Pg.4
Li'l Big Lies, Pg.4
Here's (You guessed it) another page of relatively short li'l essays on a broad range of topics, all designed to topple some portion of the hulking pile of rot that is THE BIG LIE! There's a lot of cluttered thinking going on out there, so check back some time again in the near future for more commentary on it than anyone could possibly care to read...Oh, will it never end?!?
God vs. Mammon
The Nazis' True Ideological Heirs
Peace! Peace!
"No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon (Matthew 6:24)". Those who worship the "Almighty Buck" sell themselves short. Money could never equal in value the majesty of omniscient, omnipresent, and omnipotent God, to the kingdom of whom we may be heirs through Christ.
Money in and of itself is not a bad thing. It is simply a tool to barter with while we live, and may be used to do much good. Somehow it has become a common saying that "money is the root of all evil", but the scripture that this was originally taken from was corrupted through time and misquoting. The full passage really speaks of "perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth, supposing that gain is godliness." It goes on to say, "from such withdraw thyself. But godliness with contentment is great gain. For we brought nothing into this world, and it is certain we can carry nothing out. And having food and raiment let us be therewith content. But they that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the LOVE of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows (1Timothy 6:5-10)." Considering this, it's saddening how many people in this country love and value cash more than morality these days. Just look at how Bill Clinton was given a pass on all his high crimes and misdemeanors because the economy was good (even though he had not nearly so much to do with it as the Republican congress and policies initiated during Reagan's presidency). Robert Byrd-brain, venerated in the press as the constitutional scholar and conscience of the Senate, admitted that what Clinton did leapt the bar of what counted as an impeachable offense, yet voted against his removal from office with the economy as his excuse.
It's also amazing how many women seem so intent on turning the spiritual institution of marriage into a form of glorified prostitution, marrying for money and excusing it as seeking security. This propensity has existed throughout history (it used to be called gold-digging), however it seems to be a more prevalent trend recently. Anecdotes of this abound, but a few personal experiences should illustrate sufficiently. I know someone who broke his arm once when we were at a cook-out. Instead of showing any concern or compassion for him in his pain, his wife got vicious, nasty and violent toward him (the fact that she is usually that way otherwise notwithstanding), complaining about it because it might hinder him in his job. When, as I was preparing to take him to the hospital, I suggested that considering the circumstances maybe she should lighten up on him, she threw an ashtray at me and shrieked, "That's my meal-ticket!!!" Another time, as my students were working on a project (I teach art in an elementary school), I overheard one of them telling her classmates, "My mom says he doesn't make enough money for her as a teacher." Whether or not this was somehow in direct reference to me (I don't even know her mom), I couldn't resist musing off-handedly aloud, "I'm so poor I can't even pay attention! I have enough money to last me the rest of my life, though...That's if I don't buy anything (my apologies to Henny Youngman)." Lastly, who hasn't heard the expression "diamonds are a girl's best friend"? Man, that's pathetic! They're cold chunks of hardened carbon. What kind of companionship can they provide? Beyond how they may symbolically tie two people together as a promise of matrimony (a truly valuable thing when Christ is at the center of it), what good is that sparkly ice? Packrats are attracted to shiny objects, too. Several years ago I was engaged to be married. After the break-up, when I was explaining to a friend how mercenary my ex-fiancé was in general, and how clear she made it that she loved the rock I gave her more than she loved me, he told me a story about a guy who asked a woman if she'd sleep with him for a million dollars. "YES!" came the immediate reply. "How about for ten dollars?" he asked. She barked indignantly, "Just what do you think I am?" "Madam," he said, "We've established what you are. Now we're just haggling over the price!"
