Most such as mainline Protestants such as the Episcopalians and Roman Catholics undermine interest in these passages of Scripture by teaching that these are not to be taken literally but are merely a convoluted literary metaphor regarding the ongoing struggle between good evil. Devout yet hardline Reformed and Presbyterian types insist that the events detailed in the prophetic passages of Scripture haver already taken place on what seems to our contemporary times the distant past.</p>
<p>Interestingly, in the version of Heaven that we are to be allowed to retain as a result of the graciousness of the ruling technocrats and their religious functionaries that they have apparently co-opted, the notion of the Resurrection seems to be little more than an unconnected holdover. For this description of what might still be called the Afterlife (for lack of a better term) doesn't really sound all that different than what we are already experiencing as business as usual.</p>
<p>Meachem writes, “But if you believe the world will be destroyed at the very last day while the blessed look down from a disembodied heaven, then you are most likely going to view things of this world in a different light than someone who believes there will be a bodily resurrection or an earth that is to be ..'our eternal home'.” From this difference, Meachem concludes, “Accepting the latter can mean different priorities, conceivably putting issues like saving the environment up their with saving souls.”</p>
<p>Perhaps there is some truth to the old adage that some are so focused on Heaven that they are no earthly good. However, from the eschatological expectation as articulated by Jon Meachem, those focusing on the terrestrial counterpart of a new Heaven and a new Earth don't seem to fully take to the implications of the concept of “new”.</p>
<p>For as articulated here, Meachem seems to assume that these glorified bodies will simply continue to exist in the same old world that we have always known subject to the all-to-familiar ravages of entropy and decay. He does not seem to take into account II Peter 3:10 how the present elements will melt away in a fervent heat. So why shouldn't the new Earth be as free from death and disease as our new bodies unless Meachem believes that once we die physically we will be plagued with having to endure this process yet again?</p>
<p>Interestingly, this desire on the part of otherwise secular progressives such as Meacham articulating their subdued spirituality is not so that the world we inhabit at the moment might be made a better reflection of the goodness and righteousness conceptualized in its most undiluted form in the presence of God. If anything, the motifs and symbols of belief are only being invoked in a last ditch effort to be do away with the adherents of traditional religious perspectives once and for all.</p>
<p>In his analysis, Meachem observes that these differing understandings of Heaven are in part responsible for the profound division characterizing contemporary American society and politics. But instead of admonishing those with their minds in this world to instead look up so that they might elevate their decorum and character, it is those holding to traditional understandings of virtue that are being asked --- and in certain instances even threatened and commanded --- to take a back seat and assume a posture of silence.</p>
<p>For example, an article published in December 2012 at Yahoo News was titled “Does the GOP need a religious retreat?'. In the analysis, it was pointed out that America is growing increasingly secular and perhaps even antagonistic towards viewpoints that could be categorized as traditionally religious in their orientation towards concepts such as family and morality. But Evangelicals were not applauded for standing by their beliefs in the face of overwhelming societal pressure the way contemporary media and culture for the most part in the celebratory manner often lavished upon the Amish.</p>
<p>George Mason University Professor of Public Policy Mark Rozell is quoted as saying, “The way Republicans speak is turning off the youngest, fastest growing groups in the country --- Latinos and significantly the unchurched, those with no religious affiliation. To them, the Republicans are proselytizing.”</p>
<p>But at least proselytizing denotes an effort to get someone to change their beliefs through rational persuasion or a verbally articulated appeal. These secularists and their radical progressivist allies simply demand immediate acquiescence to their ultimatums or else, with that often up to and including threats of violence.</p>
<p>Reflecting upon the tendency of the rising generation of believers not to stand for their beliefs and to simply cave to the demands of the encroaching culture, George Mason University Professor of Political Science James Wilcox is quoted in the same article as saying, “Young evangelicals don't look at the country as a battlefield...They see the 'War and Religion' narrative as nonsense; they see churches thriving ... and the extent of religious pluralism in this country.”</p>
<p>If this is how young evangelicals see the world, America is worse off than we think. For it means these individuals are not aware of what is going on around them or have incorporated into their own perspective a number of presuppositions that do not belong to a Christian worldview.</p>
<p>It has been said that, if fish could talk, they would still not be able to explain how it feels to be wet. By that, it means those that know nothing else are not usually the best ones to rely upon to explain a particular situation.</p>
<p>The youth and young adults of today have know nothing but overwhelming theological compromise, social decline, and cultural degeneracy. For example, even the Southern Baptist Convention, despite experiencing what many scholars of religious history would categorize as a conservative resurgence commencing in the closing decades of the twentieth century, is now publishing a gender neutral “linguistically inclusive” version of the Bible. And even that is apparently not enough capitulation to the advocates of political correctness.</p>
<p>At the 2017 annual meeting, a resolution was ultimately passed condemning the alleged racial superiority of the so-called “Alt Right”. But while some organizations and ideologies classified under that particular designation indeed peddle a number of questionable assumptions regarding race and ethnicity, the Alt Right is much broader and more complex for the Southern Baptist Convention to dismiss the spokesman of such a broad category outrightly so quickly.</p>
<p>After all, the Southern Baptist Convention did not come out as forcefully against Black Lives Matter and the accompanying protests resulting in upheaval leading to the considerable destruction of private property of individuals and businesses in no way directly responsible for the questionable police actions and ensuing judicial verdicts that led to this palpable outage.</p>
<p>An op-ed published in the 10/25/10 edition of USA Today titled “In God-fearing USA, Where Is The Decency?” blames the lack of civility in American politics on Evangelicals. The essay goes on to provide a couple of examples of this phenomena as well as figures attempting to slowly turn around the ship of state.</p>
