A Biblical Perspective On Collectivism

How should a faithful and obedient believer view the Collectivists in society?

This is definitely a political question, but believers are not excused from participating in politics — especially in a nations that is supposed to be based upon the principles of self-governance.  Therefore, any believer who is trying to faithfully understand and obey the Scriptures should give some consideration to this issue. After all, the desire for Socialism is a prevailing theme in modern Western politics, and Socialism is synonymous with collectivism.  So, how should believers look at the subject of the collective and the Collectivist?

Well, if we are truly guided by Scripture, then we must look at this issue through the lens of Scripture.  If we are going to do this, we might want to start by doing our best to place ourselves in the sandals of an ancient Hebrew.  After all, it was from that culture that the Scriptures came, and it was to that culture that the Scriptures were written.  Therefore, it only stands to reason that it is through the eyes of that culture that the Scriptures can be best understood.  So, what would an ancient Hebrew have to offer us in using Scripture to evaluate the idea of collectivism?

On the surface, this can be a tricky issue.  This is because Scripture most definitely does speak of people groups and nations in terms of a collective, and the ancient Hebrew would most definitely have noticed this.  The Scriptures often hold Israel — both as a people and a nation — accountable for its actions as though it were one person.  Even individual families are often treated as one person, which most certainly appears to be collectivism.  But this is a surface appearance, and it crumbles away under closer scrutiny.  When we look closely, we will find that the Scriptures inherently include something that the collectivist intentionally omits: Yahweh!

Collectivists often speaks in terms of morality, and some even give a nod to The Creator, in actual operation, the collective is amoral.  The collective is neither ‘good’ nor ‘bad,’ nor can it ever be.  This is because the collective dehumanizes the individual, which, in turn, destroys the entire notion of morality (see link for argument).  Furthermore, by dehumanizing the individual and destroying morality, the collective removes the notion of individual responsibility and accountability.  If there is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong,’ then there can be no concern for the ramifications of our actions.  Thus, the collective is, at its core, the creation of chaos, and chaos had a clear implication for the ancient Hebrew.

To the ancient Hebrew, modern collectivist theories would have represented the creation of chaos.  This is because modern collectivism goes counter to the laws which govern Creation.  Which brings us to what the Collectivist is actually trying to do when he or she describes their own version of the collective utopia.  No matter who it is, when one reads the ideas of a Collectivist, what one will find is that the Collectivist is actually describing the creation of a new reality.  They are trying to will, or speak new laws into existence.  In short, they are trying to re-create Creation.  Some have even said that they were seeking to create heaven on earth:

The teacher is engaged not simply in the training of individuals, but in the formation of the proper social life…. In this way, the teacher always is the prophet of the true God and the usherer-in of the true Kingdom of God.

–John Dewey

Now, this might seem a little presumptuous to a person in modern Western society, but how would have had a clear and powerful meaning to an ancient Hebrew — a meaning that would likely have the Collectivist you stoned for heresy and/or blaspheme!

Why would an ancient Hebrew want to stone a Collectivist?  Simple: an ancient Hebrew would have realized that the Collectivist’s attempt to speak things into existence and to bring about a new order out of the chaos they had created was an assertion of the Collectivist’s qualifications for claiming deity in the Ancient Middle East.  The problem for the Collectivist and modern believer alike is, Spiritually, nothing has changed from Job until now.  Which means that every Collectivist that has ever been or ever will be is actually trying to claim that they are god, and not Yahweh!  My dear Brother or Sister, if you doubt me, please look for their own words.  They are not shy about their belief that man is his own god:

“The turning point of history will be that moment man becomes aware that the only God of man is man himself.”

— Ludwig Feuerback

This brings us back to our original question:

How should a faithful believer view collectivism and the Collectivist?

Well, if we are truly sincere in our belief in and obedience to the Scriptures, the answers to this question should be simple:

A faithful believer must reject any and all forms of collectivism.

A faithful believer must maintain an agape love for the Collectivist, but he or she must never allow themselves to be yoked to such a person as they are — in essence — claiming to be their own god, which is ‘the man of lawlessness’ mentioned in 2 Thessalonians 2.

It may be a tough lesson to accept, especially in our modern times, but there really is no way around this conclusion — not for a faithful and obedient believer, anyway.






A BIBLICAL Perspective on Trump, Ukraine, the Whistle-blower and the Media

I am greatly troub led by the number of self-professed ‘believers’ who have accepted the media narrative on President Trump, his phone call with the Ukraine President and the supposed ‘Whistle-Blower.’  I confess, I am troubled by the fact that so many ‘believers’ seem to have divorced themselves from politics all together.  This is not a Scriptural position to hold, but that is a subject for another post.  No, the thing that troubles me the most is that so many of the ‘believers’ who are paying attention seem to have accepted the media narrative on this story.  Dear reader, there is Truth here, and though we may never know exactly what it is, we can determine what it is not.  So, why would I be so concerned about professed believers who have accepted what they have been told about this story from the ‘main stream’ media?  Well, dear reader, if you do not know the answer to that question, let me try to explain it to you.

First, I would like to remind the reader that this entire blog is written to and for professed believers.  Therefore, I assume the reader already has a working knowldge of the Scriptures.  Still, I will start with a couple passages of Scripture — just in case.  This first passage will set the foundation for this entire post:

John 8:44  (NASB)

44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks [a]a lie, he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of [b]lies.

Having cited this first Scripture, let me then remind the reader that Christ had a high standard when it comes to the notion of ‘murder:’

Matthew 5:21-22 (NASB)

Personal Relationships

21 “You have heard that [a]the ancients were told, ‘You shall not commit murder’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be [b]liable to the court.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be [c]guilty before the court; and whoever says to his brother, ‘[d]You good-for-nothing,’ shall be [e]guilty before [f]the supreme court; and whoever says, ‘You fool,’ shall be [g]guilty enough to go into the [h]fiery hell.

