Home » Posts tagged 'politics'

Tag Archives: politics

Christians & Union Membership: Religious Objectors Opt Out?

The Bible teaches that Christians should not be part of a labor union, for reasons that include those I discussed in my post “Christians and Labor Unions: An Unequal Yoke.”

King James Bible picture open Christians labor union

or

labor union communism socialism Christian fist raised

What rights does a religious objector to union membership have in the United States?  We will look at that question in this post. (Note: I am NOT a lawyer and I am NOT giving you legal advice. If you have a legal question about labor unions, please talk to a lawyer at the National Right to Work Foundation.)

Your Rights Concerning Labor Unions in a Right to Work State

If you live in a Right to Work state, it is very easy for you to avoid being part of a labor union.  Big Labor has a very limited ability to attempt to coerce or compel anyone to join it or force you to give it money in Right to Work states.  Whether you have a religious objection or you simply do not like unions, perhaps because of Biblical political views favoring freedom and a free market, nobody can force you to either join a union or force you to pay dues or any equivalent in order to work.

I know of someone who was residing in a state that had just passed a right to work law.  This person (we will use the generic singular English pronoun “he” without necessarily specifying this person’s gender, and call him “Joe.”) had gotten a government job at a college in a state that had recently passed a Right to Work law.  Without Joe’s consent, the labor union took dues out of Joe’s first paycheck.  Joe was going to file a religious objection and contacted the National Right to Work Foundation.  However, the lawyers at the Right to Work Foundation pointed out to Joe that his state had recently passed a Right to Work law.  Consequently, the labor union had no right to compel him, or anyone else at his job, to pay dues. He did not need to file a religious objection at all, but could simply ask for his money back and explain that he did not need to pay the union because of the Right to Work law.  Joe followed their advice, and after some time the union refunded him the dues that had illegally been taken from his paycheck without his consent.  Not that long afterwards an email was sent to all college employees–many, many people–stating that union dues would no longer be taken automatically from everyone’s paycheck; instead, people had to affirmatively consent to having the dues–which were now voluntary–taken out.  Only a minority of Joe’s coworkers (so it seems) voluntarily chose to give the union the money that they had forced everyone to pay before, but until Joe objected, the union had illegally been taking huge amounts of money from every or almost every college employee.  Joe’s taking a stand for Biblical, Christian principles likely cost the pro-abortion, pro-sodomy, anti-Biblical authority union millions of dollars as they were no longer able to illegally continue to take money from everyone–something they had been doing for some time in defiance of the new laws in Joe’s state.

Your Rights Concerning Labor Unions in a Non-Right to Work State

Let us say that you live in a state that does not have a Right to Work law.  What can you do?  Even in such states, secular people cannot be forced to become members of a labor union or to pay full dues–they can only be forced to pay a smaller “agency fee.”  What about a Christian with a religious objection? Based on Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and principles affirmed in the First Amendment and reaffirmed in Janus v. AFSCME, religious objectors, even in states without Right to Work protections, cannot be forced to:

1.) Join labor unions as a condition of employment.

2.) Pay union dues.

3.) Pay an equivalent to union dues to a a charity.

The legal reasoning for these facts is explained in the excellent article by Blaine Hutchinson and Bruce N. Cameron in Baylor Law Review vol. 75.2 (2023): “Jamus’s Solution for Title VII Religious Objectors.”  (Again, I am not a lawyer and I am not giving you legal advice.)  If your sincerely held religious beliefs prevent you from being able to join or fund a union in good conscience, you cannot be discriminated against any more than you can be discriminated against because of your skin color.  “We will not hire you because of your religious beliefs that do not allow you in good conscience to join a labor union and pay it dues” and “We will not hire you because you are black” are equally illegal in all fifty of these United States.

This writer knows of someone who lives in a non-right to work state (we will call this person “John,” and refer to the person as “him,” without necessarily specifying that the person is a man, not a woman.)  When John was hired at his new job at a large company, he was given a large amount of paperwork to sign as part of his onboarding.  One page of the paperwork said that he was agreeing to join the union and to pay union dues.  He told the Human Resources person who was doing the onboarding that he did not consent to join the union, nor to pay union dues, because he had a religious objection.  The HR manager told John that he “must” join the union and must complete the union paperwork.  He consequently completed the paperwork, but instead of checking the boxes to join the union wrote on the paper that he respectfully declined to join because of his religious objection.  That was as far as things went, and John was left alone for a few years; he was not a union member (unlike the vast majority of his coworkers who believed the illegal lie that HR was saying that everyone “must” join the union) and dues were not being deducted from his paychecks.

However, a few years later Human Resources contacted John and said that he needed to complete new paperwork concerning the union.  He was told to fill out the form about union dues; it was “mandatory” that he complete the form. He crossed out the “yes” checkbox and wrote “no” on the form next to where it said to join the union, and wrote on the form that he did not consent to join the union and did not authorize dues deductions from his paycheck.

Shortly after this, union dues were deducted from his paycheck, not only without his consent, but against John’s explicit affirmations that he did not want to join or fund the union because of his religious objection.  He inquired (in writing) about this, and the union wrote that he must pay dues in order to continue to work at a union site.  Human Resources also wrote that he must pay dues.  The only alternatives John had were quitting or being fired and then, if someone was interested, he could be re-hired (maybe), lose all his benefits and seniority, and start from scratch at a non-union site.  These actions threatening to fire John and telling him that he needed to pay dues to keep his job were illegal.

John reached out to the National Right to Work Foundation and explained his case to lawyers that, for free, help those with religious objections to union membership.  (They have other lawyers that provide free legal counsel to those who do not have religious objections.)  His Right to Work Foundation lawyers–who had experience in labor law all the way up to going to the Supreme Court–sent an excellent cease-and-desist letter to his employer warning them of their violations of the law.  John and some of his fellow Christians also prayed to the Lord of heaven, the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, about this situation.  John’s Right to Work lawyers filed charges against his employer and the union with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) for their illegal actions in seeking to force him to violate his religious beliefs and for deducting dues from his paycheck without his consent.

In answer to the prayers of God’s people and through the secondary agency of the skilled lawyers at the National Right to Work Foundation, John’s employer agreed to: 1.) Not fire him; 2.) Not require him to join the union; 3.) Not compel him to leave the union site for the tiny portion of non-union sites that his employer possesses; 4.) Not compel him to pay dues to the union or an equivalent to a charity.  They also agreed to compensate John because of the mental distress he endured as a result of the illegal threats to fire him, as well as paying legal fees to the NRWF.  John was also not compelled to sign a non-disclosure agreement about the whole situation.  His lawyers told him that it was an excellent outcome.  Praise the Lord!

We should thank God for and pray for the continuance of the religious liberties that we have here in the United States (1 TImothy 2:1ff.).

Once again, I am not a lawyer and am not giving you legal advice.  If you are in a situation where you have a question about labor law in relation to labor unions and religious objections, you should consult a lawyer instead of believing what some guy says on the Internet who insists he is not a lawyer,  is not giving legal advice, and who tells you about testimonies that you are not able to verify.  Reading what law journals say on this subject could certainly also be helpful, but that is also no substitute for professional legal counsel.

Do not join a labor union because the Bible teaches that you should not do it.  If someone tries to make you, if you are in the United States, you have legal rights, both in Right to Work and in non-Right to Work states.  The Apostle Paul used his rights as a Roman citizen (Acts 22:25ff.), and you can utilize your rights as an American citizen to serve the Lord with a pure conscience, seeking to live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty.

Please do not speculate on how the author of this post knows that the testimonials recounted here are accurate. Comments speculating on that question will probably not be published. If they are accidentally published, they will not be answered, but will be deleted.

TDR

Messianic Israel / Jew Evangelistic T-Shirt: Shema & Isa 53

God loves Israel! He loves Israel far more than did the Apostle Paul, who wrote under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:

1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 2 That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 4 Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 5 Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. … 1 What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? 2 Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. (Romans 9:1-5; 3:1-2)

What does God say to those who harm Israel?  “He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye” (Zechariah 2:8). As with the rest of mankind, Jews who do not believe the gospel will be eternally lost (Romans 11:28a), but nonetheless “as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes. For the gifts and calling of God are without repentance.” (Romans 11:28b-11:29).

