Is Prominent Evangelical Historian Losing His Grip On Common Sense?

Contrary to David Barton in an appearance on an episode of Kenneth Copeland's broadcast, it does not necessarily follow that, because an idea cannot be linguistically expressed in Hebrew, it is not conceptually valid.

For example, Barton went on to insist that the concept of adolescence does not exist because it cannot be articulated in Biblical Hebrew.

In that culture, one was considered an adult around 13 or 14 years of age deemed ready to assume the status as such.

The increasing number of ministers that cannot seem to keep their hands of the underaged are going to love that little nugget of supposed exegesis.

In terms of that philosophical highpoint, Barton's loosening grip on reality becomes even more tenuous.

According to Barton, the concept of rights do not exist in Hebrew.

He insinuates that these ought to be downplayed in the American system with responsibilities instead emphasized.

So when SWAT teams begin raiding churches for failing to solemnize gay marriages, on what grounds does he raise a fuss in defense of those punished for non-compliance?

Do some of these professional religionists contemplate the implications of what they articulate or do they simply spew that which postures them in the most pious light possible?

By Frederick Meekins

Crooked Televangelists More Outside Of God's Will Than Retirees

In an appearance on Kenneth Copeland's broadcast, Evangelical Historian David Barton claimed that retirement is not a Biblical concept.

Before condemning a concept because it might not be explicitly authorized in Scripture, shouldn't one try to live up to those that actually are?

For example, in regards to the purveyors of errant doctrine such as Kenneth Copeland, shouldn't Barton come out from among him and be ye separate?

God might not have intended human beings to retire.

However, it's probably a safe assertion that the Deity is more peeved about ministers that manipulate their congregations and viewing audiences through outlandish religious claims into donating gobs of money to finance the preacher's swanky lifestyle.

However, that apparently didn't prevent Barton from appearing on the broadcast of an infamous huckster like Kenneth Copeland.

by Frederick Meekins

Are You Saved?

What Does Christianity Today Have Against White People?

Conservative Evangelicals really need to stop and ask what does the magazine Christianity Today have against White people.

In the April 2015 edition, there were at least two articles that would have been construed as racist if written from the opposite perspective.

In the first, three theologians were asked, “Which false teachings are evangelical Christians most tempted to believe in?”

Before we get started, the “e” in the “evangelical” is not capitalized.

In a story regarding the Roman Catholic or Orthodox Churches, would those beginning letters be “decapitalized” so as to minimize the importance of these sects?

But now, back to the tirade.

Fuller Theological Seminar Professor Amos Young responded that racism is the one.

In his piece, the academic denounces “the long-standing Euro-American cultural privilege.”

He writes, “Too many times, ethnic minorities, especially Blacks and Hispanics are marginalized and blamed for it.”

Does Christianity Today intend to publish an expose on the frothing anti-White and anti-American sentiment emanating from the pulpits of many lefwting and minority churches?

The second anti-White incident in this very same issue of Christianity today occurred in an interview regarding a book by church historian Justo Gonzalez on the Gospel of Luke.

The article celebrates how the text “applies a Latin American lens to familiar parts of Scripture.”

The review obsequiously ponders, “When a Latin American theologian reads Luke, what there gets noticed that others might underplay?”

Does Christianity Today intend to publish an article openly asking with uncontainable anticipation of other noted scholars, “When a Teutonic American reads [insert preferred Biblical text here], what themes get noticed that others might underplay.”

Perhaps a New Testament gem that gets overlooked these days is that, if you don't work, you don't eat.

In his reply to the interview, Gonzalez celebrates how the Scripture is worded to favor the poor over the rich.

Therefore, it needs to be asked in regards to the royalties for the books he has sold over the years should these instead be given to someone that hasn't worked as hard as Justo Gonzalez to master these fields of scholarship?

Or does this Marxist posturing only apply to other people, particular those such as Whites that the editors of Christianity Today have gotten on the bandwagon against?

By Frederick Meekins

Baptist Elites Turn Against Their Membership In Confederate Flag Frenzy

Southern Baptist functionary Russell Moore is urging White Christians to comply with demands to surrender the Confederate flag.

Moore propagandizes, “The Cross and the Confederate flag cannot coexist without one setting the other on fire. White Christians, let's listen to our African-American brothers and sisters.”

Why among these ecclesiastical milksops is it always the obligation of the White person to compromise?

If race does not really exist as some of these leftwing theologians insist when they attempt to denigrate Whites any other time, why are they reluctant to condemn the flagrant sins engaged in by certain segments of the Black community such as the deliberate destruction of property following a controversial jury verdict or law enforcement tactical decision?

If we are obligated as Christians to downplay our earthly identities for the sake of heavenly unity, why did Russell Moore not condemn the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference as an organization that does not advance the cause of brotherhood among all Christians but rather an agenda focused upon determining the worth of an individual not by the content of their character but rather by the color of their skin.