One last passage before we start, if you do not mind:

1 John 4: 5-6  (NASB)

They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.


Do not just dismiss the sources cited in this post because you do not like them.  Everything reported here is true and accurate and can be verified by the reader using nothing but publicly sourced documentation.


The ‘main stream’ media is talking about the Trump-Ukraine-Biden-Whistle-Blower story as though Biden has been proven innocent and President Trump has been proven guilty.  Some of their pundits have even gone so far as to assert that any media source that expresses a different opinion is pushing a ‘false narrative.’  On CNN, Oliver Darcey even said that the ‘conservative media’ was creating an ‘alternate reality’ in which there is good reason to believe Biden is corrupt and President Trump is innocent.  I could not find the full video of that interview (Rush Limbaugh played it on Oct. 6, 2019), but I was able to find a segment of that interview sufficient enough to prove to the reader that I am not misinterpreting Mr. Darcey’s words:

Video clip of Mr. Darcey on CNN

Anyone who is honest and who has been watching will know that this is the general tone of the Trump-Ukraine-Biden-Whistle-Blower story in the ‘main stream’ media.  Essentially, the media is saying Biden has been exonerated and President Trump is guilty of obstructing justice and of using promised tax payer money to pressure Ukraine into ‘digging up dirt’ on Joe Biden.

But is this the truth?  Better yet, why would a believer even have to wonder about this question?

Let me start with what we can absolutely prove as factual:

1st, the U.S. has a Treaty with Ukraine, in which President Trump is legally mandated to work with Ukraine in invetigating and prosecuting corruption.

Treaty with Ukraine on Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters

Second, we have the full transcript — the official government transcript — the only piece of evidence known to exist that can be submitted in a U.S. Court of Law — and it does not say what the media has told the American people it says:

Trump’s Ukraine call transcript: Read the document

But let’s not stop here.  Let’s look to see what the rest of the government did to vet the whistle-blower’s accusations of wrong-doing by President Trump:

Justice Department clears Trump of wrongdoing on Ukraine call

BOMBSHELL: Intel Inspector General Found Whistleblower Had ‘Bias’ In Favor Of ‘Rival Candidate’ Of Trump, Report Says

BOMBSHELL: Volker Testimony Reveals Ukrainians ‘Were Not Pressured’ by Trump, Read His Statement Here

Ukraine’s President: ‘I Was Never Pressured’ by Trump, ‘No Conditions’ Were Imposed

Ukraine President: ‘I’ve Never Met Rudy Giuliani; ‘Never, Never Had Any Phone Calls with Him’

Ukraine files exonerate President Trump


















Now, consider what this means about the claim that President Trump pressured Ukraine to re-open the investigation into then VP Biden:

Solomon Blockbuster: Ukraine Reopened Biden Case Before Trump Phone Call

Now, in a reasonable world, the ‘main stream’ media would report all these facts and the issue would die right there.  This is all in the public arena, and it all proves — beyond reasonable doubt — that President Trump didn’t do anything unlawful in connection to Ukraine and then VP Biden.  But this world is under the influence of powers that seek to spread lies and to create chaos, so we have to look harder to find the Truth.  If we look deeper, and if the Lord’s Spirit is in us, we should be able to sift the wheat from the chaff: meaning we should be able to separate truth from deception.  So, let us start with the reasons President Trump might believe there is reason to investigate then VP Biden, Nancey Pelosi, Mitt Romney, then President Obama and maybe even the DNC in connection to corruption in Ukraine and meddling in the 2016 Presidnetial elections.

This is lengthy, but it is simple a must-watch:
















Original Ukrainian whistleblower sits down with One America News














Former CIA Official Explains that Trump did Nothing Wrong — Biden Blackmailed Ukraine












This link also connects this Biden-Ukraine story to two sitting U.S. Democrat Sernators.

Swamp Watch

OK, now, just with what we have in these video clips, it should be readily apparent that we do — in fact — have reasonable grounds to at least ask Ukraine to look in to these allegations and report back to us — especially since Ukraine has already convicted two of the people involved in these allegations for colluding with the Hillary Clinton campaign to throw the 2016 election!  But let’s not stop here.  Let’s look at other stories that have been in the news and can be verified by anyone who takes the time to look for them:

The following link directly contradicts claims that Biden has made denying he had anything to do with his son’s business dealings or the head of Barima:

QUID PRO JOE: Photo Emerges Of Biden That Casts Doubt On His Ukraine Claims

This story shows a patern with Joe Biden:

Joe Biden’s Family Used His Political Clout to Enrich Themselves

This story not only connects Senator Romney to this scandal, but it potentially links then Presdient Obama to it, as well:

US intel, Romney figure joined board of Ukraine gas company: Burisma

These next three stories connect Representative Pelosi to the same Ukraine scandal:

Son of House Speaker Pelosi made money in Ukraine, used her in ads

Report: Whoops, Nancy Pelosi’s Son Paul Jr. Was Exec at ‘Ukraine-Based Gas Company,’ Similar to Hunter Biden

Nancy Pelosi And Son Paul Featured In Commercial For Energy Company Doing Business In Ukraine

This story supports the narrative in Glenn Beck’s video and potentially connects then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, and then President Obama to the scandal:

Pelosi’s Assistant Connected Not Only to the Ukrainian Government and Military, but Also to Obama’s Corrupt Ukrainian Ambassador and Alexandra Chalupa, the Woman Behind the Russia Collusion Hoax

This next story supports the allegations that Biden used a loan guarantee to protect his son by having the Ukraine prosecutor invetigating his son’s company fired.

