The Insanity of Mormonism…


No matter how much a Mormon may claim the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is a Christian Church, that Mormon at best is mistakenly deceived or at worst know the claim is a lie.

 

JRH 6/3/19

Your generosity is always appreciated:

Please Support NCCR

***********************

The Insanity of Mormonism: Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know About This Bizarre Cult

 

By Geri Ungurean

June 2, 2019

Absolute Truth from the Word of God

 

Mormons at the door

 

For a while now I have noticed that when I look up something online about Christianity, the very first website which pops up is on Mormonism.  At first I thought it was just a glitch, but soon I realized that this was manipulation on the part of the Mormon cult.  I’m not sure how they accomplish this, but it seems to be working for them.

 

I also noticed this on youtube.com.

 

So today I decided to write an article about Mormonism.  Many Christians know that Mormonism is NOT Christianity, but I hope that after you read this piece, you will understand the aberrant beliefs of these very lost people.

 

From exposingsatanism.org

 

Mormon Beliefs, are they Christian?   (with commentary and Scripture indented)

 

The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, known as the Mormons, believes and teaches that God the Father used to be a man on another planet, that he became a God by following the laws and ordinances of that God on that planet and came to this world with his wife (she became a goddess), and that they produce a spirit offspring in heaven. These spirit offspring, which includes Jesus, the devil, and you and me, are all brothers and sisters born in the preexistence.

 

 “God is not a man, that he should lie; neither the son of man, that he should repent: hath he said, and shall he not do it? or hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?”  (Numbers 23:19) KJV

 

These preexistence spirits come down and inhabit babies at the time of birth and their memories of the preexistence are lost at the time.

 

This takes reincarnation to a whole new level!

 

Furthermore, faithful Mormons, who pay a full 10% tithe of their income to the Mormon church through Mormon temples, have the potential of becoming gods of their own planets and are then able to start the procedure over again.

 

We are called to be godly, but we will never be a god.

 

If you were to go to any Christian bookstore and look in the non-Christian cult section you will see numerous books on Mormonism that document Mormon beliefs as aberrant and UN-Biblical. The Mormon Church is not considered a Christian church.

 

Jesus warned us about such groups when he said in Matthew 24:24 that in the last days many false Christs and false prophets will arise and deceive many. Mormonism is exactly that, a manifestation of a false prophet: Joseph Smith, who taught all these things.

 

The Bible does not teach that God came from another planet, or that he has a goddess wife, or that we can become gods. In fact, the Bible clearly and definitely contradicts those teachings. But, the Mormon Church responds by saying that the Bible is not really trustworthy, that the true faith was lost, and that its leader, Joseph Smith, restored the so-called “true” Christian faith: god from another world, becoming gods, goddess mother, etc. Of course, the Mormon Church’s claim is not true.

 

Mormon Beliefs documented

 

Please note that these teachings are documented from Mormon writers, not anti-Mormon writers:

 

Book of Mormon The book of Mormon is more correct than the Bible, (History of the Church, vol. 4, p. 461.)

 

The Bible is God’s inerrant and infallible Word. It was penned by men under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

 

The Devil
The Devil was born as a spirit after Jesus “in the morning of pre-existence,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 192.) Jesus and Satan are spirit brothers and we were all born as siblings in heaven to them both, (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163]

 

The devil was not “born.”  He was a created angel (created by God) and the devil became filled with pride and wanted to be like the Most High God. Because of his pride and arrogance, God cast Satan out of heaven, and 1/3 of the “created” angels chose to follow him.

 

God

God used to be a man on another planet (Mormon Doctrine, p. 321; Joseph Smith, Times and Seasons, vol. 5, p. 613-614; Orson Pratt, Journal of Discourses, vol. 2, p. 345; Brigham Young, Journal of Discourses, vol. 7, p. 333). “The Father has a body of flesh and bones as tangible as mans…” (D&C 130:22).

 

Father God was never a man – in fact, he is Spirit. Jesus Christ (God’s son) the Second Person of the Trinity,  had no beginning and he came to earth in human flesh to reconcile those who were separated from the Father to Him – those who would believe. Jesus lived a perfect life on earth (being the only God-man) and He gave His life on a Cross on Calvary – His blood was spilt for whosoever would believe.

 

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

 

“For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved” (John 3:16-17) KJV

 

God, becoming a god

After you become a good Mormon, you have the potential of becoming a god (Teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith, p. 345-347, 354).

“Then shall they be gods, because they have no end; therefore shall they be from everlasting to everlasting, because they continue; then shall they be above all, because all things are subject unto them. Then shall they be gods, because they have all power, and the angels are subject unto them,” (DC 132:20).

 

Sounds very much like the Pride which got Satan cast from heaven!

God, many gods

There are many gods (Mormon Doctrine, p. 163).
“And they (the Gods) said: Let there be light: and there was light,” (Book of Abraham 4:3).

