via Facebook http://ift.tt/2ddBeJm
Thursday, September 29, 2016
Monday, September 26, 2016
The Liberal Agenda will be Crafted by Debate Questions as Much as (or more than) the Answers
Some are reporting that there could be 100 million people watching the first debate between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Moderator Lester Holt will be alone in his duties of asking the questions. We’ll all be paying attention to the answers, but the questions themselves are actually equally or more important.
This size of an audience gives mainstream media the opportunity to determine what we feel is important. Sorry to be the one to tell you this, folks, but that’s how the system works. Coverage is given to the items that the “powers that be” want covered. I’m not suggesting any conspiracy theories, here. It’s very well documented that the media contorts the sentiment of the nation around particular subjects through ongoing coverage of those items while stifling interest in other items based upon lack of coverage. It’s a classic case of the tail wagging the dog; they don’t simply listen to what we want them to report, but they also have a hand in reporting what they want us to see.
Holt is coming in with one major advantage: he’s a registered Republican. This means that the cards are already in play to counter any arguments that Trump was treated unfairly. This was done intentionally, not just for Trump’s sake but also for the sake of the overarching agenda itself. After watching Matt Lauer get skewered from both sides, they felt that Hold would be the least controversial host. They don’t want him in focus. They want the questions in focus.
This is when they have the biggest possible stage to craft the narrative.
Keep in mind that this is neither nothing new nor is it even that nefarious. It’s an ongoing battle between mainstream media and alternative media to keep our attentions in the wrong directions. Alternative media plays its part in highlighting the strange things that really shouldn’t be a concern while mainstream media keeps it simple by keeping our focus on the things they want us to see. This isn’t universal; there are plenty of smaller or alternative media sources that do a nice job, but unfortunately for the sake of pageviews they tend to lean towards crazy more often than not.
What’s the moral of the story? Watch the debate with discernment. Don’t just watch the answers carefully. Pay attention to the questions. There has been so much happening in the world the last year that we’ve become very easy to distract. This is their prime opportunity to keep the distractions coming.
via Soshable http://ift.tt/2dd1rpX
Sunday, September 25, 2016
Saturday, September 24, 2016
Cruz Endorsement Won’t Help Trump or the GOP. In Fact…
This weekend, I will be posting on The New Americana about how the Ted Cruz endorsement of Donald Trump for President is the rallying call conservatives have needed to finally break free from the bonds of the GOP in order to form a new conservative party. This was based upon initial reactions from many NeverTrumpers who looked to Cruz as a leader. Their reactions were not as Trump or Cruz had likely hoped.
Before we get into that, it’s important to understand that I hold no bitterness towards Cruz. It became clear through his primary campaign that many of the things we clung to regarding Cruz as a principled conservative were negotiable. This didn’t make him any worse of a candidate in most of our eyes. It simply made us realize that he’s much more of a politician than we had initially hoped. No big deal, really. Just as we put our best foot forward easily during a first date but often struggle to maintain it as a relationship continues, the revelations early on that Cruz was a politician didn’t take away from the fact that he was the best candidate for the job.
This latest “betrayal” was simply a political move, one that will prove to be a poor one. By turning the attention away from Trump’s shortcomings and towards the existential threat that Hillary Clinton poses, Cruz attempted to justify his decision as a righteous one. He, Trump, and the GOP hoped that it would be a wakeup call to those of us opposed to Trump that we have a bigger battle to fight. It was the standard “lesser of two evils” argument that we’ve been hearing for months.
That’s the problem. We already know Hillary is an existential threat. Our concern is that Trump may be a little less of an existential threat or may be even worse. At this point, we don’t know and it was people like Cruz who we looked to in order to act as the conservative dissent against Trump’s leftward lurch. Cruz pointed to a mode disciplined campaign in recent weeks as justification for changing his mind. What he failed to mention is that Trump has changed in other ways since the convention as well. He’s exposed more of his liberal ideologies, pulling down his tax cuts, promoting big government spending, proposing a minimum wage increase, pushing for government-funded maternity leave, and a handful of other Democratic ideas being adopted by the GOP. In other words, Trump may be campaigning nicer, but he’s even MORE of a threat to society today than when Cruz failed to endorse him at the convention.