 

What is the greatest blessing Jehovah has ever given Israel? The Messiah, the Savior of the world, God blessed for ever, Jesus!  To that end, we have designed the T-shirts pictured below, which have been added to the collection of evangelistic T-shirts and other materials I posted about some time ago. Both sides of the T-shirt reference the evangelistic pamphlet Truth From the Torah, Nevi’im, and Kethuvim (the Law, Prophets, and Writings) for Jews who Reverence the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, which is online at https://faithsaves.net/Messiah/.  The front has this evangelistic website as well as the text of the Shema, Deuteronomy 6:4:

שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָֹה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָֹה אֶחָד׃

Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD:

Israeli flag Shema Deuteronomy 6:4 Messiah Jesus T Shirt

While the back has the evangelistic website and Isaiah 53:8b: “For he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.”

along with, on both sides, the flag of Israel.  (We did not see a way to design the shirt so that the vowels and accents could be included, although we recognize the Biblical and historical case for their inspiration and preservation.)

We believe that these shirts can be blessed by the God of Israel for Jews to embrace their crucified and risen Messiah, Jesus, as well as to help Gentiles come to repentance and faith in Him.  If you get to evangelize Muslims because of this shirt, Isaiah 53 is good for them also, since Muslims deny the Lord Jesus died on the cross, claiming the Gospel accounts are fabrications. But Isaiah 53, which clearly predicts His death by crucifixion and resurrection, and which we have physical, pre-Christian evidence for in the Dead Sea Scrolls, cannot be so explained away by Muslims.  This T-shirt can also help you explain the powerful evidence for the Bible from prophecy for agnostics and atheists and the powerful impact of Isaiah 53 to both Jews and Muslims. Furthermore, God promises to bless those who bless Israel and curse those who curse Israel (Genesis 12:1-3). Do you want to be blessed by the living God? Bless Israel!

The immediate motivation for our making these shirts was a pro-Hamas, anti-Jewish rally we saw in Los Angeles.  Jew haters there held signs such as “Resistance is not terrorism,” glorifying the murder of 1,200 Jews on October 7, 2023, the largest single-day slaughter of Jews since the Holocaust:

resistance is not terrorism pro Hamas anti Israel Jewish Semitic A. N. S. W. E. R. coalition

They also promoted “from the river to the sea,” advocating the destruction of the Jewish state and the murder of the Jews:

from the river to the sea Hamas terrorism kill Jews

The protesters were part of the anti-Israel hate group, the A. N. S. W. E. R. coalition, who argue that to say “Hamas is a terrorist organization” is a “lie.” (By the way, if you need more reasons to stop using Google as a search engine, note the pro-terrorism, anti-Israel search results that come up first if you search for “answercoalition.org Hamas terrorism”; compare those results with what you get on Duck Duck Go, where the top result [as of the time I am writing this] is the Anti-Defamation League explaining why Hamas is a bloodthirsty terrorist organization that calls for the eradication of Israel.)  The protestors also reproduced lies pumped out by Hamas about civilian deaths in Gaza, while saying nothing about the fact that Hamas wants civilians in Gaza to die and Israel does not. Of course, Islam allows Muslims to lie–after all, Allah is the best of deceivers.

They were blocking the street so that we could not keep going on the bus we were on in Los Angeles.  Our destination was not far away–a museum in LA.  We decided to get off the bus and walk there.  A few blocks away we saw an orthodox Jewish man walking in the direction of the advocates of terrorism.  We told him about the protest; he thanked us, and re-routed.  After we got home from the museum we designed the T-shirts. It is right to stand against terrorism and for the Jewish people.  It is especially right to stand for the greatest Jew of all, the resurrected Lord, Jesus.

We saw posters like the following a few blocks away.  The anti-Jewish, pro-Hamas protestors did not say anything about these people.

Jewish babies kidnapped by Hamas poster

Jewish youth kidnapped by Hamas hostage

Jewish grandmother hostage kidnapped by Hamas

They also said nothing about United States citizens killed by or held hostage by Hamas. They are also not important, it seems. (Let me add that the large majority of inhabitants in Gaza and the West Bank support Hamas’ murder of Jewish civilians–the large majority “extremely support” terrorism, while in a recent survey only 7.3% of survey participants were “extremely against” such terrorism, combined with 5.4% who are “somewhat against” it, for a total of only 12.7% of the population who are against terrorism; it is certainly possible survey results reflect some bias, but the overall picture is likely to be accurate.)

What about here in the USA? When asked if they support Israel or Hamas, 95% of those over 65 support Israel.  The percentages get progressively lower the younger people are.  Among 18-24 year olds, only 55% support Israel, while 45% support Hamas.  This is a terrible trend, and awful evidence of the anti-God garbage taught in the public school and university systems.  Maybe consider getting some of these T-shirts for yourself or as presents for others.  Perhaps you are afraid of Muslim violence or anti-Jewish violence if you wear one, since true Islam in America–like all true Islam–is violent and bloodthirsty, not peaceful.  Perhaps if you are living in Saudi Arabia or Iran it would be unwise to wear one of these shirts; but if you live in the United States of America, and you will allow threats of Muslim violence to curtail your free speech, something is very wrong.  Obviously Christians have liberty to wear or not wear a T-shirt like this, and it is perfectly fine not to wear one, but our decisions must be made out of Biblical principle and for the glory of God, not out of fear.  If you say you would have protected Jews in the Holocaust, but are afraid to stand for them and against their murderers now, why should we believe you would have stood were you in Hitler’s Germany? There are Biblical principles here.  God’s love for Israel is not saying God loves everything the modern state of Israel does–but God still loves Israel, and Scripture still says to bless Israel.  (By the way, if you are born again, God loves you with an infinite and special love, but He still does not love everything you do–He does not love your sin, nor does He love Israel’s sin.)  Be salt and light: stand up for righteousness. Do not let the wicked pro-terrorist people be the only ones who are making their voices known.  Stand for the God of Israel, for the Messiah of Israel, and for the nation of Israel.

Postscriptum:

As FLAME: Facts and Logic About the Middle East points out concerning anti-Israel, pro-Hamas bias in media reports about Gaza civilian casualties:

[T]he media insist on treating Hamas’s notoriously unreliable information feed as fact. Conversely, they refuse to give precedence to proven, reliable sources of information, such as the Israeli or U.S. governments, the latter of which confirmed Al-Shifa’s use as a Hamas headquarters. Israel presents photographs of Hamas blocking exit highways, so Gazans cannot leave the war zone . . . but Hamas denies it, says NPR. Such is the inane, “he-said, she said” pablum we are fed by the media.

The media also steadfastly refuse to ask the questions demanded by the story—and by any curious reader, listener, or viewer. When reporters interview Palestinians on the street or doctors in hospitals, the viewer cries to know: “Do you ever see any Hamas guys around here? Have you seen any tunnels?” But never does the reporter ask this, let alone questions like, “Do you support Hamas? Do you think there should be a Palestine next to Israel? What do you think about the October 7th attack on Israel?” These are obvious queries that responsible, curious, fact-hungry journalists would and should normally ask their sources. But they never do. Why?

The short answer is that if they asked these questions, the stories they tell wouldn’t fit the narrative they are trying to sell—the narrative in which the Palestinians are an oppressed people, Israel is an evil, colonial aggressor, and Hamas is a product of legitimate Palestinian resistance.

To sell their perverse narrative, international media swallow the wildly inflated death-toll numbers cranked out by the Gaza Health Ministry. For this reason, the media simply repeat the daily growing casualty figures Hamas gives them.

Reuters reports, for example, that as of November 22nd, Gaza’s Hamas-run government says at least 13,300 Palestinians have been confirmed killed, including at least 5,600 children. But Luke Baker, a former Reuters bureau chief who led the organization’s coverage of Israel and the disputed territories from 2014 to 2017, said on X (formerly Twitter), “Hamas has a clear propaganda incentive to inflate civilian casualties as much as possible.”

Moreover, the media almost never give a breakdown of the casualties. They don’t say how many were Hamas terrorists or how many were human shields, killed in residences schools or hospitals where Hamas were hiding. They never tell how many were killed—not by Israeli forces, but by Hamas and other terrorist groups—because of misfired rockets, or by Hamas shooting at Palestinian civilians heeding Israeli orders to evacuate.

In addition, it’s probable that a significant number of the “children” reported killed or wounded by Hamas are youths aged 13 to 18, who were located in Hamas facilities or even took an active part in the fighting.

If you are not aware of the connection between Soviet communist propaganda and modern anti-Zionist lies about Israel as a colonialist oppressor, please read the article here.

