Thanks to the Berean Church in Sandpoint Idaho and Politically Active Christians Political Action Committee (PAC PAC), I have had to start reading a few books to refute their claims about Christian Nationalism not being Christian. In their two-hour presentation they mention but never quote Andrew Torba and his running mate, Rev. Andrew Isker. The only thing they reference in their presentation are three books in the Recommended Reading list at the back of Torba’s book, Christian Nationalism.
Back when I was a Roman Catholic, I learned that there are sins of commission and sins of omission. Berean purposely commits the second in their presentation. They mention that Torba and Isker recommend a book on Christian Nationalism by Stephen Wolfe but omit the part that the book is “forthcoming”. This implies that Torba and Isker are aware the book is in the publishing pipeline, but “forthcoming” says to me that they haven’t seen it in its final form. Looks like I get to spend some money at Cannon Press in the next few weeks so I can pick up three or four more books on the issue. Like I really need more books in my reading que. (I’m reading my fourth book this week which just happens to be by Gary DeMar and is not related to the present topic.).
Berean also omits a book by Gary DeMar and skips most other people on the Recommended Reading list. I know for a fact that Gary DeMar does not like the label of “Christian Nationalist”, but he says that he understands what some people are trying to say by calling themselves that. He thinks it is the wrong label to use. This fact is also absent from the Berean presentation. You would think that when Torba and Isker recommending a book by a guy that doesn’t like the label “Christian Nationalist” that fact would be a relevant point in their presentation.
The full title of the book by Torba and Isker is Christian Nationalism: A Biblical Guide to Taking Dominion & Discipling Nations.
Christian Nationalism is a movement of rebuilding, reformation and revival. We are not trying to overthrow the existing state or even necessarily earn positions in the highest levels of power. We don’t need to because we are playing the long game and are busy building things that matter. … So that is exactly what we are building: a parallel Christian Society.
A glaring omission in the Berean presentation is that they never deal with the issue of Dominion. Berean never cites any Bible verses on what they think a Christian’s role should be in our culture. They only say that Christian Nationalists are wrong but offer nothing in its place. As Gary North used to say, “You can’t beat something with nothing” but at the end of the day, that’s all they offer. Defeat and retreat are not a winning strategy or a biblical one either.
Torba’s Christian Nationalism is essentially an optimistic and post-millennial view of history that is offered as an antidote to the poison of premillennial dispensational defeatist theology that permeates most churches in the West. The bottom line is that Jesus isn’t coming back for a few thousand more years so given that, what legacy do you plan to leave for the next few generations. Torba says we should be planning at least seven generations into the future. Play the long game and Christians will transform society. We need to “take some turf for Jesus” as Gary S Paxton used to sing.
One of the most important tasks for the Christian Nationalist is overcoming the idea that the world is going to end very soon. The Pilgrims and other settlers who came to found a new Christian nation were not doing so because they expected the world to end any minute now. They did so because they were aware of the promises that God has made in His Word, that:
All the ends of the world shall remember and turn to the Lord, and all the families of the nations shall worship before you. (Psalm 22: 27-28.)
And that:
“the earth will be filled with the knowledge of the glory of the Lord as the waters cover the sea.” (Hab. 2:14.)
Torba also advocates for a variation of the strategy found in one of my all-time favorite books, “How the Irish Saved Civilization.”
Create parallel economic structures that showcase the difference between Christian culture and “the world”. Saint Patrick did this when he wished to convert a city. He set up a Christian community next to the city he wished to convert to show unbelievers that the followers of Christ had a better way to do things. Torba says that the current world system will collapse, and Christians need to be ready to step-in and help rebuild society after that happens.
The biggest complaint I have is that Torba doesn’t adequately footnote his books. There is no index of Scripture quotations, no index of topics, no index of people mentioned, and few if any citations of people quoted in his books.
For example, in Christian Nationalism, Torba quotes David Chilton several times but never says where the quotes are from. I was a friend of David’s and I recognize the quotes but please don’t ask me which book or lecture is being quoted.
All heathen cultures have been statist and tyrannical, for a people who reject God will surrender themselves and their property to a dictator. (I Sam 8: 7-20.) — David Chilton
Only one chapter in the book has any footnotes at all and that is the last chapter documenting that the original colonies were all founded as Christian outposts (colonies or nations) sanctioned by the British and under the Lordship of Jesus Christ.
Torba claims to be taking the Great Commission of Jesus literally and wanting to disciple all nations.
There is an abundance of biblical evidence for Christ’s present reign over heaven and earth. And the strongest is in the Great Commission (Matt 28: 18): “And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, ‘All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth.’ Jesus is reigning already. He doesn’t have some authority over this world, He has all of it.
This is mainstream Christian theology. Sadly, many Christians just don’t believe in it these days; hence the mess we are in. Torba also does his best to make the push for Christian Nationalism open to Protestants, Catholics, and Orthodox Christians. You might say his slogan is, “If Jesus is your Lord, welcome on board.”
The most controversial chapter in the book is his refutation of the phrase “Judeo-Christian.” The “Judeo” is not based on the Old Testament but on a rejection of Jesus as Messiah and thus incompatible with Christianity. His comments are spot-on concerning this issue.
Talmudic Judaism is a new religion made up by those who rejected Jesus Christ. It is not the precursor to Christianity; it postdates it. By using the term [Judeo-Chirstian] we are reinforcing the idea that their religion is just like ours except they don’t believe in Jesus yet, when in reality it is a new religion formed out of the total rejection of the Son of God.
Oh, I got my copy of the book from Amazon. It was one of those print on demand books and my hard cover copy is 70 pages long. Yes, I’d recommend this book.
Note: in the ten minutes (or less) that it takes you to read this, I saved you from wasting an additional two hours of your life watching the video that I reviewed. My notes were made as I watched this video, so they are jumpy.
Here in north Idaho, there is a church that is preaching against Christian Nationalism. This is not too remarkable to me since many claiming the name of Christ are not really Christians, but this instance is different. Why? Because this congregation controls a political action committee. This PAC has been a tool wielded against conservative Christian candidates. Since they have interjected themselves into the public square, I had decided to critique their claims.
Before I begin, I have a few comments.
First, there is no such thing as Christian Nationalism. This term is a strawman constructed by the Left to hammer conservatives and Christians. There is no leader of Christian Nationalism because there are no dues, membership, or anything else. It’s just a label that Liberals use to pigeonhole folks that they don’t like. Christian Nationalism is a category of people that the Left wish to dismiss in much the same way as dog excrement on the bottom of their designer shoes.
That being said, many conservatives and Christians have decided to “own” the label. For those ignorant in history or who spent too much time in public school, the name “Christian” was coined by the opponents of Jesus as a way to insult and belittle His followers. Instead of fighting the label, the Church decided to own it and thus were OK to be called something intended as an insult.
Anyone can claim to be a Christian Nationalist or called that by anyone that wishes to belittle them or be dismissive of their views of a conservative. The term itself has little to no context or content. However, why let the facts get in the way of a good conspiracy theory?
Lastly, some folks call themselves Christian Nationalists just to get a rise from the Left and folks at places like the Southern Poverty Law Center and Anti-Defamation League.
Some Christians don’t like the label because it is an inaccurate summary of their beliefs.
Anyway, The Berean Church in Sandpoint Idaho has managed to construct a two-hour presentation on the evils of Christian Nationalism. What follows will be a few comments on their presentation. The video is bookmarked in two locations.
The presentation is given by three individuals. Parts I and IV are by a black gentleman that is not identified, the next portion is given by the pastor, Michael Kohl, and a third part is by another fellow. Parts of the audio are faint and hard to understand. The video was posted to YouTube on Jan 19, 2024.
Kohl graduated for Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia which is Presbyterian and also attended the Reformed Episcopal Seminary (Philadelphia). He was in the Presbyterian Church In America (PCA) a somewhat liberal Presbyterian denomination, and has also worked in Brethren and independent Churches. The church’s statement of faith is the Five Protestant Solas with no elaboration.
Part I
This presentation begins with a PowerPoint slide Understanding the backdrop.
The four bullet points which are explained in more detail later are:
What is the term Christian Nationalism?
Who are the thought leaders of modern Christian Nationalism?
Mapping out the Christian Nationalism operation
Discovering how it matters to Idaho
First up is a video clip which is a promo for Rob Reiner’s movie attacking Christianity, God and Country. By-the-way, this turkey really bombed at the box office so don’t feel bad if you never saw it. Oh, Reiner hates Christians and always has.
My Comment on God and Country
The Hollywood reporter says of the film:
And, as the film points out in exhaustive detail, Christian Nationalism is very much a political, rather than religious, movement. The movement posits that America is a Christian nation and that the founders intended it as such. It seeks to roll back feminism, LBGTQ rights and abortion, and to either introduce Christianity to public schools or substitute them with private Christian schools funded by vouchers.
