Condamned if we do — Condamned if we don’t... we’re to blame for everything, and if we are not to blame, well, it’s our fault we are not to blame, so we are still to blame... get it...?

Someone emailed me this email and link:

No surprise here:

Someone emailed me this story, my comments appear after the story:

I think I’ll start wearing my gold Cross more often...

 

my detailed reply at the end, in answer to this nonsense.  Robert

My (quick, unpolished, unproofread) reply:

if you program a computer with false data, such as 2 + 2 = 9, when the computer does calculations the answers will be valid and logical according to what it was programmed with, but the answers will not be true in terms of reality.

They want you to step into their pseudo-reality and believe it is reality.

The author failed to note that in reality very few scientific laws have been discovered in the universe (except maybe mathematics)... what scientists find are not laws, but approximations to laws; like that tiny donut in the trunk of your car you can use in an emergency to hobble to the gas station or home; but it is not meant to go much farther.

The author, while bragging about the fraud Einstein, does not inform you that because man has not uncovered scientific law, science (or what men consider to be science) is constantly changing.  Natural laws do not change so what man has discovered is not natural law.  Aristotelian physics gave way to Newtonian; Newtonian to so-called Einsteinian; and Einsteinian is about to be put to sleep by something else.  They are not laws.  They are tools that work in absence of having the proper tool.  If you need a shovel but one has never been invented (or discovered), a stick will work; then someone invents metal and makes a crowbar and that works better than the stick; then someone invents a metal bowl and that works better than the crowbar; then someone invents a heavy duty half-bowl and welds it on the end of the crowbar and has a shovel.  Someone may invent a better shovel yet.  There may be some idea out there that no one has ever thought of that would be superior to a shovel; of course there is a steam shovel or backhoe and there is an auger for drilling post holes; but there may be something that actually manipulates matter by some energy force and digs a hole by you merely moving the mouse on your computer, even as they have computerized laser surgery.  Just because someone has never thought of it does not mean the possibility does not exist. 

But what the evolutionists do, totalitarianistically and through propaganda and brainwashing, they claim dictatorially, this is the only truth and anyone who believes differently is a cave man (which is argumentum ad hominem and argumentum ad baculum—and thus it has nothing to do with truth or science but imperial decree).

The old scientific argument that a strata of rock is 14 billions years old because a mollusc that is 14 billions years old was found there; then when asked how he knows the mollusc is 14 billion years old, he replies because it was found in a strata of rock 14 billions years old.  Evolutionists, when painted into the corner and tied down will admit that the only reason they believe evolution is because they reject creation (they reject creation because they would have to admit there is a God and if there is a God who created and owns all, that would mean they have to submit to His Law).  Evolutionists so trapped will admit that indeed you have to begin with faith that evolution is true, and then build upon that foundation.  That is not science but religion in the garb of pseudo-science, and it takes us back to the computer program in which 2 + 2 = 9... you have to start by faith that their premise is true in order for their fairy tale to appear logical.

They use circular "logic" and also talk around the issue or talk about some other issue and then act as if that proves the issue they did not talk about.

of course earth is probably billions of years old.  But not according to the "Big Bang" or more properly the "Big Boink" by which so-called "scientists" have screwed over the minds of 5 or 6 generations.  It is this Big Boink that has deceived Christendom into believing the false doctrine of the universal brotherhood of man heresy, which has resulted in the destruction of Christendom.  God created His people, Adamkind separate and distinct and forbade intermarriage with aliens, foreigners, the people of His curse, corrupt and mingled people (non-Adamite peoples).  God commands separation; communism and the Antichrist world says amalgamate: "One race, one religion, one creed".  God commanded separation and since His people, the people of Christendom (true Israel) rebelled, God is now using those very aliens peoples whom He commanded we be separate from and whose peace and prosperity we were never to seek or secure to invade and overwhelm us, until we repent of our sin against God.  God said that He separated us from other people even as He separated clean animals from unclean—and commanded us not to make ourselves abominable with either unclean animals as food, or unclean people by intermixing.  To the degree we have absorbed alien peoples we have made ourselves abominable and those branches shall be cut off and cast into the fire.  God did not create all the animals as related species and none descended or evolved from another.  Likewise peoples.  God created each special and distinct and commanded no intermixing—not even of livestock or vegetation.  Hybrids are the attempt to destroy God's creation and supplant it with something inferior though claiming it to be superior—and all such are abominations to God.  The Big Boink teaches mankind to mix it up and intermarry, based upon the false premise that all came from the same source that it is only natural that they join back together (which parallels the so-called Big Bang that all matter [where it came from they don't know] exploded [by what energy they do not know] from one giant glob and the universe "evolved" and is expanding outward but for some reason [why they do not know] that it is slowing down because it is reaching the limits to which it can expand and like a god-zillion giant cosmic baseballs on rubbed bands, the universe will eventually be able to expand no farther and it will snap back on itself and implode... and they call that "science").

Scripture says "In the beginning God created the heavens and earth."

this was not on day 1 of creation.  We are not told when "in the beginning was"; but it most certainly was aeons in prehistory long before day 1 of creation.  Thus the minerals of the earth are billions of years old.

But life on earth is only 6,000 years old.  Those Christians who disbelieve this are certainly "free" to believe whatever fairy tale they choose, their minds never truly having begun to think or meditate upon the days of creation which were 24-hour periods of time, not ages or aeons.  That theory only makes sense if you don't actually scrutinize it and analyze it, which I have in detail.  God created and performed things in a specific order to prevent people from drawing false conclusions; but that does not stop those whose minds He has blinded from thinking like fools.  Those who refuse to believe what God has said, imagining that God is limited to being the way their limited minds can conceive, are not worthy of the truth, so God will not let them know it. Of course, people are "free" to believe whatever they want, and once in God's Presence, if they are so blessed, they will be humbled and then begin to truly learn.  God created plant life on the third day and did not create the sun until the 4th day.  If the days of creation were thousands of years or aeons or ages, what kept plant life alive for that vast length of time?  If the sun were turned off or burned out what would happen to plant life (and all life) on earth?  As I wrote in my God, Man, and the Universe:

"If the Sun were to burn out, it would take about 8 minutes and 33 seconds before the Sun’s rays already in motion, would end after they reached Earth, after which there would be no more (since the Sun is 93,000,000 miles away [if scientists' calculations are accurate] and light travels at the speed of 186,000 miles per second). .... If the Sun just stopped shining, within a week temperatures on Earth would be below 0° F.; within a year ¯ 100° F."

While we cannot know what the light was that God first declared there be and how he separated day from night before the sun existed, we do know that God kept earth warm (the inner magma core was maybe hotter?) otherwise the water on earth would have all been frozen (which it most probably was originally, which is why there is the ecological record of an ice age); God may have turned the heat up on day 1 of creation, as the backup generator, until he created the sun, to get plant life through the 3rd day.  God did it in that order for a reason.  However, to assume that God had plant life growing for thousands of years without the sun or moon, is a grand assumption indeed, and Scripture says faith is derived from the facts of the word of God, not fantasy or assumption.

They act as if they know everything, which they cannot.  They cannot know all the factors.  They make calculated guesses based upon the information they have which is also clouded to some degree, at times, by what they want the truth to be, what is a profitable "answer" to discover.

When you throw a baseball or fire a bullet, it is faster when first released and then slows down based upon friction or in terms of the universe the attraction or repulsion by other astronomical bodies.  There is no way of knowing how tall Mount Everest was at the time of the flood, because we do not know the speed at which God caused it to initially shoot up and how that rate slowed down over millennia, even as we do not know at what speed the tectonic plates of the earth were moving when God smashed the one continent and set continental drift into motion; nor do we know the rate at which it slowed.

Science continually gets things wrong, whether out of fraud, incompetence, or honestly.  I remember a few decades ago when a commercial by the EGG INDUSTRY was run frequently showing some laboratory and then claiming that eggs have 33% less cholesterol than we once thought.  My first reaction is, "GREAT how many millions of dollars of a refund will we be getting for that BAD SCIENCE that we paid for that told us that eggs had 33% more...?"  In reality, it seems it has to do with the chicken's diet, health, and exercise, and also if the yolk is broken while heated (like in scrambled or omelets).  Regardless, it also needs to be realized that statistics can be twisted or mispresented to make them appear to say whatever a person wants them to say; let telling half truths or merely making innuendos and allowing people to draw false conclusions in their own minds.  Likewise, God created various distinct and unrelated species with close enough similarity so that those who hate him will foolishly think that one species evolved from another.

God darkened the minds of such to worship the creation rather than the Creator.  Initially that was through mythology, but now it is through humanism and its "pagan religious history of its origins" called Evolution, which is the new mythology which glorifies creation and man instead of God.  They truly are the blind leading the blind, and those Christians who reject the 7- 24-hour days of creation, likewise, err, not knowing the truth, and are the blind leading the blind.  If the 7 days of creation were 1000 year periods (or aeons or ages), then after being created at the end of the 6th Day, Adam and Eve had to rest for 1,000 years (and he died under the age of 1000) and therefore, had no opportunity to reproduce before they died.

I have not gone to this link.  The data is irrelevant.  People are blinded by their own pet paradigms and what they want to believe.  Very few (like Ivan Panin, David Davidson, Charles Bradlaugh, Ingersol, Paine), bow before the truth when in their attempts to disprove it, it disproves them.  If one starts with a false premise he will end with a false conclusion.  It matter not how sophisticated the theory or data is presented.  It is a fairy tale.  As I show in my book, Who Was the Serpent in the Garden... and the Waters that Covered the Earth:

"In a very interesting report by Brian Thomas, M.S., “New
Genomes Project Data Indicate a Young Human Race” it was
revealed that in 2008 a very extensive project was undertaken,
with international collaboration, to sequence with incredible
detail over 1,000 representative human genomes from
sample groups from around the world. In October of 2010
some of these results were published which support man’s
existence on the planet to be exponentially smaller than the
evolutionists have claimed—less than 300 generations, which
is consistent with the Biblical account.

[My own calculations are as follows: It has been 5,990 years from
the creation of life on earth to 2015. 2025 should be the 6,000th
year from Creation and also the 120th “Jubilee from creation”—
though this “Jubilee” does not coincide with the Jubilee begun at
Sinai; it is a different type of Jubilee.
Judah was 22 generation from Adam (though the 23rd generation
of Adamkind; being born 2256 years from the creation of Adam)
Zarah and Pharez were born about when Judah was 42. By the time
of King David (born 2922 from Adam) man’s life span seems to have
stabilized (David died at age 70, ripe in years); David ruled over all
Israel when he was 30 and soon had several children.
Thus 2962 years elapsed from the time of creation of Adam to
the time that David [the 33rd generation of Adamkind] was 40 years
old; which comprised 33 generations and an average age of 90 at
which men had their firstborn, or at least the son who constituted
the chosen line. 5,990 - 2962 = 3028 (the time left from when
David was 40 to the end of this age, using 40 as a conservative
average age at which men have had their firstborn born to them
from Moses’ day to now = 76 generations. Even if you change
the age at which men sire their firstborn to age 20, that only
doubles it to 151 generations + 33 from Moses to David’s son =
184 generations maximum from Adam to the present.]

This study examined the DNA base sequences of 2 families,
including the mother, father, and child of each. Science published
the results which concluded that each generation of
offspring inherit about 60 new mutations from the parent
generation of each. Though the purpose of the study—the
“1000 Genomes Project”— was to try to learn which DNA
anomalies cause disease, the study spat out the additional
information about how long man has been on earth. This data
was extrapolated using an extremely accurate population genetics
modeling program called “Mendel’s Accountant” (developed
by a team of scientists from Cornell University; which
program is downloadable freely). This program calculates the
cumulative effect of inherited mutations in terms of health and
survivability (I believe the point being that once any branch of
a family tree inherits too many genetic defects, which are
cumulative—life-span is continually decreased to the point
that the branch of the family tree dies out: it spontaneously
aborts or does not even reproduce before it dies). The program
reveals that even if starting with a population of 2,000 individuals,
even if each mother has 6 children, factoring in the rate
of 60 new genetic mutations per generation, humankind would
become extinct after only 350 generations (this also factors in
natural selection of the least fit having already died out and not
passed on their more-highly defective DNA). Thus, man has
not been on earth anywhere near as long as evolutionists claim."

Also, the author of this article does not comprehend even the meaning
of the words "prove, proves, proof" as he uses the word "proves" in
the very title of this article, without realizing that proof is an elusive chimera
and most people confuse opinion, deception, delusion, and mere evidence
(which may be valid or invalid, true or false)... they confuse these inferior
notions with "proof" which they are not.

As I explain in detail in my book Does God Repent? — Can God Change His Mind?