<p>As a foremost example, the column's author Tom Krattenmaker details the outrages of Senator David Vitter of Louisiana. For a campaign ad categorized as “punching below the belt” against public benefits for illegal aliens, Vitter is condemned for utilizing images of “dark skinned” Mexicans pouring through a hole in the fence. Would it have been more accurate to have filmed the piece with the buxom fair-skinned actresses from the Telemundo telenovellas who, though Hispanic, have a significant European heritage if they were to submit their samples to one of those fly by night DNA registries constantly advertised on TV?</p>
<p>The column pointed at Senator Vitter's hypocrisy of basing many of his public policy pronouncements on a Judeo-Christian foundation despite Vitter having been caught in an affair with a prostitute. Fair enough.</p>
<p>But ironically, unless one wants to base sexual morality on a Biblical foundation rather than a slippery slope of everyone determining that which is right in their own eyes, aren't those outraged at Vitter's alleged hypocrisy actually the biggest hypocrites of them all? For if we really shouldn't get involved in between of what goes on between two consenting adults, what is so wrong with prostitution so long as the adults involved aren't forced into against their will if the Ten Commandments have been eliminated as the overarching behavioral guideline? After all, it is doubtful Senator Vitter selected the toothless meth addict in the alley behind a local convenience store or in the parking lot of a fleabag motel.</p>
<p>If our bodies really are ours to do with as we please, what's so wrong with what Senator Vitter did? Under the paradigm of radical existentialist bodily autonomy allowed to fester in other sectors of social policy and culture, the only thing Senator Vitter and his lady of the evening really are guilty of are failing to comply with technically obtuse and nearly impossible to understand taxation and labor laws.</p>
<p>The USA Today article that goes on from an incident that is only wrong ultimately if one buys into the exact traditionalist morality that these radical secularists are actually calling for the elimination of to suggest that the real reason America finds itself in the tumult that the nation is mired in today is because of the failure of politically active Christians and conservatives to compromise on a number of fundamental beliefs in favor of a nebulous “civility” that attempts to emphasize the decorum found among a variety of often disparate worldviews and ideologies. These principles have been apparently elaborated more fully in a document known as the “Contract For Civility”.</p>
<p>Of such lofty-sounding endeavors, the discerning are often cautious as more often than not they are little more than mechanisms by which to box in or handcuff those coming closest to abiding by the standards of righteousness. The Civility Project was conceived of by a number of Evangelical Christians and Jew Lanny Davis. That's right, politically astute observer of current affairs, THAT Lanny Davis.</p>
<p>For those that might not be as familiar, about the only reason anyone knows about Lanny Davis is because he has pretty much made a career of publicly defending the Clinton's no matter what. Because of the hypocrisy of having such a celebrity promoting an effort lecturing the rest of us on how we are and are not to behave in terms of how we express our innermost thoughts and beliefs, many have refused to get on board or even reneged over having signed the document to begin with following additional reflection.</p>
<p>Because of the reluctance to bind oneself to the civility covenant, Krattenmaker further laments, “Speaking of those hardball rules, another seems to require that thou shalt not acknowledge anything good about anyone or anything on the other side of the figurative aisle.” If Lanny Davis is to be upheld as the sterling example to which we troglodytes and peons are expected to aspire in terms of public deportment, since his notoriety is owed for his links to the Clintons, did he denounce Hillary Clinton for her categorization of those that simply voted for Donald Trump as “deplorables”. Interesting, isn't it, how all of the compromise is expected from those on the right side of the aisle while those on the left are applauded for looting and prancing down the streets in costumes depicting the unmentionables of the female anatomy?</p>
<p>Praised as a religious leader courageously championing civility in these uncouth times is Jim Wallis of Sojourner''s Magazine. Krattenmaker applauds the numerous Bible verses soaking through his own civility campaign such as Ephesians 4:31 (“Put off falsehood and speak truthfully”), Ephesians 4:31 (“Get rid of all bitterness, rage, anger, brawling, and slander, along with every form of malice”) and James 1:19 (“Be quick to listen, slow to speak, and slow to become angry”).</p>
<p>Considering these Scriptures in relation to Sojourners Magazine, the discerning cannot help but feel a little bit conflicted. On the one hand, it is almost touching that Sojourners is taking God's Holy Word seriously for a change in light of the publication's endorsement of wanton carnality such as gay marriage as well as providing a forum for those that regularly undermine orthodox theology such as Brian McLaren. On the other hand, one is almost overcome with a sense of profound disappointment upon realizing that Sojourners has no intentions whatsoever of holding its allies to these behavioral guidelines but merely inclined to invoke them to curtail the liberties of religious traditionalists duped into these sorts of agreements.</p>
<p>For example, during the 1980's, “Sojourners Magazine” backed the Sandinistas of Nicaragua. As avowed Marxists, did these insurrectionists “get rid of all bitterness, rage, anger, brawling and slander”? Most certainly not as each of these are intrinsic strategies from the Communist playbook on the way to seize power.</p>
<p>It must be granted that picking sides in Third World political conflicts is difficult. In terms of upholding human rights, the Contras backed by a number on the political right such as Oliver North were little better. However, “Sojourners Magazine” doesn't even apply the standards of civility the publication is calling for in the contemporary early twenty-first century American context not yet irrevocably marred by upheaval or bloodshed that could be characterized as widespread or pervasive.</p>
<p>Of political conservatives, voices at Sojourners such as Jim Wallis would ask that the tone and exaggeration of vocalized outrage be downplayed and pulled back. Therefore, to be consistent, shouldn't this prominent organ of the press also admonish leftist protest movements similarly?</p>
<p>“Sojourners” did nothing of the sort. If anything, the exact opposite strategy was pursued.</p>
<p>For example, “Sojourners” did not condemn Occupy Wall Street as radical extremists given over to inexcusable violence directed at the private property of commercial enterprises or even churches. Instead the magazine extolled Occupy hooligans as prophetic voices and counseled churches susceptible to this form of propaganda to aide and abet the flagrant subversion and vandalism by bestowing items of charity upon these wanton insurgents and even opening up their sanctuaries as places of respite. It would probably take a miracle of God to get the body funk out of the carpet and off the pews should any church heed such a call given that many Occupy activists aren't exactly renowned for their adherence to conventional grooming practices.</p>