Any rational Christian believes all the things lamented by the Hollywood Reporter.
Back to the presentation
The presenter then critiques the Reiner promo and then steers people to Wikipedia for a definition of Christian Nationalism. He says he doesn’t like Liberals critiquing Christian Nationalism but then uses them as a source to do so. This is circular reasoning. He then keys on the names Andrew Torba and Nick Fuentes because they are mentioned by Wikipedia.
First up is a critique of Nick Fuentes. The clip shown is Fuentes talking of tearing down inclusive forces and kicking the Republican Party in the butt. I can tell you what’s probably coming next because Nick mentioned the word “white” and that is the racism card. In the context of DEI, Nick is right to say white people, and doubly so if they’re male, get screwed by the Democrat quota system.
I resumed the clip and Fuentes says he wants to drag the Republican Party back inside the doors of the church. FYI in the early years of the Republican Party, the Republican Party was called the Episcopal Church at prayer. The anti-slavery movement was largely a Christian one and was instrumental in the foundation of the Republican Party.
Then the presenter goes to Vincent James Foxx. Online, he goes by Vincent James. Vincent is a Republican and a self-identified Roman Catholic.
My comments on Vincent James
Vincent spends most of his podcasts talking against illegal immigration, discrimination against white people—a rection or pushback to those pushing DEI—and he points out the part played by prominent Jewish people in promoting the tearing-down of our institutions. He is not anti-Semitic, but against Jewish people born in America that have more allegiance to Israel than America. He makes it clear—if you listen—that he doesn’t hate Jews as a group be disagrees with wealthy Jewish people that teardown others to get special advantages for themselves and their allies. Rarely does he talk of Christianity except as it is affected by things like the recently adopted federal bill which gives special protections against anti-Semitic speech. This bill adopts language defining anti-Semitism which was written by a Jewish special interest group. It prohibits speaking against Zionism and makes the biblical account of Jesus’ crucifixion illegal. Yet, it got the full support of Zionist Christians but makes essential parts of the Gospel illegal to say. I think we will have more to say about Dispensational, premillennial theology before this presentation is concluded but we will see.
Back to the presentation.
The presenter plays a clip of Vincent being sarcastic and over the top talking about Christian Nationalism rolling back liberal social policy. Oh, but the presenter doesn’t really acknowledge that James is being sarcastic but takes him literally which in reality is taking him out of context. Folks, you don’t get thousands of followers online without some showmanship in your presentation. Vincent James has about 70 thousand followers on his Bitchute channel. He is on Rumble and several other places as well.
After a quick clip of James, the presenter goes on to some guy named Dave Reily. Dave Reily was recently hired by the Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF). IFF is not a part of Christian Nationalism they lean libertarian, so I don’t know why it matters.
Somehow some of these guys are Facebook friends or something like that or they reposted a meme that someone put online so now they are all part of some great conspiracy. This is really a stretch.
Switching gears slightly we then go to Andrew Torba of the website Gab. Gab is a site dedicated to free speech. It is intended to be a safe haven for Christians and other that don’t wish to be censored by BIG Tech. Vincent James has a page on Gab which is where I first come across him. Torba wrote a book on Christian Nationalism that sounds like mash-up of parts of How the Irish Saved Civilization and Christian Reconstruction.
In this book, Torba has a recommended reading section. The presenter cherry picks three guys, Doug Wilson and two of his fellow travelers in Moscow Idaho. Please note that he ignores everyone else on the list.
My Comments on Berean’s Treatment of Andrew Torba
This entire presentation of over two hours never once quotes from Andrew Torba or his book on Christian Nationalism. Nor does it quote from anyone else writing on the topic. I suspect because Torba is repackaging Theonomy and Christian Reconstruction, whereas Stephen Wolfe’s book is on political theory. Political Theory is what should be but normally omits how to get there. The reader is left with the challenge of how to implement the ideas presented.
Back to the presentation
Also, please note that we have crossed the line from Roman Catholic to Protestant people. Torba, Wilson, and others have a much more biblical and higher view of Scripture and how it should be applied to public policy than Vincent James and others.
Wilson then gets attacked by the presenter for one line in one book that Wilson wrote. Folks Wilson has written hundreds of books, articles, and other documents. Look, He is a prolific writer. I know that Wilson has many supporters and detractors but to dismiss him outright on the basis of one sentence is sloppy and disingenuous.
Oh, here is the offending statement.
But breaking covenant occurs because of unbelief, lack of faith, and because of lack of good works.
Whether this is related to James and the faith and works debate is not stated since we are denied context for the quotation.
Then the presenter goes after Peter Leithart for this quote which is never put into context.
Salvation must take a social form, and the Church is that social form of salvation, the community that already (though imperfectly) has become the human race as God created it to be, the human race that is becoming what God intends it to be. The Church is neither a reservoir of grace nor an external support for the Christian life. The Church is salvation.
This sounds like a variation of St. Cyprian, “No one can have God for his Father, who does not have the Church for his mother.”
Whatever larger point Leithart is making is never given. As Walter Martin famously said, “A text without a context, is a pretext, usually for error.”
On the basis of this quote, the presenter expects us to dismiss Leithart too.
Stephen Wolfe wrote “The Case for Christian Nationalism.” Many of their PowerPoint slides have the first name spelled a “Steven” not “Stephen.”
Drum roll, and the single pull quote from his book is:
I am not calling for a monarchial regime over every civil polity, and certainly not an autocracy, though I envision a measured and theocratic Caesarism—the prince as world-shaker for our time, who brings a Christian people to self-consciousness and who, in his rise, restores their will for good.
Again, this quote is presented without context. I can think of several possible and contradictory understandings of this quote but without context, we don’t know what the point of it really is. However, it really begs the question as to whether civil government should be based on God’s law or men’s. Ultimately these are the only two possibilities.
Wow. Surprise. We actually get a second quote from Wolfe. Presented again without context or elaboration.
Many claims in the book will worry many American conservative Christians. I’ve said that political governments can suppress false religion, establish a church, even require people to attend church. I also wrote about a ‘Christian prince,’ which is not the sort of political title one would find in America. I will not walk back those claims.
The presenter expects us to be shocked at the quote but should we really? First, we have no context for the above statement. However, I know that parts of it are easily proven true. Let’s look at a few parts of the above.
Politics can suppress false religion. Two examples. The United States outlawed the Mormon practice of polygamy. Currently, many are trying to outlaw displays of Satanic worship in public schools—especially as clubs on elementary campuses—and displays in public places. Plurality does have limits; especially, in a nation founded on Christian values. Oh, and don’t forget that all law is moral and an establishment of someone’s religion.
A State can establish a church. Yep, this is also a true statement. The majority of the 13 colonies had state sponsored churches when they ratified the U.S. Constitution. The Constitution only prohibits establishing a national church. Ditto for test oaths. Tax money also went to state sponsored churches to pay their clergy and other church expenses.
Requiring church attendance by citizens might be more problematic; however, it would not surprise me if the Pilgrims and other early settlers had such a requirement. Again, what is the context?
As for the “Christian Prince.” We are not given any context, however, my first thought is of Machiavelli’s book “The Prince.” Other ideas might include Constantine or a Trump-like figure that used Scripture as his guide to rule.
The presenter does not analyze this statement, just mocks it and dismisses it out of hand.
Congratulations. You have now endured about 38 minutes of this presentation.
Part II
With a horrible, stutter of the video, we then get a new presenter, that I assume is Pastor Kohl.
We will now get a theological critique of Christian Nationalism… well maybe.
Rev Kohl starts with a definition of Christianity or says he will, then takes a detour of sorts thru the book of Romans. He tries contrasting the Apostle Paul versus Stephen Wolfe, but Wolfe is not given in context, just one sentence, again without context. Then he goes back to Genesis and talks about Abraham.
At this point Kohl slaps Doug Wilson on a quote dealing with baptism. Again, there is no context. I wonder if Wilson advocates infant baptism while Kohl does not. And who cares? What does this have to do with Christian Nationalism? Probably nothing.
On one of the slides, Kohl has Abraham’s son Isaac spelled as “Isac”. Another minus point for Kohl.
Then he jumps to Wolfe again with a series of quotes on nationalism that seem varied. As usual, they are presented without context. Then he jumps to Moses and quotes some stuff about his wife who may have been black. I’m not sure of his point. I think that Kohl is trying to build a foundation that Christian Nationalists are all racists. Hope he’s better than that. He is on a rant about groups and factions. I will wait and see where this goes.
Now he pulls a quote from Wolfe that says the invisible church and the visible church are the same group. Again, no context so I don’t know if there is more to this than stated. We also don’t know what Wolfe’s church affiliation is so we don’t know if we are defining terms the same way or differently? Lastly, as a practical matter, we don’t know the difference between the visible and invisible church, God is the one that sees men’s hearts and knows who is truly save not us.
