Home » Posts tagged 'righteousness'
Tag Archives: righteousness
Right Applications of Matthew 5:17-20 and Wrong Ones (Part Three)
Jesus Is Scriptural
Everything that Jesus said in His sermon from Matthew 5:1 to 5:16 was a scriptural concept. Nothing Jesus taught contradicted God’s Word. Jesus is God. On the other hand, the religious leaders in Israel were “making the word of God of none effect through [their] tradition” (Mark 7:13). If anyone was destroying the belief and practice of the Old Testament, that is, the fulfilling of the Old Testament, it was them, not Jesus.
Believing and practicing the Old Testament was letting light shine before men. Jesus did that and He called upon kingdom citizens of His to do the same. Proof that He didn’t arrive to earth to destroy the scripture He inspired, Jesus promised perfect preservation of every letter of it.
If Jesus would preserve every letter of written scripture, surely He also expected His people to do all of it too. His teachers would also teach men to do everything scripture said. One could say at this point: in other words, you’ve got to be better than the Pharisees. The righteousness of the Pharisees is not saving righteousness. It is their own version of righteousness that comes from human effort. They couldn’t produce the righteousness that would get them into heaven. That righteousness comes from above.
Righteousness and Saving Faith
Righteousness, which is from above and by the grace of the Lord, exceeds the faux righteousness arising only from man’s works. It doesn’t rank scripture into majors and minors, because it can’t keep everything that He said. Like Jesus, it fulfills written scripture. James in his epistle later says the same. True believers are both hearers and doers of what God said.
Saving faith comes by hearing the Word of God. Someone is begotten by the Word of Truth. It would follow that He would also be a keeper of scripture, like Jesus said. That supernatural righteousness of God produces obedience to scripture. You can detect the unrighteous servant of unrighteousness by His diminishing of scripture.
Here is a professing teacher of God. Someone disobeys scripture. He doesn’t want to offend that person by saying something. He lets it go. This is not doing the least of the commandments and teaching men so.
Ranking Doctrines or the Triage Approach
The Pharisees of Jesus’ day ranked doctrines. Their unity revolved around a triage approach. Instead of following the teaching of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount, they pervert into just the opposite of what He taught. Unity on the least commandments, what they call, non-essentials or minors. These teachings are not a “hill you want to die on.”
Left-Winged Legalism
Professing Christians especially today practice a left-winged legalism more often than the more commonly highlighted right-winged type. The left wing calls its legalism, “grace.” It is turning the grace of God into lasciviousness. Since you can’t keep everything scripture says on your own, reduce its teachings to what you can keep. This is left-winged legalism.
Those practicing left-winged legalism relish pointing out more consistent practice of scripture than theirs as legalism. They do it all the time. How you know they aren’t legalists in their estimation is by their inconsistent practice of scripture. People who try to follow everything like Jesus taught and teach others to do likewise, they aren’t the greatest in the kingdom to left-winged legalists. Instead, they’re “legalists.” Again, it’s in reality just the opposite.
As Jesus moves on in His illustrations in chapter five, you can see how much a truly righteous person strives to love God and His neighbor. It’s not the get-by-ism of the Pharisees and modern evangelicalism, so they can keep their crowds. They’ve dumbed down scripture so that it is unrecognizable as Christianity. This follows the same tack of the Pharisees. There is nothing new under the sun.
A Hot Thing Today in Evangelical Hermeneutics Is Now To See Social Justice All Over the Minor Prophets
Was God angry with Israel for its lack of social justice? No doubt God was angry with Israel and through His prophets He warned them. The Bible, including the Minor Prophets, doesn’t mention “social justice.” It mentions just “justice.” Those who point out social justice in the Minor Prophets, or “The Prophets” as the Hebrews referred to it, say that God punished Israel for its social injustice. What they most often don’t say is that social justice itself is injustice according to its definition:
Social justice refers to a fair and equitable division of resources, opportunities, and privileges in society. Originally a religious concept, it has come to be conceptualized more loosely as the just organization of social institutions that deliver access to economic benefits.
Many different factors change the economic and social outcome of individuals. Scripture and, therefore, God doesn’t guarantee equality of resources or privileges. God doesn’t ensure equal opportunity. Bringing social justice into the Minor Prophets alters the meaning of justice, reads something corrupt into scripture.