<p>As part of the call for civility, the social engineers behind this manipulation campaign insists that we are to downplay our differences in the attempt to emphasize instead what we have in common. It is hoped that the result will be a bland pluralism in which we will surrender to the realized stupor that most viewpoints and systems are pretty much the same with no one's values really better than anyone else's. Yet the end result, as usual, is that traditional religionists and those of an allied conservative mindset are the ones expected to adopt affirmative quiescence for the sake of sociopolitical cohesion or face the consequences.</p>
<p>One such article embodying the spirit of “all values are equal except those questioning the secularist hegemony” is titled “Of Course Evangelicals Are Backing Trump: Their Beliefs Are Illogical And Contradictory”. While focusing primarily upon the initially perplexing incongruity of many deeply devout Evangelical conservatives politically backing Donald Trump who rather matter of factly lived life as an existential reprobate, the article also highlighted a number of policy areas Christian Conservatives are expected to compromise over if any sense of social harmony is to be restored to American politics and culture. Of Christians willing to betray a variety of the faith's most basic assumptions, the author gushes, “Luckily, these sorts of doctrinally orthodox, thoughtful, tolerant and compassionate Christians are growing within evangelical groups. I think it's even fair to say they''ll make up most of the next generation of Christians. They're among the most intelligent and wonderful people I know.”</p>
<p>Now lets take a moment to consider what his author is saying. In civic pronouncements, the resident of the twenty-first century is indoctrinated that it is no longer sufficient to begrudgingly put up with those with whom you disagree. Instead one is obligated to explicitly affirm the way and by what creeds everybody else decides to live their lives.</p>
<p>Yet in his essay, Mack Hayden says that these allegedly orthodox, thoughtful, and compassionate Christians that find Donald Trump “politically reprehensible” are the most wonderful people that he knows. And what is it exactly that makes these people so wonderful?</p>
<p>Why believing, in terms of politics, almost identically with Mack Hayden of course! But by making this sort of judgment, how is he fundamentally different than any other absolutist that insists that not all values or ideas are equal and in terms of how this impacts close relationships it is the proverbial my way or the highway?</p>
<p>And just what is it that makes the Evangelicals that go along with a considerable degree of Trump's initial agenda if not the glaring personal shortcomings of the President so “deplorable” in the words of Hilary Clinton and echoed in the sentiments of the Mack Hayden article?</p>
<p>Hayden writes, “If evangelicals want to reduce the size of government, they must argue with Paul about whether Christians should rebel against government at all. If they want to try to influence government with levitical commands against homosexuality, they must ask themselves why they aren't similarly trying to influence it to legislate morality when it comes to charitable giving.”</p>
<p>Hayden carries on, “If they want the redistribution of wealth, to be considered anathema, they must disagree with both the Old and New Testaments. If they believe God created the heavens and the earth, they must answer why they don't want to protect it. If they want to cry out for the rights of the unborn, they must be able to answer YHWH's admonitions and Christ's questions about why they tried to keep the refugee, and the immigrant, or the disadvantaged from assistance.”</p>
<p>Of these typical conservative Evangelical policy positions, Hayden characterizes these as marked by “illogicality and contradiction”. But instead the situation would be better characterized as one of profound worldview differences.</p>
<p>For example, if Evangelicals want to reduce the size of government, what does that have to do with failure to heed Paul's admonition about rebelling against government? More disturbingly, is Mark Hayden saying that the only legitimate government is a totalitarian one large enough to control all aspects of existence?</p>
<p>The injunction Hayden is probably referring to is Romans 13. Though Mr. Hayden would probably have few qualms about turning the United States into a comprehensive bureaucratic regime along the lines of the Soviet Union and what Americans are likely to end up with if religious conservatives adopt the kind of political pacifism he is apparently calling for, at the moment the United States is not the sort of regime where ultimate authority rests in an office held by a single human being or even a plurality of archons.</p>
<p>Rather, the distinction of the highest temporal authority governing America is instead the U.S. Constitution. The legitimacy of that particular document, in turn, is derived from “We the people.”</p>
<p>As such, the people calling for limited government are not the ones in a state of rebellion. That transgression is being committed by the elected officials and assisting bureaucrats extending the power that they have been vested with into areas over which they have not been granted an explicit foundational mandate.</p>
<p>Next Hayden conjectured that if Trumpist Evangelicals want to influence government with Levitical commands against homosexuality, they must also legislate morality in regards to charitable giving. Once again, Hayden proves that Scriptures cannot be correctly understood unless one has the wisdom of the Holy Spirit.</p>
<p>With the exception of hardline theocrats of whom it must be admitted have a disturbing degree of influence beyond their number, very few Evangelicals advocating a social philosophy inspired by the Bible are advocating a position regarding homosexuality based solely upon the Book of Leviticus (from which the adjective “levitical” utilized by Mr. Hayden is derived). For although the New Testament punishments against physical pleasure beyond the bounds of heterosexual marriage are not as extreme or as explicit as those of the Old Testament, the condemnation of such cannot be denied unless the theologian or exegete is deliberately going out of their way in order to contradict a plane reading of the text. It says in Romans 1: 26-27, “Because of this God gave them over to shameful lusts... In the same waythe men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another . Men committed indecent acts with one another, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion ”. This disapproval is further emphasized in I Corinthians where it says, “Do you not know that the wicked will not inherent the Kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexual offenders, nor thieves, nor the greedy, now swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”.</p>