 

There is ONE GOD.  Our ONE GOD has three persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit but He IS ONE GOD.

 

God, mother goddess

There is a mother god (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 443).

God is married to his goddess wife and has spirit children (Mormon Doctrine, p. 516).

 

Could this cult be any more New Age?

 

God, Trinity

The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35).

 

No – the Trinity is ONE GOD in three Persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit

Heaven

There are three levels of heaven: telestial, terrestrial, and celestial (Mormon Doctrine, p. 348).

 

The Holy Spirit
The Holy Ghost is a male personage (A Marvelous Work and a Wonder, Le Grand Richards, Salt Lake City, 1956, p. 118; Journal of Discources[sic], vol. 5, p. 179).

 

The Holy Spirit is the Third Person of the Trinity and is not made from flesh and bones.

 

Jesus

“Therefore we know that both the Father and the Son are in form and stature perfect men; each of them possesses a tangible body . . . of flesh and bones,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 38).

 

NO, Jesus and His Father are not made of Flesh and bones. When Jesus came to earth to redeem those who would believe, he was in human flesh. But before He ascended to His Father in Heaven, He was in His “Glorified Body” NOT a body of flesh and blood.

 

“The birth of the Saviour was as natural as are the births of our children; it was the result of natural action. He partook of flesh and blood – was begotten of his Father, as we were of our fathers,” (Journal of Discourses, vol. 8, p. 115).

 

Mormons teach that God the Father had sexual intercourse with Mary to conceive Jesus.  The Bible says:

“And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God” (Luke 1:35).

 

“Elohim is literally the Father of the spirit of Jesus Christ and also of the body in which Jesus Christ performed His mission in the flesh …” (First Presidency and Council of the Twelve, 1916, God the Father, compiled by Gordon Allred, p. 150).

 

Joseph Smith

If it had not been for Joseph Smith and the restoration, there would be no salvation. There is no salvation [the context is the full gospel including exaltation to Godhood] outside the church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon Doctrine, p. 670).

 

This is straight up Blasphemy!  Our Salvation comes from Jesus Christ and Him alone!

 

Pre-existence
We were first begotten as spirit children in heaven and then born naturally on earth (Journal of Discourse, vol. 4, p. 218).

 

Reincarnation with a Mormon twist.  Another term would be LIES!

 

The first spirit to be born in heaven was Jesus (Mormon Doctrine, p. 129).

 

Jesus has ALWAYS existed. He had no beginning:

The Bible teaches that Jesus was not created but was rather the Creator. “In [Jesus Christ] all things were created: . . . all things have been created through him and for him” (Colossians 1:16). The doctrine of the eternality of Christ is one of the distinguishing marks of biblical Christianity.

 

The Devil was born as a spirit after Jesus “in the morning of pre-existence,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 192).

 

Satan was created (not born) by God as God’s most beautiful of all the created angels.

 

Salvation
“One of the most fallacious doctrines originated by Satan and propounded by man is that man is saved alone by the grace of God; that belief in Jesus Christ alone is all that is needed for salvation,” (Miracle of Forgiveness, by Spencer W. Kimball, p. 206).

 

Satan in no way originated how a man must be saved. GOD told us in His Word:

 “For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

Not of works, lest any man should boast”   (Ephesians 2:8-9) KJV

 

A plan of salvation was needed for the people of earth so Jesus offered a plan to the Father and Satan offered a plan to the father but Jesus’ plan was accepted. In effect the Devil wanted to be the Savior of all Mankind and to “deny men their agency and to dethrone god,” (Mormon Doctrine, p. 193; Journal of Discourses, vol. 6, p. 8).

 

Brethren – this is so messed up and mixed up – kind of reminds me of the author of confusion!

Jesus’ sacrifice was not able to cleanse us from all our sins, (murder and repeated adultery are exceptions), (Journal of Discourses, vol. 3, 1856, p. 247).

Good works are necessary for salvation (Articles of Faith, p. 92).

 

BLASPHEMY!  Our Glorious Lord Jesus who paid for our sins in full, said “It is finished.”   And whosoever believes in the finished word of Christ is saved!

 

There is no salvation without accepting Joseph Smith as a prophet of God (Doctrines of Salvation, vol. 1, p. 188).

 

It sounds as if Satan himself took residence in Joseph Smith!

“Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved” (Acts 4:12) KJV   And we know that name is JESUS!

 

“The first effect [of the atonement] is to secure to all mankind alike, exemption from the penalty of the fall, thus providing a plan of General Salvation. The second effect is to open a way for Individual Salvation whereby mankind may secure remission of personal sins (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 78-79).

 

WHAT?

 

“As these sins are the result of individual acts it is just that forgiveness for them should be conditioned on individual compliance with prescribed requirements — ‘obedience to the laws and ordinances of the Gospel,’” (Articles of Faith, p. 79).

 

WORKS WORKS WORKS

 

“This grace is an enabling power that allows men and women to lay hold on eternal life and exaltation after they have expended their own best efforts,” (LDS Bible Dictionary, p. 697).