Why did this seminarian instead accept a position on the board of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference?

In his column extolling the imperative of lowering the Confederate ensign, Dr. Moore condemned White Citizens' Councils that attempted to rally and speak on behalf of what such entities construed as the interests of that particular pigmentation extraction during the tumultuous era of desegregation.

Would he accept a position in a similar agency charged with the purpose of looking out for the interests of White Evangelicals in this era where increasing accolades are lavished upon certain individuals for really no other reason than that they happen to be members of certain groups, or would Moore at least extend his blessings to the formation of just such an organization?

One could not help but notice how quickly Russell Mooore called for the surrender of the Confederate flag.

Was this Southern Baptist functionary as prompt in condemning the Knockout Game where groups of marauding Blacks pick a victim (often a Whiter person denigrated as a “snowflake”) for the sole purposes of determining how many blows to the head are required to render the target unconscious?

It is argued that the Confederate flag should be removed from the grounds of the South Carolina State House and ultimately the wider culture altogether largely because of how that banner is perceived by certain people.

If this is being done largely on the basis of feeling which as an existential inclination which cannot really be categorized as right or wrong, what if someone gets a turd crossways about the official state flag of South Carolina with the crescent moon on it which in some minds might evoke traumas and phobias associated with Islam?

Why aren't those with that particular psychological shortcoming or deficiency being catered to if entire cultures must be comprehensively altered because a few disgruntled activists are predisposed to rampaging in the streets and destroying private property when they don't happen to get their way?

But because a symbol or custom offends a particular segment of the population, does that mean the endorsement of such by the state must be rescinded?

A noticeable percentage of the population no doubt questions the legitimacy of Black History Month.

Does that mean the celebration should be ended?

And what about gay marriage?

If outspoken principled conservatives and ministers of the Gospel emboldened by the Holy Spirit can turn the tide on this issue, does that mean the state sanction for such unions should be revoked or at least the formation of additional licensed couplings prohibited because public opinion wills such?

Interestingly, the anti-Dixie mindset has not confined itself to the ranks of the Southern Baptist Convention of which the organization's leadership often crave the applause and establishmentarian approval that has doomed the doctrinal fidelity of numerous other denominations.

It has even spread to a number of Independent Baptists where is has predictably taken on even more fanatical tones as often occurs in this related divergent ecclesiastical movement.

In their analysis of Russell Moore's column regarding the Confederate flag, Sean Harris of the Berean Baptist Church in a SermonAudio podcast was baffled by and mocked the Southern Baptist functionary's confession that the only things Moore loved more than his native Mississippi were Christ, the Church, and his family.

Harris contemptuously verbalized that, in this day of social mobility and diversity, how is it that an individual could possess such an emotional devotion and connection to their native state.

In his online biography, Pastor Harris details his distinguished career in the U.S. military.

So why is expressing such dedication to your country in that particular manner on the part of a Christian acceptable but not to a particular jurisdiction within that particular country?

Does the pastor ridicule missionaries with a heart for a particular area or people group?

As a carpetbagger from Massachusetts, perhaps Pastor Harris ought not to ridicule that which he does not understand.

Just because he has lived a life of globetrotting, it does not follow that everyone else is so required by either inclination or circumstance.

It has been suggested that the Confederate flag should be removed because those that marched under it shot and killed American soldiers.

Should the American flag be equally exiled because General Sherman, marching under that ensign, destroyed civilian property?

Pastor Harris assured that he is so dedicated to the Lord that he doesn't even want to be associated with the flag of the United States.

Then why do his online biographies provide significant detail regarding his military service?

If patriotism is to be viewed as something little better than wicked, isn't listing such achievements akin to someone in the porn industry not only listing what films they appeared in but what roles they played.

Pastor Sean Harris of Berean Baptist Church argued that no Christian should display the Confederate flag because of the hurtful connotations associated with it.

People have also been hurt in the name of the Cross and the Bible as well.

Some Jews won't even look up at a steeple as they pass by a church.

So ought Christians to also renounce these symbols of culture and creed while we are at it?

If certain churches are bent on jumping on the anti-Confederate bandwagon, that is certainly their prerogative under the First Amendment.

Likewise, no American is obligated to remain in a church that bashes a specific heritage (especially that of those that have been with that particular theological grouping or ecclesiastical affiliation for decades and generations) in order to attract another or to win favor with the self-appointed benefactors of such demographics.

By Frederick Meekins

Southern Baptist Functionary Downplays Opposition To Gay Marriage

In a videotaped response to the Supreme Court decision authorizing gay marriage, Southern Baptist functionary Russell Moore counseled that a pastor that was gloomy or angry in response was not exhibiting the spirit of the Gospel.