This is going to hurt the GOP. It brings to light the thing that conservatives have feared the most: an unchecked Trump. Please don’t take this as support for Hillary in any way, but the one thing she has going for her in the eyes of conservatives is that she’s a clear force for us to unite against an oppose. With Trump, the opposition from the right is currently scattered. It was people like Cruz who gave us at least a little hope that Trump could be reined in by conservatives if he were to win the Presidency. By endorsing, he loses his standing as a conservative dissenter to Trump’s liberal ways.
Some would say that an endorsement does not mean that someone has embraced them fully. I disagree. That’s not to say that endorses are incapable of dissent, but it takes away their core argument. Trump represents the new Republican Party, one that can finally achieve its long-term goal of being the moderate party rather than the conservative one. The more that conservatives like Cruz endorse Trump, the more relevant a new party becomes.
We will be building this party. With or without Cruz, the need for conservatives to have a valid and tangible voice has never been more clear. If anything, Cruz boarding the Trump Train is further justification and an example of how lost the GOP has become.
via Soshable http://ift.tt/2cUKjL5
Wednesday, September 14, 2016
What the GOP Must Learn from Atlas Shrugged
For the third time in less than a week, I’m forced to invoke a book that I actually didn’t really like. Atlas Shrugged is a classic that made some great points about free market capitalism and personal responsibility, but it was a militantly anti-Christian story that glorified “enlightened” thinking outside of Biblical doctrine. Still, there are things that we can take away from it that are worth noting.
If you haven’t read it, I wouldn’t recommend it. Over the years it’s been put on a philosophical pedestal and glorified by many political pundits, particular Libertarian-leaning fiscal conservatives, but in my humble opinion it was above-average at best. Nonetheless, here’s my spoiler alert. I’ll be going into details about the ending which was utterly ludicrous in any reality other than three:
- If the world descends into a dystopian vision due to industrial economic collapse not brought on by war or natural catastrophe, the book’s end is viable.
- In a post-apocalyptic world that attempts and fails to properly rebuild, the end is viable.
- In the 2016 election where conservatism is tossed to the wolves, the end is applicable.
Obviously, I’m focusing on the last reality since it’s our reality.
Leave, Regroup, Rebuild
In Atlas Shrugged, the people who have the skills, drive, and ambition to succeed are the people who can save the collapsing socialist society around them. Unlike the realities we’re seeing around the world and the one that is emerging in America, the socialism described in Atlas Shrugged is hidden and subtle. It’s wrapped in a faux-totalitarian government that has embraced the ideas of crony capitalism without the benefits of a capitalistic engine upon which to mooch.
The capitalists, represented in Atlas Shrugged as industrialists and practical scientists, leave. The best minds are plucked from the world suddenly and completely. John Galt, the ideological leader of the movement, takes the people who can preserve society and hides them away in a mini-utopia off the map where they build a working community separate from the outside world.
They live for themselves and believe two concepts: paraphrasing, they will demand nothing of any other man and they will not accept demands from any other man.
The near future that they see is one where the world essentially collapses and falls back 100 years. Without the industrialists, trains will be replaced by horse and buggy. Electric light will be replaced by lanterns. Infrastructure will collapse. Dog will eat dog. When everything is so bad and the government is completely abolished, they will reemerge and rebuild.
This is the model that conservatives must adopt. We are the industrialists and practical scientists of the modern world. Through conservatism, the GOP has harnessed our proper and righteous mentalities in the campaign slogans, but have acted against the precepts. Just as the “looters” in Atlas Shrugged took from the industrialists, the Establishment has taken from conservatives their “fair” share while refusing to actually embrace the solutions that conservative politicians, pundits, and wonks have recommended.
For centuries in Atlas Shrugged, the looters took from the industrialists and accepted the benefits of their brainpower, then using it against them to promote an agenda that was contrary to the industrialists’ strengths and values. For decades, the Establishment has held the mantle of conservatism while practicing tactics to take conservatives down.
It’s time to depart. It’s time to leave the GOP. It’s time to take our ideas and talents to our own political party utopia and let the liberals in both parties battle to see who can do the most harm to the country, Unlike the industrialists in Atlas Shrugged, we will not wait for the collapse before we start taking action. We will regroup as quickly as possible under a new conservative party and begin preparations to rebuild conservatism and therefore the party itself.