Ukraine Prosecutor That Biden Got Fired Says He Was Told To Back Off Investigation, Report Says

And this video not only shows then VP Biden bragging about using this money to force Ukraine to fire their prosecutor, but it directly connects then President Obama to the scandal:

Watch Joe Biden Brag About Bribing Ukraine To Fire The Prosecutor Investigating His Son’s Company

Both of these next stories link all of this directly to then President Obama:

Did Joe Biden Implicate Barack Obama in Ukraine Quid Pro Quo Scandal?

Biden Spox: Hunter Was Cleared by Obama White House to Serve on Burisma Board

This story produces documents that refute Biden’s denials of wrongdoing in Ukraine:

Report: Newly Revealed Documents Blow Up Biden’s Ukraine Story

Solomon: These once-secret memos cast doubt on Joe Biden’s Ukraine story

Even his defenders on CNN have said that then VP Biden has a reason to worry here:

Burisma ‘Clearly’ Paid Hunter Biden to Sell Influence, Says CNN Contributor


FLASHBACK: Politico Claims ‘Ukrainian Efforts to Sabotage Trump Backfire’ in 2017

Ukrainian efforts to sabotage Trump backfire

Democrats Had No Problem Asking Ukraine To Investigate Political Opponents When The Target Was Trump


Then there are these three stories — all of which potentially link then Presdient Obama to this Ukraine scandal:

Brennan Went to Ukraine with Fake Passport

Ukrainian to US prosecutors: Why don’t you want our evidence on Democrats?

US Embassy pressed Ukraine to drop probe of George Soros group during 2016 election

Then there is this story, directly linking then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, to the Ukraine scandal:

EXCLUSIVE: Former Ukrainian Secret Service Official Leaks Info on How Ukraine Funded Clinton Campaign with Stolen IMF Money


This story not only connects the Ukraine scandal to then Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, but also to then Presdient Obama, the DNC and the Russian Collusion hoax (and I say hoax because it has now been proven — by the Mueller investigation — that the whole story was created by the Hillary Clinton campaign working in conjunction with a Russian company and English intelligence operative):

Why Trump’s Focus on CrowdStrike Is So Key


This story then directly links the whole Ukraine scandal directly to Hillary CLinton and Barak Obama:

Clapper: Obama Ordered The Intelligence Assessment That Resulted In Mueller Investigation

And then there is this story, which connects Obama and the DNC to corruption in Ukraine through Nancy Pelosi’s office:



The story does not end in Ukraine.  Biden and his son did far worse in China, which is why Trump mentioned it.  Here are bust a few links to help you understand this connection:

Glenn Beck details Joe Biden’s cronyism and corruption in China

Chicoms get very, very nervous as Joe Biden corruption scandal spreads to their shores

Peter Schweizer: Hunter Biden partnered with ChiCom nuclear tech espionage plotter











This blogger has just a partial summary fo the issues, but the blogger is right on target:

It becomes clear why they’re all trying to destroy Trump


President Trump is threatening the establishment in Washington, D.C., and ‘the Swamp’ knows it is in real trouble.  Once you know all of the information I just presented, then these stories start to take on a different meaning.  For example, this next story actually admits that what we are seeing is both a coup as well as subversion:

NYT Columnist: Yes, There’s a Deep State and It’s Full of People Doing Important Work to Restrain Trump

And why should this man be so concerned about Trump that he seeks to illegally remove him?  Why not just present a better candidate with better ideas and win at the ballot box?  Why do they have to impeach a President, especially when the evidence suggests the President is actually doing his job?

Rep. Al Green: “I’m Concerned If We Don’t Impeach This President, He Will Get Re-Elected”

Why would they even be thinking about such things as this?  And on what grounds would they even pretend to impeach VP Pence?

MSNBC panelist: We can impeach Pence first and let Trump name his replacement before he’s impeached too

Why would they need to move the hearings behind closed doors?  Why not show their proof to the American People?  Why not make their case publicly?

Republican Ratcliffe: Moving Impeachment Inquiry to Intel Committee Allows ‘Closed Doors,’ No Transparency

Why would their allies in the social media and tech industry be trying to silence voices like mine?  Voices that are trying to bring you the Truth?

‘BigTech’ shadowbans Ukraine facts

Why would a news paper being asking the government to control free speech?

New York Times article “Free Speech is Killing Us” calls for government to act on trolling








Dear Reader, do you remember that I started with a link of Mr. Darcey saying the ‘main stream’ media is the truth, and that those who oppose their narrative are the ‘false narrative?’  Do you not see the connection here?  This last video is a clear, real-world example of the principle in Isaiah 5:20-21:

Isaiah 5:20-21 (NASB)

20 Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil;
Who [a]substitute darkness for light and light for darkness;
Who [b]substitute bitter for sweet and sweet for bitter!
21 Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes
And clever in their own sight!


Are you still with me, Reader?  Are you starting to understand the problem here?  How could a Son or Daughter of God, possessed by the in-dwelling Holy Spirit, read all of this and not see that there is something wrong with the story being reported by the ‘main stream’ media?

But let’s not stop here.  Let’s now look at the Whistle-Blower story.  And, as you read these next links, please keep in mind that they directly mirror the accusations leveled against Justice Kavenaugh:

Despite Schiff’s denials, the evidence now suggests that he actually pushed the first whistle-blower into coming forward, and even helped to write the complaint:

Trump: Schiff Helped Write Whistleblower Report; Schiff: No I Didn’t, But I Should’ve Been ‘More Clear’

Schiff Colluded with Leaker, Suggested He Become Whistleblower

Schiff Got Early Account of Accusations as Whistle-Blower’s Concerns Grew

When Schiff lied about the transcript, then denied that he lied, even the ‘main stream’ media had to report that he lied:

WaPo Gives Schiff Four Pinocchios for Whistleblower Claim

Pelosi also lied to try and support Schiff:

Pelosi Blatantly Lies During GMA Interview About Schiff’s Reading of Ukraine Transcript

And how did the ‘main stream’ media react to all of this?