The next Wolfe quote is:
But public heresy has the potential to harm other’s souls by causing doubt or distraction or by disrupting public peace. The magistrate, who must care for the souls of his people, may act to suppress that heresy.
In my mind, I think of claims that homosexuality, abortion, or transgenderism are biblically ok. This would be heresy that casts doubt and disrupts the public peace.
Kohl mocks this whole statement but by what standard does he expect us to be government if not the Bible?
Kohl rants on about the visible vs invisible church and that Christian Nationalists have this wrong as a way for them to lord power over the rest of us. He states this as fact but never proves it. The scholarship used to construct this presentation is really poor.
As I stated at the first, there is no leader of Christian Nationalism. It is a strawman invented by liberals. Some of us are ok to own the label instead of demanding a new or different one.
Kohl tries to make out fellow believers as Judaizers. He again spanks Doug Wilson on baptism. Based on the quotes cited, Wilson believes that baptism is membership into the covenant and thus a sign of one’s salvation. This is not a radical Christian view unless maybe you are a Baptist which Kohl doesn’t appear to be. Children that are baptized are treated as believers as long as they walk in the faith. Baptized children are presumed saved. They have covenant membership and should be allowed access to the Lord’s Table, Holy Communion, or whatever you want to call it. As they get older it is assumed that they will make the faith their own via a decision, confirmation, or some other act. If they don’t then a time may come when they are not longer covenant members in good standing.
There it goes, “Judaizers were the original Christian Nationalists.”
Kohl says, Christian Nationalists believe in Jesus plus something else as the basis of salvation and that is why they are wrong. I find this troublesome because he has produced zero quotes that this is the case. He hasn’t tied salvation to any sort of political movement. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Kohl’s Three Card Monty lost the pea a long time ago, but his listeners are supposed to be in awe because the cups are still being shuffled about.
This presentation is empty of substance. The only point he has made so far is that there is a difference between the visible and invisible church and Mr. Wolfe might be shaky on that point. To me it’s a secondary issue.
I’m an hour and twenty minutes into this thing and I have yet to hear what Christian Nationalists want to do in a political way that is at variance with the Bible or why they are objectionable. Furthermore, what is the Berean Christian Fellowship’s more biblical alternative?
Mercifully it is intermission. I’m taking a pit stop. We have one hour remaining in this presentation.
This section is presented by a third person. Again, none of the speakers have been introduced.
The presenter is promising to give a history of Christian Nationalism. He references the Roman Church and pulls a quote from Leithart that sounds rather Roman. I quote only the latter part:
… so there can be no Church without sacraments. Since there can be no salvation without the Church, since indeed, the Church is salvation, there is no salvation without the sacraments.
I can see why some might object to this statement, but what does it have to do with Christian Nationalism? The Church is the Bride of Christ so there is a sense in which this is true. Also, the Church is charged with administering the sacraments. Yes, technically salvation is thru the sacrifice of Christ but all those saved by Him are part of His Bride the Church. Again, without context, I feel that this quote is being manipulated by the presenters.
The next section is some history on the Reformation. In the midst of this topic, the presenter interjects another quote by Wolfe. Again, without context. The word “who” in this quote (below) could refer to God or the prince. I can’t tell which, but it makes a huge difference in the meaning of this sentence.
The prince enlivens laws not as an agent of coercion but as the divinely sanctioned vicar of God who binds conscience to just applications of natural law, as one who directs public reason.
The reoccurrence of “the prince’ makes me harken back to Machiavelli. It is worth asking if Wolfe believes Machiavelli’s The Prince was a serious treatise of politics or a satirical document. The former is the view of most academics, but the latter is my position on this work.
The presenter bashes the idea of the prince also being the spiritual leader of the nation. Whether Wolfe advocates this or is just mimicking Machiavelli or this is in a different context altogether is unknown. I think the presenter is trying to equate Wolfe’s ideas with an Anglican view of Christianity where the king is both political and spiritual head of the nation. The U.S. Constitution prohibits this from happening by outlawing a national church. King Saul (and later David & Jesus) exercised the offices of prophet, priest, and king at the same time. This is not the American system but is clearly a biblical idea.
The presenter then quotes some fellow named Dan Fisher for writing,
“[preachers] had been laying the groundwork for the [American] revolution by preaching for years that believers could not separate their religious convictions from their political positions and actions.”
Folks isn’t that what Christian Nationalists are advocating? Religious convictions should not be separated from their political positions and actions. In other words, your faith should be reflected in how you live your life the other six days of the week. What’s wrong with that?
Oh, the last sentence of the pull quote by Fisher is:
It was clear they saw no contradiction in mixing politics and religion.
The presenter keeps going back to Wolfe’s book and contrasting his view with other writings. Folks, it’s really dumb to do this. Who says they are followers of Wolfe? I’ve never met anyone who even knows who he is. I have looked at lots of videos by Vincent James and read stuff by Torba and Wilson and never heard of Wolfe or his ideas mentioned. This is a longform strawman presentation where we get to spank Wolfe like a piñata.
Finally, he gets to his point, “the American Revolution was a violation of Christian Nationalism.”
His thesis is that King James of England was a Christian Nationalist, and the Pilgrims were fleeing to American to escape Christian Nationalism. To these guys at Berean, Christian Nationalists want to destroy our country and establish a monarchy in its place. Sorry, I only met one guy in my life that ever wanted a monarchy in the United States, and he died last year.
Now the presenter is claiming to go to the Bible to see what it says about government. Oh, the time counter is at one hour, 47 minutes. Wanna bet they call themselves a Bible church?
Their first assertion is, “Political power comes ultimately from God but practically from the will of the people.” The presenter goes to the writings of Moses where Moses sets up the rulers of tens, hundreds, and thousands. Then to Saul and then David. He is trying to claim that the Old Testament political system was a republic like ours’.
He then goes to quotes, again and again by Wolfe, concerning the prince. I think it’s clear that Wolfe is not talking specifically about America and how it should be governed but it is an update to The Prince or written in much the same style as a political theory book.
Finally, two hours in, we get to Romans 13, a favorite home to heretics and antinomians that really believed the two-weeks-to-flatten-the-curve BS. After a cursory mention of the passage, we go to secular political theory with Hans Eysenck’s Theory of Government. Oh, another misspelling on their PowerPoint slides as his last name was spelled “Eyseneck”.
In the name of fairness, I went to the fount of all authority in political matters, at least for these presenters, Wikipedia. There I learned that Eysenck forged much of the data used on his work, and no one has been able to replicate key parts of it. The data used for his political information was manipulated as well. Then the presenter goes to several other charts on politics in rapid succession. A biblical model of how we should be governed or what the rules should be followed is no where to be seen. With ten minutes remaining, he gets to a model of American government that emphasizes four points: the rule of law, limited government, government does not control access to God, and salvation is individual.
Part IV
Wow, with eight minutes left we get another part and another presenter. (same guy as Part I.)
Christian Nationalism in not Christian or American
Christian Nationalism is not the answer to our problems.
Christian Nationalism is just another flavor of tyranny.
Have an answer based on biblical principles on which our nation was founded.
Berean Church has carefully cherrypicked Christian Nationalism to make a case that can’t really be made. If they were honest then they would have dealt with Torba’s book on Christian Nationalism as well as Stephen Wolfe’s. Dominion is not mentioned at all in this presentation even thought it is found from the earliest pages of Genesis to Revelation.
Berean Church says that Christian Nationalism is not the answer, but they never offer any alternatives. They are silent on what the Bible says a civil government should do. Should we infer that God doesn’t care?
Again, Berean Church uses pull quotes from one book to try to make their case about all Christian Nationalists. Their claim that all people calling themselves Christian Nationalists advocate for tyranny is ridiculous. Even the things that they quote from Wolfe don’t support that claim. If the Biden and Obama administrations prove anything, it’s that you don’t need a monarchy to live under tyranny. Ditto for Canada and Australia.
Knowing biblical principles on how our nation was founded are great but when folks around us deny the authority of Scripture and the church is silent on today’s social and cultural issues then what good is that? How does the Bible speak to our problems now? Again, Berean Church is silent.
The words of Gary North, R.J. Rushdoony, and others are echoing in my mind, you can’t beat something with nothing. Or if you prefer, the question posed in the 1970’s and 80’s by Francis Schaffer, How Should We Then Live?
Sorry, but I don’t see Christian Nationalism as a quest to force a monarchy onto the United States. I see it as a call for Christians to bring biblical answers to bear on the real world instead of Christians hiding it their pews hoping to be raptured so they won’t have to reap what they have sewn. Christian Nationalism is a call for the Church to get off its butt and redeem the time because the days are evil.
Andrew Torba signs every email that he sends with the words “Christ is King.” He does not advocate for the United States to be ruled by a king because we already have a king, and his name is Jesus. Torba does want Christians to be free from being cancelled by the Left and advocates that we have parallel structures that are truly free of censorship. This is similar to what Saint Patrick did to evangelize Ireland.