It won’t be easy. When reading Atlas Shrugged, one is left with the feeling that everything would be fine and that the industrialists will be able to essentially reverse the apocalypse. Our situation as conservatives is the opposite. What we’re about to go through with the next liberal President isn’t necessarily going to be the apocalypse, but we’ll need all of our talents, effort, and the grace of God in order to make it possible. New parties have failed since the 19th century. We only have two things going for us:
- Never since the 19th century has there been a more suitable moment to galvanize conservatives behind a new party. The GOP has abandoned us with the expectation that we’ll return because we always do.
- We’re in the right. They, both major parties, are in the wrong.
By taking advantage of this unique political atmosphere and applying the principles of velocity and exceptionalism, defying the odds of building a new party can be achieved. Like the industrialists in Atlas Shrugged, we will allow the political landscape to hit rock bottom before bringing our ideas back to the table in a new and controlled manifestation. Conservatives will finally be able to call the shots. That’s the only way for America to see it’s brightest days once again.
The GOP will learn a lesson from this experience, but it won’t be what they expect. They’re looking for conservatives to come running back to Trump if he wins or the Establishment if he loses. We will do neither. They must be made to realize that we will no longer answer to the demands of the GOP, nor will we demand that the GOP appease us. Through a clean break, we’ll be able to heal conservatism and the nation quicker while building a stronger foundation around conservatism.
via Soshable http://ift.tt/2d0ia3R
Monday, September 12, 2016
Frank Drebin arrives at Hillary's campaign headquarters, tells press to go home. "There's nothing to see here."
via Facebook http://ift.tt/2cUUzBl
Sunday, September 11, 2016
Saturday, September 10, 2016
Easing Back into the Faithful Mix
Anyone who has had to separate themselves from something they love know that it’s very difficult. It can drain our spirits and make us question our own actions. I’ve recently had to do just that by stepping away from this website to work on a different project. Now that it’s up and running, I feel it’s time to ease back into the thing that I love most: spreading the Word of God.
As always, my priorities are faith, business, and politics. Some have asked where family and friends fit into this mix. They are part of all of it; I do not disconnect my actions from the people in my life. My wife is part of my faith, my business, and my politics. My children are entering into a each as well. All of my friends are there through faith, business, or family. I have no friends who aren’t somehow involved.
Now that the new project is up and running, there’s an opening for me to spend some time on Judeo-Christian Church. I can’t wait! There have been so many things percolating in my mind that I’ve wanted to share but couldn’t put in the necessary time. Hopefully, those things weren’t lost completely. I won’t be posting daily as I was before, at least not yet. In the meantime, please accept what I can give and pray for those who need to hear the Word of God.
The post Easing Back into the Faithful Mix appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.
via Judeo Christian Church http://ift.tt/2cP42u2
Proverbs 3:7 – ‘Be not wise in thine own eyes’
Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the Lord, and depart from evil.Proverbs 3:7 (KJV)
Sometimes, we explore Bible verses that require a great deal of guidance and interpretation. We have to look to the ancient Hebrew or Greek to make sure that we think the verse says is actually what it’s saying. He have to read it in context to find the original intent and apply it to the ongoing Biblical worldview. All the while, we have to be sure that we’re practicing exegesis rather than eisegesis. It can all be daunting.
Thankfully, a good chunk of the Bible is very straightforward. In this verse, the intentions are profound and quite clear. Our wisdom is not truly wisdom if it doesn’t come through God. Wisdom begins when we fear the Lord and departing from evil. Until we do that, we are not wise. In fact, knowing that we are not wise is the only form of wisdom that we really have outside of what is given to us by the Lord.
I guess it was a little more confusing than I thought, but thankfully the verse by itself is very clear.
The post Proverbs 3:7 – ‘Be not wise in thine own eyes’ appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.
via Judeo Christian Church http://ift.tt/2cfGgUb
What if John Galt had been Written as a Christian?
Ayn Rand wasn’t just an atheist. In many ways, she could be considered a “militant atheist” – someone who isn’t satisfied with not believing in God but who must try to convince others that God doesn’t exist. One of the most adored characters she wrote into her books, John Galt, was a representation of a militant atheist.