Nothing to See Here: Public Radio, TV Networks Ignore Adam Schiff’s Fake Quotes From Trump Transcript

The CIA changed it’s requirements for a whistle-blower after the first whistle-blower was pushed into coming forward by Schiff:

Whistleblower Misled Inspector General About Engaging With House Democrats

Intel Community Admission Of Whistleblower Changes Raises Explosive New Questions

Six ways to Sunday? Intelligence chiefs not only altered rules about firsthand knowledge to file whistleblower report…

But why would Schiff have any reason to lie, or to push a fake whistle-blower to come forward over the Ukraine scandal?

 Schiff’s office held secret meetings with former President of Ukraine







Since this post was first published, we have learned even more about the ‘whistle-blower(s).  In short, U.S. law was violated, as well as long-established rule in the House.  Furthermore, there is now good reason to believe the whistle-blower(s) are part of a CIA operation against President Trump:

CHALKBOARD: Ukraine, Trump whistleblower SKIPS STEPS to submit report……




Nancy Pelosi & Adam Schiff Caught Updating House Impeachment Process on Same Day of Whistleblower Complaint According To Report ~ illicit info

Whistleblower did not disclose contact with Schiff’s committee to inspector general, sources say

Who Does the Whistleblower Know?

BOMBSHELL: Whistleblower Had ‘Professional’ Tie to a 2020 Democratic Candidate

How elements of the Intel community are using ‘information dark arts’ against a sitting president


Who is the ‘whistle-blower’ connected to?

Dear Reader, If you are still with me, I ask you now:

Can you see that there is something very, very wrong here?  And can you see that everything we can prove, at least with reasonable certainty, seems to indicate that the reality of this story is not only bigger than we are being told, but the exact opposite of what we are being told — at least by the ‘Swamp’ and their allies in the ‘main stream’ media?  Do you see now why I am worried about all those who claim to be my brothers and sisters, yet they accept the claims that it is President Trump who is dirty in all this?

Look, I am on record from the beginning as not being a Trump supporter.  I’m still not a fan, but I can see no wrong in what he has done (now how he does it, but what he does).  If and when evidence — real evidence — is presented that indicates President Trump has done something illegal, I will not only listen to it, but — if I am convinced — I will want him impeached.  But until suich evidence is presented, I want those against who the current evidence testifies to be investigated and, if there is reason enough to file charges against them, I want them prosecuted.  But for now, given all that we do know, when I hear professed believers accepting the narrative about President Trump, I have to wonder about them — especially in regards to the principle espoused in John’s letter:

1 John 4: 5-6  (NASB)

They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us. By this we know the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.


How Far Does ‘Tolerance’ Go?

I get attacked by folks all the time.  I get attacked by people from all sides of the political spectrum.  I am used to that.  But the attacks that cause me the most anguish are those that come from others who profess to be ‘good’ believers.  These attacks cause me the most grief because, by making their attack, they prove to me that they neither know their Scriptures, nor try to follow them.  Well, as it happens, I was attacked by such a believer again today, and it was in relation to the politics surrounding the mass shootings in El Paso Texas and Dayton, Ohio.  This time, I was bothered so much that I thought I would write about it.

As it happens, this particular believer and I have had several conversations.  This person is on the opposite side from me on the political spectrum, but we managed to be cordial in our conversations.  I realized early on it would be easy to do with this person: so long as I agreed with everything they said and believed, this believer would accept me as being ‘rational.’  However, the moment I disagreed, or did not behave the way they demanded, I was suddenly a hypocrite who had something wrong with them.  And, predictably, I had the usual Scriptural attack thrown at me to prove their case.  Sadly, all that proves is that the person throwing Scripture does not know Scripture and is not trying to follow it.

That said, I beg the reader to notice I have neither named names, nor even mentioned whether I am talking about a woman or a man.  Nor have I questioned this believer’s faith.  I am merely using the opportunity of my encounter with them to launch into a much more important topic: the abuse of ‘tolerance’ in the Church.  Sadly, too many have accepted the World’s definition of tolerance and not that of Scripture.

Scripture teaches believers that they must be tolerant of those who hold different beliefs about God.  Yes, we are to preach the Gospel and to share the Truth of Christ, but, if we are rejected — and Scripture warns us that we will be — we are not to attack, but to shake the dust from our feet and leave those people form God to handle.  Ultimately, we are not responsible for saving anyone.  Our only duty is to preach the Gospel — in its true form — and to offer correction when and where we find error.  We are to do nothing more!  The result is to be left to God and the Holy Spirit.  So, if I was so wrong today, and this believer so right, why was I not left alone?

The answer is hard to accept — at least for me.  This is because this believer was using a Worldly view to deal with me.  The issue where we crossed was on tolerance in politics.  This believer demanded that I practice a Spiritual tolerance in relation to earthly matters.  Well, this is a mistake in itself.  Scripture does not teach us to be tolerant of the World’s ways.  It teaches us to be separate from them.  But this believer demanded that I not only be ‘tolerant’ by treating everything others believe as being true, but also as being equal to my own beliefs — even to the point where they expected me to prostrate my convictions in deference to theirs.  In short, I either accepted everything this believers said I had to believe, or I was an intolerant, hateful, broken hypocrite — and they said so.

There were several problems with this believer’s rebuke of me.  First, they did not offer Scripture to show me my error, but they did use it to support their attack on me.  They also did this publicly.  None of this is Scriptural.  But worse, they were demanding that I accept lies as truth, and to defer to these lies in place of my own convictions.  In short, this believer was demanding that I accept the World or I was not a ‘good’ Christian.  Sadly, I see w-a-y too much of this coming from my brothers and sisters in Christ, and it breaks my heart.