Israel & Hamas: Just War vs. Pure Evil & the United States

As blog readers surely know, on October 7 thousands of Hamas terrorists invaded Israel and butchered and tortured many helpless Israeli citizens.  On the holiest day of the Jewish calendar, they did things like the following:

A young boy and girl, 6 and 8 years old, and their parents were around the breakfast table. The father’s eye was gouged out in front of his kids. The mother’s breast was cut off, the girl’s foot amputated, and the boy’s fingers cut off before they were executed. And then their executioners sat down and had a meal.

In total, around 1,400 Israelis have been murdered by Hamas, and more than 4,500 injured. It was Israel’s 9-11.

In response, Israel invaded Gaza, intending to overthrow Hamas.  Israel told civilians to leave the northern area ahead of time–but Hamas told them not to leave, and was turning people back into the war zone.  (Did Hamas give early warning to Jewish civilians before launching their unprovoked attack? Hmm.)  Hamas deliberately puts people in Gaza in harms way so that they can be killed, and then Israel can be blamed.  Hamas’ main headquarters is underneath Gaza’s main hospital because Hamas knows that Israel respects human life, while they do not.

What are some things we can learn from this war?

1.) It is a just war for Israel.  Anyone who recognizes that God blesses those who bless Israel (Genesis 12:3) should automatically be biased in Israel’s favor in a situation like this one, but even if one very foolishly rejects God’s Word, anyone with half a brain can see which side is right in this war.

2.) Hamas is acting like faithful Muslims should act.  They are obeying the god of Islam, who told them: “slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush” (Quran 9:5).  The Quran is full of open-ended commands to violently kill people, and Muhammad was a bloodthirsty murderer, as one can clearly see if one reads his biography.

3.) Not just Hamas, but Muslims in general have an anti-Jew problem, because of their religion.  Is every Muslim anti-Jewish? No–many Muslims do not care about their religion, just like many Roman Catholics don’t care what the Bible says or the Pope decrees.  But the Muslims that do care about their religion are anti-Israel.  Why is Rashida Tliab advocating and defending genocide of the Jews? Her district is full of Muslim immigrants.  Islam in America–like Islam everywhere that it is true Islam–is violent and bloodthirsty, which is why the most dangerous evangelistic endeavour I ever had, where I was closest to being killed, was not at various Gay Pride parades, but in the American heartland politely and respectfully passing out the evangelistic work The Testimony of the Quran to Muslims. A majority of American Muslims are at least partially in favor of the brutal murders that Hamas committed on October 7, and around 40% of them approve the terrorist leader of Hamas.  Imagine if 40% of any other demographic were in favor of terrorism.  The people in Gaza voted in Hamas.  Now since that vote there have been no other elections, since Islam is against democracy and in favor of dictatorship.  There are no free and fair elections under Sharia law.  But when the Muslims in Gaza had a chance to vote, Hamas won.

4.) Because the left is anti-Bible, and because Joe Biden needs Muslim votes in swing states like Michigan to win reelection, the Democrat party is becoming more and more anti-Jewish. Calling on Israel for a ceasefire is absolutely bonkers.  More Jews were killed in a single day than at any time since the Holocaust, but Biden calling on $100 million in aid to the Muslims in Gaza and the West Bank for “humanitarian” purposes is about what the Babylon Bee described it as, and the money is certain to be diverted to support terrorism.  Would we have been fine with calling for a ceasefire after 9-11 and then giving “humanitarian” aid to the Taliban and Al Qaeda?  Biden should be calling on Israel to utterly obliterate Hamas.  Hamas should immediately release all American hostages and all other hostages.  Anyone who actually cares about the people in Gaza not getting killed should want Hamas overthrown as soon as possible.

5.) Because the mainstream media is dominated by the left, all kinds of false equivalencies are made between Israel’s just war and Hamas’s unjust murders.  Inflated numbers of casualties in Gaza are repeated by major press organizations from figures spoon-fed to them by Hamas itself.  Of course, Islam allows Muslims to lie.  Reporters in Gaza can either repeat what Hamas tells them to report or they can get tortured and killed themselves, or at the very least get kicked out of the territory.  How many Jewish reporters do you think are on the ground in Gaza getting information? Oh yes, the same number as the number of Jews who live in Gaza–zero–while in Israel Muslims are around 20% of the population and have equal rights (yes, the freest place for Muslims in the Middle East is in Israel).  And even though Israel is the freest place in the Middle East for Muslim Arabs, usually only around 33% of Arab Israeli citizens oppose Hamas, and the large majority oppose Israel’s defending itself; immediately after this butchery of Israelis–including Arab Muslim ones–23% of Arab Israelis still do not oppose Hamas, while 33% oppose Israel defending itself even while the blood of their murdered and tortured fellow citizens is barely dry.  Israel is pressured to stop fighting because its terrorist, true Muslim opponents in Hamas want as many of their own civilians killed as possible. (If you want information about Israel that is free from anti-Jewish bias, please check out FLAME: Facts and Logic about the Middle East, and consider their newsletter. They are a Jewish, not a Christian organization.)  The mainstream media are very, very worried about the the three Nazis that are left joining with the 17 KKK members in the country holding a demonstration somewhere that has thousands of counter-protesters, but a blind eye is turned to the vast multitude of American Muslims who are actually in favor of killing the Jews.

6.) The fact that this is a just war for Israel does not mean that Israel is a righteous country. The vast majority of Jews reject and hate their Messiah, the Lord Jesus. Jews from all over the world are allowed to immigrate to Israel, but Jews who believe Jesus is the Messiah are not allowed in.  Tel Aviv is considered one of the most gay friendly cities in the world, despite the clear statements in the Old Testament about the abomination of sodomy. Moses in Deuteronomy 28 describes exactly what Israel has faced for the last 2,000 years since “all the people … said, His blood be on us, and on our children” (Matthew 27:25):

 

And thy life shall hang in doubt before thee; and thou shalt fear day and night, and shalt have none assurance of thy life: In the morning thou shalt say, Would God it were even! and at even thou shalt say, Would God it were morning! for the fear of thine heart wherewith thou shalt fear, and for the sight of thine eyes which thou shalt see. (Deuteronomy 28:66-67)

 

Israel is not going to have peace, not only because the nation is surrounded by Muslims who hate Jews like the Quran tells them to do, but because the curses of Deuteronomy are upon them, and will continue on them until they repent and believe on their Messiah, the Lord Jesus.

 

7.) As individual Christians and churches, the best thing we can do is preach the gospel to every creature.  Love and preach the gospel to the Jews and send evangelists to them.  Love and preach the gospel to the Muslims and send evangelists to them. How well equipped are you to evangelize Jews?  How about Muslims?  Do you have tracts for these two specific false religions?  Love your neighbor as yourself.  How well would you want a Christian to be equipped to speak to you if you were lost in one of these false beliefs?

 

8.) From a public policy perspective, the United States should support Israel because God has sworn in the Abrahamic Covenant that He would bless those that bless Israel, something repeated throughout the Old Testament.  God used Babylon to punish His rebellious people centuries ago, and He uses Islam to punish them today, but woe to the Babylonians and to the Muslims who attacked the Jews!  If someone says we give Israel too much foreign aid and we can’t afford it, he is consistent if he is also aware that foreign aid to all countries is less than 1% of the federal budget and is also in favor of the kind of drastic entitlement reform that could actually save us from defaulting on our national debt.  If he doesn’t want to either abolish or drastically reform Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, but is very indignant about foreign aid to Israel (most of which, for weapons, goes to American companies), his position is not very consistent.  Once someone is a citizen here, he has freedom of religion and speech.  He is free to be a fool and put on a white hoodie and burn crosses.  He is free to be a fool and chant “From the river to the sea” and so call for genocide of Jews. But we should let as few of these people immigrate here as possible.  Muslims who actually believe in Islam should not be let into the country, and those non-citizens who believe in Islam’s teachings about jihad should be deported.  Furthermore, we need to recognize that, like Muhammad, modern faithful Muslims respect power, not truth.  When Muhammad was powerful, he killed the non-Muslims; when he was weak, he advocated religious tolerance.  If we want to deter terrorism and want there to be more peace, and less war, then Israel should be allowed to enact a ferocious response on Hamas that will discourage the Muslims who surround Israel from acting upon their religion’s murderous and anti-Jewish teachings.