"Proof or Faith...?
There is very little we can truly know or actually prove.
We have evidence alone in most cases when we think we
have proof. Hard sciences can be proven. In everything else
all we actually can do is amass evidence and then make a
choice concerning that evidence. No one can prove the Flood
was local or worldwide; to claim that one can is arrogant and
ignorant and shows mental instability and not being in touch
with the real world; not recognizing that there are 10,001
factors of which he is ignorant (especially concerning an
event that transpired 4,300 years ago). All the evidence is
never in. A lot of evidence is never even admitted to be
presented in court. All we can do is form an opinion, an
informed, (hopefully) intelligent opinion, but an opinion
nonetheless. I used to be able to lift my own body weight
over my head in a 1-arm snatch on a full barbell. If I could
still do that, I could prove it (actually, I could not prove it,
but only demonstrate it, or prove that I could do it, but I
could not really prove that I did do it, again, I could only
demonstrate it). Then I could. Now I can’t. Someone else
saying, “Yeah, I saw him do it” isn’t proof. If I had a video
that was made and/or if I had done it in front of accepted
verifiable authenticating committee, that may or may not constitute
proof (even some official organization saying, “We
saw it” really isn’t proof. It is testimony; evidence). Math
can be proven, a chemistry experiment can be proven, the
philosophy of logic can be proven. Few other things can
truly be proven unless they can actually be demonstrated.
Doctrine cannot be so proven; that is where faith comes in.
History cannot be so proven. The Flood is both theological
and historical, but it cannot be proven unless one was on the
ark video-taping as it occurred. Everything else is faith.
People choose which evidence they wish to believe.
Statistical probabilities are not certainties, but probabilities,
and they can be accurate or extremely inaccurate following
the law of the bell curve; and thus can be probable,
highly probable, or remotely probable, but still only probable.
Very few things can be proved universally 100% of the
time, because no event has been proven every single time
because every single time is an impossibility that can never
be achieved to infinity. Proving something that happened
before one was even born is highly improbable, if not impossible.
We see how the modern media and journalists and
historians and scientists lie and distort the truth now as the
events are actually unfolding; this is nothing new (as Solomon
said, there is nothing new under the sun). So, in reality,
people choose which historians from the past will be those
whom they choose to believe. Such is not proof. Such is a
choice; sometimes sincerely, sometimes sinisterly—but a sincere
wrong choice is just as untrue as a sinister wrong choice.
People choose which testimony or evidence (valid or invalid,
real or imagine) they will believe; but they cannot
prove that their choice is correct or their conclusion true.
Juries frequently convict the innocent and absolve the
guilty based not upon proof, but upon their own choice of
which presentation of evidence they chose to believe; and if
the evidence was false, then it certainly was not truly “proof,”
but confused for proof: that would be anti-proof."

(I express this below in another book of mine, but I cannot
locate which book, Windows 8.1 (which I now have on my
new computer) is lobotomized compared to windows Vista Business, which
I used to have (and have on my old computer)... and for some reason,
I cannot find in which book I wrote this, so I wrote something similar below).

Nothing is ever proved in a court of law.  Individuals
decide which pile of evidence they deem most convincing (based on how slick
the lawyers were, clearly they cannot make their choice based upon the evidence
that the judge refused to be admitted, and all the evidence is never in, a lot of
evidence is never uncovered, crime labs and dirty cops invent evidence,
witnesses are bribed to lie, etc., or jurors vote base upon their own prejudice or even from being
bribed or threatened.  Even if someone confesses to a crime, that is not proof that he committed
the crime, only that he confessed to it.  People confess often to crimes they did not commit for many
different reasons: some demented people do it for attention, or revenge against a parent to shame them,
some do it because they were bribed or threatened, some who are mentally handicapped are tricked by the
cops or prosecutor into thinking that if he simply confesses he can go home, some confess to a crime
in order to save a loved one who is actually the guilty party.

Such is the difference between proof and evidence; few things are ever truly proved.

Until one understands this simple fact, he understands very little.

Scientists are in many ways like individuals on juries, or judges, or even the accused.

Choices are made, and dishonestly, those choices are referred to as "proof" when it is not.

Robert

 

----

one person emailed in response:

 

On 2/18/2016 3:00 PM,
> Hi Robert,
> 
> Einstein theory, have very serious doubts that there ever could come a truth out of that. Read it shortly after getting it, but didn't get to answer right away. If memory serves me right, you are the first besides me that I've seen to take the fact that our God has always been into the equation of the earths age. Now, I know too little to know if there's any truth in the varies dating methods, so have no confidence therein. But, I've been observing enough in the mountains and so on to know that this earth is a lot older then the young earth advocates push with blinded eyes.
> 
[you wrote]
> "Doctrine cannot be so proven; that is where faith comes in. History cannot be so proven. The Flood is both theological and historical, but it cannot be proven unless one was on the ark video-taping as it occurred. Everything else is faith. People choose which evidence they wish to believe."
> 
> Doctrine CANNOT be proven??? So then, your answer is, we got to turn to faith. Well, how are we then go to prove something then? So, what is the Scriptural definition of faith?
> 
> You can answer if you want and leave it. But I now understand you as to why you believe the things you do. If doctrine can't be proven, then we are as a ship without a rudder. This is not to say that ALL doctrine can be proven, but a lot can. Then when we were told to be as the Bereans, that then has no merit and I then would know no way of helping you.
> 
> Sincerely,

-------

 

I REPLIED:
I am assuming when you say "Read it shortly after getting it, but didn't get to answer right away" that you are referring to my previous email, not Einstein's theory.

I don't know what you mean by "I've been observing enough in the mountains and so on"

You say, "so, your answer is, we got to turn to faith" as if faith is a BAD thing.  That is curious.

You say, "But I now understand you as to why you believe the things you do. If doctrine can't be proven, then we are as a ship without a rudder."

No, the fact that you say that shows then that you understand very little.  You don't understand why I believe anything because you have never ordered any of the nearly 100 books that I have written in order to actually read one.  And you don't understand the nature of truth or study or faith if you think that because we cannot prove something that we are like a ship without a rudder.  That is a gross illogical false inference.  And you don't understand the nature of proof.  Most people do not.  Semantics is partly to blame (the rest is ignorance).  There are many levels of the meaning of proof... but I speak only of the true absolute meaning.  Some people may say, "I love ice cream."  They don't "love" ice cream; if they do and they are having an interpersonal relationship with a bowl of frozen sugar and milk they are psychotic.  They either don't understand the meaning of love, or they are simply using the word in a very weak, improper manner that has become colloquially accepted.  So it is with proof / prove / proving.  Proof is something that is universal; that every sane person who sees it will agree.  However, the way most people use the word proof or prove is meaning nothing more than "it satisfies me enough to believe it"--regardless of what "standards" of satisfaction that person has.  Proof is elusive.  All the senses can be completely fooled.  The mind can easily be fooled.  A slick salesman, debater, statistician, political speech writer, con man, educator, scientist can come up with a plethora of "stories" that the average person (who does not truly think logically, having never actually studied logic, though most people think that they are logical, however, how can a person know he is logical when he has no clue about what logic even is?  most people think they have a good singing voice too, but if you have ever watched America's Got Talent, and especially the auditions, you will see just how delusional the majority of people are).  Most people think that they know a subject, even though they have never scratched the surface of it a nanometer deep.

Very little can be proven.  History is not a science.  History cannot be proved.  People choose which evidence they believe to be true, they choose which historians they choose to believe; that is not proof but opinion or making a choice.  Imperial decree is not proof.  It is edict.  Those who think they can prove things like history and doctrine are not proving anything other than their self-appointed imperial issuing of decrees they want people to accept as proof of the truth.

Can you prove the moon exists?  You can point to it and tell someone, look, that is the moon.  If they refuse to look how can you prove it?  If you are actually pointing to the planet Venus, and the person you are showing looks and sees it, have you proved the moon exists?  But saying "look" to someone is not proof.  You did not thing other than point.  Even less can man prove God.  That does not mean we are without a rudder.  It is reality.  God calls us to faith.  If He did not, then He would reveal Himself to every single individual whom He wanted to believe in Him, perform a few miracles, and the issue would be solved.  Christ said to Thomas, "Blessed are those who see not, but who believe".  Likewise, Scripture tells us, "walk by faith, not by sight".  This does not mean we stick our head in the sand.  Our relationship and knowledge of God starts with God revealing Himself (we prove nothing) and putting within us the faith to believe (we prove nothing); upon that foundation, we then accept that His Word is True and based upon the unimpeachable internal logic of the Word of God we are convinced of its truth; and show ourselves to be honorable children by studying continually, while relying upon the Holy Spirit to lead us into the truth, so that we can truly understand.  However, there are hundreds of denominations (and false religions) and thousands of different ideas.  Were there proof, there would be only one denomination.  However, there are many because people cannot agree on anything.  That is because there is not proof and because most lean unto their own understanding and are not lead by the Spirit of Truth; the majority would not believe the truth even if there were proof: the majority are selfish and only want to believe that they want to believe.

Doctrine cannot be proved; if it could would not the vast majority believe the same thing?  Does not everyone believe 2+2=4?  That is an established fact that can be proved; that is why all agree on it.  That's why they don't give B.S. degrees in history or theology.  History is an art, not a science.

Gravity can be proved, or at least demonstrated.  It can be replicated by anyone.  Just pick something up, hold your hand out away from yourself and away from any other object, and let go.  Did what you were holding and let go of... did it fall to the ground?

Okay, similarly, go ahead.  Prove the virgin birth.  Do you have a video tape of Mary's entire life, every single second, up to the point it was realized that she was pregnant, a video showing every moment of her life up to that point in time as evidence that she had never known any man?  Do you then have a sperm sample from God to prove He is the Father?  That would be proof.

I BELIEVE the virgin birth 100% without any doubt because that is what the Word of God says.  If I list the Scriptures referring to the Virgin birth, I have not proved the virgin birth (read the above paragraph again if you still don't understand); but I will have demonstrated what a collection of Bible verses HAVE TO SAY about the virgin birth, but I have not PROVED the Virgin Birth.  Thus, the next logical point necessary, in order to prove that what the Bible says about the virgin birth, in order to accept the virgin birth as true, would be to PROVE that the Bible is the Word of God.  This, likewise, cannot be done unless you can subpoena God to come down to a court of law, raise His Right Hand and swear by Himself to tell the truth, after which He would need to demonstrate that He indeed is the God Who created the universe and that yes indeed the Bible is His Word.  I BELIEVE that the Bible is the Word of God and that it is True.  I cannot "prove it" like a chemistry experiment, in which any person who attempted the exact same experiment could replicate it and get the exact same results every single time, if followed according to precise instructions under the same conditions.

This does NOT mean that we should not study or believe—because we are commanded to.  The point is that it is not us who can prove truth; it is God who has hidden truth from the world and opened the hearts and minds of His elect to believe that what He has said is true (and to actually understand the correct interpretation of what He has said); and based upon that faith we then endeavor to study to show ourselves approved.  Augustine said Understanding is the reward of faith; seek not to understand that ye may believe, but believe that ye may understand.  Faith cometh by hearing the Word of God.  Understanding is a gift given to members only and membership is handed out to the elect and the membership card is faith.  Without faith it is impossible to please God.  Without faith it is impossible to receive anything from God--including understanding.

If doctrine could be proved we would not have those who baptize by sprinkling, others by dabbing, others by pouring, others by dunking--and those who are back dunkers, front dunkers, dippers, side dunkers and double dunkers (and some who believe that baptism itself saves you, and others still that you actually have to believe that the water itself is saving you or it doesn't count).  If something could be proved only a fool would not believe it.  However, this opens up another can of worms, in that much of what is totalitarianistically forced down the throats and into the minds of the masses is not truth and has not been proved (evolution, etc.), but it has been dictatorially decreed and ordered and demanded that all bow down to the great image every time the music sounds and recognize it as god.

No doctrine can be proved.  Doctrine can be explained, and it can be explained correctly and incorrectly.  If I recall correctly, you don't believe in the Trinity.  You don't base this on "proof", you base this on your opinion of what you think is believeable.

God commands us to believe, in order to be saved, not fully understand and not prove in order to be saved.  The understanding and attempting to prove (or more precisely, "confirm") is for our edification, for our strengthening (and witness), and is act of obedience.

Further, as I explain in my, God, Man, and the Universe (pp.32,33):

“No other ancient work contains the same amount of
manuscript evidence as does the Bible. The Bible contains
66 books, written by 40 different authors spanning 40
generations and 1,500 years; yet it is consistent, coherent,
and entirely reliable. Never has science or archaeology ever
disproved a single thing in the Bible—and the Bible was
right thousands of years far in advance of secular
understanding in many matters of history and science.
Modern science and archaeology only serve to prove the
Bible. The amount of evidence proving the reliability of
the Bible is overwhelming.

There are more complete Bible manuscripts than there
are of the works of Shakespeare. The 37 plays written by
Shakespeare in the early 1600s all contain missing text
which forensic experts had to “guess” to “f ill in the blanks”
to complete the plays. It is also significant to realize that
even if all of the Biblical manuscripts had been lost, it is
possible to recreate the entire Bible by piecing together
Biblical quotes from the early Church Fathers from the 2nd
and 3rd Centuries A.D.—all for except 11 verses out of the
31,102 verses in the Bible. That is staggering in significance!

There are 24,000 existing Greek New Testament
manuscripts (complete or partial) and 5,366 complete Greek
New Testament manuscripts. The books of the New
Testament were written between the years A.D. 40 to 90.
The earliest-known copies of New Testament manuscripts
date to the year A.D. 125—which means that they were
recorded or copied only 35-85 years after the originals; which
means that even without God overseeing their copying, the
chances of them being accurate are much higher.
In contrast, there are only 643 existing Greek
manuscripts of the Iliad of Homer, which was first written
in 900 B.C., and the earliest existing manuscript was written
500 years (c.400 B.C.) after Homer wrote it. On top of that,
they are incomplete and there are 764 disputed lines of
text in Homer’s Iliad, while there are only 40 disputed lines
in the New Testament. The New Testament and the Iliad are
roughly the same size. The New Testament has 7,957 verses
of 179,011 words. The Iliad has 15,693 lines of about (an
estimated) 154,000 words.