Vincent James does not advocate for a monarchy in the United States. However, he does advocate for people to have the same rules for their friends and enemies. He despises double standards; especially, when he is a member of the group being singled out for discriminatory treatment. I think he would agree that men should be judged by the content of their character.
I have read the Boniface Option. It is short, whitty, and has a large dose of sarcasm. It calls for men to be men and laments the societal decay of our nation.
I’m not a follower of anybody critiqued in this presentation except Jesus and they didn’t have much to say about him which is sad. My views on the Bible were formed before there was such a thing as Christian Nationalism and, in some circles, they are even more controversial. The Bible says, “For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him crucified.” Let’s start with that statement and work together as we are able instead of trying to manufacture new ways to unchurch each other.
Last fall, I bought a live album recorded in the 1980’s off the artist’s [Mylon LeFevre] website. Seems he followed his parent’s footsteps and ended up in the ministry. As it turns out, this guy had died about three weeks before I placed my order. Anyway, I ended up on the ministry’s email list. This was my first direct exposure to the Pentecostal end of Christendom in many years.
The artist’s wife is carrying on the ministry and she is palling around with Kenneth Copeland.
Tomorrow, April 5th would have been Mylon’s and my 26th wedding anniversary. It was the day Kenneth and Gloria Copeland, along with my Pastors, George and Terri Pearsons, set me apart and ordained me into full time ministry.
Copeland is a guy I haven’t crossed path with since my second year of college. I had a roommate that played Copeland’s radio show in the dorm room. I’m sure he’s the radio preacher that I heard claim that if you were in prison and gave your life to Christ that not only would God forgive you of your sin, but you would be forgiven in the eyes of man and be released from prison. Apparently, when Jesus makes you free, he really makes you free.
A few days ago, I received a new email update that just blew my mind. I will quote the relevant part below and then we can talk further. I tried to find a URL with the same content but was unable to locate a copy in cyberspace. As a result, I will quote extensively to show that I am responding in context.
God recently instructed me to make a petition for the future of this ministry. We’ve started a new chapter and turned the page. God is writing my story and He’s writing yours too. As we trust Him, it will be a beautiful story. But in order to move forward, we must focus on what we know, NOT on what we don’t know. The Word is always our safe place. God is not a man that He can lie. His Word will never return void. Job 22:28-29 AMPC says we “DECIDE and DECREE a thing, and it shall be established for (us;) and the light [of God’s FAVOR] shall shine upon (our) ways.” Did you get that? We decide, not God. The verse continues to explain when situations arise that tempt us to be discouraged, we SAY, “There is a lifting UP!” So, I declare we’re going UP in this ministry!
Emphasis in the original.
First the biblical passage Job 22: 28 – 29 (KJV)
Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established unto thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways. When men are cast down, then thou shalt say, There is lifting up; and he shall save the humble person.
Who was speaking, to whom, and what was the context?
The book of Job is about a man sorely tested by Satan—with God’s permission—and then three friends of Job try to comfort him by being critical of Job and trying to prove to him that he deserved the punishment.
This chapter of dialogue is spoken by Eliphaz. Eliphaz believed that riches and material blessings were proof of a person following God and being upright. This is a popular myth that many still believe is true to this day. This myth was very evident in the time of Jesus and is seen throughout the Gospels. The belief is that the rich are so because they obey God and are blessed; likewise, the poor are poor for disobedience. Scripture makes it clear that this might be the case but not always. The rich might very well be rich by stealing and being greedy or criminals or obtaining their wealth in immoral ways. A quick read of Psalms or Proverbs makes this abundantly clear. For example, Psalm 73: 12 “Behold, these are the ungodly, who prosper in the world; they increase in riches.” Clearly prosperity does not equal godliness.
In 1710, Matthew Heny stated this on the passage in Job.
The answer of Eliphaz wrongly implied that Job had hitherto not known God, and that prosperity in this life would follow his sincere conversion. The counsel Eliphaz here gives is good, though, as to Job, it was built upon a false supposition that he was a stranger and enemy to God.
OK, so the passage in Job is not spoken by Job or God. The book makes it plain that Job was righteous and did nothing to deserve punishment. Thus, the only righteous characters in Job are Job and God. Every other character in the book is wrong in one way or another. Anyone that understands the book knows that all advice given to Job by his friends was in error. Thus, when you see this passage being brought forth as the way to conduct your life, beware. A yellow or red flag should be waving in your mind.
Let’s go through the paragraph one step at a time.
“God recently instructed me…” Like in an audible voice or via friends or His Word? I grant that God talks more than we listen but …
“We’ve started a new chapter and turned the page.” OK, your husband died, and your life continues.
“God is writing my story and … yours”. We trust Him. We are faithful to Him.
“But…”
Now comes the set-up. There is a sense in which this can be an orthodox Christian thing but not necessarily. She is in essence saying we walk by the light God has given us and we don’t know everything; like maybe the future, but we trust Him.
“The Word is always a safe place.” Really? The Word is a sword. Or if you prefer, “And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.” Matthew 21: 44. The Word shows us our need and God’s remedy. I wouldn’t describe that as “safe.” The use of “safe” here harkens back to Narnia where the question was asked as the whether Aslan was tame.
Then she quotes part of Numbers 23: 19
God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?
And then Isaiah 55: 11
So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
This verse is often understood as God’s Word going forth to either bring men to salvation or hardening their hearts for judgement.
“The special “word” which the prophet has here in mind is the promise, so frequently given, of deliverance from Babylon and return in peace and joy to Palestine. But he carries his teaching beyond the immediate occasion, for the benefit of the people of God in all ages.
Finally, we arrive at the central thesis of the entire email; namely, the verses from Job which I previously quoted.
Thou shalt also decree a thing, and it shall be established unto thee: and the light shall shine upon thy ways.
Job … says we “DECIDE and DECREE a thing, and it shall be established for (us;) and the light [of God’s FAVOR] shall shine upon (our) ways.” Did you get that? We decide, not God.
Red flag alert.
“We decide, not God.”
Folks, this email is claiming that we can tell God to do something, and He MUST do it? Wow. This is a bold and arrogant statement.
The Pulpit Commentary notes that this verse has “a touch of audacity.” No kidding.
Gill’s Exposition states, “Strictly speaking, this is only true of God, whose decrees are unfrustrable, whose counsel shall stand, and the thoughts of his heart be established to all generations; and frequently so it is, according to an usual saying, man appoints, but God disappoints …”
Is this what Matthew 21: 22 means? “And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive.”
Clearly this author would say “yes” with no caveats or restrictions. Name it and claim it. God must do what we decide. Doesn’t that make us God or at least make God, not be God?
Here again there is the implied condition (as in Matthew 7:7) that what is asked is in harmony with the laws and will of God. If it were not so it would not be asked in faith, and every true prayer involves the submission of what it asks to the divine judgment.
Munster’s Hebrew Gospel reads it, “in prayer, and in faith”; and the Arabic version renders it, “in prayer with faith”; both to the same purpose, and aptly express the sense of the words, which design the prayer of faith; or that prayer which is put up in the strength of faith; and is of great avail with God: for whatever is asked in faith, agreeable to the will of God, which is contained in his covenant, word, and promises, and makes for his glory, and the good of his people, shall be given …
Gill’s Exposition
Does God really give us a blank check to give us anything we like? Is He really the giant ATM or Santa Claus in the sky? Must God do what we tell Him?
NOPE
God makes it clear that His ways are not our ways.
For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD. — Isaiah 55:8
For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts. — Isaiah 55: 9
Jesus said if we ask anything of the Father that we shall receive.
And all things, whatsoever ye shall ask in prayer, believing, ye shall receive. — Matthew 21: 22
However, it must be in accordance with His will.
And this is the confidence that we have in him, that, if we ask any thing according to his will, he heareth us: And if we know that he hear us, whatsoever we ask, we know that we have the petitions that we desired of him. — I John 5: 14 – 15
James, the brother of Jesus, said it this way:
“Ye ask, and receive not, because ye ask amiss, that ye may consume it upon your lusts.” — James 4: 3
If you look a little further at the Scriptures, you will see that Eliphaz was wrong. We don’t tell God what to do. He is the Great King. We are to come before him in the name of Jesus and make our request according to his will. Sometimes God will grant our petitions to him, but he is under no obligation to do so. God will do what is best for us and quite often it is the hard way and not the easy one.
“Naming and claiming” or commanding God to do something just because we want it, is the clay spitting in the potter’s face. It’s more than a spiritual tantrum, its open rebellion against God. You can ask God for a million dollars or a new house or a cure for your cancer, but He is under no obligation to give it to you. The Scriptures are clear that we are to depend on Him. If anything, the trails of this life show us just how shallow and superficial such “stuff” is.