 

By the way, Russia is also guilty of awful war crimes in Ukraine. (Did you know Ukraine has the second largest number of Baptists of any European country–only less than the UK?)  Deterring Russia means letting the Ukrainians defend themselves.  Ronald Reagan, in God’s good providence, won the Cold War by helping to arm those who fought the Russians when they were invading.  We should balance the budget and pay off our national debt by fixing entitlements, and that can be done while, without putting any Americans on the front lines to fight, we send weapons to an imperfect but pro-Western nation with freedom of religion that the Russians decided to butcher the citizens of in their cruel, unjustified, barbaric, and wicked invasion.

Why I Will Not Vote for Donald Trump in 2024 as a Republican

Let me preface this post by saying that I believe whether or not one agrees with what I am saying should not cause division in a church.  Donald Trump divides the country, but he should not divide churches.  If you are united to Christ by faith you are my brother in Him, and if you are a faithful member of a true church you are in Christ’s body, and I have Christian love for you, whether or not you agree with what I say about politics below. 

I have Always Voted Republican as a Conservative

In 2016, I voted for Donald Trump.  In 2020, I voted for Donald Trump.  In every presidential election since I have been able to vote, and in every other election, I have consistently voted for Republican candidates.  Before the 2020 election, I wrote a blog post about why Christians should vote for Donald Trump because of religious liberty, abortion, and free speech.

Donald Trump American Flag 2024 election vote no 2020 riot election fraud

In 2016 Donald Trump won 46% of the vote to squeak by in the electoral college a few days after Hillary Clinton was hit with criminal charges.  Although I found his personality and character abhorrent, I voted for him in 2016 because of the Supreme Court.  In 2020, I also voted for him because of the Supreme Court.  I also though that, despite the many self-inflicted wounds he gave himself, with good conservative advisors he did a better job governing than I thought he would do.  I was very thankful that, with the help of Mitch McConnell and a Republican-controlled Senate, he appointed three justices to the Supreme Court–appointments that led to the overturning of Roe v. Wade.  That was very, very, very good.

Many of the media attacks on Trump were baseless.  He never colluded with Russia, for example.  Many other attacks were based on taking seriously what he said when, very often, even Trump himself does not pay attention to what he says (not a good idea when you are the most powerful elected figure on earth and the commander in chief of the world’s most powerful military).

My political views are extremely conservative.  Based on Scripture, they support a very limited government and are very socially conservative.  I believe the US Constitution is a very good document for running a government in this fallen world and wish that it were followed much more closely than it is.

Donald Trump Will Not Peacefully Cede Power

So why am I not going to vote for Donald Trump again-certainly not in the Republican primary, and also not in the general election, if he wins the primary?  It is not because of his horrible character.  It is not because there are good reasons to wonder if what is good for Trump is more important to him than what is good for the United States.  It is not because he constantly attacks everyone and alienates larger and larger and larger groups of people and even people as loyal as his own vice president.  It is not because he has now been convicted of battery and sexual crimes.  These are very big problems-definitely far more than enough to make me vote for someone else in the Republican primary, but in the general election I am willing to overlook them.  It is not because of some secret sympathy for the socialistic, big-government policies of the Democrat party.  I am very concerned about the judges Democrats put on the Supreme Court and other courts and I see “vote for Trump because of the judges” as the single strongest argument to vote for him, if he prevails in the Republican primary (which I fervently hope he does not).  I am very concerned about the way the Democrat party is willing to persecute churches, Christian business owners, and Christians in general who stand for what Scripture teaches on morality.

So what was the final straw for me?  I think there is a strong likelihood that Donald Trump will not cede power peacefully if he loses an election.  I believe in the American republic, not in a dictatorship by a Republican.

I did not think that Donald Trump would do what he did after losing the 2020 election.  Pursuing all legal avenues to try to get the most votes you can?  Fine.  But his refusal-for hours-to call off the rioters on January 6 was despicable, even when it was obvious that things had turned violent.  It is also perfectly obvious that the Vice President never has had the power to unilaterally overturn election results.  If the Vice President of the party in power can unilaterally reject election results, we do not have a republic, but a dictatorship.  It does not even need to be stated that the idea that the VP can do this is absolutely indefensible constitutionally.

Let’s say that it is far more likely that the reason Donald Trump was unwilling to admit that he lost the election by over 7,000,000 votes is that Trump can never admit he was wrong than that the theories he was spouting off in public, but which even his own lawyers would not defend in court, were true.  That would be a huge problem, but maybe if he had just made stuff up to support his ego and left it at that, perhaps I would still vote for him again.

However, it is now years later, and Trump is still making the same Constitutionally fatal claims.  He still claims that Mike Pence could have unilaterally overturned the 2020 election results.  That means the end of the republic and the start of a tyranny.  What did Trump do in his very first campaign rally? He put up a video and a song made by criminals who were justly put in prison for their crimes on January 6.  He showed them violently fighting the police.  He tried to put them in a good light as they were breaking and smashing and beating police officers and trying to get in to violently place him in power.  He did not put up a video of the (imaginary) people who (in an alternate universe) just happened to wander into the Capitol as tourists or something and then were arrested and imprisoned unjustly.  No, his video showed the rioters fighting with the police, and was glorifying the rioters as if they were righteous.  Note that the video from the January 6 committee here:

And Trump’s campaign video here, where the singers are imprisoned January 6 criminals:

 

have some of the same footage of rioters fighting police (see 1:14-1:30 in), although Trump puts the violent criminals up for a shorter period of time.  Trump embraces people who wanted Mike Pence executed for treason although he does not (at this point, at least, but you never know what he will do next) himself call for the execution of his own former Vice President for treason.

Trump said that he would accept the 2016 results–if he won.  He lost in 2020 and did not accept the results.  If he loses in 2024, there could be a lot of bloodshed.  If he wins in 2024-something that is very, very unlikely-there is no reason to think that he would voluntarily cede power at the end of his term.  He could come up with some reason-any reason-to retain power.  The Vice President being able to unilaterally overturn results; the election allegedly having fraud that is worse than any third-world country; Dominion voting machines changing millions of votes; you name it.  If Donald Trump can claim (even before results are in!) that the long shot conservative Republican Larry Elder lost in California to the sitting Democrat governer, Gavin Newsom, by fraud, then he can claim any election he wants was lost by fraud.

I have little confidence Trump would voluntarily cede power if he lost an election.  Furthermore, anyone that was part of his cabinet in a second Trump term would have to be an almost cultic “yes” man.  He would have to be a bobble head agreeing with any Trump claims.  Trump claimed (in his January 6 speech) that in 2020 he “won in a landslide” but is not now in office because of “the most corrupt election in … history, maybe of the world,” far worse than “third-world countries,” and “everybody knows it.” The 2020 US election was not worse than elections such as the 1927 Liberian election where the winner gained 243,000 votes from the 15,000 registered voters, the 1964 election in Haiti where the president won 99.9% of the vote, there were no opponents, and all the ballots were pre-marked “yes,” or the elections in Equitorial Guinea between 1990-2020 where the president got 98% of the vote at a minimum, with some areas giving him over 103%. Everyone knows that the 2020 election was worse than such corrupt elections, according to Trump.  Instead of having advisors like his courageous and moral Vice President, Mike Pence, Trump would have a cabinet of Kool-Aid drinkers who would actually help him to retain power after an election loss and would parrot whatever nutty claims he made.

I am not going to vote for Trump again because I do not have confidence he would cede power.  Do you have confidence he would cede power if he lost?

Why It Does Not Matter That I Will Not Vote For Donald Trump

Despite the great danger that Trump would not cede power peacefully if he were reelected, it does not matter very much that I will not vote for him.  Why is that?

1.) I am in California, so my vote does not matter in a presidential election.  California is almost certain to give its electoral votes to the Democrat candidate, and if a Republican won the electoral votes of California, he would not need them, for he would already have won other closer states in a landslide.  Were I in a swing state, I would have to think harder about not voting for Trump.