Similarly, the works of Aristotle were written between
384-322 B.C., yet the earliest-existing manuscript is 1,400
years old (from c.1100 B.C.) and only 49 manuscripts of his
works still exist. Dated much closer to the time of the
writing of the New Testament, Julius Caesar’s “Gallic Wars”
was written c. 58-50 B.C., yet the earliest known manuscript
was written 1,000 years later (c. A.D. 900) and only 10
known manuscripts are in existence.”

Now, does it not take faith to believe that God guided the men who developed our canon
and cross-compared all the known manuscripts?  Since you or I did not discover, catalog, and
cross-compare these thousands of manuscripts, we certainly cannot prove that the manuscript
from which the Bible version we use is correct.  We have to trust that God directed them in the truth.
[Similarly, if you ever fly anywhere by plane, you have to take by faith that the pilot is actually competent
and that the airline did not merely want to be the first to hire a black, muslim trans-gender, blind and deaf
quadriplegic as captain commercial pilot.]

Things built upon trust / faith are not proof; though they may lead to understanding and greater faith.

It also requires faith that the translators got it right.  However, based upon what? does a person
determine which version is the best?  I believe the KJV is the best, though not without
error (the minor error being easily demonstrated).   However, people choose what they want to believe in
any given area; and they choose whether to believe the evidence that you offer or demonstrate.
People believe what they want to believe despite the evidence.  This is a sad fact of reality.  If everything
was actually provable, people would believe.  You could force feed 1,000 rats, one at at time, successively
with cyanide and show to those watching how ever single one of them dies; you can then prepare an equivalent
dose for a human, and then ask: "Who thinks that I have not sufficiently proved or demonstrated that cyanide
is poison and at this concentration is lethal?  If you think I have not proved it, step right up and drink this glass". 
If all things were so proveable or demonstratable, everyone would believe--and respect the truth.  That is not the case. 

God, for His own Purpose, removed the application of punishment, in space of time, far enough from the crime itself,
to the point people think that they can get away with violating God's Law (their fear is extinguished because the punishment
is not immediately paired with their sinful act).  Clearly, if God threw thunderbolts down from
heaven immediately each time a person crossed any line, very few would ever cross those lines.  Similarly, if God answered
every single prayer immediately, for every single person... why... of course, EVERYONE would believe and
everyone would pray and everyone would pray all the time.  But God did not do that.  Why?  Because it is not His
Will that all believe.  Furthermore, it would cease to be faith and be something that most took for granted and expected
as a right.  Prayer would then be considered a demand: When I pray I am supposed to get what I ask for so give it to me
now God!  Christ Himself early in His ministry, knowing--determining before Creation who would believe
and who would not, purposely in the synagogue spoke some very heavy duty speech which the majority
did not understand because they did not realize that it was figurative speech and THEY STOPPED FOLLOWING
Him; why did Christ say it? because He wanted them to stop following Him because they were not of His sheep.

If you think that you can prove any doctrine, prove to me now... pick any notion out of the air and pray for it right now
and prove that the promises of God concerning prayer are true.  Pick something that could not happen on its own, or at
least something highly improbable according to the laws of statistics.  However, one prayer is not proof.  You will then
need to pick another similarly highly improbable thing out of the air and pray for that, let's say, 10 days in a row, and
inform your whole email list of each thing in advance and then offer proof that it was answered, the easiest thing would
be to pray for something globally discernable, like a solar eclipse that caught all scientists off guard... an anomaly ....
an earthquake, a tornado where there had never been one... some pestilence on evildoers in washington... the earth
opening up to receive the flood the dragon has spewed forth (I pray for that many times a day)...

Furthermore, it would not be enough for you to get 10 for 10 prayers answered, but you would then have to get another 100 people
and have them perform the same experiment to so prove it.

Again, if the promises of prayer could be proved as easily as putting money into a vending machine, everyone would "pray without ceasing" -- but that is not reality because that is not what God has determined.  God is separating the chaff from the wheat, by blessing those who see not, yet who believe... who believe even in the face of doubt, impossibility and hopelessness.

We don't pray because it is easy and because we get everything immediately like driving to Walmart or through the drive through at Burger King.

We pray because God commanded us to pray and we pray out of faith and desperation for those things we truly need.  And part of prayer
entails faithful perseverance because faith must be tested.  Before Christ gave the parable of the woman and the unjust judge He said, "Men ought
always to pray and not to faint".  If prayer were a simple vending machine, such grueling angst and perseverance in the face of (seeming) denial would not
be an issue.  Christ did not say to prove doctrine; but to believe and then the Holy Spirit would lead us into all truth.  Verses of Scripture that
tell us to prove things, are imprecise translations of those words, meaning a lower level of "proof" or they are figurative.  When God says prove Me, it is not us proving God.  It is God proving  His own faithfulness in response to our faith.  When Scripture says "prove all things" the Greek word does not mean prove in the pure scientific / logical use of the word, dokimadzo means "approve, test, examine, discern, or think competently about".  Clearly we can only do something to the extent that we are able to and therefore some things cannot be "proved" but they can be rationally discerned to the point that the evidence is greatly in their favor by which a person can safely make an informed decision.  If there were two glasses of fluid before you and one contained a colorless and odorless DEADLY poison, what level of proof would you require before you selected one to drink from?  If instead of poison, one glass contained a colorless and odorless chemical that would give you flatulence, but otherwise not harm you (only the air in the room), would you require the same rigorous "proof" if you were dying of thirst and needed to take a drink and only those 2 glasses were available?  Statistical probability itself is not proof.  Card counters and those who understand odds and the laws of statistics can go to Vegas and have a better chance of getting rich (if the casino attendants don't realize that he is trying to use math rather than simply gamble, and run him off); but even then it is not proof.  It is still some degree of guessing, though with a greater likelihood of probability than guessing based upon no evidence.  But it is not proof.  It isn't even faith.  It is a calculated but unsure hope.

If one thinks that he alone has the magic decoder ring all by himself to divine which texts and manuscripts
and parts thereof are valid or invalid (having never seen the originals, not even knowing the ancient languages),
augmented by his own dreams and any voices he may hear, --neither is this proof of anything
(but it is evidence that he is possibly delusional, mentally unstable, and antichrist).

God calls us to faith... but we are to build upon that faith by diligent study of the Word of God,
not walk around blind.  While you can present evidence for why you think a certain doctrinal position is
the correct position you cannot prove it.  You can endeavor to prove it or more properly defend what you believe
to be the correct position (which is apologetics, logically defending the Biblical position you
believe to be true), but unless you are a fairy and have a magic wand you cannot prove it.

If you could prove it everyone would lay their crowns at your feet and acknowledge every word
that fell from your tongue.  If you cannot do that, you cannot prove it.  It would be nice if such
existed, whether the truth dripped from my lips or yours.  It is not a matter of who is right and
who is wrong.  It is not about us, but about the truth—about Christ who is the Way the Truth and the Life;
about us recognizing the truth and conforming to it.

That is the purpose of faith and separates the chaff from the wheat; that was the purpose of the Parable of the
talents.  We are each responsible before God to lean not unto our own understanding but be in tune with the Holy
Spirit who will lead us into the truth.  But you cannot "prove" whether person A is led by the Spirit or person B who
has completely contradictory views.  Again, it is a matter of faith and a matter of honest study and trusting the
Holy Spirit to show whether person A or person B is true.  However, it seems that God is testing us (not for Himself,
but to show to us), like the parable of the stewards and talents; to see who will understand correctly and do what is right.

You ask for the Biblical definition of faith; if you have studied the Bible, I thought you would know this.

Hebrews 11:1

"Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."

(right there, the first verse in the "Faith Hall of Fame" chapter of the Bible; have you never read that verse?)

of course, in that definition, you will not find the word prove or proof anywhere.  How can you prove something you cannot see?

While prove/proving/proof/proved are used in Scripture maybe a total combined 40 times, faith, faithful, faithfulness is used around 340 times.

For by Grace are ye saved through... (proof?) no... faith.

Without (proof?) it is impossible to please God? no... faith.

Don't draw another false inference that study, testing, examining, discerning is not important; it is.  But faith is the foundation.  Which books of the Bible
do you believe don't belong in the Bible, or which parts of which books do you believe don't belong in the Bible, and what is your evidence and authority for such claims?  If you are the one to make that decision, then it has nothing to do with proof, but your faith in yourself and what you determine is of greater authority than the centuries of true scholars who developed the canon of the Scriptures.  Have you even read a book on "how we got our Bible" and studied the history of the Bible and the Christian Faith to even know what issues are involved?  Have you read any books on the Reformers, the Reformation, the doctrine of the Reformation or the Puritans?  Did you take any college courses or have you ever read any books on Logic?  If not, then upon what do you base all your "proof"...?

The Bible and Biblical truth is spiritual.  It must be spiritually discerned.  It cannot be discerned by those who are unconverted
or by those Christians who are carnal, not walking in the Spirit, leaning unto their own understanding.  Christ said He
would send the Holy Spirit to lead us into the Truth.  Those not led into the truth (only deluded into thinking they
are) are not walking in the Spirit, but in themselves.  God said He blinded the eyes, and shut the ears, hearts, minds of all
and only opens those of the elect whom He draws unto Himself.  Without faith it is impossible to believe.  Without
faith and without the Holy Spirit it is impossible to understand the Truth of God's Word.  Granted, those who are unconverted
and carnal Christians can certainly understand, to a limited degree, "facts", "details", "data", and "information" in the Word of God
but they cannot understand TRUTH and they cannot see the Big picture, and even if they could see it they could not believe it.

THAT is the purpose of faith and that is the relation of faith to understanding.

Also, I don't know what you really mean by

"you are the first besides me that I've seen to take the fact that our God has always been into the equation of the earths age"

Have you never met anyone who believed that God created the heavens and earth?  Am I the first one?  I really don't know what you are saying.  I find it odd that you think that you can prove things when you don't even communicate coherently (and I don't mean that as an insult so please don't take it as one; take it as a challenge to communicate precisely, otherwise, what is the point in communicating?  I trust that despite any flaws in my thinking and expression--I wrote this email once and went over it once, I did not pour over it for a week as if it were a dissertation--but I do believe that have communicated my position coherently; whether you agree with my position or not, I certainly have given you a lot to think about, rather than merely saying a few things that left you wondering what I was actually talking about).

If you meant, "You are the first person other than myself whom I have heard express the notion that the earth itself is older than 6,000 years, while life on earth is only 6,000 years old" then I don't know why you did not say something like that.  I don't know what "God has always been into the equation of the earths age" means, so I cannot comment further; but I will make a few more general comments concerning this issue.

The 6 days of creation began when God said, "let there be light".  However, Scripture clearly says that "In the Beginning" God created the heavens and the earth.  That was BEFORE day one; in an archaic, undefined period of time called "in the Beginning".

Nowhere does Scripture say that God said, "Let there be dirt.  Let there be water.  Let there be rock.  Let it form a ball and hang in empty space."  For whatever reason, God deemed not to tell us how or when He created Earth itself.  But Job 26:7 post-facto does tell us that God "hangeth the earth upon nothing" (contradicting the ancient myths of the earth being on the back of a turtle or snake biting his own tail or elephant or the pagan god Atlas).

The age of the earth is irrelevant concerning the Scriptural account; what is relevant is the age of life on earth, which began with the 6 days of creation, God creating the conditions for life on day 1, when He said, let there be light, most probably He ordained the laws of nature, energy, matter, the pre-requisites for life as we know it.  He then caused dry land to appear.  Of course, He could have created sea life before dry land was to appear, but that is not what He determined to do.  He then created plant life, then sustained it until He created the sun, moon, and stars.  After He created plant life He created the animal kingdom, and finally Adamkind completely separate therefrom.  All that took place in 6 days and then God rested.  The young earth believers, if they understand Scripture, believe LIFE is young, not necessarily that the rocks of the earth itself are young.  

However, even secular scientists think they can prove things, when they cannot.  No scientist can prove that any rock is a certain age.  What he proved is that he has faith in an instrument that has been calibrated to indicate that a rock is a certain age.  I can fix my kitchen scale below zero, to negative one, then when I weigh a hamburger out to 1 lb. (though it is actually 2 lbs.) I can then believe I am staying within a calorie restricted diet.  I take the meat out.  Look, I weigh it.  1 lb. 

Of course, "science" is a bit more "sophisticated" or complex and unless you have the club membership and the white lab coat and have taken the Hypocritical Oath ("I believe in science above all other gods"), then you will be told you don't have the right to question because you don't understand: "We are the experts--look, we have white lab coats and pieces of paper on the wall called diplomas and licenses and awards--so trust us." 

Of course I over simply and over generalize and certainly don't pigeon hole all science or scientists into the same fraud... but the truth is, a computer spits out answers based upon what "reality" it was programmed to accept as truth, and thereby give all answers based upon that standard.  As the old saying goes in computers "G.I. - G.O."  (Garbage in, garbage out.)  If the data entered was not true, the answer the computer spits out will be valid based upon the flawed data, but it will not be true (this explains the results of the past 4 or 5 electronically determined "elections"). 