Friends, accepting all beliefs as true and equal is conforming to the world, and conforming to the world is not sound doctrine.  I know this to be true because I know the Scriptures and I do try to live by them.  Yes, I fail — often.  Too often I know I am doing wrong even as I do it or choose to do wrong.  And yes, I know this makes me a hypocrite.  But I fight the sin side of my human nature as best I can and I trust Christ to protect me.  I can do nothing to justify myself before God.  Only Jesus can do that.  So no work I do will be of any use to me.  No, I fight the sin side of my nature because I desire to be obedient.  This is just made harder when I see other professed believers attacking each other over not being a ‘proper’ Christian.  Imagine how you would feel if you were accused of being a hypocrite by someone who was playing the hypocrite by attacking you?  But rather than feel wronged or injured, I feel grief.  How can God’s people be so ignorant of God’s Laws?

This brings me to the political side of this attack.  The person in question sides with the gun-control lobby.  To this believer, President Trump is an evil racist whose language has caused these attacks.  This believer also told me I have to see that the Republicans are just as guilty of causing hate as any Democrat.  And I had to agree that I could not question what the Democrats do or I would be guilty of being part of the problem.  In was all more of the: “Agree with me or you are not a ‘good’ Christian/person” routine.  Honestly, I am used to it.  I expect it from the World.  But I do not expect it from a person who professes to be a believer.

So, here is where I had a real problem with the individual responsible for this post.  When I tried to point out that the side with which they stood had kicked God out of its platform; defends the murder of the unborn; promotes the LGBT agenda; advocates for government control of our entire lives; covets the property of others; promotes dependency and rejects personal responsibility — and more — I was told that I was being a hater and am part of the problem.  My dear reader, all of the things I listed are true, and all of them are signs of a rebellious heart.  None of them are supposed to reside in the heart of a true believer.  Which brings me to this dilemma:

If we are to judge based on the fruit of the person’s heart/actions, how am I to judge such a person as this believer?


(P.S. I already know the answer, I just don’t like what it implies... 😦  )



Religious Tolerance in America

What is Christian tolerance? Should Christians be tolerant of other religious beliefs?

Do we have the right to make these judgments?


ATG on Talk Radio

For those who might be interested:

I am fortunate enough that, for whatever reason, people find value in what I have to say.  A couple weeks ago, this lead to my receiving an invitation to be a guest on a regional talk radio program, The Morning Drive with Steve NicholsMy first appearance can be found here (please fast forward to the 15:09 mark as the FB audio was off until that point).  I am posting this today to let those who may be interested know that I will be on Mr. Nichols’ show again tomorrow morning, August 2, 2019.  The show will air live on Face Book from 6 – 9 AM EST.  If you cannot watch the show live, Mr. Nichols posts the re-play on his program’s FB page so that you can go back and watch it at your convenience.

Unless I mess up or bomb, I have a standing invitation to be on Mr. Nichols’ show the first Friday of every month.  So, until that changes, you will be able to hear me live or on video re-play — if you are interested, that is.

Beware of People Trying to ‘Speak Things into Existence”

Just because we do not see something, that does not mean it does not exist. We cannot see the wind, but we know it exists because we can still sense it.  This applies to other things, as well.  It’s just that, sometimes, a thing is not so readily apparent as the wind so we have to train ourselves to look for it.  However, once we learn to look for it, we may find that we see it all around us.  This is how it is with many spiritual matters.  The ancients saw them everywhere in their daily lives, but today, we have gone blind to them.  The danger here is, while we may not care about the things of the spiritual world, this does not mean the spiritual world does not care about us.  This is why those of us who profess to believe in the Scriptures should try to learn to see the world through the eyes of the ancient Hebrews, so that we can start to see the world as they saw it, not as we have been trained to see it.  When we do this, we may find that we have been missing a great many things that are vitally important to not only understanding the Scriptures, but also to living them in our daily lives.

If you study the Ancient Near East (ANE) culture, one of those important spiritual matters you will discover is that the people of the ANE connected ability to ‘speak things into existence’ to the idea of deity.  In other words, if you could speak things into being, that was an indication that you were a god.  Well, our times and culture may have changed, but this belief has not. There are people all around us trying to ‘speak’ their own reality into existence.  And, yes, whether they realize it or not, these people are making a claim to be a god — because only the One True God can speak things into being.

So, what do I mean by ‘speaking things into existence?’  Well, the easiest place to find this is in the world of politics.  If we look there, we will find many examples.  The claim that there are more than two sexes is such an example.  There are only two sexes: male and female.  Yet, there are people who think they can create, alter or interchange this reality simply by stating they ‘identify as’ whatever ‘sex’ they define.  This is not only an attempt to speak a new reality into existence, but it is also an absurdity. (NOTE: I do not say ‘gender’ because, while the word is used to replace sex, it was not originally understood to mean sex.  The way we are using it today is a perversion of its original meaning).

Socialist economics is another example.  The idea that the government can take from producers and give to consumers in perpetuity is an attempt to speak a new reality into existence.  Just because the idea can be created, and even sounds good, this does not mean it can work — and therefore exist — in reality.  In this case, it cannot, because it violates God’s Natural Laws.  In this case, it violates the laws governing energy and entropy.  One cannot keep spending without producing.  This is just a simple fact of Natural law.  And, under Socialism, the spenders quickly out pace the producers until, sooner or later, the system collapses.  It collapses because, though it may have appeared to exist in reality, it didn’t because it can’t.  This universe simply does not work in a way that will allow something like Socialism to exist.