In a heartbeat, I’d trade everything I have, just to have my son back. I’d gladly give up my material possessions and my very life to see my son returned, but the truth is I have no control over such things. My wife and I pray daily and weep often that he is lost. His loss is a daily burden on both of us.
God doesn’t promise us a life of easy and prosperity; instead, he asks us to take up our cross and follow him. None of us is promised tomorrow. We certainly don’t have the right to expect anything from God, but he gives us generously as he sees fit.
Lastly, you will find that a form of judgement from God is giving us what we want.
His judgment, at least on this side of eternity, is to give sinners exactly what they want in preparation for the final day of judgment. And this is manifestly just, for sinners not only sin, but they take the extra step of justifying their sin and the sin of others. They approve of sin—calling evil good and good evil—and they encourage others to do so as well [Romans 1] (v. 32).
Prosperity, as the world defines it, is often just a way for God to turn up the heat on folks when judgement day rolls around. Anyone claiming that God must do anything we tell him to do is preaching “another gospel” and not the one delivered once and for all to the saints.
All law is legislating morality. All law is religious. Ditto for other political acts. The is no neutrality. This is a figment of the imagination. Those claiming neutrality are simply using such a claim to force their will on others while trying to stifle any opposition as they impose their morality on others.
Such was the case yesterday when the President of the United States, for the first time in the history of the Republic, purposely dissed any proclamation of Easter and thanking God for so great a salvation. (OK, Obama got close to this, but Joe went even further.) Joe proclaimed Easter Sunday as Transgender day of Visibility. Furthermore, no Christian symbols were allowed on any Easter eggs at the traditional White House Easter Egg Hunt. Yep, I know bunnies and eggs are not really Christian but in our Hallmark culture, the two have been baptized as Easter symbols.
Biden and company have been in an all-out war on Christianity—as was Obama when sleepy Joe was his Vice-President.
Biden—who thinks he can somehow be pro-abortion (for all nine months of the pregnancy)—and a Roman Catholic in good standing is simply an evil man. The spirit of antichrist is the platform of the Democrat Party (and of many Republicans too).
As for the cult of sterility, they are claiming 28 feast days and three months of the Julian Calendar in their attempt to abolish Christianity.
Fox News Digital found at least 28 other related holidays celebrated in the U.S., including International Asexuality Day, International Day of Pink, Day of Silence, Harvey Milk Day, Pansexual and Panromantic Awareness Day and International Drag Day.
There are also entire months devoted to LGBT causes or commemorations, including Pride Month in June, LGBT History Month in October and Transgender Awareness Month in November.
Biden should not be flying the rainbow flag or proclaiming any fag days to start with. Transgenderism is even more evil than homosexuality. It is a false and destructive religion. Changing one’s name is a sign of it being a religion. Thinking that one can change their gender is hubris and a type on mental illness. Thinking its God’s fault because He made you the wrong gender is blasphemy. On the face of it, transgender ideology violates at least half of the Ten Commandments.
To promote transgenderism (and a lot of other false crap in our society) is to tear down the Christian roots of our country.
Oh, we have known that Sunday March 31st, 2024, was Easter Sunday for at least the last four hundred years. The church calendar was figured out to the year 8,000 back in the 1600’s. So, there’s no excuse for a conflict… unless you want to have one.
Megan Rapinoe; aka the purple haired girl formerly on the women’s (can I use that term Megan?) soccer team; aka the girl who in her last game tore her ACL and claimed there was no God, is shooting off her mouth again. This time her vile stink was slung at a fellow women’s (again, is this offensive to you Megan?) national team player. Check this out.
U.S. Women’s National Team midfielder Korbin Albert issued an apology on social media after she liked and shared posts mocking soccer star Megan Rapinoe and the LGBTQ+ community.
Fans on social media noticed Albert, 20, had liked and shared several videos on TikTok and Instagram that included anti-LGBTQ+ messaging, including one post making fun of Rapinoe’s injury in the final game of her career.
Albert, it should be noted, wears Megan’s former number 15. Rapinoe skewered her and put her on blast….
“For people who want to hide behind ‘my beliefs’ I would just ask one question, are you making any type of space safer, more inclusive, more whole, any semblance of better, bringing the best out of anyone?” Rapinoe wrote in her Instagram story.
The message continued, “Because if you aren’t, all you believe in is hate. And kids are literally killing themselves because of this hate. Wake, TF up! Yours truly, #15.”
Rapinoe concluded her story by writing, “For all my trans homie enduring this horrific treatment day in and day out I see you and hear you and I am WITH YOU.”
Wow. This is coming from the tolerant left? No surprise. Albert I will note attends Notre Dame University and was likely raised in a Roman Catholic (oh my, bad Megan…. hateful right-wing cult) family. Megan, being the nasty vile person she is, has now sic’d her hateful followers on Albert. Her followers have one goal, to seek and destroy anyone who dares speak out or have an opinion that isn’t Group Think. I would love to see the DM’s (direct messages) Albert has received, I bet it’s full of hate.
Congrats Megan. You won. You aren’t even Transgender, but you feel you must lead a small army of folks who have massive mental health issues like yours, to destroy any opposition or contrary opinions. At my business, thanks to your soldiers, we no longer have a men’s and women’s bathrooms, they are “restrooms.” The building is populated almost entirely females, as some offices have private bathrooms for their staff. The female employees (oh wait…ummm persons with a vagina) have been complaining that the toilet seats have urine on them, or the floor has urine on it. Congrats Megan… you won! At my favorite Mexican Restaurant, we have a women’s restroom, and something called a family restroom. I guess a family that pee’s together, stays together? Which restroom does the biological male choose Megan?
As far as hate goes? How about stop inflicting hate on groups you do not like? It’s obvious you hate white men and women; however, allow me to point out, the only, and I mean only group who supports trans folks, are older white men and women. Check the polling data out. You want to know what groups hate you, Megan? Black, Hispanic and Asians. Big Time. Again, check it out. Want to know what other groups hate your LBGTQ lifestyle? Middle Eastern folks. Again, check it out, coming out and being discovered as a member of the alphabet soup can lead to death. Yup. Afghanistan? They are going to bring back public stoning. Oh, check out how their judicial system works. They think you committed a crime… you are guilty, it’s a sham trial. But hey, the USA is terrible right?
Hate religion? Ok, then religious holidays no longer apply to you! No time and a half pay because you do not believe in a God. You are required to report to work and work you will on that day. It shouldn’t be a big deal working on Christmas, right? BTW should we cancel Christmas altogether? Last I checked it’s a Mr. and Mrs. Claus not trans/gay/lesbian couple. So, let’s get rid of it right?
Megan…may I make a suggestion; you won’t listen but let me try. It’s called “live and let live”. You should understand some folks will not support your lifestyle (you are married to another woman, so I call it a lesbian “marriage”) however since it is the law of the land (at least for now), I am happy for you and your partner. I attend church services once a week… how about we agree to a cease fire? As far as trans folks go, if you are over 18 by all means you do you. I just want folks to understand the consequences down the road, as I feel this isn’t discussed at all. If a bakery won’t do a wedding cake etc. for LBGTQ folks, find another one? Why try to destroy that business? The logic is simple, an LBGTQ friendly store likely won’t make a GOP/Nazi/KKK etc. cake. Just find a different store. Some people believe in God, others don’t. The believers go to church or watch it… the non-believers do not attend. Frankly it doesn’t bother me. But why not live and let live?
Finally, I want to run a scenario by you Megan. Say its 4 years ago, you are still playing professionally. I join your team. I am a 27-year-old white male biologically, but since I started puberty blockers and doing estrogen injections, as far as your sport is concerned, I’m cleared to partake. I make the team since I possess a body and skill set superior to your teammates. Of course, I have your support and likely some of your teammates, right? I’m trans so you better support me, right? It doesn’t matter if I start, come off the bench, or seldom play because I made the team. The game/practice ends, and we go back to the locker room. It’s time to dress down, shower etc. I have long hair, and have shaved everywhere else on my body, but I have all my male parts still. You going to be completely naked around me? You ok with me being naked around you? Would your teammates care? Carli Lloyd seemed fairly outspoken that she wouldn’t accept me. What would your reaction be Megan?
Best part Megan is you don’t have to react. You have retired. Your safe space is the 5-million-dollar apartment you and your partner Sue Bird own. It’s likely one of many properties you call your own. The biggest decision you have to make is what Michelin Star restaurant to eat at. You likely attend an exclusive gym for only the super wealthy. You have zero interaction with the unwashed masses you claim to care about. You are the worst kind of person. You’re just another limousine liberal trying to tell the rest of us how to live. Be better. Start a support group for trans people. Share what trans people want/need to feel included. Quit glorifying countries that hate folks like you. Need I remind you Britney Griner was arrested, jailed, and convicted in Russia likely because she is a girl, black, and a lesbian. Be an agent of change. Stop your hate.