There are far more factors that science does not know than it knows about, so they cannot know what a plethora of unforeseeable factors may be contaminating and confounding the results, giving a false answer that they think is true.  When they say that a rock is so ever how many years old, what are they actually saying?  do they even know?  Science cannot even define motion.  What is a rock?  A rock is comprised of minerals.  What are minerals?  Minerals are specific conglomerations of specific molecules of various distinct elements.  Molecules are distinct atoms bonded together in a specific fashion.  So when they are saying a rock is so many years old, are they saying the rock is that age, or the minerals, or the molecular bonds or the atoms?  Are they able to separate the age of each?  Do they even know what they are talking about? 

If I have a pile of sand, a pile of granite dust or very fine gravel, a pile of cement, and a bucket of water, and I mix it together in various ratios and make cinder blocks or a concrete slab... each of those elements had an origin, a history, and an age of its own before I joined them together.  Can science tell when I joined the elements together to make the block (not knowing any of the conditions in which I made them, nor the conditions in which that block was subjected for the past however many years, whether it was in a climate controlled environment for 10 years, then under water for 10, then outside in the sun for 20, then back in the climate controlled environment for 5, before I threw it in a peat bog?  Can they then also tell me the age of the sand, the age of the granite dust, the age of the cement, and the age of the water (not knowing the conditions or origin of those elements either)...?  Maybe I just need a lab coat and a decoder ring and club membership and then I could believe.

Of course not all science is so blind... but a lot of what is called science is blind and even fraud, and it is passed off as proof when it is not.  As the old story goes, I believe on a ship crossing the atlantic the Prime Minister of Israel and Einstein met every day and each day Einstein explained E=MC(2) to him, and Ben Gurion said, after Einstein explained it to him every day for a month, that finally at the end of the trip he believed that Einstein actually understood it.  Of course, the humor being, Ben Gurion was clueless about what Einstein tried to explain and Ben Gurion did not know Einstein was telling the truth, but he believed Einstein thought he knew what he was talking about.  The same goes for any "science" or any "belief"... if you immerse yourself deeply enough you may actually believe it, but that does not make it true (though it may be true or it may not; but it always helps to have Imperial power to make a decree and have armies to enforce that everyone "believe" it).

Had God created earth on day 1 or 2 it seems logical (not based upon our own opinion, but based upon the logical format and pattern of God telling us what He created on each day and nowhere does He declared, "let the earth appear out of cosmic dust", and then "let there be light" and then and the evening and the morning were the first day").  Thus, it seems logical by Scriptural pattern that He would have so told us that He created the earth on day 1 or 2, had He indeed created it on day 1 or 2; but He did not tell us and it adds to the sense of the ancientness of the narrative, and infers that He created earth long in pre-history, like a sculptor may purchase a huge block of granite and let it sit, untouched, until he finally had the inspiration and had decided what He would sculpt out of it.  Of course, God did not need to wait for inspiration or decide what He would finally do; He ever knew and He does not need "inspiration".  Why He so determined to create earth and leave it unformed for some unknown period of time, we can only postulate.  This creating earth and leaving it tohu bohu or without form and void until He determined to form it into earth as we know it, has nothing to do with any "gap" theory.  All life is the same age, albeit, a day or two separated.  It is not that some species are more ancient or didn't "evolve"; but God created each species as they are to serve His Purpose.

Herein, I have given 100x more evidence of what I believe, than you offered any "proof" of what you believe.  My evidence is based on faith and Scripture and logic.  Your notion of "proof" (whatever that is) is likewise based on faith (whether you realize it or not), but what that faith is in remains to be seen.

I say nothing to be insulting, but to make points.  I have no perverse need to be right.  Stock in me has not shot up because of my taking half a day to type this out.  I have profited nothing.  I seek to profit nothing.  My sole desire is to glorify God by diligently searching out a matter and presenting coherent thought for others to consider in light of His Word and hopefully be led of His Holy Spirit to understand truth.

Robert

 

 

 

January 30, 2016
Finicum’s Wake: Ode to Lavoy and Freedom

 

[Note, after a bit of information, unrelated, in terms of Irish tragedy and

the background of my titling this "Finicum's Wake", I will get to the topic

of the Malheur Patriot standoff.]

I recall from English Literature class in college, a novel titled Finnegan’s Wake, by Irish author James Joyce and it was true to the nature of the classic Irish tragedy (similar in some ways to the Russian-style tragedy novel).  Finnegan’s Wake is noted for its literary significance due to its experimental style (Joyce spent 17 years writing and it and completed it as his last work before his death) and it is reputed to be one of the most difficult works of fiction ever written in the English language.  Trying to comprehend it is like trying to read a work piecemealed gluing Shakespeare and Mark Twain together and stuffed into a New York Times’ crossword puzzle heavily encrypted with secrets and riddles and jargon, mythology and history (and who knows, maybe a little senility and loosening of associations? a wee bit of opium? or maybe even a dash of a joke on the literary world, as Piscasso pulled one after the other on the art world?)—and in light of all that, imagine trying to read it with comprehension after having not slept for 48 hours, when English is not your first language.  Maybe I exaggerate.  Maybe not.  Read it for yourself if you have nothing constructive to do; it may be a good mind exercise; mental gymnastics, intellectual contortionism:

http://editura.mttlc.ro/fwliniarized/FW%20LINEARIZED%20full%20text%20pp%203-628.pdf

 

The general English-speaking public is utterly ignorant of Finnegan’s Wake—and most probably they will remain so and will be just as ignorant concerning Finicum’s Wake... unless the peoples of the U.S. of Christendom awake!

A few of the more-profound, memorable, or moving comprehensible quotes from Finnegan’s Wake:

“They lived and laughed and loved and left.”

“First we feel.  Then we fall.”

“Let us leave theories there and return to here’s hear.”

“A way a lone a last a loved a long the riverrun, past Eve and Adam’s, from swerve of shore to bend of bay, brings us by a commodius vicus of recirculation back to Howth Castle and Environs.”

“I done me best when I was let.  Thinking always if I go all goes.  A hundred cares, a tithe of troubles and is there one who understands me?  One in a thousand of years of the nights?  All me life I have been lived among them but now they are becoming lothed to me.  And I am lothing their little warm tricks.  And lothing their mean cosy turns.  And all the greedy gushes out through their small souls.  And all the lazy leaks down over their brash bodies.  How small it’s all!  And me letting on to meself always.  And lilting on all the time.”

“My leaves have drifted from me.  All.  But one clings still.  I’ll bear it on me.  To remind me of.”

“Sniffer of carrion, premature gravedigger, seeker of the nest of evil in the bosom of a good word, you, who sleep at our vigil and fast for our feast, you with your dislocated reason, have cutely foretold, a jophet in your own absence, by blind poring upon your many scalds and burns and blisters, impetiginous sore and pustules, by the auspices of that raven cloud, your shade, and by the auguries of rooks in parlament, death with every disaster, the dynamatisation of colleagues, the reducing of records to ashes, the levelling of all customs by blazes, the return of a lot of sweetempered gunpowdered didst unto dudst but it never stphruck your mudhead’s obtundity (O hell, here comes our funeral!  O pest, I’ll miss the post!) that the more carrots you chop, the more turnips you slit, the more murphies you peel, the more onions you cry over, the more bullbeef you butch, the more mutton you crackerhack, the more potherbs you pound, the fiercer the fire and the longer your spoon and the harder you gruel with more grease to your elbow the merrier fumes your new Irish stew.”

“Thus the unfacts, did we possess them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude...”

“over the bowls of memory where every hollow holds a hallow.”

“In the ignorance that implies the impression that knits knowledge that finds the nameform that whets the wits that convey contacts that sweeten sensation that drives desire that adheres to attachment that dogs death that bitches birth that entails the ensuance of existentiality.”

“Grace before Glutton.  For what we are, gifs a gross if we are, about to believe.”

“I mark the long winters and the isolation.”

“Wait till the honeying of the lune, love!  Die eve, little eve, die!  We see that wonder in your eye.  We’ll meet again, we’ll part once more.  The spot I’ll seek if the hour you’ll find.  My chart shines high where the blue milk’s upset.”

“Bite my laughters, drink my tears.  Pore into me, volumes, spell me stark and spill me swooning,  I just don’t care what my thwarters think.”

“And you’ll miss me more as the narrowing weeks wing by.  Someday duly, oneday truly, twosday newly, till whensday.”

“He is cured by faith who is sick of fate.”

“O, undoubtedly yes, and very potable so, but one who deeper thinks will always bear in the baccbuccus of his mind that this downright there you are and there it is is only all in his eye.  Why?”

“Into the wikeawades warld from sleep we are passing.”

“Begin to forget it.  It will remember itself from every sides, with all gestures in each our word.  Today’s truth, tomorrow’s trend.”

“A dream of favours, a favourable dream.   They know how they believe that they believe that they know.  Wherefore they wail.”

“This machine kills fascists.”

“Till tree from tree, tree among trees tree over tree become stone to stone, stone between stones, stone under stone for ever.  O Loud, hear the wee beseech of thees of each of these thy unlitten ones!  Grant sleep in hour’s time, O Loud!  That they take no chill.  That they do ming no merder.  That they shall not gomeet madhowiatrees.   Loud, heap miseries upon us yet entwine our arts with laughter low!”

“We who live under heaven, we of the clovery kindgom, we middlesins people have often watched the sky overreaching the land.”

“Sleep, where in the waste is the wisdom?”

“Never back a woman you defend, never get quit of a friend on whom you depend, never make face to a foe till he’s rife and never get stuck to another man’s pfife.”

“For all their faults.  I am passing out.  O bitter ending!  I’ll slip away before they’re up.  They’ll never see.  Nor know.  Nor miss me.”

[... regardless, though I know little to nothing, it is clear that Finicum will be missed more and by more than Finnegan thought that he would be.]

[Those who need a less-comprehensible selection to ascertain its abstrusity, consider:

“Anna was, Livia is, Plurabelle’s to be.  Northmen’s thing made southfolk’s place but howmulty plurators made eachone in person?  Latin me that, my trinity scholard, out of eure sanscreed into oure eryan!  Hircus Civis Eblanensis!  He had buckgoat paps on him, soft ones for orphans.  Ho, Lord!  Twins of his bosom.  Lord save us!  And ho!  Hey?  What all men.  Hot?  His tittering daughters of.  Whawk?  Can’t hear with the waters of.  The chittering waters of.  Flittering bats, fieldmice bawk talk.  Ho!  Are you not gone ahome?  What Thom Malone?  Can’t hear with bawk of bats, all thim liffeying waters of.  Ho, talk save us!  My foos won’t moos.  I feel as old as yonder elm.  A tale told of Shaun or Shem?  All Livia’s daughter-sons.  Dark hawks hear us.  Night!  Night!  My ho head halls.  I feel as heavy as yonder stone.  Tell me of John or Shaun?  Who were Shem and Shaun the living sons or daughters of?  Night now!  Tell me, tell me, tell me, elm!  Night night!  Telmetale of stem or stone.  Beside the rivering waters of, hitherandthithering waters of.  Night!”]

------------------

This was a senseless over-the-top armed presence at the Murder in Malheur.  Malheur, a National Wildlife Refuge, means “bad time”, that is misfortune, in French, and is near a small town named Burns—a rather poor choice for Custer or anyone to make his last stand.  

What transpired was quite different from what occurred in Ferguson (a Scottish name, though I doubt any Scots still be there), in the State of Missouri (which some pronounce Misery) or Baltimore, Maryland where the police and mayor and other officials just stood back and let the blacks burn down buildings and steal just about anything.  It seems the only ones arrested or prosecuted were those who exercised their Constitutionally protected God-given rights to defend their property with equal force.

Malheur is a National Wildlife Refuge in the middle of nowhere... —yet the “alleged” (and unproven) “government” was so concerned that they sent an entire army to deal with a group of ranchers peacefully occupying a remote public park area in the middle of winter... all the while, the FEDs were engaged in psychopolitical warfare in the community, pretending to be militia members to make the community hate the ranchers and militia.  The Federal U.S. government has no right to own or occupy land, except a tiny portion around Washington D.C., and a few forts in each state.  Yet allegedly BLM (Bureau of Land Management), an illegal bureaucracy, has been attempting to obtain large tracts of land by force; allegedly due to vast mineral wealth on them, and due to powerful individuals and corporations wanting that wealth.  The action is illegal and the governments of the states and local government is illegal if they do not back the citizens instead of the phoney FEDs.

Is not this action against these ranchers and militia a violation of Posse Comitatus?  Are not these police and FED units actually military if they have military weapons, military equipment, military vehicles, and military tactics? (psychopolitical warfare)...?  Why were such valuable resources amassed against peaceful and rightful citizens instead of against Muslim terrorists flooding into the U.S. from every international pore?   When the corrupt U.S. and State governments allow Sheikh Mohammed Kamel Alsaud to purchase the small town of Buford, Wyoming from a Vietnamese entrepreneur!  He bought the town last year for $1.8 million and hired the Bin Laden group to develop a nearly $750 million project to build “Mecca of the West” within the heart of Christendom, and nonmuslims will not even be allowed to enter it (but view from a distance for $15 from a telescope).