The simple fact of the matter here is that our society is filled with people who think they can speak (or ‘will’) a change to this world.  If we look closely and honestly enough, we may even find we do this, ourselves.  This is the essence of ‘The Man of Lawlessness‘ Paul spoke of in 2 Thessalonians 2.  As believers, we should train ourselves to watch for people who are trying to speak or will changes to God’s Created Order.  They are literally claiming to be above God.  Not only does this speak to their heart, but it speaks volumes to whatever notion or idea they are trying to speak into existence.  Believers would be wise to be very cautious in dealing with such people and more so with the ideas/changes they are trying to create.

I’ll leave you with a more timely example ripped from our daily headlines:

The attempt to do away with or erased national borders is a declaration of being a god.  So is a push for one-world government.  The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob created the nations at Babel.  Any attempt to undo this is an attempt to override God’s Will, and only a greater god can do this.  Since there is no greater god than the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, then this is an example of ‘The Man of Lawlessness.’  It is an attempt to speak a new reality into existence: a reality that openly defies the Will of the One True Living God.

Therefore, my brothers and sisters, learn to look for those who are trying to speak things into existence.  Whether they realize it or not, they are claiming to be a god, and the spiritual world knows it.


A Scriptural Perspective of Trump’s July 14, 2019 ‘Go Back Home’ Tweet

So, President Trump is said to have Tweeted a ‘Racist‘ comment about four Democrat Congresswomen.  Well, I am not going to address that issue.  If the ‘Racism’ aspect of this issue interests you, I wrote about this from a more ‘secular’ perspective on The Road to Concord.  If you are interested, you can find that post here.  WHat I want to address about this issue on ‘As Through Glass’ is the Scriptural warning hidden within the story — a warning no one seems to be seeing.

Now, before I go any further, let me say that I am depending upon the reader to have actually read and studied Scripture (if the reader has not done so, honestly, this may not be the blog for you).  Assuming the reader knows Scripture, then the reader should know that God is not lawless, and neither are those who seek to align themselves with Him and His Laws and Ordinances.  If we can agree that lawlessness is a characteristic of those who are in rebellion, or even in a state of open war against God, then the rest of this post will be easier to understand, though it may still be difficult for many to accept.

So, what ‘Scriptural Warning’ do I see in the story about Trump’s supposedly ‘Racist’ Tweet telling four Congresswomen to ‘Go Back Home?’  That’s simple: I see lawlessness — but I see it on ‘the other side!’

Please hear me now.  I want to state this clearly and forcefully:

I do not support the tone of Trump’s words.  They were rude.  But they were not wrong, and I reject anyone who tries to argue they were!  I reject them, not because I am a ‘hater,’ but because I try follow Truth, and the Truth is, Trump was correct about his main point: that these four Congresswomen are a force of destruction.

Trump is correct: these four Congresswomen are a force of destruction.  They do not seek peace.  They do not unite.  They do not lift up or edify.  They do not even follow the law.  Instead, they seek to tear down, divide and destroy, and they are totally lawless in their approach.  According to Scripture, all of this is the mark of Satan and Satan’s followers — not of God and His children.

Now, dear reader, if you think that all of this sounds like hate and not love, I would remind you that God commands us to have an agape love for others.  Agape is not always ‘nice’ or ‘fuzzy’ love.  It is what we call ‘tough love.’  Agape does not ignore or tolerate lawlessness, it seeks to correct it.  So, while I have serious doubts as to Trump’s belief in Christ, I can see that his words and actions are more lawful than lawless.  I see this because, though he is rude and crass, he seeks to follow and enforce our laws — which is what Scripture commands.  While, on the other side, I see the same rude and crass language, but I also see lawlessness, and God condemns that.

OK, where do I see lawlessness in this particular story?  Well, for one, in the language.  Trump’s Tweet simply was not Racist.  Therefore, by saying it is racist, those who make that accusation not only break the laws governing language, but they also falsely accuse an innocent man.  Both of these are violation of God’s Laws.  The first is a violation of God’s Natural Law, the second is a violation of His Revealed Law.  But both are lawlessness.

Then there is the fact that the Speaker of the house, Nancy Pelosi, violated House rules by calling President Trump a racist.  When the Republicans objected and demanded her words be purged from the Congressional record, the Democrats agreed that she had broken House rules, but they refused to enforce them and remove her words from the record.  This is more lawlessness in defense of lawlessness.  Nowhere in Scripture does God command or condone lawlessness in the furtherance of His Kingdom — nowhere!  Scripture says God will take lawlessness and use it for the good of those who obey Him, but it never says lawlessness is obedience.  That is replacing good with evil, dark for light, and God’s Word says woe to those who do this.

Finally, I have a memory, and I can remember President Obama making comments about ‘white people’ that, had a white person said them about ‘black people’ not only would have been condemned as ‘Racist,’ they would have been ‘Racist.’  But the very same people who are now accusing President Trump of being a racist excused and defended President Obama.  The point here is that God does not allow for two sets of laws: one for you and one for your enemies.  God has one Law and it applies to everyone.  If the reader will remember, it was this very sort of hypocrisy that caused Christ to condemn Israel’s leaders as ‘children of Satan.’  So, how is it any different today?  If we see lawless people being hypocritical in an attempt to defend their lawlessness while destroying those who oppose them, how can they possibly be any different than the Pharisees?  And how could a believer possibly think that Christ would condone such behavior when He condemned the Pharisees for it?  Remember: God is the same today as yesterday, and He will be the same tomorrow!

So, while I understand that this is a politically charged issue in our society, if I look at this issue from a Scriptural perspective, I see wrong on both sides, but I only see a war against God’s Word and Law on one side — that of the American Left.  Now, please understand, I am not trying to make a political statement here.  I am not endorsing a political Party.  I have serious problems with both Parties, and those problems are driven by my growing understanding of the Lord’s Word.  No, all I am addressing here is the fact that this latest attack on President Trump is just more of a long stream of lawlessness, and that lawlessness is rebellion against God.