When I say, “justice,” I’m speaking of the Hebrew word mishpot, found 421 times in the Old Testament. Translators translate mishpot both “justice” and “judgment.”
Evangelical social justice warriors use a prophet like Amos, where in 5:7 he says,
Ye who turn judgment to wormwood, and leave off righteousness in the earth.
“Righteousness” (tsidaqa) in the second half relates to “judgment” (mishpot) in the first half. A warning occurs later in verse 15:
Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish judgment in the gate: it may be that the LORD God of hosts will be gracious unto the remnant of Joseph.
“Establish judgment” (mishpot) and the “LORD God of hosts will be gracious.” Same chapter, verse 25, was a common refrain from civil rights leaders, used according to what became called “liberation theology,” which spiritualizes these Old Testament passages with a form of amillennialism.
But let judgment run down as waters, and righteousness as a mighty stream.
Social justice advocates now use these verses in a wide ranging manner, that is hardly justice. The “judgment,” that is mishpot, is the judgment of God. How does God judge what occurs? Israel doesn’t follow God’s laws, which are His righteousness. Israel falls short of the glory of God.
Micah is another prophet who confronts the same theme as Amos in such verses like 3:9:
Hear this, I pray you, ye heads of the house of Jacob, and princes of the house of Israel, that abhor judgment, and pervert all equity.
“Equity” at the very end isn’t a contemporary understanding. The Hebrew word means “straight, right, level, or pleasing,” as in pleasing to God. Israel was making crooked what was straight. That’s injustice.
When some people get away with lawbreaking because they’re rich, that is injustice. It’s not judging like God does. When that occurs, the straight becomes crooked. It’s also allowing people to get away with such activity.
Today the social justice warriors are championed by the rich, who get off the hook for their injustice. They cover for criminal evidence on a laptop of the President’s son. They tear up public property in Seattle and Portland without arrest. Illegals flow across the border. A homeless man urinates on the street without justice. Yet, all of this is “social justice.”
A verse in Micah equal in fame to Amos 5:25 is Micah 6:8:
He hath shewed thee, O man, what is good; and what doth the LORD require of thee, but to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God?
People “do justly” or they don’t. In other words, they characteristically do what pleases God or they don’t. Justice relates to God. Doing justice means no one gets away with unrighteousness, which is what God says it is. If he does break God’s law, he repents. When a boy dresses like a girl or a girl dresses like a boy, that’s not mishpot. Abortion violates mishpot too. I can keep going a long time with such examples of the transgression of God’s law.
Calling the contents of the preaching of the Minor Prophets “social justice” perverts the point and meaning of the Minor Prophets. It sounds like impressive exegesis to a woke audience. It panders to that group. However, it corrupts justice. It makes the straight crooked in contradiction to Micah 3:9. It promotes redistribution of wealth, taking from those who earned it and giving it to those who didn’t, a form of thievery. This corresponds to a now famous statement by President Obama when he ran for reelection in 2012, speaking of small business owners, “You didn’t build it.”
The prophets preach repentance too. Amos 5:4 says, “Seek ye me, and ye shall live.” 5:6, “Seek the LORD, and ye shall live.” 5:9, “Seek him that maketh the seven stars and Orion.” 5:14, “Seek good, and not evil, that ye may live: and so the LORD, the God of hosts, shall be with you, as ye have spoken.” The road to justice starts with personal repentance, seeking the LORD and, therefore, His ways.
Perhaps the greatest abuse of justice is idolatry, elevating man’s lust above God. False worship. Rather than loving God, loving your self. None of this is mishpot. This isn’t justice. This isn’t seeking after God.
The Meaning of “Done” and the Work of Christ
I didn’t hear language until recently both in preaching and in reading of the existence of only two religions, one “do” and the other “done.” This nice turn of phrase might help someone who thinks salvation is by works. A popular leader in “new revivalism,” comparable to the label “new Calvinism,” wrote a book titled, “Done.”
In a sense, depending upon the explanation, the “done” versus “do” aphorism is true. With a different explanation, it can also be false though, and dangerous. What I read, very often it is. Many who emphasize “done” and not “do” are wrong, mainly in their watery, pliable definition of “done.” The ambiguity provides for doctrinal perversion.