Jake the Snake
Editor’s Comment: I think Korbin Albert should have stuck to her original comments. Megan’s real problem is God not Albert. Megan doesn’t like being reminded that she is wrong. (See Romans 1:21-32) She resorts to blustering and bullying and tries to cancel those that disagree with her. Too bad. It’s curious that often the loudest voice is the one that’s in the wrong. They hope their volume will drown out the rest of us.
Democrats are livid that their Sacrament of Abortion suffered a major setback when Roe v Wade was undone by the Supreme Court. This threw the issue back to the states. Each state has different laws on the subject. Some like California have enshrined not only abortion but infanticide as the law of the land while others have essentially eliminated the abominable practice all together.
Donald Trump is responsible for putting justices on the Court that had the principles to do the right thing. Now, Trump is trying a dangerous gambit that has little upside. He again, and I say again because he floated some similar rhetoric many months ago, is trying to get a national agreement on abortion limitations. We just got the issue sent back to the states and now Trump wants it Federalized via Congressional action. Whiskey Tango Orange Man?
Trump wants four things in the federal abortion law, a limit to 16 weeks (which we concede is a major improvement on California, New York, and many other states) and he wants the exception clause of rape, incest, and life of the mother.
First, why does Trump expect candidates for Constitutional office–the House and Senate–to take campaign positions on a clearly state issue? If the Supreme Court couldn’t find abortion in the Constitution, then why should Congress claim they have the power to add it unilaterally?
Second, at 16 weeks, all we are doing is trying to reinstate abortion as a form of birth control. Less than one percent of abortions when it was legal under Roe were for such situations as rape, incest, or life of the mother. The few have always been the grounds for slaughtering the many.
If Trump is simply trying to illustrate that Democrats are hellbent on abortion being legal everywhere, for all nine months of pregnancy, and daring them to defend this extreme position, maybe he makes a political point, but I see weak-kneed Republicans as terrified that Roe is gone. Like many other issues in politics, it was safe to fundraise on an issue that they have never been willing to correct via the legislative process. Repeal and replace Obamacare being the other example on the Republican side of the ledger, immigration on the Democrat side. As stated before, politicians would rather campaign on an issue than actually try to fix it.
Oh, 16 weeks is on the edge of viability under current medical knowledge and about the time folks begin noticing the “baby bump” on pregnant women.
When Roe was legal, Planned Parenthood would never report cases of rape and incest to law enforcement so what makes you think they will now? They will just call it that in order to kill the baby, but no police reports will be generated. They will hide behind HIPAA, and other privacy laws and it will be back to business as usual.
Molach god of child sacrifice
The only potentially moral reason for abortion is an argument of self-defense in the rare case of the mother’s life being balanced with her child’s. The reality is that the life of the mother is the only time a decision is made between a woman and her doctor.
Trump is wrong to float this idea even if it is just to flush-out the extreme views of the Democrats. Abortion is wrong be it 16 hours, weeks, or in the case of California 16 months. Abortion is wrong in cases or rape and incest. Better to punish the offenders and place the baby up for adoption if mom can’t care for the child.
Lastly, Trump just galls me when he uses the Disney lie of following your heart when dealing with abortion.
But I tell people, No. 1, you have to go with your heart. You have to go with your heart.
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? — Jeremiah 17:9
Sorry Donald but you can’t be a child of God and offer your children to Moloch. Furthermore, asking God to Bless America when we serve other gods is using God’s name in vain. Abortion is a violation of several of the Ten Commandments in one act. Any nation supporting such abominations is on the chopping block of divine judgement.
Last Thursday I did something that I haven’t done in a long time, I went to a concert. The location was in nearby Troy Montana. The Community Baptist Church there was sponsoring a free concert by a Christian rock band called “Disciple.”
I looked the group up on the Internet and found that the band was similar to ‘Seventh Day Slumber.” If this doesn’t help, then “Stryper” will get you close. The band is on the fringes of what I can handle on the rock/metal spectrum. I have heard “Wolves at the Gate,” and that group is beyond what I’m comfortable listening to. In my mind there is still a difference between singing and screaming.
Playable Concert Sample
My first challenge was finding the venue of the concert. I went to said Baptist church and found literally two people on the property. They were in a room that was visible from the parking lot. I looked around the church and found no one else. I decided to ask the fellows about the concert but as I approached the door, I heard them praying the pray about “Lord let me accept the things I cannot change…” In my mind I knew I had stumbled upon a 12-step meeting. Instead of asking for help, I opted to head for the exit. On the wall near the exit door was a Disciple poster and an autographed guitar.
I figured that the venue must be elsewhere in this town of 800 souls. I looked up the concert on Disciple’s website and found that the venue was not the church but a community building. I went to the listed address and found an empty building with no lights on. Then I looked up the venue by name and found yet a third address. This was the multipurpose/basketball arena for the local high school. I knew by the number of cars in and around the building that after three tries, I had finally found the correct location.
Booked with Disciple was a character named Ryan Ries. I’m not sure what Ryan was all about because by the time I found the location, his part was over. Per the Internet, Ryan has a group called the Whosoevers that works with youth.
From what I have heard, some folks have issues with Ryan’s approach to the gospel and whether he is orthodox in his theology. I was hoping to hear what he had to say but alas I was too late. I have seen one or two cars in my area with stickers about this group, so I know some of my neighbors support him.
Oh, in the midst of trying to find the third location, I got a call phone from one of our crack staff members in California filling me in on the results of California’s Super Tuesday vote. I had to end the call prematurely because I was entering the venue.
I found a very different set-up from what you might expect for a concert. I entered the building from the north side. On my left was the basketball backboard and net. Under them was a merchandise table selling t-shirts and CDs. On the right, were bleachers. The bleachers were pulled out so that folks count sit on them. Towards the front, just past center court, was an area with a computer and mixing board. This area was roped off.
The stage was erected under the opposite basketball backboard. A rope was stretched across the front of the stage about four feet back. Thus, people had the option to sit in the bleachers on one side of the arena with the band on their right or they could be standing on the basketball floor in any area not roped off. This allowed me to be about eight feet from the guitarist on the left side of the stage. I would estimate at least 450 were in attendance but it may have been as many as 600. Not bad for a town of 800 people.
Prior to the concert’s beginning, a multimedia presentation about the band was displayed. The multimedia presentation continued thru the concert. It made the concert seem like an immersive music video with many images flashed on the screen. Also, on the screen were most of the words of the songs as they were being sung. I found this helpful, especially since I had only heard one of their songs one time prior to this performance.
The band sang about eight songs and then the lead singer gave a talk about giving yourself to God. He was especially concerned with turning the hearts of the Prodigal Son. As the father of a Prodigal Son, I get this need as well as the emptiness you feel because one that you love has been snatched by the enemy. The difference of course is that God can turn the heart of the Prodigal, but I cannot.
He also spoke of the recent loss of his dad and the reality that once we’re gone, someone else gets to go thru all our stuff. Most of what we accumulate in our life has no value to anyone else. Stuff mostly gets trashed or donated and only a few things may be of interest to anyone else. This story was a challenge to store treasure in heaven and not trash on earth.
The band then played a few more songs and left the stage. As is often the case, they then returned for an encore of about four more songs.
When the band feigned the end on the concert, they went behind the stage. One of the band members found the Trojan head (the high school mascot) behind the stage and return for the encore wearing it for the first song.
The concert was really free, not even a “love offering” was taken. The only cost to me was the $32 that I spent on 3 CDs that I have yet to listen to.
Lastly, since crossing from Montana to Idaho moves me from Mountain to Pacific Time, I got home 20 minutes before I left Troy, driving the speed limit all the way.
Please note lyrics on screen in the background
Disciple seems like a decent group of guys trying to reach people with the Gospel as they understand it. I would go see them again but there’s no chance my wife will go with me. Oh, they do have a website that has acoustic versions of many of their songs available. Perhaps a mellower take on their music would at least let me share it with my bride.
The closest they get to the old California HQ in Elk Grove is Vacaville on March 16th.
Folks, frankly I’m tired of all the nonsense about this conflict. However, the two articles that I will dive into in mere moments are worth a look, if nothing else but to see that our way of looking at the world is very different from that of the people propelling this conflict. Our categories of thinking and reasoning in the West are not capable of understanding this conflict. We should abandon all hope of a rational understanding of this conflict and embrace the craziness as a foreign worldview.
Theory One
The first story is from World Net Daily. If you don’t understand the theological presuppositions of this website, then you might miss the point of what you are about to read. These guys are all-in on Hal Lindsey’s Late Great Planet Earth—except for the part about it happening 40 years after Israel became a nation—which clearly never happened. They are Premillennial and Dispensational. As a result, they are very pro-Zionist. On occasion, these assumptions have a way of making them look foolish.
(Please note that just because these guys believe this stuff doesn’t mean that it can be found in the Bible because it can’t, but it is entertaining.)