<p>As such, given the nature of this revelation, the Christian holding that God does indeed offer forgiveness to anyone willing to confess that they are a sinner and that nothing can be done to wash away the stain of sin but to claim that one has been washed in the shed blood of Christ does not necessarily want to see the same penalty imposed as that under the Old Covenant with Israel. However, it does not follow that these sorts of relationships should then therefore be allowed with all of society then compelled to celebrate them for fear of the retribution likely to follow from exhibiting an insufficient degree of enthusiasm.</p>
<p>Mr. Hayden then adds to his snide remark incorporating charitable giving into those aspects of morality that can be legislated. He writes, “If they want the redistribution of wealth to be considered anathema, they must disagree with both Old and New Testaments.” Once again, he proves what a dangerous thing incomplete knowledge can be.</p>
<p>Both the Old and New Testaments do teach the importance of charitable giving. However, nowhere is this admonishment to be construed in a coercive manner.</p>
<p>The smart alack critic might respond that, in Old Testament Israel, Deuteronomy 14:22 orders those living under the Covenant to give give a tenth of what they have to the Lord. So is that the premise they really wish to argue from?</p>
<p>Alrighty then. What the text is calling for is for donation into the centralized storehouse of the Lord.</p>
<p>In other words, the contribution was to go directly into the coffers of the centralized institutional religious authority. So would Mr. Hayden like to call for the establishment of a national church that he would be required to give to irrespective of whether or not he agreed with the organization in terms of doctrine and theology.</p>
<p>In the New Testament in particular (that portion of Christian Scripture the reprobates like to invoke when they want to insist that God is really no longer into punishing that which used to be categorized as sin), the model extolled tends to be more voluntary in nature. II Corinthians 9:7 assures that God loveth a cheerful giver.</p>
<p>That means God wants us to give what we want to give. Seldom is anything done under the compulsion of the threat of violence (which in essence what every law is) done cheerfully. God realizes that, in this so-called Dispensation of Grace, He will have more flowing into His coffers by allowing believers to do so on their own than if He fires and brimstones the faithful into coughing up what they owe like the proverbial mafia goon twisting the arm of a resentful shopkeeper.</p>
<p>Apostates advocating the idea of compulsory collection and redistribution of resources love nothing more than the account from the Book of Acts detailing how many in the early church pooled together what they did happen to have for common benefit. These textual critics that any other time go out of their way to downplay or even poo poo the Biblical narratives describing supernatural intervention in this particular instances amazingly don't seem to mind pointing out how Ananais and Saphira were struck dead by the Holy Spirit for retaining for themselves a portion of the proceeds from selling a piece of property.</p>
<p>About the only correct conclusion liberals draw from that account is that Ananais and Saphira died. The rest of the interpretative argument they make is entirely incorrect.</p>
<p>For starters, Ananais and Saphira were not struck dead for refusing to submit fully to what those advocating assorted varieties of liberation theology would insist was a primitive form of Communism or for keeping some of this profit for themselves. What they were struck dead for was lying about the matter.</p>
<p>If anything, the Apostle Peter confirms a position very pro-private property in its underlying orientation. In Acts Acts 5:1-11, he affirms that the property was their's to do with as they pleased and that, if they did not want to, Ananais and Saphira were not obligated to give the church a single cent if they did not want to.</p>
<p>What the couple did not have a right to do is get up there before the congregation and tell everyone that they were handing everything they had made from the sale of the property under consideration. So much for Mack Hayden's insinuation that the Scriptures endorse a systematic redistribution of wealth to the point of taxation being punitive in nature rather than to simply provide needed services.</p>
<p>Mr Hayden continues in his diatribe, “If they believe that God created the heavens and the earth, they must answer why they don't want to protect it?” Once again, Mr. Hayden has revealed just how little he knows about conservative Evangelicals as well as most areas of public policy.</p>
<p>Granted, one might find a few nut job preachers that insist that, since Jesus is to return soon, there is little reason to be good stewards of the natural resources God has blessed humanity with. What Christians, conservatives, nationalists and populists disposed towards Trump have a problem with is just how broad the scope of environmental preservation has become in terms of regulatory intrusion.</p>
<p>For example, there are instances where a transient puddle on private property has come under government purview as a wetland or navigable waterway. Some of the very first pieces I ever published in the mid 90's were about a municipal ordinance that forbade homeowners from removing trees from their own property.</p>
<p>Mack Hayden finishes his litany exposing just how ignorant he is regarding a variety of public policy issues with the following statement. “If they want to cry out for the rights of the unborn, they must be able to answer YHWH's admonitions and Christ's questions about why they tried to keep the refugee, the immigrant, or the disadvantaged from assistance.” Oh where do we begin with this one.</p>
<p>For starters, in speaking out for the rights of the unborn, what is being called for is the most basic right of them all. That is, of course, namely the right to life itself or, to put it more bluntly, the right not to be murdered.</p>
<p>Individuals profoundly motivated by their religious convictions to speak out on public policy issues who are opposed to unlimited immigration such as Pat Buchanan have never called for the execution of illegals whose primary crime was the violation of U.S. border law. It is because all people are made in the image of God that all people --- irrespective of their nation of origin – must be made to abide by these sorts of regulations for the benefit of all people.</p>
<p>Since at least the development of different languages at the Tower of Babel, it has been part of God's creation plan in terms of social organization for people groups of assorted commonalities such as language, culture, and even physical characteristics to conglomerate together usually in definable geographical territories. As a result, governments --- for good or ill is not the purpose of this observational analysis at the moment --- are instituted to protect those dwelling within a particular jurisdiction.</p>