Therefore, was Christ not reflecting the Gospel when He drove the moneychangers from the Temple as He flipped over tables and drove them from the premises at the receiving end of a knotted chord?

Moore further reflected that we must not succumb to the American mode of anger where we demonize our enemies.

Does Moore mean in a way similar to the disparaging characterizations he has made regarding Christians that listen to Conservative talk radio and are reluctant to take down the Confederate flag?

Perhaps Dr. Moore would prefer that we adopt the ghetto mode of anger given his preference for that demographic as of late where we would loot the inventory of a local merchant that has nothing to do with the dispute setting off such upheaval.

Of would the Al Qada mode of anger be more appropriate where jetliners are flown into skyscrapers?

The strength of Protestant Evangelical scholarship has been an enthusiasm for what words mean.

At the core of the word “demonize” is “demon”.

Shouldn't those bent of destroying God's intended order for humanity be opposed strongly?

If you aren't going to get upset about that intent, there really isn't anything to get jacked out of shape about.

By Frederick Meekins

Headline Potpourri #74

Civil War video games are no longer available through a number of a number of online retailers. It is claimed such forms of recreation are “mean spirited”. Yet the ones where you shoot police officers, hijack automobiles, and hump street whores in the backseat are no doubt still available as a testament to the extent to which the nation values free expression.

If Southern Baptists are obligated to renounce all things Southern as a gesture of inclusive good faith to prove how welcoming the denomination is to all people, does the African Methodist Episcopal Church intend to drop the descriptor of “African” from its name and to conduct outreach to Whites by fawning over how wonderful Caucasians and Caucasian culture are?

When clicking to watch a Christian video on Youtube, site administrators ought to respect the ministries utilizing the service enough to place before the content a commercial for something other than a so-called “invisible condom”.

One has been decapitated and over a dozen injured in a terrorist attack at a French fuel refining facility. Does Amazon intend to ban products bearing Islamist symbols similar to those hoisted by the Jihadists during the assault?

Eric Boling on the Five has celebrated retailers banning the sale of Confederate paraphernalia and memorabilia as a triumph of the free market system. But is this the triumph of unfettered capitalism or yet another example of fascistic elites imposing their iron-fisted social engineering? In a free market system, wouldn't those that desire Confederate merchandise be allowed to purchase all that they desired? For is that not the doctrine of the faction of Fox News analysts that extol the economic above all other social spheres when it comes to things such as hard liquor, legalized narcotics, and debauched entertainment?

In his analysis of violent upheavals in Baltimore and Ferguson, Malik Shabazz counseled that those destroying property and rampaging in the streets still needed to be loved. So why isn't he as magnanimous when it comes to his endorsement of a plan to kill any White person in sight irrespective of whether or not they bear responsibility for the terrorist assault upon the Charleston church?

If a colon test advertised on the radio is a noninvasive smear of digestive effluent, why is one required to have a prescription for it?

The gays have accomplished for now what decades and centuries ago most would have considered impossible. It is now our turn to plant seeds and warp minds in a long game where this cultural outrage can be one day overturned either reformationally or constitutionally

Perhaps the Southern Baptist Convention should be abandoned for the establishment of a Confederate Baptist Convention or a Confederate League Of Christian Churches where people of all backgrounds will be welcomed but that will not put up with the bashing of traditional Americanism or White folks as seems to be becoming an epidemic in many allegedly orthodox and conservative churches. It was said on a news special designed to work everyone into a terror over summer weather claimed that interest in survival training is at an all time high. Now doubt because of a love of nature. Likely nothing to do whatsoever with rampaging inner city mobs, the abolition of the Confederate flag, and the federal recognition of sodomite matrimony.

A news program designed to work everyone up into a terror lover summer weather listed the equipment one ought to take during a trek through the wilderness. Shouldn't a firearm have also been on the list?

A news program designed to work viewers up into a terror over summer weather revealed that the hottest days of the year occur during the season. That statements has got to be a contender for the No “You No What” Sherlock Award

On “It's Academic”, Hillary Howard is in a sleeveless blouse. In his decades hosting, did Mack McGary ever appear on the program sleeveless?

In a panel discussion at the Southern Baptist Convention, ethicist Russell Moore admonished that Christian parents shouldn't be ashamed of their gay children. That is, because Moore went on to assure, most gays aren't like the activists depicted in the media. Does Moore intend to extend the same broadminded charity to Christians that refuse to take down the Confederate flag or refuse to give up Conservative talk radio? Moore has heaped homiletical condemnation and mockery upon Christians that disagreed with his leftist inclinations regarding these cultural practices.