Anyway…
While political experts worldwide pontificate on the war in Gaza, most have overlooked Hamas’ explicitly stated reason for its Oct. 7 attacks on Israel, revealed on Day 100 of the war.
Incredibly, according to the terror group’s military spokesman, it has to do with attempting to prevent the “ceremony of the Red Heifer” – a mysterious event of great meaning to both Jews and Christians.
“We look back 100 days to remember the educated, the complicit, and the incapacitated among the world powers governed by the law of the jungle, reminding them of an aggression that reached its peak against our path (Al-Quds) and Al-Aqsa, with the start of its actual temporal and spatial division, and the “bringing of red cows as an application of a detestable religious myth designed for aggression against the feelings of an entire nation in the heart of its Arab identity, and the path of its prophet (the Night Journey) and Ascension to heaven.
The red cows or heifer is related to the establishment of the mythical third temple in Jerusalem.
The “red cows” referred to by the Hamas leader were five red female calves brought to Israel in September 2022 by Boneh Israel, an organization that connects Christian lovers of Israel to the Holy Land, working under the auspices of the Temple Institute, an organization in Israel focusing on establishing the Third Temple.
Yep, some Jews and Christian folks like those at World Net Daily want to see the Jews build a new temple in Jerusalem and reestablish animal sacrifices. Talk about bringing on the old-time religion!
Obeida continued, focusing his ire on Israel for aspiring to build the prophesied Third Temple:
“We will not tire or falter in calling all the free people of the nation to rise to support their Aqsa and the path of their prophet, which the criminal Zionists are practically advancing towards destroying and establishing their temple. This is what we have chosen with our blood in Gaza for 100 days and for which the epic of October 7th was about.”
Zionists of both Jewish and Christian persuasions believe the mosque on the Temple Mount must be leveled and that it will be replaced with a Third Temple. Once this is constructed, they believe that animal sacrifices of the Old Testament will again commence.
Christians support this idea because they believe that a third Temple is necessary to usure in the return of Jesus and institute Armageddon. Oh, these Christians believe that most Jews living in Israel will be killed as a result of all this and then somehow those remaining will acknowledge Jesus as their Messiah.
Here is more …
Islamists do indeed perceive the five red cows from Texas as a dire threat. Arab-language media covered Obeida’s speech extensively, focusing on the red heifers. Both Cairo24 and Al Jazeera reported on the speech, emphasizing that the heifers had been acquired and brought to Israel by evangelical Christians.
After the announcement of the arrival of the cows last year, Hamas reacted almost immediately, warning that the potential Jewish ritual posed a threat to Al Aqsa. This warning came during the Jewish high holidays. Arab-language media, including the “Al Manar” channel, which is closely associated with Hezbollah, are reporting on the intention of the Temple organizations to make a sacrifice on the Temple Mount. The Hamas journal Al–Rassala published an article claiming that the slogan “Al Aqsa is in Danger” is no longer sufficient because the Israelis are already working on manifesting the Temple rituals that would “Judaize the holy mosques.”
For Christians holding to a premillennial view of eschatology, even just one red heifer arriving in Jerusalem means the Rapture is imminent. They believe a Third Temple will be built during the End Times, at which point all the other prophesied events will follow.
The fact that Israel is a clearly secular nation and not one established on the basis of the Old Testament’s Laws doesn’t move the needle in this discussion.
Theory 2
Theory Two is one based on the idea that Israel is not bound to uphold the Ten Commandments.
Theory Two is a mixture of things unrelated to Theory One but interesting in its own right.
In a startling reappraisal of the situation in Israel, former U.S. Ambassador Chas Freeman described the official narrative of the October 7 attacks on Israel as a “cover story for genocide” – backed by “hard line pro-Israel American leaders.”
Speaking on December 26 to behavior analyst Thomas Karat of SaltCube Analytics, he described the Israeli reaction to the October 7 assault which triggered the Gaza invasion. Speaking of the assault which triggered the Gaza invasion, he said:
The Israeli response is essentially to conduct a genocide in Gaza. They are attempting to expel or murder all the Palestinians there. This is a crime against humanity under international law, but Israel justifies it with a cover story, which is that it is going after Hamas.
The mainstream media tells us that the war in Gaza was triggered by the slaughter of Israeli citizens attending a music festival, by the Islamic militia Hamas. Instead, it appears many Israelis were killed by their own army, following a secretive government doctrine known as “The Hannibal Directive.”
Freeman points out how Israel’s war in Gaza began with a lie.
Reflecting extensive research by independent journalist Max Blumenthal, Freeman refers to the “outlandish music festival… taking place beside a concentration camp” at which over a thousand Israelis lost their lives.
“The people who were killed there were largely killed, it appears, by hellfire missiles and by other undisciplined fire by Israeli forces”
Citing extensive Israeli sources, Blumenthal was accused by an Israeli journalist from Ha’Aretz of spreading a “conspiracy theory” – about the fact that the Israeli army bombed Israeli houses and even its own military base with tank shells and missiles fired from Apache helicopters.
Whilst Hamas did indeed kill Israeli civilians during its military action, a month later, Ha’aretz confirmed the Grayzone report as true, admitting that it was Israeli action which killed many of its own people. It should also be understood that most Israelis of fighting age, in civilian clothes or not, were considered by Hamas to be combatants because they are almost all reservists or otherwise in the Israeli military as required by law.
The reason for this action is said to be the secretive “Hannibal Directive,” which dictates that Israelis taken captive should be killed by the military rather than left in the hands of Palestinian militants.
An Israeli helicopter pilot quoted by Ha’aretz supported the charge Israelis had been murdered by their own army according to this Israeli government doctrine.
Freeman claims the Hannibal Directive led to most of the deaths on the day, as it dictates, “rather than get into bargaining over a hostage exchange, you should just kill the Israeli hostages along with their captors. And that was also a factor here.”
Freeman recalls earlier remarks of now Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, saying
“I think his exact statement was he hoped for a war which would provide an excuse for the final removal of all Palestinians from the land of Israel as claimed by Israel.”
Freeman reminds listeners that Israel is unique for two reasons: “It has no borders” – a startling claim evidenced in the Israeli press here – and it is led by Netanyahu’s Likud Party whose “charter calls for Israel to extend from the river to the sea.”
This phrase, which is now mistakenly charged as some sort of Palestinian endorsement of genocide, was in fact quite the opposite. It is a Zionist endorsement of genocide against Palestinians.
Conclusion
Folks, I find it interesting that both of these theories or explanations of the current war are probably true but likely incomplete reasons for what we are seeing.
Yes, I personally know Jews that are all-in on a Third Temple and believe it will happen someday. That Christian Zionists are supporting this too is not surprising. However, this has nothing to do with Biblical prophecy or the Return of Christ.
On October 7th, did Israeli forces fire on their own so they would not be taken as hostages? I think this is possible. That Israel would negotiate with Hamas on the issue of hostages is unusual and not how their government used to operate. Israel has been provoking Palestinian people for many years and systematically pushing them out of areas that they once occupied.
That Benjamin Netanyahu’s political party slogan is “from the river to the sea” is hysterical to me when said slogan is widely reported in the United States as being anti-Semitic. Guess Jews can say it with impunity but not anybody else.
I really hadn’t planned on getting into this fray until I read an article by Michael Brown. Brown gets it so wrong that I felt compelled to chime in. Below are quotes from Brown’s article on World Net Daily unless otherwise noted.
What did commentator Candace Owens mean when she posted that “Christ is King” in the midst of a very public dispute with her Daily Wire employer Ben Shapiro? I’m not going to enter into the details of that dispute, other than to say I agree with Shapiro’s concerns.
Here, I want to focus on Owens posting the words “Christ is King” on X (formerly Twitter).
In a previous post, she quoted the words of Jesus that “you cannot serve both God and money,” causing many to wonder if this was a dig on Jewish people, who are allegedly money hungry.
I was going to block quote Mr. Brown but decided to take this one section at a time.
OK so here is the first break with my position, Brown agrees with Ben Shapiro. Shapiro is all in on Israel’s war with Hamas and has even defended Israel’s use of nuclear weapons and genocide in the name of self-defense.
Mr. Brown’s article is on a website run by Christians that hold to a Premillennial view of eschatology. Their view is that the current nation of Israel is a rebirth of the Old Testament nation by that name and that modern-day Israel is prophetically necessary to usher in the Return of Jesus Christ. This is hooey. The biblical nation of Israel ceased to exist in 70 AD. The Jews of today (with few exceptions) are not ethnically related to the Jews of 2,000 years ago. Furthermore, Jews need to come to God just the way the rest of us do, through His son, Jesus the Christ.
For those wondering what could be wrong with proclaiming “Christ is King,” the unfortunate reality is that this beautiful, biblically based truth has been hijacked by elements of the extreme religious right, often with antisemitic implications.