It makes good preaching to turn to the words of Jesus, “It is finished” (tetelestai, perfect passive), the work of salvation done by Christ on the cross. With the popularity of a new and false view of sanctification, many Christian leaders now say that since salvation is done, when you sin, just preach the gospel to yourself, so you won’t feel burdened down by the guilt. Tetelestai is perfect passive (not to get super Greeky with you), not the aorist tense, completed action. With the perfect, the work is done, but the results are ongoing. Jesus works, but His work doesn’t stop working.
Paul wrote in Philippians 2:13, “it is God which worketh in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure.” He’s not done working in you. “It is finished,” but the results are ongoing. How do you know your salvation is done? Jesus said, “Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew7:21). “He that doeth.” That’s not “done;” that’s “do,” “doeth.” For the one who is really “done,” he will “do.” When someone isn’t doing, then his salvation isn’t done.
The work that Jesus does transforms the actual life, not some kind of fanciful, chimerical life, not actually lived. Some of the “done” people say, Jesus lives it, and you just claim what He did as if it was you. Some reading this may say that you’re not believing that. You are when you lump sanctification with justification. How you know you’re saved is that He keeps saving you. Evidence. It shows up. God provides measurables.
Partly why Jesus’ righteousness doesn’t show up in the the “done ones” is that they did not repent, unless a deconstructed, dumbed down repentance. They changed their mind about their not trusting in what Jesus did. They repented of depending on self. This is the so-called repentance of the Pharisees that diminishes righteousness, what Paul called, ‘establishing your own righteousness and not submitting unto the righteousness of God’ (Romans 10:1-4).
Salvation is “done,” don’t get me wrong. What does “done” mean? When God saves someone, He changes him, makes him a new creature (2 Cor 5:17). Sin doesn’t dominate him any more (Roman 6:14). The eternal life he possesses is more than a quantity of life, but a quality of life. The epistle of 1 John says the life of God indwells the done one (1 John 1:1,2, 5:11), what Peter described as partaking of the Divine nature (2 Peter 1:4).
Very often, modern purveyors of “done” mean, even if for only practical purposes, their salvation is all set regardless if they practice sin as a lifestyle. Any hint that a life is going to change and salvation means “do” and not “done.” As a consequence of this false view, he becomes cemented in sinning, because he sin with no repercussions.
The apparent, albeit wrong, alternative to “done” says receive salvation through Christ’s death after trying to be a good person and living a righteous life. A biblical alternative is that salvation isn’t done until the believer is glorified, and when his salvation is truly done, Christ indwells Him and continues saving him. When God doesn’t indwell someone and transform him, he can only still “do,” except in a dangerous way, fooled in thinking the Lord saved him, when He hasn’t.
Justification In Job, pt. 2
Justification by faith is both an Old Testament and a New Testament doctrine. It reads like a major theme in the book of Job, the oldest Old Testament book. Job’s friends speak to him about justification and Job answers about justification. Is Job justified?
A related aspect to justification is a common Old Testament Hebrew word, mishpot, translated “judgment.” Forms of mishpot occur 23 times in Job. “Judgment” and “righteousness” both have been assessed as the theme of the entire Bible. I can’t disagree with either assessment. Over ten years ago I read a book by James Hamilton, God’s Glory in Salvation through Judgment: A Biblical Theology, which proposed judgment as the subject of all of scripture. Men are judged by God as to whether they are righteous. He judges a man righteous, who is justified. Men also judge other men as to their justification, which is what Job’s friends were doing.
Judgment, mishpot, by God is based upon His righteous nature and standard or law. A popular recent, contemporary concept is “authenticity” or “authentic.” Job was authentic, and the normal or plain understanding of authentic has been based upon an objective standard, so outside of one’s own self. Self-authenticity is a kind of oxymoron. Just because you’re consistent with your own understanding of who you are doesn’t make you authentic. Naugahyde couldn’t be said to be authentic. Leather is. And one can judge leather by an objective standard. It was at one time the outer layer or skin of an animal.