Atlas Shrugged is a very good book from a secular perspective. It has some lessons to teach about personal responsibility, the potential disasters that can arise from social justice, and most importantly the general well-being of the nation that can be built when the government gets out of the way of free market capitalism. It’s a good read for those who are firm in their faith and who have no fear of facing challenges from alternative non-Biblical philosophies.
Two warnings: First, here’s your spoiler alert. I won’t go into too many details but we’ll be discussing the characters quite a bit. Second, this is not a book that I would recommend to anyone who still has questions about whether or not they believe. The book makes no real arguments against Creation, but it definitely paints the concept of faith and organized religions in ways that are insulting. This is, in no way, a Christian book.
With that out of the way, let’s look at John Galt himself. For background to those who haven’t read it (and don’t plan on reading it) or for those who need a refresher, John Galt is the unofficial leader of a group of thinkers and doers in a pre-dystopian world. Over a twelve-year period, he and a few of his friends build a hidden group that operates partially in the outside world and partially in a secret paradise they’d set up in a valley in the Rocky Mountains. They are trying to bring together the industrialists, scientists, and generally exceptional people in America to hide away while society around them crumbles into a liberal disaster.
The book uses mild hyperbole to show the deterioration of America and the world as a result of indoctrinated laziness and fear from a pseudo-totalitarian form of government. It requires suspension of disbelief to imagine this happening in such a short period of time, but in that suspension of disbelief we’re able to see an unintended Biblical message that would likely annoy Rand if she had been aware of it.
Why Atlas had to Shrug
The deterioration of society happened, in Rand’s opinion, because the people in power reached the culmination of centuries of radical social justice liberalism. The “thinkers” other than the protagonists all believed that fairness superseded value. This gave rise to a perverse form of socialism that wasn’t quite communism but was beyond the redistribution of wealth. People were to be paid based upon need rather than accomplishment. This concept mixed with utter corruption and exaggerated cronyism created the environment where America could go from being a vibrant industrial nation to complete collapse within a decade.
This was framed as a battle between the “looters” and the “industrialists.” The industrialists built the best parts of society’s infrastructure and financial stability while the looters took advantage of them to promote their corrupt goals.
It would be impossible today. It might not be impossible in the near future, but there’s a concept that would have halted Rand’s dystopian vision in its tracks. The Bible represents the ultimate combination of property rights with caring for the weak and needy. As long as there is a true Biblical faith prominent in the nation, the evils required to take the nation in that direction will be halted. The scary thing to consider is that the two factors for collapse are increasing: Biblical faith is losing prominence and liberal policies are growing in power and frequency.
John Galt and his cohorts were necessary to save a remnant of the nation and the world while everything collapsed so they could come back and rebuild if and when they chose. This hyper-elitist mentality of being above the elites who were above the proletariat and everyone in between is only necessary if the proletariat has their Biblical faith disarmed. For Rand’s vision to have basis in reality, faith would have to be almost completely abolished.
Was there a Better Way?
Lost in the grand rise of freedom for the industrialists is the fact that Atlas Shrugged essentially rooted for the death of millions. We are supposed to cheer for those who have chosen to abandon society because society wouldn’t allow the industrialists to do what they needed to do to save the world, but there’s only a hint of the destruction that their choice caused. We see it near the end as Eddie Willers is left to die on the train track that he’d spent his adult life defending. Eddie never embraced the pseudo-totalitarianism of the looters. He supported the ideas of the industrialists even if he was never fully aware of their plans. In fact, Willers was the closest that anyone could come to being part of the hyper-elite; he was a childhood friend of one of the founders, Francisco D’Anconia, a long-time friend and confidant of John Galt, and the only trusted asset (as well as lifelong friend) of the protagonist, Dagny Taggart.
Didn’t matter. He wasn’t part of the hyper-elite. He was left to die, not because he represented the evil of social justice but because he was only a common man.
Eddie should have been helped. Millions of people who didn’t believe in the evil doctrines of the government but who were not part of the upper echelons of thought should have been helped. Instead, they were cast out and left to die by the industrialists who were safe and prospering in their little slice of heaven. Would some of them be able to see a better world after total collapse? Certainly, but only after the hyper-elites decided that the time was right for them to reenter the world and rebuild it as its rightful leaders.