Apparently for Brown, when a person says, “Jesus is Lord” or “Christ is King,” they are being antisemitic. Brown seems to believe the Dispensational view that Jews can come to God without believe in Jesus. Sorry dude but that is not in accord with Scripture. If there is any way to God without going through Jesus, then Jesus died in vain and thus our faith is null and void.
“That chant is now a calling card of Nick Fuentes and America First – a podcast, conference and community within the broader white Christian nationalist movement. It also happens to be a core proclamation of Christians through the centuries.
This paragraph is a train wreck of mashed-up stuff. I will try to unpack this a little bit.
First, who cares about this Nick Fuentes guy. I looked him up on the Internet and the first hits I got were websites attacking Nick Fuentes such as the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). These guys hate Christians and anyone on the right side of the political aisle. As a high-profile Christian on social media, if you’re not on their bad list then I doubt you stand for the right things.
Fuentes once had dinner with Donald Trump and Kanye West. Fuentes has a group called America First Foundation. It was founded in 2020. Four years after Trump was elected on a platform of America First.
America First Foundation’s purpose is:
Our country is having a crisis of faith. We’ve lost faith in God, in our institutions, and in our destiny as a people. This absence has left the foundational pillars of America in ruins. Immigration has spiraled into a mass invasion, eroding our identity as Americans. Our cities, once shining achievements of our prosperous civilization, are now symbols of decline and decay. Our people have been taught to hate themselves and their ancestors, all the while being encouraged to embrace degeneracy and sin.
Our forefathers created this nation with their blood, sweat, and tears. Their struggle produced a country rooted in Christ, family, and virtue. Following in their footsteps, we aim to restore those lost values while building a happy, healthy, and prosperous future. Much like our ancestors, we strive to create a home with dignity and reverence for God.
While we take inspiration from the past, our movement is focused on the future as we plot a new course for America in the decades and even centuries to come. We are tapping into the creativity of our nation’s young Christian men, born and raised in a technologically rich, but spiritually poor era. It is these visionaries who will remake the American character, grounding it in Christian virtue and societal excellence. America First is carving a path forward that is truly revolutionary. With your continued help and support, this movement can actualize its vision for the future, forging a new version of America, worthy of our posterity.
We live in an era of Critical Race Theory (CRT) and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI). These are direct attacks on Christianity, Christian Culture (Western Culture), and American Values. Was America ever a perfect country? Nope. But the Left is openly tearing down the last vestiges of what America once was in the names of socialism, communism, and a bunch of other _isms. Mr. Brown thinks pushing back against the Liberal onslaught of evil by me or Fuentes or Candice Owens or whoever is wrong. Why? I guess things are supposed to get worse and worse until Jesus returns. Many in his camp hold to this perverse view that to oppose evil is to delay the return of Christ.
Also, where and how did Fuentes get ownership of the slogan “America First”? I thought to love one’s country was called patriotism. If God put you in a particular country, then to love your country is to agree with God that His purpose in placing you in a particular place and time is good.
Brown then starts in with rhetoric about the white Christian nationalist movement. What a loaded term. I guess white people can’t have a voice in today’s America? At least that is what Mr. Brown seems to imply. The Liberal message is clear, if you are white, you have no voice. Shut-up because all that is wrong is your fault. If you’re a Christian, ditto. It’s all your fault so shut up. If you’re for America, then you are racist so shut up. However, being for war in Ukraine or Israel at the expense of the US is OK? Supporting marriage as between a man and woman is racist and hateful but gay or trans whatever is honorable? These messages in our culture today are symptoms of great evil and rot in our nation.
Oh, my other thought is when did Fuentes become a name for a white guy? Thought that was a Hispanic name. Then again, the “Proud Boys” were led by a Hispanic guy but somehow, they are white supremacists anyway. Seems like white is a very malleable category. Mr. Brown seems to think the best position for white folks is grabbing their ankles and says, “Please sir, may I have some more.”
“When I say ‘Christ is King,’ I mean something very different from what Fuentes means. While there is a long history of Christian support for violent racism – even using that very same language – a proper theological understanding of ‘Christ is King’ ought to compel us to live at peace with our neighbors.”
Mr. Brown, who doesn’t want to live at peace with their neighbor?
Last I checked, Kanye West was a black guy that loved Jesus. He was with Fuentes who claims to love Jesus at the dinner with Trump who also claims to love Jesus. If he was as racist as you imply, why would he choose to hang out with a black guy?
Kanye West
Oh, by-the-way, loving Jesus is the way to racial harmony and the solution in the Middle East wars.
I didn’t see anywhere that Fuentes is advocating for armed conflict or violence or race wars. To say Christians, have a long history of racism and violence is very provocative and demonstrably untrue, at least in terms of a body count.
More people died in the 20th Century as a result of beliefs underpinned by Darwin and his survival of the fittest than in all the religious wars in the history of the world. Darwin is the basis of humanism, eugenics, communism, and socialism. The body counts of abortion, Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and others could be close to a billion souls lost in the last century. It is estimated that 3.5 million people died as a result of all religious wars in the history of the planet. Clearly, no comparison.
Furthermore, more people are in slavery today than ever in the history of the planet but because we can get electric cars and iPhones cheaper, we look the other way. Fuentes is opposed to tyranny and slavery, but Mr. Brown says Fuentes is a bad guy? Seems like Brown is setting up a Fuentes as a strawman so he can beat him like a pinata? Then Brown is challenging Candice Owens to agree with him or else. Oh, yea. Candice Owens is black, or at least looks to be nonwhite to me, so how is she throwing in with white Christian nationalists? I think Mr. Brown is very confused.
This last part is most instructive.
But without a doubt, there is a growing minority that connects “America first” with the proclamation of “Christ is King” in a way that perverts the very meaning of those Jesus-exalting words.
Yes, Jesus is King and will always be King. He was born a King, died a King, reigns in heaven as King, and will return as King – in fact, as King of kings and Lord of lords (Revelation 19:16). For myself, as Jewish follower of Jesus, I unashamedly proclaim Him as the Messianic King and the Savior and Lord of all. And yes, in His name and authority we are called to go and make disciples of the nations (Matthew 28:18-20).
But to use “Christ is King” as a political slogan, especially one with racist and antisemitic overtones, is to bring disgrace on that holy and beautiful name.
At the end of his article, Brown finally exposes the defect of his theology. Jesus is just the Savior of your soul. For him, all this Jesus stuff is just spiritual. It has no earthly application. Brown cherry picks the Great Commission as the totality of the mission of the Christian Church because Jesus reigns only in Heaven.
Brown is the one denying Scripture. Clearly, he doesn’t understand the meaning of the Ascension of Christ or His Kingdom. Jesus is sitting on the Right hand of the Father ruling the nations now. Jesus will continue to rule until all nations submit to His Lordship. Brown is blinded by the Dispensational presuppositions that he is trying to impose on the Bible. Sorry Mr. Brown but they aren’t there.
Christian Nationalists want biblical values to be the values of our country, not secular humanism or socialism or communism. God has blessed us as a nation to the extent that we honor and obey His Law. We are currently under God’s judgement for disobeying Him. Christians, including Christian nationalists, want limited government and the freedom to worship God. They want God welcome into the public square not cancelled from it along with His followers. The basis of our Republic was once the Ten Commandments and needs to be again.
Some folks believe that they should actively work to oppose evil in our society and make our laws and values a reflection of God’s Revelation. In short, transform the culture. Some of us are having a healthy discussion as to whether we should use the model of St. Patrick or St. Boniface. We are working to answer the question of Francis Schaeffer, “How should we then live?”
Meanwhile Mr. Brown wants to sit it out and hope the Rapture happens, so we won’t reap what we’ve sewn. Sorry but Jesus ain’t coming back in your lifetime or that of your grandchildren so what now? If all you want to do is wait around for a third temple or some other nonsense, wake up. Scofield was wrong. Hal Lindsey was wrong. You are wrong. Matthew 24 was fulfilled 2,000 years ago.
Some of us hope to leave the world a better and more righteous place than we found it. We must try but the results are God’s not ours.
Ben Shapiro demands that Israel’s interests supersede those of the United States. If you dare to disagree then he starts calling folks racists. Sorry but I and many others dissent. I think the US should stay out of this war.
Meanwhile, Brown only wants us to be involved due to heretical theology. Brown wants us all in for Israel because he thinks we need to bless Israel to be blessed. (Zionism is a part of his dispensational/premillennial theology.) Sorry, but the New Testament Church is true Israel not the folks using that name today that live in Palestine or whatever you want to call Judea in this day and age.
Candice Owens is right that Christ is King. The problem is that our fellow Americans no longer believe that. This is not a race issue, it’s a heart issue. Until Christians live as Christ commanded seven days a week, don’t expect things to get any better. For Mr. Brown to essentially call Candice Owens a white Christian nationalist is beyond laughable.