Was Job justified? Was he an authentic righteous man? He, his friends, and finally God have this discussion. Satan said he wasn’t. God said he was. So what is it?
One of Job’s friends, Zophar, starts his speech in chapter 11, asking and using the ninth of twenty-eight usages of a form of the Hebrew verb form tsadek (v. 2):
Should not the multitude of words be answered? and should a man full of talk be justified?
Zophar insinuates overt loquaciousness of Job, implying Job’s justification of himself with his words. Zophar is suggesting that rather than the words of Job justifying him, it be the consequences of his actions. In other words, someone facing the hardship of Job couldn’t be righteous. In weighing Job’s talk against the gravity of his situation, Zophar infers that the latter condemns him. However, Job’s guilt or righteousness could not be judged by the circumstances of his life. Job has been arguing against the false conclusion that his trials evidenced unrighteousness.
In a second chapter of Job’s answer to Zophar in Job 13:18, he says:
Behold now, I have ordered my cause; I know that I shall be justified.
12 Why doth thine heart carry thee away? and what do thy eyes wink at, 13 That thou turnest thy spirit against God, and lettest such words go out of thy mouth? 14 What is man, that he should be clean? and he which is born of a woman, that he should be righteous (tsadek)? 15 Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight. 16 How much more abominable and filthy is man, which drinketh iniquity like water?
Is it any pleasure to the Almighty, that thou art righteous (tsadek)? or is it gain to him, that thou makest thy ways perfect?
4 How then can man be justified with God? or how can he be clean that is born of a woman? 5 Behold even to the moon, and it shineth not; yea, the stars are not pure in his sight. 6 How much less man, that is a worm? and the son of man, which is a worm?
Alas! and did my Savior bleed?And did my Sov’reign die?Would He devote that sacred headFor such a worm as I?
5 God forbid that I should justify you: till I die I will not remove mine integrity from me. 6 My righteousness I hold fast, and will not let it go: my heart shall not reproach me so long as I live.
Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God’s elect? It is God that justifieth.
I put on righteousness (tsadek), and it clothed me: my judgment was as a robe and a diadem.
Let me be weighed in an even (tsadek) balance, that God may know mine integrity.
Then was kindled the wrath of Elihu the son of Barachel the Buzite, of the kindred of Ram: against Job was his wrath kindled, because he justified (tsadek) himself rather than God.
12 Behold, in this thou art not just: I will answer thee, that God is greater than man. . . . . 32 If thou hast any thing to say, answer me: speak, for I desire to justify thee.
For Job hath said, I am righteous (tsadek): and God hath taken away my judgment.
2 Thinkest thou this to be right, that thou saidst, My righteousness (tsadek) is more than God’s? . . . . 7 If thou be righteous (tsadek), what givest thou him? or what receiveth he of thine hand?
I will fetch my knowledge from afar, and will ascribe righteousness (tsadek) to my Maker.
Wilt thou also disannul my judgment (mishpot)? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous (tsadek)?
And it was so, that after the LORD had spoken these words unto Job, the LORD said to Eliphaz the Temanite, My wrath is kindled against thee, and against thy two friends: for ye have not spoken of me the thing that is right, as my servant Job hath.
Justification In Job, pt. 1
When someone thinks of Job, the book of Job from the Old Testament of the Bible, maybe he doesn’t think of “justification.” I’ve taught through the whole book twice, once fast and the second fairly slowly. Recently I was reading through it the second time this year, moving through the Bible twice in this year, and the word, “justify,” stuck out this time to me.
When I taught slowly through Job, I taught the theme was the security of God. God kept Job. Job passed the test because of God. I taught that Job was about God and what He did, not about the person, Job. When we look at the names of the books of the Bible, we can think about the men of the Bible. However, the whole Bible is about God.
The Hebrew word, tsadek, that is translated, “just” or the forms of it, “justify,” “justified,” etc. is found at least twenty-eight times in Job. In this post or maybe a series of two of them, I want to look at all of those usages and how they fit into the book of Job. The word refers to something that is according to a standard that is of the nature and the will of God, so it is just, right, or righteous. It doesn’t fall short of the glory of God. The word applies to God. The standard for right or righteousness is God. Whether someone is righteous or just compares to God, not a human standard.