Christians Must Not Support Socialism!

I posted a lengthy essay on The Road to Concord about Socialism, “What Is Socialism?”  Now, I understand that there are many believers who think that Christians should stay out of politics.  While I disagree, that would be a discussion more suited for The OYL.  This post is intended more to help those believers who might fall for the lies of Socialism.  As such, this post is intended to be a clear warning: those who support Socialism are supporting a false god!

OK, why would I claim that Socialists are supporting a false god?  Well, it would really help if you read, “What Is Socialism,” but I’ll try to give you the short version.  That short version goes like this:

Under Socialism, the government is the head (where the will resides) and the collective is its body (that which executes the will).

Not only is this true, but it is crucial to understand what follows from this Truth.  Socialism claims to be a more moral system of governing society; a system where every individual is treated and cared for equally.  But this is a lie!  Think about it.  If the government is the head, and society is the body, then you and I are nothing more than cells.  Now, when was the last time you and I worried about what happened to a single cell in our body?  Never!  None of us have ever worried about such things, and neither do Socialists.  True, Socialists make grand promises, but so does Satan — and for the same reason: most people have to be tricked or deceived into worshiping a false god, and Socialism is a false god.  I’ll explain.

Under Socialism, the individual is irrelevant.  All that matters is the society.  Thus, the individual has no rights; only society has rights.  This is why, under Socialism, ‘justice’ is described in terms of ‘social justice.’  And, because the government is the head, it dictates to the body what is and is not ‘social justice.’  In short, the government decides what is right and what is wrong.  Put another way, under Socialism, the government decides what is and is not moral.

Now, I don’t know about you, but the last time I checked, only God — the One True Living God — can define morality.  Which means, if the government is claiming to have the authority to decide right from wrong, then the government is also claiming to be a god.  Therefore, if I give my support and allegiance to government; and I look to and depend on government for the very sustenance I need to survive, then I am worshiping a false god.  Dear friend, that is the Beast: the same beast described in Daniel and in the Book of Revelation.  Go read Daniel — carefully.  When Daniel asked him to explain, the angel told Daniel that the beats represent kingdoms and their associated kings/rulers.  Today, we call them governments, but they are still beasts, and they devour souls — just like beasts.

There are many more theological reasons for doing so, but this is the primary reason I am warning Christians against supporting Socialism: because, if you support Socialism, you are giving your allegiance to a false god!

The ‘Good’ NAZIs

I deliberately chose the title of this essay because of the reaction it would create in the average person.  In our society today, the average person will read the title of this essay and stop right there.  They won’t bother to read it.  They will simply allow their personal biases and preconceived notions to draw all their conclusions about what my essay is about for them.  And, sadly, they will almost certainly be wrong.  However, this does not apply to you.  If you are reading this, you have already shown yourself to be among the few people left in our society who have not been conditioned to turn away from something just because of the words used to describe it. This makes you a rare person in our world these days: a person who seeks to learn and to try to understand.  Therefore, let’s see what ‘Truth’ we can mine from the idea of the ‘good’ NAZI’s by asking a simple question:

Were there any ‘good’ NAZIs?

This is not such a simple question.  It is not simple because it depends on what we mean by ‘good.’  I am prone to suppose the average person will think that ‘good’ refers to a person who would have opposed the ideals espoused by the NAZI movement.  If so, then — by that standard of ‘good’ — it would be very difficult to image there were ‘good’ NAZI’s.  This is because membership in the NAZI Party was voluntary.  One had to be invited in to the NAZI Party or otherwise seek membership.  Either way, membership in the Party was voluntary.  This means, if a person were a NAZI, that person was — by their willing membership — embracing the principles and ideals of the Party.  Unfortunately, not even this conclusion is as clear as it should be.  This is because of another problem with our modern society: our propensity for make excuses.

A person so disposed might read my last paragraph and immediately object by arguing that a German may have been invited to join the Party and agreed to do so for fear of what might happen to them if they refused.  Or they might object by saying that, just because a person joined the NAZI Party, that didn’t mean they agreed with everything for which the Party stood.  An excuse maker might argue that a person would seek membership in the NAZI Party for the financial or political benefits that came with membership.  But does fear or a desire for personal gain excuse a person from willingly joining their name to something thought to be as evil as the NAZI Party?  There were plenty of people who refused to have anything to do with the Party and they lost their lives in the process.  Which leads us to the question of whether or not a person who joins the NAZI Party out of fear can be ‘good’ while others were killed because they expressed moral objections to the Party and the things it represented?  Put another way, is a coward just as ‘good’ as the person who dies for their beliefs? Or, can a person who joins for financial or personal gain be ‘good’ when others lost everything they owned for opposing the NAZI Party?  Once again, either way we look at these questions, we come back to what we mean by the word, ‘good.’

Think about the notion of ‘good’ for a moment.  If you were in Germany in the late 1930’s and early 1940’s, and you hated the Jews, believed in the master race and German supremacy and were loyal to Adolf Hitler, then you would have made a ‘good’ NAZI.  In such case, ‘good’ would mean that you did the things the Party demanded of its members.  Therefore, one could argue that, in 1930’s and 40’s Germany, all NAZI’s were ‘good’ people.  At the same time, if you found yourself in the NAZI Party, but you hated Hitler, secretly helped the Jews and thought the idea of a super race was ludicrous, then it would be difficult to see how you could possibly be considered a ‘good’ NAZI — at least, not from the Party’s point of view.  Therefore, it could just as easily be argued that no one who opposed the NAZI Party was ‘good.’  Thus, the natural conclusion from all of this is that ‘good’ would seem to be a relative term that has a close association to how well a person’s behavior conforms to a given set of beliefs.