2.) However, although it would be a harder call, even if I were in a swing state I would not vote for Trump because of the threat he is to the Constitution.  Even in this case, though, my vote would not matter.  Why?  Because Trump is unelectable.  He lost a winnable election in 2020 through self-inflicted wounds, and after January 6 he was no longer a viable candidate for president.  He is never going to get the 46% of the vote that he got in 2016 again-much less the higher percentage he would need to win against someone less repulsive than Hillary Clinton a few days after she was indited.  Joe Biden, the Democrat Party, and the mainstream media will work very hard to make Trump the Republican candidate in 2024 because they know he is not electable.  Donald Trump turned what should have been a red wave in 2022 into a red trickle, even though he was not on the ballot.  People do not want someone who supports violent riots, injuries to hundreds of Capitol police officers, and the end of the republic for a dictatorship where the Vice President can unilaterally overturn results.  Running on a pro-January 6 riot platform is bonkers.  If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would wonder if the Democrats were secretly paying off Trump to run on something like that.  The electorate does not want a candidate who justifies violent attempts at revolution and whom a jury has found guilty of sexual assault.  If Republicans nominate someone creepy enough, they can even lose Senate races in Alabama.  (Note that Roy Moore was only credibly accused of sexual crimes–Trump has not only been accused, but been found guilty by a jury of them.  Roy Moore lost deep, deep, deep Red Alabama.  How badly will Trump lose?)  Trump has alienated a large portion of the Republican electorate but he unites the Democrats. He alienates moderates and far, far more than half the voting population.  A vote for Donald Trump in the Republican primary is a vote for a united Democrat government that controls the House and Senate–probably with large majorities–and the presidency in 2024.  It is a vote for a Democrat president who will do everything he can to get Roe v. Wade back.  The question is not whether Trump can get the 46% he got in 2016.  The question is whether he would be able to get 40%, or 35%, or a number even lower than that.  The question is whether the Democrats would win in a huge landslide that can introduce constitutional amendments or just a big landslide that can abolish the filibuster and appoint radical leftist tyrants to the Supreme Court.

So the fact that I would not vote for Donald Trump in the 2024 general election will not matter–if he is at the top of the Republican ticket, the election will not even be close.

However, in the Republican primary my vote definitely WILL matter.  I will be voting to keep Trump away from the Republican nomination, so that limited, Constitutional government, religious liberty, and other incredible blessings here in the United States may continue, by God’s grace.  While I think Mike Pence would be even better than Ron DeSantis, I will plan to vote for whoever appears to have the best chance at keeping Donald Trump away from winning the nomination, at least if it is still in play when I have a chance to vote in the primary, Lord willing.

As a postscript, let me say again that I believe whether or not one agrees with what I am saying should not cause division in a church.  Donald Trump divides the country, but he should not divide churches.  If you are united to Christ by faith you are my brother in Him, and if you are a faithful member of a true church you are in Christ’s body, and I have Christian love for you, whether or not you agree with what I say about politics in this post.

TDR

Social Media and Electronics: Addictive Drugs for Christians?

Are social media and electronics drugs to which Christians are addicted-by the millions?

Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, WhatsApp, Twitter, Snapchat, Linkedin, Pinterest, Tiktok–mind-numbing, time-wasting distractions, all.  Then there is email–Gmail, Yahoo!, AOL (if you are really old-school), as well as texting, blogging, threads, and all sorts of other ways to use up on the Internet the days and hours God has given you to serve Him.  Many people spend a lot of time making big bucks trying to figure out ways to keep you on their website longer; scrolling is designed to suck you in, suggested videos on YouTube are there both to keep you on the website longer and to influence what you are thinking about, the “ping” when you get a new text is designed to get you to check it right away.  Many of the apps that are hugely popular on smartphones and devices tap into decades of neuroscience and psychology research funded by the casino and gambling industries, which are designed to be addictive.  Americans check their phones approximately 344 times a day, and nearly half of them openly admit that they are addicted to their phones. Physical substances are not the only drugs that are addictive and which turn your brain into putty and your conscience into a wreck-social media and electronic devices do as well.

mom dad son stare cell phone dumb Christian

Can some beneficial things be found on the Internet, on social media, etc.?  Yes-after all, I have a YouTube channel (and a Rumble channel in case YouTube censors me), a website, and (more than one) email address.  I am thankful for the material at Way of Life Literature.  I am writing (and you are reading) a blog right now.  Occasionally the Internet can save time-making some purchases at home online can save time that would otherwise have to be spent going to a store. In general, however, social media is designed to get you to do the opposite of what God says:

“So teach us to number our days, that we may apply our hearts unto wisdom” (Psalm 90:12)

Our use of time should be intentional–we are to “number” our days so that we can properly apply our hearts to wisdom.  Our use of time must not be determined by whatever happens to ping next or whatever thumbnail YouTube has pop up to suck us into spending more of the limited time we have before we go to the grave or before the return of Christ watching a pointless video, or even a somewhat benefical video that is less valuable than an intentional, best use of time.

What can be done?  Here are two suggestions.

1.) Make the Lord’s Day a social media fast.

Make it a distinctly different day.  Don’t use any social media at least one day in seven.  Don’t watch YouTube. Don’t go on Facebook.  Don’t check email.  Don’t read text messages.  Don’t look at your phone, unless it is an important call and someone actually physically calls you.  Make an exception for someone who you are texting to give a ride to church, or to a family who you are going to minister to and fellowship with for lunch, or something like that–but otherwise, stay completely off.  Let the muscle memory atrophy of looking at the phone whenever ten seconds is available, at least one day in seven.  Instead, use that time to practice the greatly-neglected duty of conscious meditation on God and His Word, a duty which is too often swallowed up by being on social media day and night:

This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein: for then thou shalt make thy way prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success. (Joshua 1:8)

But his delight is in the law of the LORD; and in his law doth he meditate day and night. (Psalm 1:2)

While the Lord’s Day is not a Christian Sabbath, the principles of the Westminster Larger Catechism for your use of time on the Lord’s Day are still valuable:

The … Lord’s day is to be sanctified by an holy resting all the day, (Exod. 20:8,10) not only from such works as are at all times sinful, but even from such worldly employments and recreations as are on other days lawful; (Exod. 16:25–28, Neh. 13:15–22, Jer. 17:21–22) and making it our delight to spend the whole time (except so much of it as is to be taken up in works of necessity and mercy (Matt. 12:1–13) ) in the public and private exercises of God’ s worship: (Isa. 58:13, Luke 4:16, Acts 20:7, 1 Cor. 16:1–2, Ps. 92, Isa. 66:23, Lev. 23:3) and, to that end, we are to prepare our hearts, and with such foresight, diligence, and moderation, to dispose and seasonably dispatch our worldly business, that we may be the more free and fit for the duties of that day. (Exod. 20:8,56, Luke 23:54, Exod. 16:22,25-26,29) … The sins forbidden in the fourth commandment are, all omissions of the duties required, (Ezek. 22:26) all careless, negligent, and unprofitable performing of them, and being weary of them; (Acts 20:7,9, Ezek. 33:30–32, Amos 8:5, Mal. 1:13) all profaning the day by idleness, and doing that which is in itself sinful; (Ezek. 23:38) and by all needless works, words, and thoughts, about our worldly employments and recreations. (Jer. 17:24,27, Isa. 58:13) (The Westminster Larger Catechism: With Scripture Proofs, Questions 117, 119)

Consider abstaining from even a lawful use of social media on the Lord’s Day.

2.) “Number” your days (Psalm 90:12): specifically plan and limit the time you spend on social media the other six days of the week.

Maybe make it a rule that you only check your email once a day, or perhaps only once in the morning and once in the evening. If someone needs you right away, he can use the voice that God gave him to call you on the phone or use his legs to actually walk up to you and speak to you face to face.  Make a rule on how often you check text messages and stick to it.  Make a rule that, unless you have already spent adequate time in seeking God’s face in the reading and study of Scripture, in prayer, and in meditation, you don’t use social media at all, and when you use it you consciously decide ahead of time how long God would be glorified by your being on TikTok or Twitter instead of reading Scripture or an edifying book, and spend that amount of your life up on social media–no more, only less.  If, as a family, you “don’t have time” to have family devotions, or to regularly preach the gospel to your community, or to memorize Scripture, then you certainly don’t have time, as a family, to have any social media accounts.  Have someone keep you accountable to live by your “numbering” (Psalm 90:12) of your life.  How many Christian homes have “addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints” (1 Corinthians 16:15) in comparison to those who have addicted themselves to the slavery of the cell-phone?  Are you loving your children by giving them a cell phone, or by resisting the societal pressure and not giving them one?  Are you loving God and spiritually benefiting yourself by your phone and social media use?

Your life is a stewardship from God for which you must give an account.  Don’t waste it on social media.  Overuse of social media is a tremendous contributing factor to spiritual immaturity in the Lord’s churches, and among people old and young people in professedly Christian homes.  Under-use of social media is a contributing factor to-well, probably, to spiritual maturity, greater intelligence, real Christian friendships, and the ability to do such increasingly rare things as concentrate on something for a long period of time. After all, neuroscience research shows that smartphones make people stupider, less social, more forgetful, more prone to addiction, sleepless and depressed, and poor at navigation. The phone may be smarter, but you are not.