It might not be for some time to come. However, there will eventually be a movement of to get the Supreme Court to legalize cannibalism as a human right. The court has already ruled similarly in favor of other assorted unthinkable depravities. The edict will be handed down either in regard to some form of human flesh grown in a lab or of dissidents no longer categorized as being fully human. Just recently, global warming critics were described by a federal functionary as "abnormal", perhaps one of the greatest insults that can be applied in a system that values group conformity and the collective over that of the individual.

Univision removed the Miss USA pageant from its programming schedule over Donald Trump's insightful observation that the swarms of illegals pouring over America's borders aren't exactly the cream of the crop in terms of human capital. In response, Trump has threatened to sue the network. But how is the removal of Trump's beauty pageant from the airwaves markedly different than his demand that the Confederate flag be removed from public display?

A number of Republicans are being pressured to refund campaign contributions from an organization known as the Council of Conservative Citizens because of the group's less than enthusiastic endorsement of interracial relationships. Should Democrats be forced to return donations from the variety of ethnosupremacist front groups drawn to that party's ideology of heavy-handed statist interventionism such as the NAACP and La Raza? And what of potential contributors to Democrats actually linked to advocating revolutionary violence such as CAIR or the Occupy Movement? FBI files reveal that Obama advisor Valerie Jarret has a Communist pedigree that can be traced back for decades. Therefore, shouldn't concerns be raised over Obama's questionable links as rigorously as Ted Cruz's or even Mike Huckabee speaking before an event with shady sponsorship

By Frederick Meekins

Godless Cathedral Dean Wants History Censored In The Name Of Revolution

The Dean of the National Cathedral in Washington wants stained glass windows honoring Stonewall Jackson and Robert E. Lee removed.

The idea is that the role of the Cathedral is not so much to serve as an historical memorial but rather as a tool of propaganda to subliminally manipulate those exposed to the edifice into embracing the revolutionary consciousness preferred by the prevailing elite.

If the windows commemorating the Confederacy are to come down, should the body of Woodrow Wilson be disinterred from its resting place in these formerly holy halls?

After all, was not the former president a segregationist, so much so that he resegregated the civil service?

But then again, his corpse will probably be allowed to remain given that he embraced the preferred mindset of this cathedral's religion that the masses of humanity exist to be molded and conditioned by the technocrats ruling over them.

While we are at it, perhaps the questions should be raised as to how long until the Cathedral tosses its Christian iconography out with the morning trash as well?

After all, Gary Hall, the Dean of the Cathedral, is on record in the Washington Post claiming to be a Christian atheist, meaning that he doesn't believe in God but not so much so as to forsake his comfortable church-provided lifestyle.

His ecclesiastical superior, Bishop Mariann Budde, is little better.

According to VirtueOnline, she recently blasphemed in the Cathedral by admitting during an ordination service that she no longer prays in the name of the Trinity.

And on the day the cross is taken down, you will probably find Republican presidential candidates stepping over each other in the rush to get to the microphone to posture and preen how wonderful it is that the old emblem of suffering and shame will no longer be allowed to sew division among the creeds and faiths of the human species.

By Frederick Meekins

Headline Potpourri #73

The Chinese government insists that it is not responsible for the intrusion compromising the data of over four million federal employees. The regime assures that it has laws against hacking. Just as the dictatorship no doubt has exquisitely written legislation protecting religious freedom and statutes against organ harvesting.

Driving for Uber might be better than starvation and homelessness. However, if you get a hold of the wrong customer that files some kind of lawsuit, you'll probably end up starved and homeless.

The film San Andreas was simultaneously entertaining and thought provoking. Amidst the superb special affects, one's mind contemplates especially the seismic prophecies foretold in the Book of Revelation. Also, depictions of the buildings collapsing upon the people almost brings tears to one's eyes as the sequences make you reflect on what thousands of American's endured on 9/11 at the hands of scumbag terrorists. Though not a particularly devout or explicitly religious film, it was a commendable touch for a change that it was the scientist urging prayer in light of the overwhelming devastation.

The Duggars placed locks on the doors to protect the children from their depraved son. I can think of something else the Duggars should have put a lock on long before that point.

In the book The Natural Family: Where It Belongs (New Agrarian Essays), historian and cultural analyst Allan Carlson insists that the wholesome and devout family ought to be one that toils the soil. Given his extensive academic qualifications and scholarly activity, it must be asked how often does Professor Carlson putter around in the dirt? Or is this yet another expectation to be imposed on the lesser classes of the species?

If teen girls don't want to be physically subdued by police, perhaps they ought to act more ladylike.

In regards to the Dennis Hastert case, if an American can be punished for depositing or withdrawing an amount over as well as below a certain amount without notifying authorities, how long until the financially enslaved will be required to obtain government approval for the simplest of transactions? For example, what is to prevent the government from denying access to your cash reserves for the purchase of non-approved foods of questionable nutritional content. After all, presidential candidate Mike Huckabee considers your weight not only an individual health issue but also one of national security.