From John Galt’s perspective, this was an absolute necessity. Society couldn’t be saved without a complete purge of the social justice mentality that ruled it. This is where a new suspension of disbelief has to happen if we’re to extrapolate beyond the final page of the book and see a happy continuance as Rand intended. We are to believe that after the world had been brought back centuries to be driven by horse and wagon rather than railroads and planes, that the industrialists were savvy enough to bring the world back. We are to believe that the lessons from the purge would be so deeply embedded that the corruption the industrialists fought would never reappear. Most importantly, we’re supposed to believe that their sheer will would be enough to unite the world behind their goals and under their leadership.
This is where the extrapolation falls apart. It doesn’t matter how much philosophy Ragnar Danneskjöld brought to the world. Hank Reardon’s skills in business and smelting were strong, but not strong enough. One could say that John Galt’s science was earth-changing, but as with everything else, it required labor. For the world to be rebuilt as they hoped, they would require the willful submission of the masses that remained. Unfortunately, the masses that would remain wouldn’t be like Eddie Willers. They would be the “strong” who had taken what they needed by force to survive. The roving gangs that emerge in chaos would embrace their own strength and would actually see the re-industrialization of the world as a bad thing.
They would fight and they would probably win.
What if, instead of abandoning the world, the hyper-elite decided to lead the world? Could they have united rather than divided? Could they have consolidated their efforts towards saving the world instead of hiding away while it collapsed?
Since we’re discussing fiction, it’s easy to speculate. Nothing in it is real so any perspective is valid. As such, I’ll contend that by embracing faith and realizing the truth of the Bible, John Galt could have led a different revolt. Rather than hiding, he could have led. If all of this were real, if John Galt were real, then the only chance of success would have been by embracing the realities that the Bible describes.
Throughout the Bible, the Grace of God bestowed on individuals was greater than anything they could have contributed otherwise. It wasn’t the physically strong such as Saul who were empowered. It was the weak in strength but strong in faith such as David who were empowered. What if John Galt had been written as this type of person? What if, instead of being strong by his own powers, he took his strength and acknowledged that it was given to him by God?
I won’t speculate further on how this could have rewritten the book and yielded the same secular message against socialism while bringing forth the more important message of faith. That’s for you to ponder.
We Need Modern John Galts
There’s a reason that I decided to write about John Galt from a Christian perspective. We need people like him today. It’s not his scientific skill nor his industrial savvy that is required. We need the expression of the realities of the Bible to bring the world back from the brink, if that is God’s Will. So many are willing to abandon this world. Some do it for righteous reasons; we are told to not love this world. Others do it out of disgust; it’s being given over to the evil will of men. In a time where progress seems unstoppable, we’re breeding the essence of our own destruction.
The concept of John Galt as a Christian leader is one that should entice us. Nobody knows whether or not the end times will begin tomorrow or in a century. Some can demonstrate that the end times have already begun. It is imperative that people step up and declare the truth of the Bible to as many as possible. A character like John Galt, if manifested in the real world with a Biblical worldview, could do good in the name of Yeshua Ha-Mashiach.
It doesn’t end there. We need planners like Dagny Taggert. We need supporters like Eddie Willers. We even need pirates like Ragnar Danneskjöld. By no means am I suggesting that Atlas Shrugged is a model for modern day Christendom. Rather, I believe that Christians who are still worshiping the tenets of Ayn Rand or any other secular thinkers should take what they’ve learned and see them through a Biblical perspective.
Without intention, Ayn Rand developed a mindset that partially promotes the necessity of a Biblical worldview. The realities of a dystopian society may or may not be upon us, but the best chance of bringing as many people as possible into an embrace of our Lord and Savior is if we’re willing to see the world for what it is. Atlas Shrugged teaches us that a Biblical worldview is the only thing that can truly save us. That was Rand’s contribution even if her intention was the opposite.