What do you do to resist the mind-numbing, soul-sapping, intelligence-eliminating drugs of social media and electronics?  Feel free to share your suggestions below.  If you don’t have any, because you aren’t doing anything to stay off or wean yourself off from these addictions, maybe it is time to start.

TDR

A Personal Financial Advisor to Invest with Biblical Values?

What can a Christian do when he wishes to honor the Lord with his investments?  Can he use a personal financial advisor who is a Christian?  I have written in the past, and highly commended, the Eventide family of mutual funds.

Eventide logo Christian mutual funds Bible based investing godly righteous money

Their fund family includes the Eventide Gilead Fund (ETILX), Eventide Healthcare and Life Sciences Fund (ETIHX), Eventide Exponential Technologies Fund (ETIEX), Eventide Large Cap Focus Fund (ETLIX), Eventide Dividend Opportunities Fund (ETIDX), Eventide Multi-Asset Income Fund (ETIMX), Eventide Limited Term Bond Fund (ETIBX), and Eventide Core Bond Fund (ETIRX).  (They also have class N, A, and C shares as well as class I shares, but I utilized the ticker symbols for the class I shares here.) When one invests with Eventide, he avoids companies that support wickedness like abortion, tobacco, cannabis, pornography, violent media, and so on.  In addition, their investment philosophy  goes one step further to ask important questions about integrity, business practice, and value-creation.  I was very excited to find out about Eventide years ago, and still believe they are the best option for practicing Bible-based values in investing, for the reasons explained in my review of the Eventide family of funds and their second-best competitor, the Timothy Plan family of funds.

 

Are your investments clean, or at least as clean as the Timothy Plan–which is in many ways good, although at a lower standard of Biblical conformity than Eventide–would view it?  You can get a complementary moral audit from them of what you own at a link on the page here.  Why not find out?  Are you afraid of what you will discover?  Would you rather find out now, or at the judgment seat of Christ?

 

One might suppose that he could have a personal financial advisor assist him in investing in a clean, God-honoring way.  Is having an actively (or passively) managed account with a personal financial advisor an option?  Fidelity, Schwab, Merrill Edge, and many other investment firms provide the option of a personal financial advisor who will seek to follow your investment directions for a fee.  On multiple occasions, when I have discussed Biblical, Christian values with such people, they have said that they could follow our virtuous, godly directives and set up something that was acceptable.  Does this work?  I recently tried it.  How did it go?

 

As is common knowledge, in the San Francisco Bay Area homes and condominiums are very expensive.  I would like to be able to buy a residence close to Bethel Baptist Church that fits our ministry goals and family needs.  I have prayerfully formulated a plan to get there that also dealt with other financial goals.  Because Scripture affirms the value of a “multitude of counsellors” for safety and being established in one’s purposes (Proverbs 11:14; 15:22; 24:6), I wanted to run my plan by more than one financial advisor.  I got a complementary meeting with one from Schwab, while with an organization called Personal Capital, part of Empower, I scheduled a meeting because they had promised one would get $100 for meeting with a financial advisor and getting a proposal.  I was willing to hear what the Personal Capital person had to say about my investment plan, and that they would give me $100 for meeting with him made it better.

 

Over the course of three meetings, I explained my Christian, Bible-based values and what I viewed as acceptable for investments. The financial advisor with Personal Capital said something like that he was a devout Christian himself.  He said he managed the assets for numbers of Christians and others who, for example, did not want to invest in abortion.  Now that sounded good, no?  Surely if one can get one’s investments personally under the care of a financial advisor who is himself a Christian, and who manages the assets of numbers of Christians, one can invest cleanly, like one can with Eventide.  The financial advisor provided a variety of reasons why he thought what he would offer would outperform an investment strategy that held strictly to a number of Eventide funds.  (This post is not about the performance side of the question, but I am actually skeptical of his claim that his mix of investments would outperform what I was doing with Eventide.  For example, since inception on 7/8/2008, the Eventide Gilead Fund has grown at an annualized 12.99%, and class I shares since inception on 2/2/2010 have grown at 13.60%.  That is a long time for them to outperform by several percentage points what the Personal Capital gentleman said I could expect what he was offering me would probably earn on average.)  His company has a section on its website promoting the option of socially responsible investing, which they advertise as a way “to align [one’s] investments with [his] personal values and beliefs.”  In any case, for investing in a righteous way, he is certainly a better option. Right?

 

Unfortunately, no–wrong.  First, he said that he did not have the ability to actually determine whether individual companies were actually engaging in evil behaviors, or actively seeking to do good, the way that Eventide would do.  Trying to make investments clean would just be, with him, taking a base strategy that did NOT evaluate things from the perspective of the kingdom of God, and simply attempting to improve it a bit.  What he could do was take out some notorious companies such as a casino here and there.  Would the personalization he offered be clean, according to the complementary moral audit mentioned earlier in this post?  Highly unlikely.

 

Furthermore, he also wanted to diversify into foreign companies (a reasonable idea; nothing wrong with that).  But for the foreign investments, he would simply have me get ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds) that had no moral or Christian component whatsoever.  So domestically, I could be part-owner (through ETFs or other investments) of companies that were engaged in evil, although not as notoriously.  Outside of the USA, I could own companies that were chopping up little babies in the womb, selling abortion drugs, or marketing cigarettes and booze to twelve-year-olds.  No filters whatsoever.  Problem.

 

After the third meeting, when I got his actual proposal, I looked over the companies that he wanted me to invest in.  I cannot share on this blog post what they were, because it is proprietary information with them.  However, without even doing a complementary moral audit, I knew that many of them would fail, and that a Christian had no business owning them.  It would be a tremendous step backward were I to join the Christian clients of this professedly devout Christian financial advisor.  My investments would not be clean, much less focused on companies that are positively doing good.  It would be a bad choice.

 

If blog readers assume that their investments are clean because they have a financial advisor who goes to church, reads the Bible, and even possibly is a truly born-again Christian, they should make very, very sure about it.  At least with my situation, the fact that this advisor told me that he was committed to Christian doctrine and managed the money of a good number of Christians, and could personalize investments to avoid what is bad turned out not to mean a whole lot.  It meant we could take a framework focused solely on gaining filthy lucre and could clean up bits and pieces of it.  With Eventide, everything is built around a Biblical framework of investing.  What a difference–and what a blessing!  Eventide won hands-down over the professedly devout Christian financial advisor who said he could personalize investments to be suitable for Bible-believers.

 

Naturally, I did not sell my Eventide investments and move over to Personal Capital with Empower.  Personal Capital would not have allowed me to invest in a way that glorifies and pleases the Lord.

 

Other reasons why I did not move over to them–such as that Empower had poor customer service when they were the 401K company for one of my jobs in Wisconsin (I was able to invest in Eventide through them, and that’s all I did), that what the financial advisor said would be their likely performance is lower than how Eventide has performed since their Gilead Fund and other funds started, that Empower / Personal Capital never even gave me the $100 for spending a lot of time with them and having several meetings, that they did not have a phone number for me to call to get help with this, but only an email, and that their customer service here in California seemed to have even more room for improvement than they did in Wisconsin, were less important, although they were not very promising.  These all could have been reasons for me not to go with them.  That I could not invest cleanly was necessarily a reason not to go with them, but stick with Eventide.

 

What about you?  Do you have confidence that what you invest in pleases the Lord, and will be something you can be happy about when you stand before Christ on judgment day?  Don’t assume that you do, just because you have a financial advisor who claims to be a Christian and who says he can personalize your investments.

 

TDR

 

 

Answers to the Racist Race Question: White/Black or Human/American?

Scripture teaches that there is only one race–the human race. Furthermore, Biblical teaching condemns racism and, when consistently applied, results in the abolition of chattel slavery.  Consequently, I do not appreciate the renewed push, especially on the left, for making everything about race.  Critical race theory is both contrary to Scripture and (unsurprisingly) does not reflect reality, reflecting in many ways a worldview that is contrary to what God has revealed in His Word.

 

Furthermore, since when surveys ask me about my “race,” I am going to be judged by the color of my skin and not the content of my character, I know that if I answer the way the survey wants me to I will give the “wrong” answer.  Since my skin is on the lighter side of the spectrum of human pigmentation, making less melanin than some others whose ancestors came from warmer regions, I am supposed to answer “white,” and then feel guilty for the oppressive role that my ancestors played in human slavery in the USA (even though they weren’t even here, but immigrated to the USA after slavery was already abolished, on one side of the family fleeing the slavery of communism).  As someone who is “white,” I am oppressing Barak Obama, Kamala Harris, Michael Jordan, and other incredibly powerful, wealthy, and influential people who are “black.”  If I answer “white,” I will be discriminated against in the name of “equity.” My area will get less federal and state funds. It will just be worse for my community and for me as a person, and I will be contributing to dividing my nation over race, when the amount of melanin made by one’s skin is one of the least important features of a person.