A big part of Job is whether Job is right with God. You could ask, Is he saved? To be saved, you have to stand before God as righteous. Apparently, Job was righteous, but not according to everyone. How righteous did he need to be? Whatever trials he went through, was it because he was not righteous or because he was? These are important questions. Everyone needs to think about them still. Here’s a last one. If God is the standard, His righteousness, how is Job or anyone else to be justified before God? This brings in the doctrine of justification. How is someone justified? Churches and religions differ as to the answers to these questions, and there is only one right answer.
I’m going to assume that you know, that in the story of Job (chapters 1-2), he is put through one of the most difficult trials ever for any human being in all history, losing all his children, his wealth, and his health. God allows Satan to put Job through this test to prove whether he’s really a righteous man. Satan says, no. God says, yes. While going through these severe circumstances, certain so-called friends of Job give him speeches, also casting doubt on his righteousness.
In Job 4, one of the friends, Eliphaz, talks to Job and argues essentially that people go through things like Job out of judgment for their sin. It had to be his sin. As further evidence, Eliphaz recounts in verses 12-16 that a spirit had given him (we know none sent by God gave him the message) the following message (verse 17), which is also the first usage of tsadek in the book of Job:
Shall mortal man be more just than God? shall a man be more pure than his maker?
It’s the word, “just.” Through the use of these questions, the message to Job is that he shouldn’t be justifying himself before God. Even though no angelic spirit communicated or even would communicate those questions to Eliphaz — you can’t be more just than God — it introduces the subject matter.
Job speaks in Job 6 and says in verse 29:
Return, I pray you, let it not be iniquity; yea, return again, my righteousness is in it.
If thou wert pure and upright; surely now he would awake for thee, and make the habitation of thy righteousness prosperous.
I know it is so of a truth: but how should man be just with God?
Whom, though I were righteous, yet would I not answer, but I would make supplication to my judge.
If I justify myself, mine own mouth shall condemn me: if I say, I am perfect, it shall also prove me perverse.
If I be wicked, woe unto me; and if I be righteous, yet will I not lift up my head. I am full of confusion; therefore see thou mine affliction.
What Is the Righteousness of the Pharisees That Ours Is Supposed to Exceed According to Jesus?
In what’s called the Sermon on the Mount, Jesus says in Matthew 5:20:
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.
I’ve heard this explained in a number of different ways, often, I’ve found, in convenient ones to make room for false doctrine or practice. One error I’ve heard says something like the following and maybe you’ve said it. I’m going to indent it, so that you’ll know it’s representing what other people say it means:
The Pharisees were super righteous people. They were fastidious at keeping the law, since they were experts and were so, so into the law. They were very righteous people, just not perfect, which is what it had to be in order to be saved.
Furthermore, there are versions of Pharisees today. They try to keep all the laws and are very strict. This strictness is Pharisaical, and it produces people who are self-righteous and are trying to impress people with their righteousness by being stricter than others.
This representation of the “righteousness of the Pharisees” doesn’t fit the context in the sermon of Jesus. Jesus wasn’t talking about how greatly righteous the Pharisees were, but how poor their righteousness was. That is seen in the preceding and the proceeding context of Jesus’ sermon. I contend that evangelicals use this false interpretation of the sermon to attack both keeping the law and strict keeping of the law.
A misrepresentation of Jesus, that He wishes to disabuse His audience, was that He, as a teacher, was trying to destroy the law. He says in verse 17:
Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
You could hear, “Just the opposite.” What Jesus came to preach didn’t result in people not being righteous. They couldn’t and wouldn’t be righteous the Pharisee way. The Pharisees were the ones diminishing the law, not Jesus, and Jesus illustrates that in the post context of verses 21 to 48. The standard remained God and not the Pharisees, as Jesus ends the chapter in verse 48.
As Jesus described His position on not destroying the law, He talked about the perpetuity of every jot and tittle (verse 18) and that the greatest in His kingdom kept the least of His commandments (verse 19). The salvation that Jesus taught would produce righteous people. They could and would keep the law — more than that.
Jesus first illustrates His position by giving several examples of the application of “Thou shalt not kill.” His audience had been taught that a particular law or standard of righteousness and if they were at the Pharisee level, they wouldn’t still be keeping the law like Jesus taught that it should be kept. Because of that, they weren’t being righteous.