The post What if John Galt had been Written as a Christian? appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.
via Judeo Christian Church http://ift.tt/2cuxbKl
Monday, September 5, 2016
Donald Trump is Napoleon the Pig from Animal Farm
It’s easy to find irony in comparing Donald Trump to the villain in George Orwell’s Animal Farm. First, the fact that Orwell was a socialist might make the comparison something of a compliment in the eyes of Trump supporters who either haven’t read it or are unfamiliar with its meaning. Second, the villain, a pig named Napoleon, represents Joseph Stalin, one of the early leaders of the Soviet Union.
The biggest irony, though, is that Trump would likely consider it endearing in some way. He would respect Stalin’s absolute authoritarian power over the land and while he would condemn Stalin’s actions against his own people, there would be a hint of longing to be like him in other ways.
If you haven’t read the book, do so before reading this article if you ever plan on reading it at all. There are spoilers coming. It’s still taught in most public schools, so we’ll assume that most have read it.
The story follows Napoleon who, after the farm animals vanquished their human masters, shared a leadership role with Snowball. Through cunning and manipulation, Napoleon forced Snowball from the farm as well, leaving the fate of the animals on the farm in his own hands. He went on to convince the animals that his actions, while seemingly contrary to the precepts they’d established from the start, were actually in their own best interests. Some of the animals questioned his intentions mildly, but they all eventually went along with it.
Over time, his shifts away from the independence and beneficial living circumstances that they fought for initially led to harsh realities facing the animals. They thought they remembered that things were different in their initial thinking, but they trusted Napoleon, his fellow pigs, and the harsh dogs who accompanied them everywhere. In the end, they came to understand that the pig they’d followed to keep away from the evils of men was actually working towards becoming one of the enemies himself.
Donald Trump is Napoleon to the Republican party. He’s slowly shifting the conservative principles of the party out the door and replacing them with the same sort of populist views that helped to build the modern Democratic party. Some Republicans are noticing the shifts and crying foul, but most are accepting him just as the farm animals accepted Napoleon. “He’s not perfect, but at least he’s not a Democrat.”
If Trump wins (and I believe that he will), we will see through his first and only term that he’s a big government, big-spending Democrat who has used immigration as a way to demonstrate his conservative credibility. I don’t doubt that he’ll build his wall, though not necessarily for security. There are better ways to secure the border that won’t cost $70 billion and that won’t require the use of eminent domain to lurch the lands by the border away from Americans who own them. In fact, a drone-based electronic border would be exponentially more effective because it would allow us to actually monitor the entirety of the border and to catch those who try to cross it. The wall will bring us a false sense of security as we’ll hope that there are no 31-foot ladders to scale a 30-foot wall or as we pray that there aren’t a ton of tunnels that the wall would not be able to detect. or prevent.
A virtual wall would be practically impenetrable, but one would have to understand Trump’s motives for building a wall in order to understand why he won’t go with the better, cheaper virtual wall. He wants a monument. He wants The Great Wall of Trump to rival The Great Wall of China in a thousand years. It’s his windmill from Animal Farm.
If Trump is Napoleon, then his fellow pigs are Chris Christie, Ben Carson, Rick Perry, and the various Republican officials who have stood by his side. That would mean that Trump’s variation of Napoleon’s dogs would be Sean Hannity, Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh, protecting him from insult and attacking those who would question their top pig.
When the dust settles, we’ll have a wall and a bunch of liberal policies that would be very similar to the ones we would get with a President Clinton. The real difference is that with Clinton, we can oppose her in unison just as the animals opposed humans together… and won. Trump will deliver us to the humans (liberals) and it will be too late for opposition when it’s revealed.
This isn’t a call to vote for Clinton. She’s just as bad and I would never ask anyone to vote against their conscience. However, a vote for Trump is just as bad because he’s the enemy within rather than the enemy we can all unite against. 2016 is a sad year for conservatives, but at least it gives us the ability to start fresh with a new party separate from the GOP or the Democrats.
via Soshable http://ift.tt/2c3wYKK
Are We Seeing the Deadly Head Wound of Revelation Being Inflicted on the Islamic State
Speculation has never been something we like to engage in on this site or in our walk with Christ. Throughout the Bible, we are warned about participating in falsehoods, changing the Word, or leading people astray which is why we try to stay within the realm of the certain. Thankfully, there is certainty in the majority of the Bible, so we rarely have to venture too far from it.