 

I have consequently decided to answer surveys on race in one of two ways.  When a survey asks about “race,” I will use the “other” checkbox and say:

 

1.) “Human.”  I am part of the human race.

 

One family, one race, one Savior

 

or, alternatively,

 

2.) “American.”  That would seem to be as legitimate a choice as Nigerian, Norwegian, Japanese, Cuban, etc.

 

American flag waving American race

The only exception for me would be on a medical form where it could actually make a real difference, as people who are descended from Japheth are more likely to get some diseases, and less likely to get others, than descendants of Ham (and the same goes for the descendants of Shem).  If the question actually serves a legitimate purpose, I can answer it the way they want me to.  But if the form is simply to promote “equity” by punishing some groups to favor others based on the color of their skin, I am going to answer “human” or “American.”

 

Furthermore, since a man can really be a woman now, men can get pregnant, many children in public “schools” are identifying not only as the other gender but even as “furries” or other animals, it should be no difficulty for me to identify as whatever I want for race.  If men and women are not determined by biology, my race could be Mutant Ninja Turtle, or I could be a pigeon.

 

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles race human race

 

 

So there is certainly no reason I cannot truthfully answer “human” or “American” on the “race” question.

 

I would also encourage you to think about the divisive and racist race questions that come up in many settings.  Think about whether we would be better off if a very high percentage of the population started answering “human” to these questions and started believing what the Bible says about race and racism.

 

TDR

Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by Richard Whately & Skepticism

Have you ever read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte by Richard Whately? (view the book online for free here or here; a version you can cut and paste into a document so you can listen to it  is here), or get a physical copy:

 

David Hume, the famous skeptic, employed a variety of skeptical arguments against the Bible, the Lord Jesus Christ, and against the possibility of miracles and the rationality of believing in them in Section 10, “Of Miracles,” of Hume’s Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding. Whately, an Anglican who believed in the Bible, in miracles, and in Christ and His resurrection, turned Hume’s skeptical arguments against themselves. Whately’s “satiric Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Bonaparte (1819), … show[ed] that the same methods used to cast doubt on [Biblical] miracles would also leave the existence of Napoleon open to question.” Whately’s book is a short and humerous demonstration that Hume’s hyper-skepticism would not only “prove” that Christ did not do any miracles or rise from the dead, but that Napoleon, who was still alive at the time, did not exist or engage in the Napoleonic wars.  Hume’s argument against miracles is still extremely influential–indeed, as the teaching sessions mentioned in my last Friday’s post indicated, the main argument today against the resurrection of Christ is not a specific alternative theory such as the stolen-body, hallucination, or swoon theory, but the argument that miracles are impossible, so, therefore, Christ did not rise–Hume’s argument lives on, although it does not deserve to do so, as the critiques of Hume’s argument on my website demonstrate. For these reasons, the quick and fun read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte is well worth a read. (As a side note, the spelling “Buonaparte” by the author, instead of Bonaparte, is deliberate–the British “used the foreign sounding ‘Buonaparte’ to undermine his legitimacy as a French ruler. … On St Helena, when the British refused to acknowledge the defeated Emperor’s imperial rights, they insisted everyone call him ‘General Buonaparte.'”

 

Contemporary Significance

Part of the contemporary significance of Richard Whately’s Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte relates to how we evaluate historical data. We should avoid both the undue skepticism of David Hume and also undue credulity.  Whatever God revealed in His Word can, and must, be accepted without question.  But outside of Scripture, when evaluating historical arguments, we should employ Biblical principles such as the following:

 

Have the best arguments both for and against the matter in question been carefully examined?

Is the argument logical?

Are there conflicts of interest in those promoting the argument?

Does the argument produce extraordinary evidence for its extraordinary claims?

Does the argument require me to think more highly of myself than I ought to think?

Is looking into the argument redeeming the time?

Are Biblical patterns of authority followed by those spreading the argument?

 

(principles are reproduced from my website here, and are also discussed here.)

 

A failure to properly employ consistent criteria to the evaluation of evidence undermines the case for Scripture.  For example, Assyrian records provide as strong a confirmation as one could expect for Hezekiah’s miraculous deliverance from the hand of Assyria by Jehovah’s slaying 185,000 Assyrian soldiers (2 Kings 19). However, Assyrian annals are extremely biased ancient propaganda.  Those today who claim that any source showing bias (say, against former President Trump, or against conservative Republicans–of which there are many) should be automatically rejected out of hand would have to deny, if they were consistent, that Assyrian records provide a glorious confirmation of the Biblical miracle.  Likewise, Matthew records that the guards at Christ’s tomb claimed that the Lord’s body was stolen as they slept (Matthew 28).  Matthew, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, intends the reader to be able to see through this biased and false argument to recognize the fact that non-Christians were making it actually provides confirmation for the resurrection of Christ. (If you do not see how it confirms the resurrection, think about it for a while.)

 

Many claims made today, whether that the population of the USA would catastrophically decline as tens of millions would die from the COVID vaccine, that Democratic gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams had her election win in Georgia stolen by Republicans, that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump had his 2020 election win in Georgia stolen by Democrats, that 9/11 was perpetrated by US intelligence agencies, that Trump colluded with Russia to win the 2016 presidential election, that the miracle cure for cancer has been discovered but is being suppressed by Big Pharma, and many other such claims are rarely advanced by those who follow the Biblical principles listed above for evaluating information. Furthermore, the (dubious) method of argumentation for such claims, if applied to the very strong archaeological evidence for the Bible, would very frequently undermine it, or, indeed, frequently undermine the possibility of any historical investigation at all and destroy the field of historical research.

 

In conclusion, I would encourage you to read Historic Doubts Relative to Napoleon Buonaparte, and, as you read it, think about what Scripture teaches about how one evaluates historical information.

 

TDR

 

-The Amazon link above is an affiliate link. Please visit here to learn about how one can donate to charity at no additional cost when purchasing products at Amazon and here to learn how to save on Internet purchases in general.

Redeeming the Time and the News

The Bible commands Christians to redeem the time:

 

See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil.” (Ephesians 5:15-16)

 

I have thought for a while about ways to use for the Lord in the best possible way the limited time we have on this earth to serve Him. For quite a while I have not spent any significant time reading news articles; to learn the news, I have cut and pasted articles, mainly from the “useful sources for news” section on my website, to keep up with what is going on.

 

In a recent article on my website, I wrote the following:

 

[I]f you do not spend serious time in Bible reading, study, memorization, meditation, and prayer daily, in order to grow in grace, and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, along with being a serious servant in one of Christ’s true churches, then forget about [things like politics] … and forget about social media, YouTube, and other such unnecessary things until you repent and make seeking the kingdom of God your first priority (Matthew 6:33).

 

Wanting to actually put in practice what I am writing, I thought about whether the time I spent listening to news articles was the best use of my time.  I have as a life-goal to write a mutli-volume historic Baptist systematic theology. Would progress toward that goal, or study related to other writing projects, be a better use of time than keeping up with secular world events? Would spending more time memorizing or having Scripture read aloud be a better use of time?  Am I truly redeeming the time I spend listening to the news?

 

As a result, I determined to cut both reading and listening to the news out of my life–to take a “news fast” in August, as it were–and evaluate after the month was over if the time was being used more profitably.  The question is not whether there is profit in being aware of the news–perhaps comparable to the profit of bodily exercise, for a little time, 1 Timothy 4:8–but if it was as profitable as other things that are more specifically kingdom-related.  Indeed, since God is sovereign over the affairs of men, doing something more specifically kingdom-related may indeed even do more good in this world than would the knowledge gained from the news, as well as having promise of the life which is to come.

 

So how did it go? I have not missed knowing less of the news by using the time for other things that are more specifically kingdom-related.  Sometimes I have been curious, but I do not think I have missed that much.  It might be fine as well to know less contemporary news and have time to do something like listen through Churchill’s History of the English Speaking People or some other classic work that will help provide broader perspective on history. I am planning to prayerfully reevaluate now that the month is over in order to see what is the best way to proceed for the glory of God at this point.