A 56 year old New Zealand woman landed a 907 pound tuna after a four hour struggle. In response, cultural apologist and pundit Doug Giles (who reminds everyone just how manly he is by deliberately killing exotic animals on safari) posted, “Bow and kiss her ring all metrosexual males.” And the question to be asked is why. Does he demand the same of butch feminists that could be outcooked by a man in the kitchen? While a compelling human interest story that prompts a “gee whiz look at that” response, so long as those that Giles derides as “metrosexuals” have jobs and provide for themselves, there is nothing in divine revelation insisting that one must take to the high seas in a form of fishing than can be described as anything other than recreational. Wouldn't the manlier thing to do be take the money needed to pursue an elaborate hobby such as deep sea fishing and pay bills or put it away for retirement?

In defense of Marco Rubio, it has been claimed that an $80,000 boat is not a luxury. In light of gas prices that skyrocketed a few years ago as well as a few other reasons, I might get to Ollie’s Outlet four times a year now where I agonize over whether or not I need a book priced at $5.99.

Is political correctness really the only reason Jerry Seinfeld won't perform of college campuses? It's doubtful most of those students now were even born when his sitcom was broadcast on NBC. So when he tried to perform on college campuses, how would Jerry Seinfeld be introduced? As guest lecturer in Ancient History?

If a conservative had said what Bob Costas said about Bruce Jenner, wouldn't Costas had called on the thought criminal to be sent to a Khmer Rouge reeducation facility?

On The Five, Dana Perino suggested that professional athletics associations ought to finance a public relations effort (also commonly referred to as a propaganda campaign) urging inner city youth to respect and comply with law enforcement. There is nothing wrong with such a message. However, even if these enterprises have these funds at their disposal, they are not obligated to provide such outreach. They are not a church or a related kind of philanthropic organization. The responsibility of such is to provide entertainment. As a multimillionaire in her own right, why doesn't Dana Perino finance such cultural conditioning?

Regarding the principal fired for posting online for suggesting that the police officer at the pool party didn't really do anything wrong, Dana Perino on the Five suggested that those kinds of comments should perhaps have been said around the dinner table and not enunciated publicly. But doesn't this degree of self censorship plant the seeds of a regime where one will eventually be carted off to a reeducation camp for precisely verbalizing these errant thoughts in the privacy of one's own home?

The Obama Administration is conspiring to construct affordable housing in affluent neighborhoods. That's so when juries hand down verdicts specified demographics disagree with they won't have to travel far to destroy the property of White people.

If it is a violation of human rights to consider an individual's race in determining their qualifications and character, shouldn't the NAACP functionary courageous enough to conceal her demographic background be heralded as a patriot of the first order? For is it not an act of revolutionary consciousness to deny the government information to which it is not truthfully entitled?

If liberals want to insist that the NAACP functionary was less than truthful regarding her origins as an African American, aren't they required to abandon the foundations of evolutionary anthropology that all human beings can trace their origins back to Africa?

If tolerancemongers are going to insist like Gnostics that the materiality of the physical being does not exist or is irrelevant, shouldn't the NAACP functionary that presented herself as Black despite being born as White as a Dutch baby's backside be publicly celebrated as Bruce Jenner for embracing one's true identity. After all, this racialist is just as Black as Bruce Jenner is a woman.

A woman has realized that she was inadvertently abusing her husband. In the article detailing this confession that went viral in online Christian circles, this epiphany transpired during a marital spat when the wife observed her husband relenting to a verbal berating despite obeying the command he had been given and how many of his actions were determined by the instinct to avoid her verbalized rages. Eventually, men are going to be condemned as neglectful and abusive if they now comply with the dictates of their spouses in order to avoid being chewed out.

Bill Clinton intoned during a CNN interview that “You can't have people walking around with guns.” Does this include the members of the former President's Secret Service detail as well?

In a discussion of animal rights on the “Knowing The Truth” broadcast, theologian Richard Land reflected upon the implications of introducing robots to patient care. He observed such a development would undermine the element of human contact in the healing process. But was was the last time anyone has felt like anything other than a slab of meat when dealing with medical professionals and insurance bureaucracies?

Generations Radio astutely observed that parents cannot send their children to a 20 minute Sunday school and expect their children to be Christian. Instead, exposure to the faith must be comprehensive and constant. Yet just days prior to that pronouncement, this very same ministry insisted that the Christian parent cannot manipulate the child's environment and expect the child to become Christian. Under a Calvinist soteriology, despite the parent's best efforts, the child might just be one of the poor souls God created for no other reason than to toss into Hell. By this logic, in the final analysis, does it really matter whether parents send their child to a 20 minutes Sunday school once per week or subject their children to around the clock indoctrination?