Now, before I go any further, I want to ask you to indulge me in a quick caveat:

As a believer, right and wrong are defined by God’s Word.  Through the Scriptures, God has given us His commandments, his laws, His ordinances, His decrees, His judgments and His determinations.  Thus, ‘good’ would refer to the person who accepts God’s definition of right and does there best to live accordingly.  Now, please, understand that I am well aware of the passage where Jesus says none is ‘good’ but the Father, and that no human can be ‘good’ in the sense of perfectly obeying all of God’s ordinances from birth until death.  I am going to ask you to accept that I am not trying to make a theological point about ‘good,’ but rather, I am trying to make a practical point about how to apply the notion of ‘good’ in the life of a believer.  Therefore, if you will allow me this indulgence, let’s agree for the moment that a believer should understand that ‘good’ is linked to everything God has decreed as ‘right’ or moral.

So, if  we are all OK with this, then let us ask ourselves once again:

Was there such a thing as a ‘good’ NAZI?

For me, B3A, and by my understanding of the Scriptures, I am forced to decide that, no, it was impossible to be a ‘good’ NAZI — at least, not from the point of view of God’s law.

So, of what use is any of this to us, today?  Well, let’s apply our discussion to some more modern issues and see if it helps us see them in a different light.

Well, what if I told you that my answer to a question hinged on the meaning of what the word, ‘is,’ is?  Would Bill Clinton’s infamous answer to a question posed to him during his impeachment process suddenly take on any new connotations for you?  Perhaps not.  If you are among the few who will read this far, then you may well have understood that President Clinton was being purposely deceptive in his answer and, if you knew he was being deceptive, then you might have also realized that deception while under oath or abut legal matters is against God’s moral code.  Therefore, we can conclude that Clinton’s intentions at that moment were not ‘good.’  But what about those who are less obvious about their intentions?  How does the question about the ‘good’ NAZI help believers be more discerning of the world?

Let me answer by asking this question: what does ‘America’ mean to you?  Certainly, ‘America’ means different things to different people, even to the men and women who built this nation.  However, nearly all of the founders would have said that ‘America’ stood for things such as individual rights and liberty, the rule of law, freedom of worship and of conscience and the right to pursue a moral and virtuous life.  But what about today?  When you hear someone talk about ‘America’ today, are they talking about these same things, or do they have a different understanding of what ‘America’ means?  Once again, this can be difficult to determine, but much more crucial to understand than the average person will ever realize. To those who call themselves ‘Progressives,’ ‘America’ means a nation much closer to the model of Communist Russia.  We know this because the founding fathers of the Progressive movement said so — clearly — and because modern Progressives have proudly and publicly embraced those founding fathers of the Progressive movement.  They use the same words, but they mean entirely different things by them.  So, can Progressives be ‘good’ Americans?

As a believer, I trust you have heard the warning that there will be those who are suddenly destroyed while they are in the very process of declaring peace and prosperity.  I suspect that warning is the Biblical equivalent of what I am trying to explain.  In fact, it is the very passage that inspired this essay.  How could God destroy a people that was experiencing prosperity because they had achieved peace?  After all, Scripture commands us to seek peace, and it promises that there will be blessings for those who make peace.  So, if there is prosperity in the land because of peace, then why would God destroy the nation?  Could it be because the people of that nation have a different notion of ‘peace and prosperity” than God’s?

You see, there are many people who speak the same language you and I speak.  They even use the same words.  They say they believe in the same things and want the same things as us — but they don’t!  In reality, these people have very different ideas of what ‘America’ means, and they want very different things.  To them, ‘good’ means something entirely different from what a believer should think is ‘good.’  These people are ‘good’ NAZI’s in the sense that they embrace and advance their concepts, but they are anything but ‘good’ according to God’s Word.  Believers can know this because these people replace evil for good (see Isaiah 5:20-21).   Just imagine what might happen if this nation were to embrace people whose ideology of peace and prosperity is based on the practice of murder, theft and slavery and who force the whole nation to worship them as gods.  If you know the history of the NAZI Party, you may realize that this is exactly what the Party did to the German People in the late 1930’s, and the Party called is peace and prosperity.  Look what happened to Germany after they turned away from God’s idea of ‘good.’  Now, ask yourself, what will God do to America if we follow down that same path?


The Future of This Blog

This is one of three blogs that I maintain.  I maintain three blogs for the benefit of my readers.  Each blog focuses on a different subject.  This blog is where I take my understanding of the principles from my first two blogs and apply them to matters of culture, politics and current events.  Essentially, you can think of ‘As Through Glass‘ as a political blog written from a Scriptural perspective.  My first blog page, ‘The OYL,’ focuses on how I understand and try to live according to Scriptural teaching.  My second blog, ‘The Road to Concord,‘ focuses on the principles of Liberty, as understood from the Scriptural position of Natural Law.  In the past, I have refrained from connecting these three blogs.  I am ashamed to admit that this was done mostly out of fear.  From this point forward, however, I will not allow fear to muzzle me.  I will interconnect the different areas of larger issues by linking to any of my other blogs whenever I feel lead to do so.  As best I can understand it, the task I have been given is to just explain how I see and understand the Scriptures; what I have learned about the things that have been and are happening in the world around us; and how I see the ways they are all connected. If you find that anything I ever write helps you better understand the Scriptures or the world in which we live, I would humbly ask that you share those messages with others.  I will not be advertising or promoting any of my blogs in any way.  Again, as best as I can understand it, I have been told to leave the spread of my blogging efforts strictly up to those who read it.   I am not to help in any way.  Therefore, that is exactly what I am going to do: I will write, as much and as clearly as I can, then leave it to God — working through you — to put whichever of my messages need to be read before whomever needs to read them.  In this way, whatever good my blogs may achieve, it will be entirely by the hand of the Lord.  At least, this is my most sincere desire and prayer.