 

The time many preachers of the gospel spend on the news, or watching various videos, if added up, could be time that would enable them to be fluent in both Greek and Hebrew, vastly sharpen their preaching and ministry skills, and lay up much treasure in heaven drawing near to Christ and ministering to the saints and the lost. And how about the use of time by ordinary church members?  We will have to give account for every one of our minutes at the judgment seat of Christ.

 

There is profit to knowing the news.  However, to repeat what I had affirmed earlier, please prayerfully consider the following:

 

[I]f you do not spend serious time in Bible reading, study, memorization, meditation, and prayer daily, in order to grow in grace, and in the knowledge of Jesus Christ, along with being a serious servant in one of Christ’s true churches, then forget about [things like politics] … and forget about social media, YouTube, and other such unnecessary things until you repent and make seeking the kingdom of God your first priority (Matthew 6:33).

 

If you do not seriously study Scripture and read the Word daily, forget about the news.  If you do not spend serious time in prayer, forget the news.  If you do not memorize Scripture, forget the news. If you do not set aside regular time for meditation–or you have, over the years, read thousands and thousands of pages of news but not even one book on meditating on Scripture–forget the news.  If you do not regularly preach the gospel to every creature and seek to make disciples, forget the news. If you do not have family devotions, forget the news. And what goes for the news goes for social media and other similar time-suckers on the Internet.

TDR

It Won’t Do You Any Good to Apologize for Trump

Very often conservative support for President Donald Trump starts with an apology.  It goes something like the following.

I know he writes mean tweets and makes nasty insults, calls people names like a jr. higher.  He is badly flawed, foul, immoral, a lawbreaker, braggadocios, self-centered, divisive, petty, a liar, a con man, a flip flopper, a criminal, authoritarian, and banal.  But, I still voted for him because, you know, I look at performance.

People who start with an apology, I believe, think they’re warding off the expected angry reaction.  Or, they won’t be associated with the worst character traits of Trump, readying themselves to hear them.  I’m writing to say that it won’t do you any good to apologize for Trump.  Embrace him.  Accept his 2016 victory and his presidency.

None of the other 16 candidates would have defeated Hillary Clinton.  Trump did almost everything he said he would do.  He stuck his thumb in the eye of the corrupt media.  He battled and fought for conservatives against the greatest political opposition in my lifetime and maybe all of American history.

In 1836, Sir Henry Taylor wrote the classic book, The Statesman, the first modern book devoted to that subject.  He wrote:

[A] statesman has already, in the commonwealth of his own nature, given to the nobler functions the higher place; and as a minister; therefore, he is one whom his country may be satisfied to trust, and its best men be glad to serve. He, on the other hand, who sees in the party he forms only the pedestal of his own statue, or the plinth of a column to be erected to his honour, may, by inferior means and lower service, accomplish his purposes, such as they are; but he must be content with vulgar admiration, and lay out of account the respect of those who will reserve that tribute from what is merely powerful, and render it only to what is great.  “He that seeketh to be eminent amongst able men,” says Lord Bacon, “hath a great task; but that is ever good for the public. But he that plots to be the only figure amongst ciphers is the decay of a whole age.”

Professor at Notre Dame, Michael Zuckert, wrote in 2020, Lincoln and Democratic Statesmanship:

Our ideas of statesmanship are fraught with seeming contradictions: The democratic statesman is true to the peoples (sic) wishes and views—but also capable of standing against popular opinion when necessary. The statesman rises above conflicts and seeks compromise between parties—but also stands firmly for what is right.

And I quote all that material about statesmen and statesmanship to get to my subject of President Donald Trump.  I’m not going to say whether I think he is one or not.  As you scan through the annals of the history of government, who was a statesman and did it matter?  Was Julius Caesar one?  What about William the Conqueror?  Was King George III?  What kind of statesmen presided over the Roman Coliseum?

If you go to scripture, you can look at all the various leaders of nations in order to surmise the statesman.  Old Testament Israel looks like a recent Marine Corps slogan, “A Few Good Men.”  Very few.  A statue of General George Patton sits outside the library at West Point some say because he didn’t spend much time in there.  Even Patton wouldn’t survive the present environment of the United States.

Today some propose settling for nothing short of Burkean conservativism in the trajectory of Russell Kirk.  They yearn for William F. Buckley at the National Review.   Jonah Goldberg just today, as I write this post, attacked Trump again.  These conservatives, including many professing Christians, now take on the chief identification of Anti-Trump.  In his piece, Goldberg insulted Trump voters, showing again, as he and others have again and again, got Trump wrong.  This is seen all over his post in the LA Times, which doesn’t publish true conservatives, where he wrote:

One of the paradoxes of charismatic leadership is that the leader’s illegitimacy — in legal, rational or traditional terms — can have the effect of strengthening their hold on their followers. This dynamic has been at the heart of Trump’s distortion of the right. If the man cannot measure up to the traditional, moral, rational or legal yardsticks that conservatives once ascribed to leadership, then it is the yardstick’s fault for not measuring up to the man.

That’s right.  Through his charisma, Trump has a cult-like, worshipful loyalty on his voters, who are called followers.  All of these 74 million voters, which was more than any presidential candidate had ever received in any presidential election, could not see the fraud that Trump was like the enlightened Goldbergian human being.  Goldberg said concerning the Founder of Turning Point USA, “Charlie Kirk, a pliant priest in Trump’s personality cult.”  On the other hand, the public intellectuals (if that is possible), who voted for and defend Trump, call Goldberg the subject of Trump derangement syndrome.  Douglas Wilson wrote last week:

Whatever I might think, the brains behind the progressive left have decided to take a header into the maelstrom of “doing whatever they can to advance the narrative and person and prospects of Donald J. Trump.” This is what a derangement syndrome can do to you. It turns the quivering brains of high-powered political operatives into a soupy kind of jelly, with green mold on the surface.

I see the jelly with the green mold coming out of Goldberg’s ears.

To speak of Trump without apology, consider why you voted for him, support him, and would vote for him again as president, even though you’re a Christian.  You don’t have to use the Russia hoax, even the Dobbs decision to overturn Roe v. Wade with all the conservative justices Trump appointed.  Trump believes that something in the United States is of higher value than other nations worth protecting by securing the borders.  Borders conserve something on the inside that is better than what is on the outside.  That simple, basic conservative idea separated  Trump from his competitors like the wall he aspired to build.

A long time ago the United States left the possibility of a Russell Kirk conservative.  We are in much more desperate times.  We have to look to principles much more basic than those outlined by Edmund Burke and Benjamin Disraeli.  The Brexit vote in England recognized this too.  What I’m describing, Jonah Goldberg calls “instrumentalism.”  He wrote in another essay:

The least objectionable of them justified their decision in the name of instrumentalism—“Trump’s flawed, but we can use him.”

This isn’t using Trump until we can get somebody better.  That’s still an argument for 2024.  No, Trump is where we’re at.  Maybe we will get somebody better, but that’s also the reasoning behind what led to Joe Biden in 2020.

Trump isn’t an instrument.  He espouses necessary, rudimentary principles.  His don’t go far enough.  They don’t do as much as I would do.  But they go further than what we would get from anyone else, such as names like Dole, McCain, and Romney.  Even throw in George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, and Gerald Ford.  Trump truly raised the bar over these men.

I want to argue just a little.  You say, Trump is authoritarian.  He’s a fascist.  By far.  By far, the greatest threat of fascism is the progressive left, like Ronald Reagan said:

America stands on four main values: Faith in God, Freedom of Speech, Family and Economic Freedom. If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism.

Trump in his presidency practiced the separation of powers.  He picked federalist Supreme Court justices, who did more to decentralize the federal government than in decades.  Trump supported that.  You’re just swallowing a lie when you say he’s a fascist or an authoritarian.  He gave freedom to become energy independent, turning loose the American people.

Maybe you say he’s a want-to-be dictator because of January 6, 2020.  Nothing like that came close to happening on January 6, nothing even nearly as bad as what did occur in Seattle, Portland, and the Twin Cities of Minnesota in the previous summer.  The Russia hoax disenfranchised Trump voters.  Illegal ballot harvesting did too.  The perpetrators walk free.  Does anyone think that we live under a fair justice system today?  Where is the abuse of power?  Who has attempted to criminalize parents who speak up in school board meetings?

I don’t apologize for President Donald Trump any more than I do for the minutemen on the Lexington Green.

AUTHORS OF THE BLOG

  • Kent Brandenburg
  • Thomas Ross

Archives