Why were these over-empowered public servants not engaged in finding real criminals and terrorists?  These ranchers were standing up to corporate-bureaucracy passing itself off as “government”, stealing land, committing real acts of terror and violence against ranchers, and then falsely charging, falsely prosecuting and unjustly convicting peaceful ranchers (Hammonds) for “terrorism” for the sole crime of burning off brush—a standard practice—and the fire got a little out of control and burned a few acres of unused grass.  However, the BLM allegedly burned down hundreds of times that amount of land—land that was being used, land that had cattle on it, burning many cattle (where is PETA’s outcry?) and even burning ranchers’ fences, corrals, barns, and homes and refusing to allow the ranchers to stop the fires destroying their livelihoods and property.  How is this Justice?  How is this rule of law?  Why do public servants think that they are the master?  Tyrants!

“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?” —Thomas Jefferson

“To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.” —Thomas Jefferson

“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.... Experience has shown, that even under the best forms [of government] those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.... History in general, only informs us what bad government is.  Blest is that nation whose silent course of happiness furnishes nothing for history to say.... Resistence to tyrants is obedience to God.... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.... God forbid that we should ever be twenty years without such rebellion.” —Thomas Jefferson
Such resistence is not “rebellion”—the corrupt, renegade politicians are the ones in rebellion.  It is not rebellion to fight off savages trying to break into your home to rape, pillage, and murder.
Thomas Jefferson also expressed:

“On every question of construction of the Constitution let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.”

Any politician who would interpret the Constitution in any but the historical way is guilty of treason and violation of his oath of office to defend the Constitution; to instead change or scrap it for something that gives aliens rights and the rightful citizens nothing.  Aliens have no rights, except in their own countries.  They have privileges in our nations if they abide by our rules (which cannot Constitutionally be changed to cater to them)—and those rules and privileges can be changed or withdrawn at any time.  True citizens alone have rights.  Any politician who says otherwise is guilty of Sedition and High Treason.  Our forefathers did not risk their lives and fortunes to give rights to the Third World savages or the American Indians or the African slaves.

Will there be any of these FED and Oregon State stormtroopers who develop a conscience and spill the beans about this planned assassination...? this blatant murder...?  Will any dare to brave and scale the impenetrable Blue Wall (police force)...?  Will their be any “Justice” meeted out by the corrupt impenetrable Black Wall (so-called Judiciary)...?
Two decades earlier, other stormtroopers “chased” in slow-motion low gear black celebrity murder suspect O.J. Simpson across Los Angeles (practically giving him an escort wherever he wanted to go, by shuttingdown traffic and forming no road blocks) and let him escape into the safety of his house, after a long, drawn out charade.  The glorified black comedian “family man” Cosby has allegedly been accused of rape and sexual assault by more women than have allegedly accused Clinton... and Cosby has allegedly dodged prosecution (so far).  Most recently, the black celebrity Montel Williams reportedly expressed with invective something to the effect that the government should send in the SWAT team and kill all these ranchers and militia at the Malheur, expressing “[I am] Totally fine with a massive use of deadly force in Oregon to take out Ammon Bundy” .... “I’m calling on Govt to end terrorist siege perpetrated by a bunch of hillbilly American Taliban.”  

[Isn’t “hillbilly” a racial slur coming from a black?  Technically, I believe hillbillys are from Appalachia or the Smokey mountains in the U.S. southeast.  Rustic individuals in the west (in many places where there are no mountains or hills), if they are cattlemen, are referred to as cowboys, if they use horses to round-up their cattle, wear cowboy hats, and boots.]  

Furthermore, violent criminal Black Panther gang members threaten white voters in Philadelphia and elsewhere 2 presidential elections in a row (a Federal crime) and the black attorney general does nothing.  Whipped, corrupt, bought-and-paid-for, treasonous politicians do nothing about the Black Panther’s crimes, the Attorney General’s crimes, Hillary’s crimes, and don’t even ask for proof that the imposter in the White House is Constitutionally qualified to hold office (nor did they investigate how 120% of eligible voters in a given district, many of whom had never voted before, “voted” nearly 100% for Obama, and other proofs that the computerized voting system was tampered with, some officials even reporting they saw the tampering).  Treasonous Congress has not demanded to see his proof of citizenship or ask why a phoney birth certificate that was photoshopped was passed off as a real birth certificate (which itself is fraud and he has made millions and has indebted the nation in trillions as a result of that fraud).  Treasonous Congress has not asked why his Social Security number is from Connecticut, a state in which neither he or his parents ever lived; nor have they asked why he has reportedly spent nearly a million dollars (or more) to keep his personal records secret.  Was he or was he not a “foreign student” at Occidental University?  Why are not these questions asked to him under oath, with no teleprompter, no handler, no speech-writer, no lawyer to coach him, without having the questions supplied to him in advance so he can think up a good lie (as all the so-called Presidential “debates” or Press conferences do).  Thomas Jefferson said, “When a man assumes a public trust, he should consider himself as public property.”  When someone assumes a public trust he waives many of his own rights and agrees to be held to a higher standard because he has the welfare of millions of people in his hands (rightfully or not) and he also agrees to operate within the narrow, limited authority given to him, not violate the Constitution as if he is a dictator.  Why does no one from Obama’s alleged Harvard Law School class remember him?  Why has Congress not investigated and asked for records? interrogated the staff, faculty, and student body?  Obama hiding all these things and spending so much money to keep them hidden or produce fraudulent documents, itself is a crime in addition to his fraud in claiming that he was going to be the “transparent” president.  He’s transparent all right—anyone with a brain saw through him from day one.  The phoney courts are stacked, the phoney legislature is stacked.  It does no good to “vote someone out” 4 years later (irreperable damage is done and they are then paid pensions, health care, travel, secret service, etc. for the rest of their lives, rewarding them for treason) because 4 years later when new candidates are voted in we will simply find out that all the new “conservative” politicians are liars too (which is treason and fraud).  The solution is to impeach them all for their crimes of High Treason and execute those guilty of Treason—and make certain that all politicians upon taking their oath of office realize that any attempt to subvert the Constitution and strip the lawful citizens of their rights, and import aliens and cater to them, is treason, and let them know the penalty for treason up front; and tell them that they will not vote on their own salaries and benefits, that their pay will be the pay of the average American, and that they will receive no free benefits and no pension.  If you take the fun out of crime there will be less crime.

Aliens take over our all of our major neighborhoods—entire cities... stealing hundreds of trillians of dollars (how much is an entire city like New York, Washington D.C., Philadelphia, Miami, Chicago, Los Angeles, Dallas, etc. worth? roads, bridges, tunnels, highways, businesses, homes, parks, utilities, monuments, zoos, museums, man-made lakes and riverways, etc.?) that our ancestors invested in building those entire cities... and they commit hundreds of thousands of of rapes, murders, and multifarious thefts in addition to the grand theft of entire cities—and tens of millions of them are paid centuries of welfare of various sorts, putting them on a taxpayer-funded breeding program; and then quota laws are passed to give many of them high-paying jobs for which most are entirely unqualified.

What crime did any of these ranchers commit other than trying to expose pseudo-political corruption?  Did they threaten any other Americans who wanted to enjoy the National Wildlife Refuge in the middle of winter, in the middle of nowhere?  Did they beat anyone up? rape them? rob them? play the knock out game? murder them?  If it is public land the ranchers and militia had a right to be there.  They are part of the lawful public.

Transients / bums / vagrants / hobos / streetpersons sleep on public benches in parks in our cities, which taxes pay for—none of those worthless people contributing.  They are allowed to sleep on and defile the benches and those whose taxes pay for those benches cannot sit on them.  These filthy homeless litter, urinate, and defecate wherever it suits them, making our downtown cities smell like Third-world gas station bathrooms!  Yet they are not gunned down, even though they have no right to defile the public places paid for by those whose taxes developed and maintain them.

Read the Finicum family’s statement (see the link listed shortly) and compare it to statements made by the families of Trayvon Martin*1 or Michael Brown*2 or Freddie Gray*3 and compare it to the general reaction of the black community.  Compare what Finicum did (nothing) to what Martin, Brown, and Gray and others did.  Rodney King*4 (was no choir boy) and the police officers involved, all of whose irresponsible actions are blamed for setting off the L.A. riots of 1992, and the despite the seemingly unjust case of Arthur McDuffie*5 and the police officers involved, all of whose irresponsible actions certainly did not warrant the Miami riots of 1980.  

[*1 See http://pamelageller.com/2013/07/trayvon-martins-involvement-in-local-burglaries-covered-up-by-media-school-police-prosecutors.html/ for the cover-up of Trayvon Martin’s criminal record.  There were minor riots after this case, and scattered criminals acts nationwide, with blacks shouting at their intended victims, “This is for Trayvon” (someone they didn’t know and who were ignorant of the facts concerning the case).  

*2 Charles Johnson, Editor-in-chief of GotNews, filed a lawsuit in St. Louis seeking the release of Michael Brown’s juvenile criminal record, claiming there was no cause for the records to remain sealed.  Johnson says unnamed law enforcement told him that Brown’s juvenile arrest record contains a second-degree murder charge and information linking him to the notorious Crips street gang.  Johnson’s lawyer, John C. Burns, compared the Martin Brown case to Smith v. Harold’s Supermarket (1984) case in which a white 18-year old William L. Halstead, stole a packet of cigarettes and a security guard broke his neck.  Halstead suffered paralysis and died 19 days later. Halstead’s juvenile arrest record was released, even though his family protested; yet the dead black Brown’s records are kept sealed (as are Communist subversive Martin Luther Kings’).  The media showed pictures of Brown when he was a child and said that he had “no adult criminal record”; but did not mention his juvenile record, expulsion from school, or the fact that when he punched the police officer in the face and tried to take his gun from him (after having assaulted a convenient store clerk and stole a box of cigars), “little angel baby” Michael Brown weighed 289-pounds and was 6-foot 5-inches tall.

*3 Freddie Gray had been involved in 20 criminal court cases; 5 still active at the time of his death; he had already served two years of a 4-year sentence in prison and was paroled—and violated parole—but not returned to prison, serving only a month in jail.  In the Baltimore riots about $9 million in damage was done, in addition to looting and stealing, and murder and assault.  

*4 King admitted that he tried to evade arrest in the high-speed chase because if he was arrested for driving under the influence it would violate his parole for a previous robbery conviction.  After blacks rioted, over $1 billion in damage was done, in addition to looting and stealing, and murder and assault.  4,000 National Guard troops patroled L.A.

*5 McDuffie (with no known adult criminal record) had multiple unpaid traffic tickets and was riding his motorcycle with a suspended license; after running a red-light he led police on a high-speed chase on his motorcycle, was cracked in the head several times either from a motorcycle crash and / or resisting arrest and died 4 days later.  This was during my senior year in high school.  We lived in North Miami but went to church in Central.  It looked as if a hurricane had hit Central Miami.  National guard troops with M-16s were on every corner (around 1,000 National Guard were deployed).  Curfew was in effect at night.  Over $100 million in damage was done, in addition to looting and stealing, and murder and assault.  The family later was granted $1 million.]

In reality, these actions did not set off those riots.  As in all black riots or other criminal acts of theft, arson, assault, and murder, it has nothing to do with the alleged, perceived “victim”.  Whites don’t rob and steal from each other and destroy their cars and houses and businesses when there is an injustice (perceived or real).  Why is it acceptable behavior by blacks?  If they cannot live in a civilized world they should be returned to the jungle.  If they are equal, why are their two sets of rules—they being given preferential treatment?  These blacks simply use any exuse to commit crime, loot, vandalize, burn, assault and murder.  The blacks did the very same thing in downtown Philadelphia (1983) when their basketball team, the 76ers won the championship (I was living with my grandparents in a suburb of nw Philly at the time).  They destroyed buildings, looted, started fires, smashed and turned over cars, metro buses, and bus shelters.  You cannot tell the difference between their celebration or their protest.  That shows it is not really protest, but any excuse to go ape.  They did the same thing in 2008 when the Philadelphia Phillies finally won the pennant—and the police chief said, “It’s OK.  It’s all right.  People are having fun”.  The brass of Baltimore likewise told the police to “stand down” and “let them get it out of their system”.

Mayhem resulted by blacks going ape in Miami, L.A., Ferguson, Baltimore... —and how many of those black criminals that robbed and committed arson and mugged and beat people up... how many of them have been prosecuted...? —even though many were caught on video tape robbing liquor stores (a Federal crime) or other stores, stealing or destroying everything—and their numerous body tattoos served as fingerprints that can be spotted from yards away.  They stupidly covered their heads with their shirts leaving their chest, back and arms bare, exposing all their “tats” (did they steal those tats too? where’d they get the money for all those tats?  how can people on welfare afford tattoos?)...?  How many of those many hundreds or thousands have been prosecuted for their real crimes...?

Another BLM (Black Lives Matter) create disturbances and violate other peoples’ rights that would get white people arrested.  During the same time as the Malheur standoff, the Black BLM took over San Francisco Bay Bridge and chained themselves together and stopped all traffic!  In Canada they shut down a subway.  At a political rally (Bernie Sanders, I believe), they charged onto stage and took the microphone from him and begin spewing their rhetoric while he meekly stood there and did nothing; whereas, if a white person had done that security forces would have piled on him like the opposing team sacking a quarterback during the Superbowl.

Why are there two sets of laws? one for humans and one for primates? and why are animals allowed to run wild wreaking havoc while peaceful citizens cannot exercise their rights to life, liberty and property / pursuit of happiness without fearing a corrupt government’s retribution on them for exercising their God-given rights?