Given my own financial status, I suppose it's fortunate that I tend to honestly LIKE cheap junk. In addition, I currently rent a dingy li'l hovel (I'm looking around, hoping to buy my OWN dingy li'l hovel). If I was rich, I'd just be able to afford MORE cheap junk and a BIGGER dingy hovel! Although I don't love nor presently make all that much money, I'm a committed capitalist and believe in the free market system on principle. Why resent the wealthy when most of them got that way by putting in long hours and taking chances that others don't? There is a biblical admonition that if one doesn't work, one does not eat (2Thess. 3:10). This is echoed by Robert A. Heinlein, via Lazarus Long, when he famously said, "There's no such thing as a free lunch." Welfare advocates believe in forced compassion (which is no true compassion at all), wherein money is taken from the people that made it through taxes, and is given to those who never earned it. Many columnists (Paul Craig Roberts, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, etc.) have commented that liberals are all for wealth redistribution when it's done forcibly by government (Years ago, I had to laugh when Bill Clinton and his gang started referring to taxes as "contributions", implying they're something given out of the goodness of one's heart...Try withholding your "contributions" from the IRS sometime and see what happens), but wouldn't condone it if done to them at gun point by robbers (I've heard it said that a conservative is a liberal that got mugged...I'd take it a step further and state that a conservative is a liberal who got mugged by reality!), in spite of it being the same difference. Beside being the more moral path for that reason, a free market affords people more freedom in general. Freedom in turn provides those who take advantage of it the opportunity to make more wealth. When wealth is created, the standard of living is raised for all, even those at the bottom rung of the economic ladder, more so than in those systems which exist under communism or socialism (more peaceful, democratic robbery). The Bible obviously advocates the owning of private property. How can stealing be a sin if one can't own something to begin with? I abhor the faulty argument I've heard so often about the similarity between communism (always qualified with the phrase "in its pure form", as if that ever existed anywhere) and the early Christian church. The folks that attempt to make this bad analogy always neglect to notice or mention that the former, every time it's been tried, has been mandatory, enforced through tyranny. As concerns the latter, members of the newly formed church of Jesus pooled their resources voluntarily to further the cause of Christ (Acts 2:44-47, 4:32-37). The couple described in Acts 5:1-12 (Ananias, and his wife, Sapphira) clearly fell instantly dead when they were caught lying to the Holy Ghost and God about holding back from the group some of the money that they got through selling a possession, not because they kept some of what belonged to them at the outset.
Regardless of the merits of capitalism, one should wisely meditate on Christ's rhetorical question, "For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul (Mark 8:16)?" My name, Edward, means guardian of wealth. Though I don't necessarily see that in action in my life monetarily, I consider it more important to be possessed of spiritual things (The law of thy mouth is better unto me than thousands of gold and silver. Psalm 119:72). In Luke 12:15-21 Jesus warned, "Take heed, and beware of covetousness: for a man's life consisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth. And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully: And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods. And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said unto him, Thou FOOL, this night thy soul shall be required of thee: then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God." Reiterating, Jesus also said, "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: But lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal: For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also (Matthew 6:19-21)." If temporal riches increase, we should not set our hearts upon them (Psalms 62:10).
A rich man approached Jesus and asked Him what he needed to do to inherit eternal life. "Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me. But when the young man heard that saying, he went away sorrowful: for he had great possessions. Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. When his disciples heard it, they were exceedingly amazed, saying, Who then can be saved? But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible (Matthew 19:16-26)." I heard an explanation of this business about the camel passing through the eye of a needle that sounded plausible. Apparently, in the fortified cities of Christ's time, there was a small opening in the wall surrounding them called the eye of the needle. Travelers arriving at night after the main gates were closed could use it to access entry. The eye of the needle was only big enough for the traveler's camel, stripped of its burden, to crawl through on its knees. Hence, a rich man may only enter heaven if he is willing to let go of his earthly goods and go in humbly through the only entrance available, which is Jesus Christ the Lord.
Truly, "the best things in life are free," the free gift of eternal life granted by grace through faith in Christ being the primary, best example. Ownership of a gift doesn't become official if one does not accept that gift, however. The wealthiest man on earth, if he hasn't received Jesus personally as Savior by the time he dies, will find out that "you can't take it with you when you go...Money burns!"
The Nazis' True Ideological Heirs
Liberals love to compare conservatives to Nazis in general, and to Hitler in particular. They delight in referring to those on the right as fascists. In doing so, however, they ignore history as it compares to their own natural inclinations, labeling others with epithets that rightly belong at their own doorstep.
Nazis were not the National Socialist German Workers' party in name only. Fascism, as promoted by Mussolini and Hitler, had everything to do with socialism as it is defined and understood in practice.
Socialism allows for private ownership of business, controlling the means of production by government through democratic processes (In the USA, this is attempted by bloating the centralized federal government), as opposed to communism, in which the public, government itself, owns the means of production (generally achieved by force, as in the case of the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia and Mao's in Red China). Both are forms of collectivism and wealth redistribution, differing only in the method of reaching the same end.
By 1933, Nazi party members, democratically elected, gained a majority of seats in Germany, giving them control of the Reichstag and allowing them to install Adolph Hitler as Chancellor. Nazis believed in the "total state" or totalitarianism in the extreme, with all individual rights eliminated, the state considered supreme. In the Third Reich, citizens retained private ownership of their companies, but government demanded total control of it...All of the individual's wealth and being were to be subservient to society. Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels said, "To be a socialist is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole." Through taxation, regulation, and by benefit of massive bureaucracy, the Nazis ruled the economy and the German people with an iron fist, slaughtering or imprisoning anyone who resisted.