<p>Throughout the course of history, the state, kingdom, or empire administering a respective territory can either be hostile to those arising from beyond its borders or it can be for the most part welcoming or at the least benignly indifferent. In either case, the purpose of government is to foremostly protect those with a recognized status or those outsiders that have not violated objectively established criteria for the purposes of being extended welcome.</p>
<p>Requiring those that wish to enter to abide by a set of preestablished laws and procedures, if anything, is both an affirmation of the basic underlying humanity of the migrant as well as protection of it. For to overlook this sort of transgression is to assume that the violator is not much more than an animal unable to abide by civilized standards. And a monitored border and ports of entry selective as to whom may pass beyond such scrutiny are a deterrent to the kinds of human trafficking and resultant exploitation that turn the American dream into a nightmare for those victimized by the deliberately nefarious concerned with advancing their own benefit even at the expense of violating the image of God in one of the most egregious ways possible.</p>
<p>Apparently, Mr. Hayden upholds as the ideal by which the migrant and the destitute are to be treated the Mosaic law of the Old Testament. Does that include those aspects that the unregenerate such as himself would categorize as harsh by twenty-first century American standards?</p>
<p>For example, even if Old Testament Israel did allow sanctuary to outsiders, it is doubtful such sojourners would have been allowed to propagate alien beliefs and ideologies in opposition to those held by the Chosen People. Of the suspicion of outsiders holding to worldviews at variance with Biblical revelation the Mosaic law advocates according to Deuteronomy 7:3-4, “Do not intermarry with them. Do not give your daughters to their sons or take their daughters for your sons, for they will turn your sons away from following me to serve other gods, and the Lord's anger will burn against you and quickly destroy you.”</p>
<p>If we as Americans are to grant the refugee and others in need assistance because that is how we are admonished by Scripture, does Mr. Hayden intend to embody the sort of consistency he is calling for by modifying this nation's public assistance programs to mirror those described in the Bible? As such, does Mr. Hayden intend to call for the elimination of most benefit transfer payments? Don't worry, the needy and unemployed will be able to eat.</p>
<p>Using the example of Ruth and Naomi, the truly needy would be more than welcome to gleen the leftovers dropped in the fields or even from those crops that the government provides subsidies for farmers are to destroy or don't quite meet some arbitrary aesthetic standard regarding appearance but have little to do with nutritional quality.</p>
<p>If that is still deemed too cruel by assorted twenty-first century standards, those wanting more contemporary prepackaged meals could be required to put in labor at an establishment something akin to a food bank. For if these individuals have vitality enough to piddle away on smartphones or the carnal gyrations that result in the conception of additional children,, there is no reason they cannot at least stock shelves and sort through boxes a couple hours per month at minimum.</p>
<p>In the clash of values, the discerning observer of civic events cannot help but notice that it is always the conservatives that are ordered to compromise or to be held responsible for the pending societal collapse. This tone is evident in an Associated Press story published on 2/15/2013 titled, “Unyiedling GOP Politicians Doing What Voters Ask”. Of what the article categorizes as “those who stubbornly refuse to compromise”, such a strategy is seen as a “tactic that some see as damaging the GOP brand and pushing the nation repeatedly to the brink of fiscal chaos.”</p>
<p>So did the journalist composing this piece also publish a companion essay detailing how Democratic recalcitrance is just as much gumming up the work of government? If anything, would it not be the Democrats pushing the nation at an even faster rate towards financial ruination?</p>
<p>After all, at least in theory anyways, the assorted streams of conservatism that tend to galvanize around the Republican Party usually urge an approach towards governance extolling a degree of financial restraint when possible. The liberals that usually gravitate towards the Democratic party are the ones that seldom ever met a spending program that they did not like and often in the forms of programs and policies that the government of a free people ought not to be involved with in the first place.</p>
<p>By Frederick Meekins</p>The Study Of The History Of The End Of The World, Part 2tag:12160.info,2020-06-02:2649739:BlogPost:20238392020-06-02T03:30:00.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>Jeroslav Pelikan is quoted as saying, “Apocalypticism ... was the mother of all Christian theology. (Kyle 32).” With technological explanations provided in the attempt to understand many of the obtuse symbols detailed in the eschatological portions of Scripture, it can be easy to assume that preoccupation with the End Times and the return of Christ are new phenomena some might describe as afflicting contemporary believers. However, this sense of anticipation has been a part of Christianity…</p>
<p>Jeroslav Pelikan is quoted as saying, “Apocalypticism ... was the mother of all Christian theology. (Kyle 32).” With technological explanations provided in the attempt to understand many of the obtuse symbols detailed in the eschatological portions of Scripture, it can be easy to assume that preoccupation with the End Times and the return of Christ are new phenomena some might describe as afflicting contemporary believers. However, this sense of anticipation has been a part of Christianity since its earliest days. And yet that perspective was also an inheritance bequeathed to the faith as a result of it fulfilling the promises and claims of ancient Judaism.</p>
<p>The West's fascination with End Times speculation can be traced to the tumultuous religious melting pot and crossroads of the Mediterranean world. Though steeped more in a cyclical philosophy of history than their monotheistic Hebrew counterparts, a number of Greek thinkers such as the Stoic Zeno believed that the world would be violently destroyed and begun anew. The Zoroastrians of Persia adhered to an eschatology similar in its broad outline (even if not in specifics) to that of Christianity in that this dualistic system believed that the god of light would remove the good people from the world before it was destroyed with molten metal and restored to sinless perfection.</p>
<p>It is argued by scholars of textual higher criticism that the Israelites did not possess a detailed cosmology of the Afterlife until coming into contact with the Zoroastrians during the time of the Babylonian captivity. Exposure to these ideas coupled with the despair of such a national calamity inspired the development of Jewish apocalyptic literature such as the Books of Ezekiel and Daniel. Those holding to Scripture as divinely inspired would respond that the Israelites should not be accused of cultural misappropriation for allegedly co-opting the eschatology of the Zoroastrians. Such an interpretation would rather consider it a coincidence of divine fortuitousness for the Zoroastrian mystics and contemplatives to have come so close to the truth without the benefit of direct inspirational revelation.</p>