If Jesus’ audience hated people in their heart, they were guilty of murder before God. If they said certain hateful things, they were committing murder. If they wouldn’t reconcile with someone, they were as much murderers likewise.
Pharisaical righteousness was designed around something less than law keeping. They didn’t really keep the Sabbath, didn’t really not murder, and didn’t really not commit adultery. They didn’t really love God or their neighbor.
The Pharisees concocted means of appearing to keep the law or just keeping their own minimization of the law, what we might call today a deconstruction of the law. With the Pharisees, you could keep the law without actually keeping it. Jesus pointed this out again and again.
You don’t have the righteousness of God when you have that of the Pharisees. You weren’t keeping the law, when you were a Pharisee.
There is an irony to the false interpretation. It is Pharisaical. It purposefully diminishes the law and therefore diminishes the righteousness of God. What I’m saying also fits into what the Apostle Paul said that they did in Romans 10:3:
For they being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God.
The righteousness of justification by faith produces a righteousness greater than what the Pharisees believed and lived. It would look like the righteousness of God, because it was a righteousness of the power of God. This was having your house built on the rock of Jesus Christ and not the sand of the Pharisees.
Christian Patriotism
Christian patriotism could sound like an oxymoron. Patriotism is devotion to and rigorous support of one’s country and Christian is devotion to and rigorous support of Jesus Christ. If you’re really a Christian, then there would not be room for patriotism. What is true about this?
At some point, some kind of patriotism isn’t Christian anymore. There’s a real danger of that. However, I believe patriotism can be consistent with being a Christian. It’s even good and right to a certain extent that is still in the bounds of actual patriotism. Some will disagree and I think in many cases it is harmful disagreement.
Right now, it seems to me that about thirty percent of Americans do not love the flag. In a recent article in the New York Times, an article, “A Fourth of July Symbol of Unity That May No Longer Unite,” starts by telling the story of a produce salesman, who couldn’t sell his potatoes to locals because he displayed the American flag. They associated that with something evil. The theme of the story is that the American flag is a polarizing symbol, not a unifying one.
The state itself wants to change the story of America that is told to children growing up in its school system. It’s a version of history that isn’t happy about America, let alone patriotic. I would assert that those who attack America are an almost exact overlap of those who will attack Christianity today. They’re the same people. Some patriotic Americans now don’t feel free expressing patriotism. Now the American flag associates with Christianity to many and they’re either happy or unhappy with it in a divisive way.
Where does patriotism go too far? God isn’t worshiped by singing a patriotic song; He isn’t. We won’t sing patriotic songs as an act of worship. Mormons have a view very close to the idea that the U.S. Constitution is inspired by God. That’s also not true.
Christian patriotism could be something in the trajectory of Paul’s claiming and using Roman citizenship. It was helpful to him based upon the providence of God. The providence of God is a practical ramification of the sovereignty of God. Because of the power, wisdom, and love of God, we can know that He allows and causes everything, so that He is working all things together for good to those who love God. We look for those ways.
The United States is an example of the providence of God, especially the idea of America, and any way that the scriptural aspects of this idea are upheld. By being patriotic, we are being thankful to God for what He has done. We want to support this. We want to hang on to this. We don’t want to lose this.
America is a part of the plan of God. God has used the country insofar that America has held to scriptural concepts and a belief in the true God. Righteousness has exalted the nation. Sin on the other hand is increasingly though being a reproach to the nation, and genuine Christians would do well as salt to retard that corruption in a patriotic manner.
Christian patriotism is loyal to the preservation of a righteous nation as salt. Why retard corruption? Why not let the nation die? This isn’t God’s will for a Christian. A true patriot will embrace what makes America great and preserve it. To keep it, you’ve got to know what it is. You’ve got to teach it. When people try to keep you from teaching it, you try to do something about that.
Christian patriotism connects with something in the past to celebrate. There is something to shoot off fireworks, wear red, white, and blue, and be thankful to God. Nations are in the will of God. The preservation of those nations requires true affection for what truly makes them great. Patriotism and this affection might be one and the same.
Recent Comments