Though liberals and conservatives seem at times to have shifted, trading places in their stances on certain issues (Liberals are now for preferential treatment based on race while conservatives are for a color-blind meritocracy; conservatives value legitimate freedom of speech while liberals seek to exercise censorship and suppression of dissent through "political correctness", etc.), each pretty much stays true to its basic philosophy. Conservatives favor the free market and adherence to constitutionally guaranteed individual rights, while liberals, secure in their own self-perceived superiority and leery of anyone else's ability to determine the course of their own lives, want a monolithic, centralized federal government to run everything under their elitist guidance. The liberal dream mirrors what the Nazis envisioned and eventually attained.
It's the liberals who (like the Nazis) want to control private property and businesses through governmental regulation. It's the liberals (like the Nazis) who never met a tax increase that they didn't like, and expect their brown-shirts in the IRS to enforce confiscation of capital so they can redistribute it as they deem best for the supposed good of society. It's the liberals, with their men Bill and Hillary Clinton leading the charge, that tried to put our nation's health care system (one-seventh of our GNP) under the control of the federal government...According to my dictionary, that makes Bill and Hill fascists! It's the liberals (like the Nazis) who practice propaganda, holding hegemonic control over the media, press, education, and the dissemination of information. It's the liberals who (again, like the Nazis) conduct pogroms by demonizing white European males and Christians (the dreaded "religious right"). Under the guise of eliminating crime, Hitler instituted the Nazi Weapons Law of 1938, which outlawed firearms ownership by anti-Nazi opposition, Jews and Gypsies. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't it liberals who are for gun-control? Liberals are the ones who devalue and facilitate the destruction of human life, only instead of killing Jews in gas-chambers, they promote the use of the abortion clinic.
When I was in school, I was shown a diagram of the political spectrum that looked like this:
communism----liberalism----moderate middle----conservativism----fascism
The idea was that to the extreme left was communism, and to the extreme right was fascism. As I was discussing this with my brother, he suggested that this model would more properly be represented as a circle, with the extreme right and left ends meeting at "totalitarianism". After much studied consideration, though, I've decided that the model should be a line, but should actually look more like this:
dictatorship/tyranny--communism--fascism--socialism--liberalism--middle--conservativism--libertarianism--anarchy
You'll note that the middle is no longer in the middle in my diagram, but if one is honest, one will admit that things have slid leftward in this country for awhile now anyway. For a bunch of people that always enjoy lecturing the rest of us about avoiding stereotypes and labels, the leftists sure aren't shy about applying both with gusto themselves! I've heard it said that anyone more conservative than Joseph Stalin is considered a right-wing extremist now-a-days. I thought about placing libertarians to the left of conservatives because many of their positions seem so liberal (Many are for drug legalization, and are "pro-choice" for example), but these positions arise mainly from an intense belief that government has no business whatsoever interfering with our lives. I personally have a bit of a libertarian streak in me, as do many conservatives (William F. Buckley Jr., for one, thinks drugs should be legal, and Ann Coulter at one point considered running against that pantywaist Chris Shays [R-Conn.] on the Libertarian ticket, reconsidering partly due to this same libertarian idea of legalizing drugs), by reason of an instinctive aversion to big government. I placed libertarianism at the extreme right in my model since, if taken to its logical end, its absolute implementation would result in chaos and lawlessness due to a total lack of government. Beside that, leaving nothing to the right of conservativism would have given aid and comfort to the enemy by bolstering their contention that mainstream conservatives are indeed extremists, although as Barry Goldwater said (before he got squishy in his old age), "Extremism in defense of liberty is no vice."
Comparisons to not only Stalin but to Hitler as well more accurately apply to liberals, not conservatives. If conservatives should be compared to anyone it would more correctly be to our country's Founding Fathers, for their desire to conserve a limited government that protects our individual rights, and for their fight to preserve the principles inherent in our founding document.
*CLICK HERE TO READ AN EXCERPT FROM Chapter 1 of THE OMINOUS PARALLELS, by Leonard Peikoff
*CLICK HERE TO SEE THE NAZI WEAPONS LAW OF 1938
*CLICK HERE TO SEE THE NAZI PROPAGANDA ARCHIVE
Whether the dirty-looking welfare bums, "glory days" seeking ex-hippies, and college student hippy wanna-be "peace protesters" bawling about our action in Iraq realize it or not, they are sinning against God by refusing to fight or support our troops as we find ourselves in the midst of war! Many pacifists and appeasers fail to grasp the concept that peace is often only purchased by the cost of war. When an aggressor or unrepentant evil regime is intent on forcing the issue, the issue may most likely only be resolved by force!