So why is gubernatorial experience important to the Jeb Bush faction of the Republican party when a significant percentage of the candidates backed by Jeb over the course of his lifetime themselves did not possess gubernatorial experience?

If Jeb Bush is to be heralded for having married an Hispanic to the point where he is viewed as an Hispanic, shouldn't the NAACP functionary be similarly applauded for mating outside her race?

In an article on the death of Christianity, Southern Baptist hierarch Russell Moore writes, “...a Christianity that reflects its culture, whether that culture is Smith College or NASCAR, only lasts as long as it is useful to its hosts. That's because it's, at root, idolatry and people turn from their idols when they stop sending rain.” Perhaps Dr. Moore should remember that as he runs around like a lap dog puppy snuggling up to a number of perspectives whose primary purpose is to badmouth America and elevate subversive minority supremacists.

In Colorado, if an employer can fire an employee for partaking of legalized medicinal cannabis in that jurisdiction, why can't businesses deny services to gay marriages?

Pope Francis has pontificated that one does not exhibit genuine faith until one takes what one requires for one's own needs and instead provides for the poor with it. So does this mean that the Vatican is holding an estate sale or auction to divest itself of the institution's vast artistic and real estate holdings for pennies on the dollar?

The Christian Bible Study Massacre proves why a pastor that feels so led should be allowed to hold a Bible in one hand and a firearm in another.

Regarding the terrorist assault on the Charleston, South Carolina church, did media and law enforcement immediately describe the suspect as White or did these officials hem and haw ringing their hands as they described every feature other than the suspects socially constructed, non-existent race as they do in many other mass casualty incidents?

The families of the victims of the terrorist assault on the church are not under obligation to be so quick with their forgiveness. They should stew in their anger for awhile. Especially if this pissant has not said he was sorry or expressed any sincere remorse.

The same leftists moving production of the drama “Veep” from MD to CA because of tax incentives no doubt rank among those that insist that you don't pay your fair share and condemned golfer Phil Mickelson when he confided taxes in part prompted his move from CA to FL.

On “Cashin In” on Fox News, financial analyst Wayne Rogers described the Book of Revelation as “ridiculous” when it was pointed out that a proposal to microchip incarcerated inmates was disturbingly similar to the Mark of the Beast foretold of in the Apocalypse. Would he categorize Islamic holy texts in a similar fashion?

Usually when these leftists speak of healing division that translates as you are expected to go along with their blame Whitey and bigger government handouts agenda.

Interesting Obama does not say as much about gun violence when it is perpetrated by his inner city base of support in staggering numbers over the course of a given weekend.

Mittt Romney is suggesting that the Confederate Flag is offensive and ought to be set aside. And what of those similarly repulsed by cultic missionaries knocking at the door? Should that tradition also be forbidden because some find the practice offensive?

It was rhetorically asked in a sermon if Jesus would rather find you reading the Bible or a text message when He returned. Wouldn't that depend more on the particular text message? In themselves, text messages are morally neutral. So what other daily tasks are to to suspend for the appearance of holiness? Should a preacher ask if Jesus would rather find you reading your Bible or swatting your spouse's backside when He returns?

Is there really a reason for a pastor to point out in a Father's Day sermon that in his rhetorical selection that he is using the term “fathers” rather than “men” because the day's homily is intended for fathers because there are men in the congregation who are not fathers even though by tabulation that applied only to two of the male's in attendance? Being made to feel just a step ahead the town drunk or whore, it almost makes one feel like one does not belong there and not go back.

In profiles of terrorist scumbag Dylan Roof, the descriptor of “unemployed” is verbalized with a negative intonation. Is shiftlessness applied in such a derogatory manner to members of the Occupy movement or to violent protesters in Baltimore and Ferguson?

Will those insisting that Paula Deen should be financially ruined for verbalizing the N-word in the privacy of her own home following a violent crime call for the immediate removal of President Obama from elected office for verbalizing the N-word in reference to violent crime?

President Obama insists that America's heritage of racism has not been overcome. And that's why he was elected to the presidency twice? The second time was even after it was pretty much proven he was inept and incompetent.

Is it a wave of unity, as it has been categorized, to remove the confederate flag from the state house in South Carolina? Or is this being done more out of fear that the Obamavoters and welfare recipients are preparing to rampage like they did in Baltimore and Ferguson when they don't get their way?

On The Five, it was said one should live as if the person writing your eulogy were watching. Isn't that we have social media and the Internet for nowadays? What if you really don't want a funeral when you croak? It's just a bunch of people coming to gawk at your lifeless corpse feigning that they care when they really didn't when you were alive.