The Book of Revelation is different. With so many interpretations and understandings that have been proposed over the centuries, it’s hard to avoid speculation. As long as it’s done with a spirit of discernment and with open discussions at heart, we feel it’s good to speculate if only to open up further discussion. From Islam to the Roman Catholic Church to America to the European Union to aliens, the identity of the first beast in Revelation 13 has been the topic of many viable theories. Of particular note is the vision that a deadly wound was inflicted on one of the heads of the beast, then the wound was healed.
And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?Revelation 13:1-4
It’s always imperative to read exactly what was said in scripture. Human nature gives us the tendency to read things into the text; we extrapolate what we can conceive into things we don’t understand. For example, some of the most prolific Bible scholars would tell you that the head was killed and revived. The text does not say that explicitly. It says that the head was wounded to death and healed. This could mean that it was killed and revived. It could also mean that it received a wound that should have killed it and was miraculously healed before death. As we see later in the same chapter, the latter is the case as it refers to the beast “which had the wound by a sword, and did live,” yet some scholars still refer to the incident as death and revival.
Another example of reading facts into the text based upon our assumptions, an act known as eisegesis, is that most assume the dragon healed the wound. A careful reading shows that the deadly wound was healed and that the dragon gave power unto the beast, but it doesn’t explicitly say that the dragon healed the wound. Some may say we’re splitting hairs or we’re getting too literal with our exegesis. I would warn that frivolous assumptions are much more dangerous than treading too carefully when reading the Bible.
One final assumption that is often made: the heads of the beast are heads of state. There are books written about how the head of the beast that is wounded is the antichrist, but again the text does not say this explicitly. We are often told that any mention of someone or something that is bad in books of prophecy must be referring to the antichrist, but there are reasons that this and other books are so nebulous in their portrayal of the various characters involved in the last days. While it’s very possible, perhaps likely, that the heads of the beast are heads of state and that one or all of them are representations of the antichrist, we are compelled to offer a less popular alternative for the sake of discernment. If we are, indeed, in the last days, then it will be extremely important for believers to remain diligent in their watching of world events in order to recognize when things spoken of in the Bible are coming to pass.
The theory I’m about to touch on is one that we don’t fully embrace. In fact, we choose to not fully embrace any of the theories until facts or further understanding gives us reason to do so. It’s best to know what options to consider and to keep our eyes watchful of all realistic potentials rather than focus on one that may or may not be real. I say that we’ll touch on it only because this could very easily be an exhaustive study and we’re only wanting to plant the seed so that others may do further investigating.
If the beast in Revelation 13 is Islam, then it’s possible that the head that is given the deadly wound is the Islamic State. Currently, Islam is broken up into various warring factions which could represent the various heads of the beast. Because the beasts are personified, it’s easy to assume that they refer to individuals, but that’s often not the case in the Bible. Individual entities are often used to represent nations and people groups. Throughout this chapter, some portions seem to indicate that the beasts are men and other portions indicate that they’re groups.
We’ll leave that debate for others. Again, we are only pointing to possibilities. The concept that the Islamic State could be this beast with a deadly wound makes sense as we look at current events. We’re witnessing ISIS being driven back from lands that they’ve held for months. We’re seeing them getting bombed by Russian jets, American drones, and now Turkish tanks. Over the coming weeks, we will likely hear of more wounds to this beast that could culminate in a massive blow that many would consider them being wiped out.
Watch for this. If it happens, then we may also see the rise of the Islamic State through its other component: terrorism. While the military operations are faltering, they have infiltrated the west through Europe as well as into the United States through various means. They are also indoctrinating “homegrown” radicals throughout the world. As ISIS suffers a grave military wound, it will be time to watch for a miraculous “revival” that happens through the devastation of terrorism.
We’ll leave it there. Again, we’re not point to what will be, but rather what to look for if it does come to pass. We’ll leave the rest of the investigating and speculation to you.
The post Are We Seeing the Deadly Head Wound of Revelation Being Inflicted on the Islamic State appeared first on Judeo Christian Church.
via Judeo Christian Church http://ift.tt/2bTjiEt
Saturday, September 3, 2016
Friday, September 2, 2016
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)