How many millions of dollars of taxpayer money did the pseudo-government misspend with this entire army over a non-issue of peaceful protestors in the middle of winter occupying something that wasn’t even being used?  Heads should roll.  Will they?  Only the heads of rightful citizens,   if good people don’t stand up and only if they impeach or recall corrupt politicians who have committed High Treason and violated their oath of office, since they were elected to represent the people—the people who are heirs of the U.S. when established—not the imported Third World, not the pseudo-government bureaucrats, illegitimately appointed officials, special interest groups, or corporations.

This (Irishman, I assume his name is Irish) LaVoy Finicum (according to the link I will list shortly) raised 11 children and 50 foster children.  

He didn’t have 11 illegitimate children and then say, “Someones gots ta be responsible, someones gots ta pay fo my chilluns”... and expect the taxpayers to support him and his family (and their descendents and their descendents) for the rest of eternity.  I don’t know anything about LaVoy Finicum, but I would make a fair guess that he was a contributor to society, not a parasite.  From watching the brief youtube video he made (link to be listed below), I would have liked to have known him.  He was a hero.  Was he perfect?  Of course not.  Would we have agreed on everything?  Doubtful.  But he stood up to defend our nation against internal enemies.  He stood up for his kinsmen, fellow-ranchers, patriots, neighbors though many hundreds of miles apart.

Do we see a trail of sqaulor and litter and refuse marring the path that these ranchers and militia trod?  Have they urinated and defecated all over the ground and in the building they were occupying?  Have they graffitied and vandalized and destroyed property?

Were LaVoy’s and Bundy’s and the others’ judgments flawed?  Who really can say?  Unless one has had such real wrongs perpetrated against you for decades, stealing your property and livelihood, and intimidating, assaulting, and even murdering or falsely prosecuting you, you really cannot determine if their judgment was flawed or not.
What I do know is that if no one stands up—if not enough people stand up soon it will be like the Bolshevik Revolution of which, decades after, Solzhenitsyn lamented:

“And how we burned in the labor camps later thinking: What would things have been like if every security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive, and had to say good-bye to his family?  Or if people had not simply sat there, palling with terror, but had understood that they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up an ambush of a half-dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?  The cursed machine would have ground to a halt.  If, if, if!  We didn't love freedom enough.  We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”

Not all of those in Russia were fortunate to make it to the prison camps (and that “fortune” meant brutal treatment, near-starvation, freezing cold, overwork... no “reparations” [something apparently given only to weak, inferior people who had imaginary injustices perpetrated against them] and death for the majority).  The option to the Gulags was 66 to 180 million white Christians being brutally murdered and all their property stolen, and no reparations... a “hush up” and cover-up by governments, news sources, and institutions of learning over the past 100 years.

Americans stupidly think that the government will never take their guns from them; that they will never give them up.  They stupidly don’t know history: or even current events: many cities already have banned them and reportedly California has begun “No Notice” gun confiscation).  The people of Imperial Russia (before it fell to Bolshevism) had more guns and swords and knives than any other nation.  First they start with registration, then charging a permit each year; then continually raising the permit fees and restrictions and requirements until you can’t afford to own them.  Even now hospitals and insurance forms ask if you have guns in the house.

If communities do not stand up and reject aliens and pagan religions and perverts being thrust into their society to which everyone must bow... If people don’t stand up and stop the rape and murder, the vandalism, the squalor, the theft, the leeching off society and breeding of aliens now, they never will.  These destroyers have been thrust in for a reason: to fragment society so that it is not cohesive so that it cannot stand up.  The U.S. Colonies were able to repel the might of the British Empire because the people in the Colonies were kinsmen and Christians: They were one.  Solzhenitsyn also expressed: “To Destroy a people, you must first sever their roots.”  That is what they have done.  If people don’t stand up now, what will they do when the tanks and helicopters and armored personnel vehicles (which nearly every county law enforcement is collecting) roll up on their lawn to confiscate their guns—knowing that their neighbors won’t stand up for them because they did not stand up for their neighbors? knowing that nearby brother and sister communities will not come to their aid since they did not go to theirs?  Stand up or die!

Clearly Bundy and Finicum and other were expecting many others, thousands, even millions to stand up.  A million blacks march, and yet Bundy could only get 150 people to stand up to real totalitarianistic tyranny!  How Sad!  They were sorely disappointed.  Who is responsible for LaVoy Finicum’s murder (in additon of course to the ones who pulled the trigger)...? —every American in that community and nearby communities that did not stand up.  I guess there was a ball game on t.v. and the general populace was more interested in watching a bunch of grossly overpaid and over-senstationalized alien whore-mongering criminals fight over a ball.

Why don’t we care about our own people being robbed, raped, assaulted, falsely prosecuted, imprisoned, murdered?  Brainwashing?  Complacency?  Denial? or Apathy and Cowardice?

“Whoso stoppeth his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard.” (Proverbs 21:13)

If that murder and assault on a been perpetrated on a truckload of blacks half of the U.S. would be burning by now (and all the liquor, shoe, and t.v. stores would be looted).

If Swedish or German men were raping Muslim women, all hell would break loose in a unholy Jihad and United Nations would even step in. 

[Let Merkel and other leftist politicians and the Pope spend a few nights without their bodyguards sleeping among these so-called “refugees”.]

Why do God’s people do nothing? —because we have turned our backs on God and God has sent a spirit of delusion, slumber, fear, complacency, stuporbowl.

When our people are being executed one by one, when rights are being stripped from us, our economy and nation plundered, politicians not even trying to hide their treason... what will it take for people to realize if they don’t stand up while they still have the numbers, there will never be any future opportunity to stand up? ...learned helplessness, brainwashing in the schools, media, and churches... —it is all strong delusion sent upon us by God for the masses of His people to believe a lie because they have rejected Him... by allowing aliens, pagan temples, political corruption, false doctrine in the churches, seminaries, lies being taught in schools, blasphemy in the media and movies and music, perversion glorified, evolution mandated, etc.  God is allowing us to reap what we have sown to separate the chaff from the wheat.  Only those who turn to Him in repentance will survive the coming judgment.  The chaff shall be burned with the tares with unquenchable fire.

Read the below PDF link.  
http://www.rense.com/general96/FinicumFamilyStatement.pdf

 

then watch this short video and try not to cry as you admire him and mourn his life being cut off for no valid reason:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JtHUkokYnMY&;;feature=youtu.be

—and get off your butt and tell everyone that you know to do the same.  If the people you know, your friends and family and co-workers don’t care, then shake the dust off your feet as testimony against them and wash your hands of them and have nothing to do with them until they fall on their faces before God for their apathy and their immorality.  Nowhere in the U.S. Constitution... nowhere in the Bible are we required to give our money, our nations, our lives to aliens and perverts.  God does not command us to be tolerant or to love HIS enemies or do good to them.  That is a complete misreading of the Word of God.  Christ forbade us to give that which is holy to the dogs, or cast pearls before swine—lest they turn and rend you.  Christ said it is not right to take the children’s bread and give it to the dogs—and the corrupt churches who don’t know the difference between sheep and pigs, dogs, and wolves, have Christ’s sheep (the Master’s children) breeding with the pigs, dogs, and wolves!  Tolerance, compromise, “getting along” with aliens, evil, perverts, and heathen is a concept found nowhere in the Word of God and it is nowhere suggested by Natural Law. 

“Individual Liberties are antecedent to  all government.” (Common Law Maxim)  Aliens have rights in their own nation; not in ours.  They don’t give us or our religion equal rights in their nations.  We can’t move to their nations, be put on welfare for however long we want to milk the system, then be elected to their parliament and change their laws to favor us.  It is only perpetrated against Christendom and Christendom is participating in its own suicide.  I’ve written for decades: When two sports teams or two armies meet on the field of battle and one side rigidly holds to a set of rules and the other does not, the side that does not will win every time.  That’s why we are losing.  There are two sets of rules.  One for us and the other for them.  What’s ours is theirs and what’s theirs is theirs.  It is meant to destroy us and it is doing so well.  Top participating in your own suicide.  Stop helping murder your own family.  Stop giving up to the dogs the priceless inheritance your ancestors left for you.  Stop sinning against God.  He did not command tolerance.  He commanded separation, holiness, and obedience to Him and He commanded us not to intermarry with the heathen, not to learn their ways, and not to seek their peace or prosperity forever.  

The god of tolerance is the Antichrist in disguise and the only purpose for tolerance is to destroy us.  The myth of “equality” was invented and “minority rights” legislated to weaken Christendom from within (and destroying our economy through the Welfare State, politicial corruption, and unjust wars).  Once the minority becomes the majority, the mask will come off and minority rights will become extinct and “majority rights” will be re-instituted and it will be “open season” on us.  Tolerance has already been shattered as a myth once they have weakened us.  Those who championed tolerance are the most intolerant of all.  It is terrorism for a pervert sue a bakery for declining to bake a pervert wedding cake, when there are 12 other bakeries willing to do so.  It is fraud if the pervert does not order a cake from each bakery.  How is that “tolerance”...?  Tolerance is a One-Way Street.  He is trolling and is a terrorist.  Such bakeries need to unincorporate.

Stop watching and supporting traitorous, soul-selling, alien, leftist, antichrist, whoremongering degenerates play with a ball, sing, or act (theater, t.v., or movies).  Freedom is at stake.  The barbarians are pouring through the gates.  Just say NO to mindless, unproductive, nation-destroying senseless amusement that simply gives hundreds of millions of dollars to the destroyers of Christendom—and do something and do it now!  Educate yourself.  Educate others.  Support those like me who have been standing in the gap thanklessly for a quarter of a century.  Stand up in your community and shame others into standing up.  Circle the wagons.  Search your heart, read God’s Word, see what He requires, rend your heart and your garment and repent and live as God Commanded.  He did not abolish His Law.  The Law was never for salvation but is the Moral Code that He commanded us to follow as obedient children.  If in sin God will not hear our prayers, bless, or deliver us.  There is the etymology—the pathology of our problem.  God is Immutable.  Holy.  Perfect.  So is His Standard of Holiness.  It cannot change.  That which He declared to be abominations never become moral, wholesome, and good.  “Come out from among them and be ye separate, be holy for I the Lord thy God am Holy—and ye shall be my sons and daughters.”  Obedience does not make us His children, we are His children because He sired us.  Obedience establishes His children as honorable sons and daughters whom the Father will bless, protect, and give inheritance.  Once we repent He will destroy our enemies instead of allowing them to destroy us.  Which do you prefer?  Then do what is right.

Read more of these Ruminations.  Email the links to everyone you know who has a brain, is moral, and cares—and if there are those in your life who do not have those 3 things then why are they in your life?

Read my books:

Uncovering the Mysteries of Your Hidden Inheritance,
What’s Keeping God From Delivering America, Britain, and Europe From Destruction...?,
Ten Commandments For You(th),
and Does God Repent? — Can God Change His Mind?

Whatever everyone has been trying has not been working.  When everything that politicians do only makes the matter worse, it is not an accident or bad luck, but conspiracy.  No one is that stupid.  99% of the preachers and Bible teachers are blind or part of the conspiracy.  We are teetering on the brink of destruction.  It’s time to do what God commanded.

“He that saith, I know Him [God], and keepeth not His Commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.” (I John 2:4)

Christ said,

“17Think not that I am come to destroy the Law, or the Prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.  18For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the Law, till all be fulfilled.” (Matthew 5)

Keeping the Law does not save, but Scripture says,

“...Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.” (Galatians 5:16)

—what are the lusts of the flesh? —doing everything that God forbade and not doing everything that He commanded.
If one is truly converted, if the Holy Spirit truly lives inside him, he will obey God because that is what honorable children do and that is the purpose that the Holy Spirit indwells those who are truly converted—to lead us into the Truth and obedience.  Those who do not obey God are promised that their prayers will not be heard and that they will be rejected on the day of Judgment because their actions will show that they were never of God.  Christ said that on the Day of Judgment, those who thought that they were Christians serving Christ (though they did what they thought was “good”—so defined by an apostate church taking its orders from a godless antichrist government, perverting what God has called “good” and “evil”—instead of what God commanded):

“I never knew you: depart from Me, ye that work iniquity [the Greek is anomos meaning “lawlessness”].” (Matthew 7:23)

God is full of mercy and compassion on those of His children who repent before Judgment falls, but after Judgment falls, He shall have no mercy.

“But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.” (I Timothy 5:8)

Those who do nothing when the barbarians are pouring in through the gates, who marry their sons and daughters to them, and tolerate their gods, are worse than an infidel and have denied the true faith—and Christ said that those who deny Him before men, them will He deny before His Father Who is in Heaven.

Each time that evil rears its ugly head in society and Christians say and do nothing THEY DENY CHRIST.  To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it no to him it is sin.  Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that friendship with the world is enmity with God, therefore, whoever would be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.

"Choose you this day."  Our ancestors chose—and died—to give us freedom.  Will you just piss it away?

“It is a fearful thing to fall into the Hands of the Living God.”

“Judgment begins with the House of God”—with His people.  Why? —because they know better!  They have no business living like savages, learning the ways of the heathen, and spurning what He commanded.

That is why the mud tsunami is upon us.  This is the fulfillment of Revelation in which the Serpent / Dragon opens his mouth and vomits out a flood (alien peoples) to overtake / drown the woman and her child (God’s people).  However, God says that He will cause the earth to open up and receive the flood, to give His people a little respite.  But God hears only the prayers of His children who are not living in unrepentant sin and who have confessed their sin and returned to living the way that He commanded and stop following false christs and blind shepherds.  Until that point in time comes, God will cull His herd and allow the wolves to devour all those who aren’t repenting—until the only ones left are those who have repented!