In an oration where Hillary pledged to the New World Order just how much she despises being White (but not so much so that she will surrender her vast fortune), the presidential candidate said guns should not be allowed into the hands of those that harbor hate in their hearts. That translates you should not be allowed to own a firearm unless you pass a political and worldview litmus test.

Greg Gutfeld said on Fox News that, if the victims of the Charleston terrorist assault want the flag removed, that is enough for him to have the Confederate flag removed. As a borderline alcoholic, if someone who lost a family members in a drunk driving accident calls for the reenactment of Prohibition, does that mean he will swear adherence to the behavioral codes of a temperance league?

On the Five, Eric Boling said in reference to a number of retailers censoring the exchange of Confederate merchandise that the free market should be allowed to decide. As a Roman Catholic, would he endorse retailers prohibiting the sale of Christian paraphernalia in general and of that specific theological persuasion in particular?

Rand Paul has come out in support of removing the Confederate flag. If nothing else, at least the debate is settled that his support of states rights and the Tenth Amendment are merely euphemisms regarding the legalization of pot and hardcore narcotics after all.

So does everyone believe the liberal dogmas regarding race or ethnicity because those are their sincerely held beliefs or is it that they fear the inquisition that will descend upon them and destroy their lives if there is even a hint that you might disagree with these dictates on even the minutest level?

Greg Gutfeld on Fox News claimed that it is absurd to argue that, if the Confederate flag is taken away now, eventually the flag of the United States will be taken away at some point not too far down the road. It is less absurd than the moronic postmodernism that permeates his eponymous Sunday night broadcast.

In the Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC, a bicyclist exposing himself to a young girl and a woman. In solidarity with the victims of this vile act, shouldn't the nation rally against bicycles? In self-congratulatory gestures displaying celebrating how progressively sympathetic we are as a society, retailers should stop selling bicycles and related bicycle merchandise. Governments ought to end the support of bicycles by rescinding funds for bicycle infrastructure such as lanes, paths, and racks. If you support these proposals, it is obvious that you aren't willing to do what is necessary to stop the predators that are emboldened to perpetrate these crimes as a result of advancements in self-propelled personal transportation vehicles.

Of the Confederate flag, Donald Trump said, “...let it go, respect whatever it is that you have to respect because there was a point in time and put it in a museum. But I would take it down.” What he is saying that it is time for the South to surrender to the inevitability of Yankee domination and the imposition of the values of the Northeastern elites. If these are the kinds of principles that Trump holds to and espouses, on what grounds does he refute those advocating acquiescence to Red China? Like the Confederacy, how do we know that American economic independence isn't something meant to be relegated to a museum?

A pastor remarked that the phrase “Dance with the devil you know” did not sound like Biblical advice even it it was apropos. Now is that because the adage seems to counsel compromise with Satan or rather because dancing was involved? In certain Baptist circles, the greater outrage might be that dancing was involved.

Citizens are being assured that the lowered Confederate flags will find a place in a museum. But given the propaganda, distortions, and outright lies subtly disseminated through these venues of public display regarding evolution, how long will this esteemed artifact be allowed to remain on display or undefiled by falsehoods or condemnations pertaining to it?

By Frederick Meekins

Ethicist Fuddles The Differences Between Genocide & Infanticide

During a lecture titled “Ethics In The Age Of Terror & Genocide”, an astute member of the audience observed during the question and answer portion of the presentation how many Americans recoil in outrage at the concept of genocide but are morally comfortable with abortion.

It was interesting to hear the lecturer wiggle herself out of the conundrum by invoking the technicality that genocide is the killing of people because they are members of a particular group while abortion does not necessarily target the victim for extermination for that particular reason.

That is, of course, unless you are a confirmed Sangerian.

According to the logic elaborated in the response, it is only wrong to eliminate groups and not necessarily individuals.

The propagandist proceeded to elaborate a number of criteria separating abortion from genocide.

Among these were the rights of the woman and how the unborn child is not a human life that can exist on its own.

But how are these appreciably different than the justifications invoked by the Nazis such as living space for the German people and that the inhabitants of these targeted areas weren't really humans capable of surviving on their own either by the standards of that particular regime?

By Frederick Meekins

Scout Head Promotes Immorality Among The Organization's Ranks

Speaking to a national meeting of the Boy Scouts in his role as the organization's president, former CIA director and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in reference to gays among the ranks of the group's membership and administration proclaimed that “we must deal with the world as it is, not as we might wish it to be.”

He insisted that such an adaptation of policy was necessary or the assembled would be required to face “the end of us as a national movement.”

What he is saying is that there are no enduring values or standards.

According to such logic, dependent upon the context the Boy Scouts are no more morally superior to the Hitler Youth of Nazi Germany, the Red Pioneers of the Soviet Union, or an ad hoc ISIS training camp in the Syrian desert.