<p>Perhaps the most detailed portion of the Old Testament considered apocalyptic in nature is found in the Book of Daniel. Beginning in chapter 7 and onward through 12, a number of interpretations have been developed by theologians and Bible scholars in the attempt to understand the potentially confusing and most certainly disturbing imagery. Those of a liberal persuasion tend to view the text as more historical in nature. The narrative, such scholars contend, was not written towards the end of the Babylonian exile. Instead the author was actually writing following the desolation of the Temple by Antiochus Epiphanes in such a way so as to make those events sound as if they were yet to transpire within the context of the passage (Thompson, 17).</p>
<p>The futurist interpretation of the Book of Daniel, to which a significant number of Evangelical eschatological theologians adhere, contends that the events described in the text were yet to have taken place at the time they were actually written about by the eponymous Daniel. These prophecies in large part pertain to a series of empires that were yet to come. The empires were in turn symbolically depicted as a series of beasts as well as to what segment and metal they corresponded to on a great statue in a vision by Nebuchadnezzar as interpreted by Daniel. Of particular interest to students of the End Times is the description of the fourth beast. For adorning the fourth beast was a living horn representing a fierce king that would speak blasphemous things against God and make war against the saints. Historicists have traditionally interpreted this to be Antiochus Epiphanes. However, a number holding to the futurist school of interpretation believe this also to be a warning regarding the Antichrist foretold to appear slightly before the Second Advent.</p>
<p>The academic elite might attempt to downplay the apocalyptic nature of the Old Testament by insisting that what appear to be predicted events actually transpired prior to being written down. However, the prophetic nature of the New Testament cannot be as easily denied. Beginning in the Gospels (particularly in the Olivet Discourse of Matthew 24-25), Christ Himself warns of signs such as the kingdoms that will rise against kingdoms and the earthquakes that will take place in diverse places. The message continues well into the Epistles that establish the doctrinal parameters of the church that formed shortly after Christ's resurrection.</p>
<p>Paul warns in the Epistles to the Thessalonians of the man of sin to be revealed and in I Corinthians 15 that Christ will appear in the twinkling of an eye. However, this emphasis upon the End Times was not particularly confined to a single Apostle. In II Peter 3, the believer is told that the present Earth will be consumed in a fervent heat.</p>
<p>The Apostle that perhaps dealt the most extensively with the End Times was none other than John the Beloved. It is in his epistles that the enigmatic Son of Perdition is referred to openly as the Antichrist. John went on to reveal the demonic nature of that figure as well as describe other aspects of the End Times in the Book of Revelation (interestingly enough also known as “the Apocalypse”). Like its counterpart the Book of Daniel in the Old Testament, the symbolism depicted within Revelation is so overwhelming for the human mind to grasp that the attempt to understand the text has spawned a number of conflicting interpretations. Similar to the interpretations of the Book of Daniel, these viewpoints are the historist, the idealist, the futurist and the preterist (Kyle, 37).</p>
<p>The idealist interprets the Book of Revelation as merely an allegory of the struggle between good and evil intended to comfort the believer irrespective of their circumstances by reminding that Christ is ultimately triumphant. The preterist believes that Revelation was intended for the first century church undergoing persecution at the hands of the Roman Empire, assuring believers in that day that their persecution would come to an end. The historist is somewhat more eschatological in its interpretation in that the viewpoint sees Revelation as predicting the broad forecast of church history rather than focused upon events immediately preceding Christ's return. The futurist is the interpretative viewpoint the most eschatologically apocalyptic in that those holding to the perspective contend that the symbolic descriptions contained within the narrative are prophecies regarding events to take place during a time of judgment immediately prior to Christ's return.</p>
<p>All of the prophecies to be considered divinely inspired are found within the corpus of the canonical Old and New Testaments. However, since the earliest days of the church, that has not stopped those gripped with a fascination for the events predicted to take place towards the end of the age from elaborating upon these in the hopes of better understanding what are admittedly complicated texts. Sometimes this speculation has proven helpful. More often than not, such has resulted in additional confusion, even occasionally crossing the theological line into outright error.</p>
<p>With Jesus expected to return shortly and in light of the sporadic yet brutal persecution of Christians on the part of the Roman Empire, one of the earliest (and perhaps most prominent) temptations in regards to eschatological studies was date setting. Extrapolating from II Peter 3:8 that a thousand years are as a day with the Lord and in light of the seven days of creation detailed in the Book of Genesis, it became a popular belief that Jesus would return around the year 6,000 which was believed to be around the time theologians such as Hippolytus and Irenaeus of Lyons were making such predictions (Abanes, 283).</p>
<p>Unfortunately, such apocalyptic speculation did not confine itself to the theologian's study. The self-proclaimed prophet Montanus exuded such enthusiasm that he spawned his own movement, Montanism (of course). It was his message that the return of Christ was so imminent that believers no longer found themselves in the Church Age but rather in the Age of the Spirit. As such, no longer were intermediary institutions such as the organized church or even Scripture necessary for the faithful to discern the will of God. Rather, such knowledge was available through the direct imputation of the Holy Spirit to any that believed.</p>
<p>Those overseeing the Bride of Christ realized that they needed to get the situation under control. Belief in Christ's return was no doubt an indisputable component of the Christian message. However, with the rise of Constantine, the empire had declared a truce with the church to the point where widespread persecution not only came to an end but Christianity ended up becoming the official state religion. That ended up opening another can of worms as to what was to be done with those that did not believe as those in authority thought they ought.</p>