In our personal relationships, we are expected to turn the other cheek, and most liberal "Christian" churches prefer to only see the "nice" Jesus that said things like that. The problem comes in when they ignore the fact that the God of scripture is not only a God of peace and love, but also a God of justice. Indeed, He can only rightly be the one if He is also the other. Governments were ordained by God to punish evil-doers, and that includes those that comprise other nations.
Romans 13:1: Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
2: Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.
3: For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
4: For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.
5: Wherefore ye must needs be subject, not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake.
6: For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.
7: Render therefore to all their dues: tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.
Sometimes war is the only moral and just solution. When our government calls us to fight, it is not only traitorous and treasonous to give aid and comfort to the enemy by protesting the effort, displaying a lack of loyalty to one's country, it is in effect a slap at the face of God!
When the Israelites were preparing to go to war in order to inhabit the land that God had promised them, certain of their tribes wanted to hang back and not fight, figuring the war had nothing to do with them because they were going to plant themselves in a land on the other side of the river:
Numbers 32:1: Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had a very great multitude of cattle: and when they saw the land of Jazer, and the land of Gilead, that, behold, the place was a place for cattle;
2: The children of Gad and the children of Reuben came and spake unto Moses, and to Eleazar the priest, and unto the princes of the congregation, saying,
3: Ataroth, and Dibon, and Jazer, and Nimrah, and Heshbon, and Elealeh, and Shebam, and Nebo, and Beon,
4: Even the country which the LORD smote before the congregation of Israel, is a land for cattle, and thy servants have cattle:
5: Wherefore, said they, if we have found grace in thy sight, let this land be given unto thy servants for a possession, and bring us not over Jordan.
Now catch this, Moses' response to them:
Numbers 32:6: And Moses said unto the children of Gad and to the children of Reuben, Shall your brethren go to war, and shall ye sit here?
7: And wherefore discourage ye the heart of the children of Israel from going over into the land which the LORD hath given them?
Isn't this exactly what the protesters are doing? They're discouraging the hearts of their countrymen as they fight and die to protect the freedoms they so cavalierly exercise with their actions. The liberty they share with the rest of us is being bought with the blood of their fellows, and they trample it under foot. Moses continues:
Numbers 32:8: Thus did your fathers, when I sent them from Kadesh-barnea to see the land.
9: For when they went up unto the valley of Eshcol, and saw the land, they discouraged the heart of the children of Israel, that they should not go into the land which the LORD had given them.
10: And the LORD's anger was kindled the same time, and he sware, saying,
11: Surely none of the men that came up out of Egypt, from twenty years old and upward, shall see the land which I sware unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob; because they have not wholly followed me:
12: Save Caleb the son of Jephunneh the Kenezite, and Joshua the son of Nun: for they have wholly followed the LORD.
13: And the LORD's anger was kindled against Israel, and he made them wander in the wilderness forty years, until all the generation, that had done evil in the sight of the LORD, was consumed.
14: And, behold, ye are risen up in your fathers' stead, an increase of sinful men, to augment yet the fierce anger of the LORD toward Israel.
15: For if ye turn away from after him, he will yet again leave them in the wilderness; and ye shall destroy all this people.
Moses doesn't pull any punches here. He calls those unwilling to fight alongside their brothers evil and sinful! In this case, those men saw the error of their ways, and agreed to go to war with their brethren. Moses saw that this was good, but gave them this stern warning:
Numbers 32:20: And Moses said unto them, If ye will do this thing, if ye will go armed before the LORD to war,
21: And will go all of you armed over Jordan before the LORD, until he hath driven out his enemies from before him,
22: And the land be subdued before the LORD: then afterward ye shall return, and be guiltless before the LORD, and before Israel; and this land shall be your possession before the LORD.
23: But if ye will not do so, behold, ye have sinned against the LORD: and be sure your sin will find you out.
The cowardice and complacency of the protesters of the present will come back to them someday, one way or another. Their sin will find them out! It may not be until Jesus comes back as a warlord on his white charger to take back what is rightfully His, but it will happen.
Rev19:11: And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12: His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13: And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14: And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
This Jesus will be coming to execute justice, and he won't be turning the other cheek!
Beyond addressing the slackers of his own day, perhaps Patrick Henry was presciently imagining our current crop of wimpy peace protesters discouraging the hearts of their brethren engaged in battle when he echoed this account in Numbers, saying, "If we wish to be free; if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have for so long been contending; if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be attained-we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must FIGHT! An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us...It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. The gentlemen may cry, Peace, peace! but there is no peace. The war has actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the crash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that the gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God. I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!"
Entire written contents copyright© 2002 by Ed DeVore
*CLICK HERE TO GO TO GOLGOTHA HOME
*COSMIC EDDIE'S CYBER SPACE (stories, comix, personal stuff)