The Scout Oath reads, “On my honor, I will do my best to do my duty to God and country, and to obey Scout law, to help other people at all times, to keep myself physically strong, mentally awake, and morally straight.”

The Scout Law is summarized as “A scout is trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent.”

But what happens when these virtues hinder a Darwinian understanding of survival of the fittest?

Should this classic moral code be abandoned should an ethic based on tooth and claw prove more utilitarian and efficacious?

That is, after all, what Robert Gates is advocating.

No wonder the war against terror, in part, floundered under his tenure as the Secretary of Defense.

By Frederick Meekins

Shouldn't Fathers Be Expected To Care For Their Own Kids?

In a SermonAudio podcast, the pastoral council of the Berean Baptist Church in Fayetteville, North Carolina announced as an objective the promulgation of the expectation that single men are obligated to marry women with children fathered by someone other than themselves.

The pastors went as far as to compare the practice to Boaz marrying Ruth.

It is nothing of the sort.

The vast majority of single mothers these days are not widows.

They are either divorced or have never been married at all.

Secondly, Ruth did not have children.

The Moabitess was a widow free and clear.

Boaz never had to deal with the inevitable “you are not my father” confrontations.

And back then, even if he had, there was not the likelihood of a disgruntled child reporting false abuse allegations to social welfare operatives.

In the discussion, it was suggested it was more honorable for a man to marry someone that already has kids.

The only obligation is for the one having the fun making the children to provide for the children.

A man does not sin if he refuses to saddle this other man's burden.

This is the duty of the child's mother and father.

Why is the man that hasn't ruined his life up until this particular point compelled to settle for second hand merchandise?

If the single woman with offspring is out primarily to land someone to punch her meal ticket and to put a roof over her head, why can't she be admonished to settle for a man with other children like a Brady Bunch situation?

Given the doctrinal fussiness and finickiness of many Independent Fundamental Baptists where you are treated as something of a pariah or an outcast unless you measure up 100% to the sect's rigorous standards that are not always explicitly spelled out in Scripture but are rather opinions buttressed by stained interpretations of divine revelation, this raises a number of very important questions or at least observations.

Will these Independent Baptists now insisting that single men are obligated to marry women with children (especially if these women have been divorced) in the future allow men hoodwinked into pursuing this lifestyle allow them to do anything in church other than occupy a pew or fill a collection plate?

Many of the congregations adhering to this particular brand of theology are governed by covenants and bylaws explicitly forbidding divorced men or men marrying women that have been divorced from holding either the pastorate or the deaconship.

Don't think this is not a valid concern.

At the small Baptist church my grandparents attended, you would have thought the pastor had sanctioned lesbian polygamy when the hardliners revolted over him officiating a marriage between widower and a widow who divorced her drunkard husband two marriages back with her two previous husbands long dead by the time of the disputed ceremony.

Christ does indeed forgive.

However, He often decides to require us to deal with the consequences of our own decisions.

By Frederick Meekins

Pastor Snidely Ridicules Christian Laborers Viewed As Beneath Him

In the opening of a News In Focus podcast posted at SermonAudio, the assembled pastoral counsel poked fun at someone that categorized themselves as a “Christian trainer”.

Following a dismissive remark by the head pastor, one of the dutiful underlings remarked how presenting oneself as a Christian trainer was akin to claiming one was a philosopher.

And what if these were either one's vocation or avocation?

Often the positioned clergy of these more fundamentalist sects rank among the foremost in restricting who may hold status as a recognized minister or the quickest to scold a recognized minister for straying beyond the delineated parameters of the Gospel message into the areas of generalized moral or psychological application even if the teaching provided is basically drawn from Biblical principles.

For example, Joel Osteen is often derided for being more of a motivational speaker than an actual pastor.

But it seems there is also an underlying derision there when someone might have a message or insight of value to the wider church or Christian world but is cautious not to assume the responsibility or authority of the pastoral office.

At the end of the discussion, the head pastor was impressed with what the Christian trainer had posted.

But instead of leaving the compliment at that, the pastor snidely remarked but could the Christian trainer preach.

Frankly, such an aptitude might not even be relevant for that Christian trainer's ministry.

Ephesians 4:11 says, “And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers.”

Therefore, if someone mocks an individual that might have the ability to teach (which the written word is a form of) but not necessarily the ability to preach, isn't the critic edging dangerously close to pronouncing that the critic knows more about how God has gifted a particular individual than God Himself?

If this is to be the attitude of a number of God's undershepherds that all others endeavoring to speak Christian truth should be looked upon in a spirit that cannot be categorized as anything other than ridicule, perhaps a list should be formulated as to what kinds of occupations are considered worthy of placing something in the collection plate.

For if you can't respect how a person honestly makes a living, perhaps your own ministry shouldn't be benefiting from such labors either.

By Frederick Meekins