<p>As the church grew more comfortable and came to the conclusion that this life was not so bad after all with the hope that Jesus would still one day come but just not right now, the foremost thinkers in all of Christianity were charged with devising ways to subtly shift establishment theologies underlying eschatological speculation. This new outlook tended to favor the allegorical interpretation of the Alexandrian theologians such as Origen over the more literalist scholars of Ephesus and Antioch (Kyle, 38). For example, Eusebius of Caesarea denied that Christ would return to establish an earthly kingdom. Instead, he argued in his Ecclesiastical History that history up until that point had been working to establish a truly Christian empire not so much under Christ but rather directly governed by Constantine.</p>
<p>The thinker doing the most to divert the church away from its premillennial footing was Augustine of Hippo. As an admirer of Plato, Augustine was repulsed by the idea of a materialist millennium where a variety of carnal pleasures could be enjoyed. Instead in The City Of God, Augustine held that what the millennium symbolized in the Book of Revelation was actually the period of history following Christ's Resurrection as the teaching of this miraculous event spread throughout the world. Such a doctrine that downplayed the notion of a literal millennium but not denying the implications of the Scriptural text outright came to be known as amillennialism.</p>
<p>By Frederick Meekins</p>Hit and Run Commentary #128tag:12160.info,2020-05-31:2649739:BlogPost:20240362020-05-31T15:49:42.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p>In the column titled “White Nationalist Terrorism and the Gospel”, Southern Baptist ideologue Russell Moore condemns White nationalism as “the way of the flesh” and “as the tribal identity cult”. So when does he intend to publish a column similarly condemnatory of Black Lives Matter, La Raza, or even Antifa? Rather in numerous essays and public statements, Moore has admonished Whites as to why they must strive to comprehend the anger of minorities that results in looted businesses and…</p>
<p>In the column titled “White Nationalist Terrorism and the Gospel”, Southern Baptist ideologue Russell Moore condemns White nationalism as “the way of the flesh” and “as the tribal identity cult”. So when does he intend to publish a column similarly condemnatory of Black Lives Matter, La Raza, or even Antifa? Rather in numerous essays and public statements, Moore has admonished Whites as to why they must strive to comprehend the anger of minorities that results in looted businesses and destroyed property. So long as it is apparently not Moore’s or Southern Baptist property it’s not all that big of a deal.</p>
<p>For all the condemnation of it, ever notice how not much definition is given to White supremacy and racism? Considerable outrage has been articulated against talk of Hispanic invasion referenced in the so-called manifestos posted by two recent mass murders. Yet little is being said regarding sentiments in these tirades regarding population control and radical environmentalism. Anyone utilizing violence against unarmed civilians to further an ideological agenda must be condemned for the perpetration of such an egregious act. But why is it that every culture and racial extraction with the exception of Whites are not only allowed but celebrated in organizing to protect its heritage?</p>
<p>How exactly is racism and White supremacy being defined? Does it consist of the insistence that certain areas are less desirous to live in because of the cultural and character shortcomings of those residing there? If so, should those rushing to condemn President Trump’s remarks about Baltimore refusing to live in the area be similarly condemned? After all, with so much abandoned property there, real estate has got to be quite affordable. In the future, perhaps real estate professionals should be authorized to report to law enforcement agencies and credit bureaus those refusing to consider property in these areas no one is supposed to consider as less than desirable if their price happens to fall within a particular buyer’s affordability threshold.</p>
<p>In light of a series of mass shootings across the United States, it has repeatedly been said that people need to come together in unity. Apart from not shooting others, just how close are people obligated to draw together? Relatedly, do those categorizing these incidents as failures in tolerance intend to compromise on those incessant demands constantly made by those advocating progressive revolution under threats of violence and upheaval? For it is usually those holding to traditionalist conceptions of normality that are expected to alter their fundamental beliefs or be imposed a variety of punitive sanctions.</p>
<p>So if President Trump’s rhetoric can allegedly indirectly cause violence, where is condemnation on the part of mainstream media and presidential candidates for the direct calls for violence against Senator Mitch McConnell?</p>
<p>Progressives are outraged that some would question the accuracy of Jeffery Epstein’s death being a suicide. To do so is deemed to be spreading conspiracy theories. So what other things that authorities tell us are we obligated to believe as docile minions of the New World Order? More importantly, who exactly is it that determines what we are and are not allowed to question?</p>
<p>Business Insider is accusing conservative media (Fox News in particular) of categorizing illegal immigrants as invaders hundreds of times hundreds similar to rhetoric invoked by the El Paso mass murderer. Patrick Crusius’ manifesto also mentioned over population and resource depletion, topics mentioned even more through the indoctrination permeating mainstream media, public education and reinforced by a litany of environmental organizations. So, to be consistent, where is the rhetoric calling for the toning down of ecological alarmism?</p>
<p>Southern Baptist Theological Seminary President Daniel Akin in an oration at First Baptist Church of Durham in support of social justice insinuated that critics of this leftward turn are akin to the Gestapo. In the remark, Akin observes that often we go looking for secondary things to pick fights about rather than try to get along. But when these social justice acolytes sweep into churches, do they intend to heed their own advice and bite their tongues when they see something that they disagree with?</p>
<p>Perhaps if a church looks good enough to swindle away from a dwindling congregation, at least do them a solid allowing them to keep the American flag and to sing a few patriotic anthems about three times per year during designated civic commemorations.</p>
<p>On an episode of the Christian Transhumanist Podcast, theologian N.T. Wright criticized those that emphasize that believers go to Heaven after we die. Rather what to be taught is renewed life following Christ’s Resurrection. But do we get continued individual existence or not after we croak if we believe in Christ? If not, why bother?</p>
<p>As much as consummate establishmentarian Richard Clarke cusses in his Future State podcast, on what grounds can these sorts get bent out of shape regarding Trump’s potty mouth?</p>
<p></p>
<p>Frederick Meekins</p>The Study Of The History Of The End Of The World, Part 1tag:12160.info,2020-03-28:2649739:BlogPost:20119902020-03-28T02:41:04.000ZDr. Frederick Meekinshttps://12160.info/profile/DrFrederickMeekins