You are seeing the fulfillment of the book of Daniel, the vision of Nebuchadnezzar of the great image.  We are the feet of clay mingled with iron—which represents integration (in violation of God’s command).  This is the last kingdom of the earth: Christendom that has devolved into end-time Babylon (which means, “confusion by mixing”).  Clay and iron don’t mix.  Clay and iron will dis-integrate: They can’t uphold the weight of the statue.  When Christ smashes those feet 6,000 years of history and civilization will fall and come to an end.  Then Christ will say, “Bring those My enemies that would not that I should rule over them and slay them before Me.”  Christ said that He would command the angels to “uproot every plant (tare) that My Heavenly Father has not planted” and “remove all those things that offend.”  The majority in Christedon don’t believe the Bible is true.  They will be on the judgment end of Christ’s sword.

Seek God while He may be found.  Every single true believer is a watchman on the wall—and if the watchmen fall asleep or do not sound the alarm, God says their lives shall be required of them.  Those who bear no fruit are not of God and will be shocked on the Day of Judgment.  May God awaken His people before that fateful day.  May people stand up now while there is time, or God will not stand up for us.  If we don’t stand up for our kinsmen, they will stand up for us.  We reap what we sow; but others will also reap collateral damage from our sinful sowing or failure to sow.

Lavoy was a Mormon.  I don't claim to know what is in the hearts or minds of Mormons any more than I claim to know what is in the hearts and minds of Catholics.  I pray that he truly acknowledged Christ Jesus as the only sacrifice for sins and that his family likewise is truly converted and trusts in God, Christ Jesus, and His Word not the Mormon Church or the Book of Mormon any more than a person of the Reformed Christian Faith trusts in John Calvin or his books.  True Faith is built solely upon the facts and doctrine contained in the Word of God—and that Truth cannot be understand without the Holy Spirit to guide one into the understanding of that truth.  All writings of man or church are secondary and whenever the contradict the Word of God they are to be rejected.  Lavoy died 2 days shy of his 55th birthday and left behind a wife, 11 children, and 19 grandchildren (and many foster-children).

 

I've just spent 2 days to write this in honor of someone whose name I had never heard until a few days ago.  I pray more than a handful of people will read this, and take it to heart, and stand up and do what's right or we will lose our nation.  We will lose freedom.  We will be raped and robbed and pillaged and murdered and dispossessed just like the millions who already have to which the average Christian in Christendom turns a blind eye and goes back to watching the Superbowl.  God save your people!  Open their hearts and minds and deliver them from their apathy, fear, delusion, selfishness, and rebellion against You so that you will hear our prayers and deliver us while there is yet someone left to deliver.  Christ queried: When the Son of man returns will He find faith yet upon the earth? and that unless God draws short the days of vengeance that are soon to fall on us, no flesh would survive.

-------------------

UPDATE

See also:

 

http://freedomoutpost.com/new-synced-video-of-eyewitness-confirms-story-about-lavoy-finicum-murder-as-fbi-agents-are-under-investigation-for-possible-misconduct-video/

and

JEANETTE FINICUM RESPONDS TO OREGON STATE AND FBI INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

This was not a "traffic stop"--that itself is a bald-faced LIE.  The very suggestion / claim shows BAD FAITH and SUBTERFUGE and evidence of CONSPIRACY to hide the truth.  How many traffic stops have multiple vehicles of Oregon State Police and Feds filled with trigger-happy psychopathic neanderthals (Israeli trained, I hear)...?  If it was a "routine traffic stop" WHAT WAS THE PROBABLY CAUSE in the middle of nowhere on a deserted road in the middle of the wilderness?  did he run over a chipmunk?  Shot 4 times in the back.  Is that a routine traffic stop?  Cops in Baltimore and Ferguson "stood down" and just watched and allowed blacks to trash vehicles and burn buildings and were warned just to let them get it out of their system.  Cops in Philly let "fans" turn over metro buses and cars and set them on fire to "celebrate" Philly's team winning, and the cops say they are just happy.  WHAT WAS THE OFFENSE OF THE ROUTINE TRAFFIC STOP?  What was the reasonable suspicion or probable cause?  What was the crime?  What were the police talking about for 5 minutes when the vehicles were stopped on the road...? were they talking about failure to yield right of way or crossing the solid yellow line?  Do they claim his tags were expired... surely that would be cause for the police to open fire on a vehicle of men and women who had shown no aggression and had brandished no weapons.  This was murder, assault, TERRORISM.  The Feds / cops can't even get their stories straight after a month.  GIVE THEM ALL LIE DETECTOR TESTS AND TRUTH SERUM.  They are PUBLIC SERVANTS and they waived all right to privacy when they assumed a public trust.

Someone emailed and asked:

I find it interesting [concerning the 3 books you reprint, listed below] that General Erich Ludendorff says all three (Papacy/Jesuits, Freemasons, supernational jews/soviets) were struggling against each other for control of the world but at the same time he says jews were involved in everything.  So wouldn’t that mean there was no “real” struggle?  The same group was really behind all of them.  I know there was a struggle between jew bankers and non-jew bankers (Barings, etc vs. Rothschilds and the Frankfurt/Dutch allies, etc.) but we all know how that turned out.

[- The Coming War (1931), 176pp., pb., 18.00.  All 3 are very rare; all 3 he unabashedly exposes Jews, Catholic Church, & Freemasonry; the great thing, he did not like Hitler at all, so the enemy cannot honestly denounce him as a “nazi.”
- Destruction of Freemasonry Through Revelation of Their Secrets (Rebel or Reactionary) (1927, 3rd edition 1957) 142pp., + about 10 pages of illustrations; pb., 16.50 + P&H (about 350,000 copies of the first 2 editions sold; 2nd edition was 1937)
- The Nation at War (1931) 189pp., pb., 18.00 + P&H.]

----
I replied:

Movies like ...
- “Three days of the Condor” (1975; Robert Redford)
- “The Gauntlet” (1977; Clint Eastwood)
- “Hopscotch” (1980; Walter Matthau, which is a dramedy)
- “The Man With One Red Shoe” (1985; Tom Hanks / John Belushi, which is a dramedy)
- “Conspiracy Theory” (1997; Mel Gibson)

...all clearly show that there can be competing factions in an organization like the CIA or other such groups or “governments”; the same thing occurs in “Banana Republics” and other unstable regions in the Third World in which various local gangs, drug lords, communist-funded military, etc., all compete for the same territory / oil / poppy field / town etc.

Of course these superb movies show that there is a good faction and bad faction; but in reality, for the past 100 years or so they have all all bad factions competing against each other, like different packs of wolves fighting over the same herd of sheep; which “Enemy of the State” (1998; Will Smith / Hackman) superbly shows.
While these are fictional movies, as Lord Byron, George Gordon said, “Truth is strange; strange indeed—stranger than fiction.”

Just because 2 or more powerful and wealthy people / organizations are Jews doesn’t mean that they like each other or want to share the power / loot.

Like the excellent movie “The Italian Job” (2003; Wahlberg / Sutherland / Norton) shows, and as one of Bronson’s (Buchinsky) movies was even titled, there is (no) “Honor Among Thieves” (1982 VHS title of the 1968 French-Italian movie, Adieu l’ami, [“Farewell, Friend”) and “The Mechanic” (1972; Bronson / Jan Michael Vincent; Mechanic refers to a hit man).

Though most people don’t realize it, in a lot of movies, like those of Bronson or Eastwood’s westerns, there really wasn’t a hero, but what is called an “anti-hero”.  Basically, the anti-hero is a bad guy, but he fights the other bad guys to protect the innocent; not necessarily out of the goodness of his heart, but he just doesn’t like the other bad guys, or he had nothing better to do so he decided to do a good deed, or the bad guys inadvertantly wronged him in their attempt to kill the good guys, and he takes it person and wipes out all the bad guys, not to help the innocent, but for his own reasons.  This probably explains most of politics and the history of governments in their intrigue, wars, and evil.

As these movies show, once they have been successful against a common enemy or in pulling off a heist, the bad guys liquidate each other so that they don’t have to share the loot and power.  Or, since they know they cannot trust their co-conspirators to keep their mouths shut if they get caught, or in case his co-conspirators are thinking of killing him, it turns into an unofficial game of “wack others before others have a chance to wack you”.

Just because they are cut from the same cloth does not mean that they like each other or “play well together”.

The Catholic church and the Jews and Islam might be considered more like 3 mafia families attacking each other (the upper echelons of each are reportedly run by the same cabal family, even though the underlings / pawns / foot soldiers of the 3 groups don’t have a clue).  Of course, if a group of Irish Protestants, Syrian “Christians” or American Christian patriots are standing in their way of global domination, they might have an “unofficial truce” against each other while they fight the common enemy.  It may seem that the Vatican does not have the troops to compete, but even as the corrupt British paid the American Indians to massacre, rape, and kill white settlers in the U.S. Colonies, don’t be surprised if the Pope / Vatican tells the hundreds of millions of hispanics that they should rise up and kill all the white people in the U.S. and Europe and that the Church will “absolve” them of their sins, because they are doing “God’s service” in exterminating the “heretics”.  Remember that little thing called the “Inquisition” or “St. Bartholomew’s Day Massacre”... or 1,001 others tortured and burned at the stake...?—well, most Protestants have never read a book on the history of the Reformation or Reformers, such as Foxe’s Book of Martyrs, so they probably don’t remember.  As Spanish-American philosopher George Santayana said, “Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.”

Like the t.v. reality show Survivor, or others like it, individuals may form a pact to work together to make it to the later stage of the game, working as a secret or open team to eliminate everyone else; but each knows that when it comes down to just their little group and no one else is left, it is “every man for himself”... however, some without honor (not that the others have honor either, but they are simply gullible for trusting the others) will secretly sabotage even those who are in their “pact” if they consider them a threat and feel safer helping to eliminate one of his own sooner, if he thinks that he can easily take care of the lesser competition later on.  Backstabbing is a way of life for such.

Parasites, once the host is dead, then parasitize / predate upon each other.  Tiger sharks are so vicious that often in the womb, the dominant tiger shark fetus, before even being born (they are live-bearers, not egg layers) will kill and eat all his womb-mates!

Their goal is to control all factions of all countries... in medicine, law, economics, industry, government, church, media, etc., in each nation.  But as several Jews have noted, Jews need a common enemy (or an illusion thereof), and without so-called Antisemitism (or the illusion thereof), Jews would cease to exist, because without an outside enemy they attack each other.  Once a dictator is “put in place” he then likes the power and actually thinks he is the boss; then the ones who put him in power try to kill him and he them.

[Note: I haven’t rented a movie or turned on the tv for 5 years, and haven’t been to a movie theater for 10 or 15; but the movies I did watch in the past, I remember vividly.]

 

 These are ever-so brief excerpts from my upcoming book

Ten Commandments for You(th): for Youth, Adults —for Everyone.

[God promised long-life, health, prosperity, blessing, youthfulness to those who obeyed Him. Solomon (who in his early reign was godly and obeyed God's Law and taught it to his son) wrote under Divine inspiration:

"1My son, forget not my Law; but let thine heart keep my Commandments: 2For length of days, and long life, and peace, shall they add to thee.  3Let not mercy and truth forsake thee: bind them about thy neck; write them upon the table of thine heart: 4So shalt thou find favour and good understanding in the sight of God and man.  5Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.  6In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He shall direct thy paths.  7Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil. 8It shall be health to thy navel, and marrow to thy bones. " (Proverbs 3)]

 

However, since God’s Judgment has not fallen in ways that sinful man chooses to recognize,* sinful man has concluded that either God does not exist or that He no longer cares or that He has “changed” and therefore, Judgment will not be forthcoming, and therefore, there is nothing to worry about (I Peter 3:4-6).  So the Outlaw** Church has become the openly rebellious “Harlot Church” that Revelation 17:3,4 talks about.  It is not pleasant to point out, but ignoring reality does not accomplish anything—and it is a sin against God to ignore sin.  Putting a band-aid on cancer or giving a termite-riddled house another coat of paint hides the ugliness, but does not solve the problem.  Christ referred to the same corrupt church and state in His day as “white washed sepulchres full of dead men’s bones”.  English and American Common Law declare, “It is a fraud to conceal a fraud”.  Likewise, it is a crime to conceal any other crime.

{* —theft, rape, mugging, murder, political corruption, tyranny, loss of freedom, invasion of the Third World and pagan religions, inflation, unpayable debt, disease, the flaunting of immorality and perversion and forcing moral people to accept it, apparently are not obvious enough for the “Christian” who is a friend of the world and therefore the enemy of God.  As I have written in many of my books, “Why should God deliver us from what we are willing to tolerate?”  God commanded us to hate evil, and instead we have turned a blind eye to it, given it a franchise, and put it on a breeding program.  Therefore, we deserve it: every single bit.  You reap what you sow.
** —the Ichabod Church (the glory has departed) devolved into the Outlaw Church.}

 

Despite the modern Anglican Church being catholic and not Protestant (or actually, a liberal hybrid), The Book of Common Prayer (first written in 1549, under the leadership of Archbishop Cranmer, during the short reign of Edward VI. after England and the Anglican Church's break with Rome) in the General Confession, the collective prayer that opens the service of Morning Prayer, reads ever so eloquently:

“Almighty and most merciful Father, We have erred and strayed from Thy Ways like lost sheep, We have followed too much the devices and desires of our own hearts, We have offended against Thy Holy Laws, We have left undone those things which we ought to have done, And we have done those things which we ought not to have done, And there is no health in us: But thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us miserable offenders.”

 

However, repentance entails two things:

1. Stopping the forbidden behaviour; and

2. Beginning the commanded behaviour.

 

Without both, there is no repentance.  In addition to repentance, one also has to confess to God ones sins and ask for forgiveness through Christ.  Sin against God and ones brethren cannot merely be "swept under the rug" and one cannot "pretend it never happened".  True repentance will lead to stopping the sin, beginning the commanded behaviour, confession to God and those wronged, and possible restitution.  Without that, there is no repentance and God is not fooled.  A thief who is caught and convicted is sorry he was caught, but not necessarily sorry he committed crimes and sinned against God and man.  Christ's Parable of the Prodigal Son gives us the true picture of repentance:

"18I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, 19And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants." (Luke 15)

 

Christ said every tree is known by its fruit.  Christ and John the Baptist, His forerunner preached, "Repent" and "bring ye forth fruits meet [required] for repentance."  Those who do not do so, do not do so because it is not within them to so do.

This is the only formula that will save us.

Those who truly do, may be spared the plagues that will soon fall [as were the obedient Israelites in the land of Goshen], if they truly repent, seek God, learn what He requires, and separate themselves from the wicked so that Judgment can fall.  Those who don't will have God's Judgment fall on them along with the wicked world [symbolized by "Egypt"] as God pours out His Wrath and shakes Heaven and earth.

Those who think this malodorous stench of modern society smells just lovely, will be destroyed, because they are not of God.  All the evil in society is not "normal".  It is not merely "part of life".  This is not how our nations were when they were founded.  Crime was 1/100th of what it is now.  Over millennia and centuries, this did not change... until  the Third World and their paganism and immorality was imported and put on a breeding program.  It is not normal.  It is vile.  It is death.  Those who like the smell of death shall have it for eternity.  Those who don't like the smell of it need to repent NOW.

 

..........

 

{We discuss elsewhere the neurotic obsessive-compulsive disorder which the sinful Pharisees had, demonstrated by their endless rules of “hand washing” rituals.  However, they also said if a flea jumped on you on the Sabbath, you could not kill it because that would be “hunting” (which is “work”); or you could not walk through the grass on the Sabbath, because that scatters seed and that would be “sowing” (which is “work”).  They added many, many other of their own rules and the people grew sick of God’s Law Itself, not realizing that it was the Pharisees perversion of the Law that was the problem.  Likewise today, many of God’s people have been turned off to Christianity, not realizing that it is the false modern version of Christianity that they abhor, because down deep in their soul they recognize false doctrine when they hear it (one-world, humanism, multi-culturalism, statism, etc.); but the majority, like pigs at a trough, just lap it up and grunt with ecstacy.  Not only can they not “think outside the trough”—they don’t want to.  But Christ’s blind sheep realize that this false doctrine is destroying Christendom; even though they don’t know what true doctrine is.  Tragically, the majority who reject the false modern church also reject Christianity altogether.  They want to preserve our heritage, culture, and constitution—but they don’t realize that the only way that can be done is by understanding true Christianity.  Most people will want to preserve their heritage and culture and constitution and even their “faith”, but they base their preservation on their feelings and personal ideas.  Feelings and personal ideas can change, and selfish, immoral people often “bend the rules” when it is convenient.  A little changing the boundaries between right and wrong will eventually lead to the utter demolishment of the boundaries.  The only way to preserve our heritage, culture, nation, and faith is to realize that God commanded it and that there is never any excuse for compromise.}

Other nations spying on us is really a moot point when those alien peoples have been allowed to enter our society, gain power in the highest echelons, and change our laws to suit them and all other aliens.  We would not need to spy on alien nations if those aliens stayed in those nations; however, to spy on them when allowing their people to proliferate in our land, then becomes meaningless.  It does no good to study parasitology if one has no plans on removing the parasites from his own body.  In reality, it is about the subversive element in each nation spying on their tribesmen who are the subversive element of another nation, because there is no honor among thieves and the tribesmen don't want their fellows to get more than their share of the power or wealth.

However, for a prospective presidential candidate (who actually is not legally allowed to hold the office of president, but that didn't stop Obama, so now anyone thinks he can run, and the Constitution be Damned)... who thinks it is okay for an alien power to spy on the US but not vice version, is a declaration of intent to commit treason, so just save us all the trouble and hang him now.  Any US politician who goes to the State of Israeli and is wined and dined and coached on how to vote has committed treason.  US politicians are elected to serve the interests of Americans, not Israelis or anyone else.  Let them go run for Israeli Parliament and see how well they will be treated as "equals" (in race or religion) and see if they can then change Israeli law to suit whomever.  This is pre-treason.  That is all we can expect from someone who is not even eligible to hold office and that includes Hillary, Rubio, Cruz, and the Hindu.  A woman cannot be president, and therefore, cannot be vice president; further, if Hillary had been prosecuted for even a fraction of her crimes and treasons, those also would disqualify her from holding any office.  In the Presidential debates or campaigns, why isn't anyone asking her about Bengazi? Fast and Furious? her illegally deleting thousands of emails to hide her crimes?  Destroying evidence is a crime in itself.  Have her and all Presidential candidates submit to a drug test, a mental and physical competency test--and a LIE DETECTOR test and ask if he/she has ever committed any crimes or treason within office, or have ever attempted to undermine the US Constitution or strip the people of their rights; if they have imported aliens to swamp the voter's booth and if they have purposely destroyed the economy to weaken the nation; or if he/she plan to commit more.  THAT is not too much to ask of someone who will hold the most powerful office in the nation... but of course, those ineligible to hold it should be asked those questions in order to prosecute them for their crimes.  INDIVIDUALS have rights against self-incrimination.  BUT PUBLIC SERVANTS are no longer individuals when they step into a public trust and they have no right to privacy, and if it be found that they violated that trust, their official capacity and immunity is stripped from them and they then become individually liable for their crimes.

Public servants have no right spying on their master (the people), but the people ought to have 24/7 video and audio of every single word and deed of their public servants; each should have a 24-hour video feed at their website.  No private communications.  They can't be trusted.

 

 

NOT EVEN KINGS have absolute power.  The people crowned their king.  The people of Israel, in fact, had asked God to give them a king to be their ruler.  This is a clear delegation of the PEOPLE'S authority within limits, onto the king.  The people asked for a king, they crowned a king.  The king derives his power and authority from the people by God's design.  The king is not dictator.  God holds the people responsible for their rulers.  Scripture clearly tells us that God caused the Northern House of Israel to be conquered for the sins of wicked king Jeroboam, and the Southern House of Judah to be conquered for the sins of their wicked king Manasseh (though Manasseh himself, in captivity, repented)—because the people restrained them not!  Since God judged the people for the sins of their kings, the people had authority over their kings and it was their duty to restrain and even judge their kings when they departed from the contract; that contract being that the king would rule righteously according to the Law of God.

We see after Israel received her first king, Saul (who was a good king for a brief moment), after a very short period of time, Saul began to do things on his own initiative, not seeking God's counsel, not waiting on God.  Saul made a foolish decree that during a certain battle against the Philistines, no man in battle was to eat anything until the day was over, or he would be executed.  Jonathan, Saul's son, had forayed out on an expedition and Jonathan, with the spirit of the Lord and only his armor bearer bravely took on 20 Philistines and defeated them, and struck fear into the hearts of the Philistine army which began a route which eventually ended in a mighty defeat of the Philistines, who had been oppressing Israel for decades.  After his skirmish, not knowing of his father's decree, Jonathan, weary, came upon some honey in the woods and ate some.  Eventually (leaving out some details), Saul learned that someone had eaten, but the people would not say who had eaten.  It was discovered that it was Saul's son Jonathan, who had been responsible for the victory over the Philistines, and Saul, his wicked heart already showing, declared that Jonathan would be put to death.  For one of the few and rarest of times in all of history, the people stood up to an evil ruler and said, "NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

"And the people said unto Saul, Shall Jonathan die, who hath wrought this great salvation in Israel? God forbid: as the LORD liveth, there shall not one hair of his head fall to the ground; for he hath wrought with God this day. So the people rescued Jonathan, that he died not." (I Samuel 14:45)

 

He that hath ears to hear, let him hear...  Be ye doers of the Word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.  To him that knoweth to do good and doeth it not, to him it is sin.

"We ought to obey God rather than men" — and this includes corrupt (and especially illegitimate) rulers, kings or otherwise.

 

“All human laws which contradict His Laws [Bible], we are bound by conscience to disobey.” —George Mason (1725-92; American statesman who held great influence; author of the Declaration of Rights while serving as a member of the Constitutional Convention in 1776; member of the Federal Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia in 1787 and took
an active part in drafting the United States Constitution).

“Individual Liberties are antecedent to all government.”  (Common Law Maxim)

God created Adam in His Image.  That image is not to be murdered or corrupted or perverted or abused.

God established a hierarchy of authority and established His Law.  Whenever any authority violates that Law he steps out of his authority and himself becomes a criminal.  It is then the people's duty to bring that criminal to justice, by reassuming their own authority and rescinding the delegated authority they had invested the representative with; and the aberrant, renegade, criminal former-authority is then to be tried and sentenced for treason against God and man and there is only one penalty for that.

Thomas Jefferson said,
“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that this people preserve the spirit of resistance?... To consider the judges as the ultimate arbiters of all Constitutional questions is a very dangerous doctrine indeed, and one which would place us under the despotism of an oligarchy.... On every question of construction [of the Constitution] let us carry ourselves back to the time when the Constitution was adopted, recollect the spirit manifested in the debates, and instead of trying what meaning may be squeezed out of the text, or invented against it, conform to the probable one in which it was passed.... The Constitutions of most of our states assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and their duty to be at all times armed...”

and

“In questions of power, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution.... Experience has shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.... History in general, only informs us what bad government is. Blest is that nation whose silent course of happiness furnishes nothing for history to say.... Resistance to tyrants is obedience to God.... The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.... God forbid that we should ever be twenty years without such rebellion.”

Give not that which is holy to dogs, neither cast pearls before swine lest they turn and destroy you.

 

Christendom has gone to the dogs.  Why?  Because “Christians” have given it to them.

 

Just like corrupt politics, despite all evidence to the contrary, they continue to believe and push their irrational, immoral, unnatural agenda and lie with clever charts or explanations and tell you how it is working—or at least, how it “WILL EVENTUALLY” work: like the deluded gambler who thinks he will “hit” eventually and continues to throw good money after bad in his psychotic perverse addictive break from reality.

Pretty soon a dog will be able to marry a fire hydrant... and the dog’s treatment of the fire hydrant will not be considered “spousal abuse” because it is part of their “culture”.

God deliver us.  Open the eyes of your people and let them see they are following a false Christ leading straight to the beast.  Convict them of their sins against You and against nature.

“Woe unto them that call good evil and evil good... therefore is there wrath upon you from before the Lord.”

Lord please send Your Wrath!  Send it quickly and send it fully and let it work the work You intend for it to accomplish, to polarize and divide, to chasten Your people to repentance and drive the wicked further from You toward destruction.
Let your people see the evil, putrid fruit they have reaped from the vile wickedness which they have sown “in Your Name”, and bring them to repentance and then open a hole in the earth to swallow the alien flood that the dragon has spewed out to destroy us Your children; which flood You have brought upon us for our wickedness, but grant Thy people the wisdom to see their foolish, perverse error, and grant them Thy Holy Spirit to grace them with repentance so that they can once again by Your Power “choose life and live”.  Deliver Your people from the hallucinogenic daydream drug-addiction of materialism and amusement.  Only a fool loses himself in leisure, amusement, and materialism when the barbarians are flooding in through the gates and when You have commanded us, “Occupy till I come”.  Put Your Holy Spirit of boldness and power and conviction and holiness within Your people to STOP being cowards, STOP being tolerant of what You commanded us to hate and have no fellowship with and no peace treaties; which You commanded us not to ignore, but eradicate—from the secret sin in our own hearts to the invading heathen who are emerging, it seems from a bottomless pit—a pit which we incubated, stirred, and then took the lid off.  We deserve judgment, but have mercy on us and deliver us and instead pour out Your Wrath and Fury on those who hate You.  May you open the eyes of Your people to stop following the false christ and follow the True One, Who will return with His Holy angels—not to rapture us away—but to separate the wheat from the tares, and remove all those things that offend, every plant that His Heavenly Father did not plant, and will command the holy angels, “bring hither those Mine enemies that would not that I rule over them and slay them before Me.”  Grant Your people in blindness and rebellion the grace to repent so that they are not among those Your enemies.

 

Does anyone else care?  Can anyone say "Amen"...?  Let the redeemed of the Lord say so.  Stand up and be counted.  Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness but REBUKE them!  "If two of you shall agree on earth as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done of My Father Who is in Heaven."  If you agree, tell me, how else can I know?  Copy and paste and email these around to others, or send them the link.  Support this ministry and do what you can do to spread the work I produce, my books, these articles—the Truth.  Don't hide your light under a bushel.  God will hold you accountable.  God does not expect anything from us other than our faithfulness to do what we can do.  How unreasonable / hard is that...?