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Deep within their hearts and minds, a significant number sense that the world is careening towards something that is both catastrophic yet wondrous all at the same time. Not exactly sure of what that is, many attempt to get a handle on this feeling of apprehensive expectation by conceptually referring to the stimuli and data provoking this emotional response as “the End Times”. With advances in technology just as likely to make our lives more complicated as…</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Deep within their hearts and minds, a significant number sense that the world is careening towards something that is both catastrophic yet wondrous all at the same time. Not exactly sure of what that is, many attempt to get a handle on this feeling of apprehensive expectation by conceptually referring to the stimuli and data provoking this emotional response as “the End Times”. With advances in technology just as likely to make our lives more complicated as convenient, it is understandable for contemporary man to assume that this is the first era in the history of the species to experience this particular variety of spiritual distress. However, the perspective of history shows how this cognitive distress is nothing new but has been an inherent component of Western civilization derived from that tradition's Judeo-Christian foundation even among segments of it that would no longer directly identify with that particular set of religious presuppositions.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">In “The Last Days Are Here Again: A History Of The End Times” Richard Kyle begins his analysis by starting off with a definition of a few of the terms vital for understanding this particular area of theological study but which are often muddled as a result of their similarity (18-23). The first term defined by Kyle is “apocalyptic” or “apocalypse”. He defines that as a body of literature unveiling a divine secret in a manner that presents a catastrophic narrative describing a cosmic struggle between good and evil that often concludes in a decisive battle or deterministic series of events. Kyle proceeds to make a distinction between the terms “apocalyptic” and “eschatological”. In his use of the term, Kyle defines eschatology as “a study of the last things” of which the apocalyptic is a subset concerned more with impending doom.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Kyle is also careful to make a distinction between apocalypticism and millennialism. He does note that there is often overlap between the two. However, not all professing apocalypticism necessarily believe in millennialism and not all millenarians are apocalypticists. For example, theologians professing a postmillennial return of Christ do not usually believe in apocalypticism. Instead such exegetes believe conditions will improve gradually with the Second Advent occurring only after a near complete Christianization of the world. Adherents of certain forms of secularist catastrophism such as the nuclear freeze or environmentalist movements warn of an impending doom but do not necessarily foresee a desired golden age coming about afterwards should the horror that they warn against actually transpire.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">A primary question raised is what is it about Western civilization that makes those steeped in it --- be they explicitly religious, secular, or somewhere along this spectrum --- susceptible to apocalyptic thinking? The first factor leading to the allure of an apocalypse is the pervasive insistence throughout Christian theology that Christ will indeed one day bodily return to Earth. Thus, at its heart, the Christian faith is by definition a millennial religion. For whatever reason in the goodness of His providence, God decided it was best to reveal in His word more of a symbolic outline of the conditions surrounding the return of His Son rather than detailed specifics.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Often it is the as[iration of man to desire more knowledge than he was intended or even capable of handling. That has resulted in those drawn to these particular passages of Scripture referring to the consummation of all things often undertaking an attempt to fill in what the human mind might perceive as gaps in our understanding. Such can serve a role if it draws the believer into a close study of the revered text for the purposes of deepening the understanding of the God supernaturally inspiring these works. However, the result can be deleterious if the outcome of that study is the confusion and unnecessary fear that often surrounds apocalyptic speculation if basic presuppositions such as no man knowing the day or hour as stated in Matthew 24:36 are not adhered in the rush to discover what is believed to be some new prophetic insight.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The second factor that can lead to an undue emphasis on the apocalyptic is the philosophy of history underlying much of Western thought. Such is derived from Christian assumptions, in particular those relating to the doctrine of Christ's return and those events leading to the commencement of eternity. Of the Western linear view of history, Kyle writes, “Rather, history moves from one event to the next until it reaches its final goal (22).”</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">While this view allows for repetitive themes and patterns, unlike the cyclical philosophy of history more characteristic of Eastern religions, the Judeo-Christian model does not hold to what amounts to a reincarnation of events as well as people. Instead, history will come to a decisive conclusion in the final judgment. Interestingly, though the intentions were far from Christian and the attempt to reach its goal marked by disastrous carnage, Communism also adapted a linear conception of history with the system's ultimate goal a classless utopia after the establishment of such all conflict would ultimately cease.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">The scholar focusing upon this area of theological study most also note the distinction between the “apocalyptic” and “eschatological”. In his use of the term, Kyle defines eschatology as “a study of the last things” of which the apocalyptic is a subset concerned more with impending doom.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">Kyle is also careful to make a distinction between apocalypticism and millennialism. He does note that there is often overlap between the two. However, not all professing apocalypticism necessarily believe in millennialism and not all millenarians are apocalypticists. For example, theologians professing a postmillennial return of Christ do not usually believe in apocalypticism. Instead such exegetes believe conditions will improve gradually with the Second Advent occurring only after a near complete Christianization of the world. Adherents of certain forms of secularist catastrophism such as the nuclear freeze or environmentalist movements warn of an impending doom but do not necessarily foresee a desired golden age coming about afterwards should the horror that they warn against actually transpire.</span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 12pt;">By Frederick Meekins</span></p>