 

“We know that it is by grace that we are saved, after all we can do,” (2 Nephi 25:23).

 

The Trinity
The trinity is three separate Gods: The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. “That these three are separate individuals, physically distinct from each other, is demonstrated by the accepted records of divine dealings with man,” (Articles of Faith, by James Talmage, p. 35).

 

NO NO NO!  The Trinity is ONE God with three persons – Father, Son and Holy Spirit!

 

Back to the article

 

Mormon beliefs are not in line with biblical truth. Because they teach things that are opposed to the word of God. It is clear that Mormonism is not Christian. (emphasis added)

 

Mormons, as well as Jehovah’s Witness, believe that Jesus and Satan are blood brothers

 

Question: “Are Jesus and Satan brothers?”

 

From Got Questions

 

Answer: No, Jesus and Satan are not brothers. Jesus is God, and Satan is one of His creations. Not only are Jesus and Satan not brothers, they are as different as night is from day. Jesus is God incarnate—eternal, all-knowing, and all-powerful, while Satan is a fallen angel that was created by God for God’s purposes. The teaching that Jesus and Satan are “spirit brothers” is one of the many false teachings of the Mormons (Latter-Day Saints) and, to some degree, also the Jehovah’s Witnesses. Both of these groups are properly labeled as cults because they deny essential Christian doctrine. While they use Christian terms such as JesusGod, and salvation, they have heretical views and teachings on the most basic and essential Christian doctrines. (Please note that most Mormons today will vehemently deny that they believe Jesus and Satan are brothers. However, this teaching was most definitely a belief of the early Mormons.)

 

The teaching that Jesus and Satan are “spirit brothers” is born out of the Mormons’ misunderstanding and distortion of Scripture as well as some of the extra-biblical teachings they consider to be authoritative. Simply put, there is no way you can read the Bible using any type of sound hermeneutical principles and come away with the idea that Jesus and Satan are “spiritual brothers.” The Scriptures are very clear that Jesus is fully God, not some type of lesser god as the Mormons and other cults believe. The Scriptures are also very clear that God is transcendent above His creation, which simply means that there is no comparison between Christ the Creator and Satan His creation.

 

Mormons believe that Jesus Christ was the first “spirit child” born to God the Heavenly Father with one of his many wives. Instead of acknowledging Jesus as the one true God, they believe He became God, just as they will one day become gods. According to Mormon doctrine, as the first of the “spirit children” of God, Jesus had preeminence over Satan or Lucifer, who was the second “son of God” and the “spirit brother” of Jesus. It is ironic that they will use Colossians 1:15 as one of their “proof texts,” because it says that “[Christ] is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn over all creation.” Yet they ignore verse 16, where we see that “By [Christ] all things were created that are in heaven and that are on earth. Visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or powers. ALL THINGS were created through Him and for Him.” All things—thrones, dominions, principalities, or powers—includes Satan and his demons.

 

In order to believe that Satan and Jesus are “spiritual brothers,” one must deny the clear teaching of Scripture. Scripture says that it was Jesus Christ who created all things and that, as the second Person of the triune Godhead, Christ is fully and uniquely God. Jesus claimed to be God in many passages of Scripture. In John 10:30 Jesus said, “I and the Father are one.” Jesus was not claiming to be another, lesser god. He was declaring that He was fully God. In John 1:1–5 it is clear that Jesus was not a created being and that He Himself created all things. “All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made” (John 1:3). How much clearer can it get? “All things” means what it says, and it includes Satan, who as an angel was himself a created being just like the other angels and demons are. Scripture reveals Satan to be a fallen angel who rebelled against God and Jesus to be God. The only relationship that exists between Satan and Jesus is that of creation and Creator; of the sinful created being, Satan, and the righteous Judge, Jesus Christ.

 

Like the Mormons, the Jehovah’s Witnesses also teach that Jesus and Satan are spiritual brothers. While some Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses might sometimes try to sidestep this teaching because it is so antithetical to what the Bible actually says, it is nevertheless what these organizations believe and is part of their official doctrine.

 

Mormons believe that, not only were Jesus and Lucifer “spirit children of Elohim,” but that humans are spiritual children, as well. In other words, they believe that “God, angels, and men are all of the same species, one race, one great family.” This is why they believe that they themselves will one day become as much of a god as Jesus or even God the Father. Rather than seeing the clear distinction in Scripture between God and His creation, they believe that one day they will be a gods themselves. Of course, this is the same old lie Satan has been telling us since the Garden of Eden (Genesis 3:15). Apparently, the desire to usurp the throne of God is endemic in the hearts of men.

 

In Matthew 16:15 Jesus asked the important question: “But who do you say that I am?” This is a question that is essential to salvation and one that the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses get wrong. Their answer that Jesus is the spirit brother of Satan is the wrong one. Jesus is God the Son, and in Him the fullness of the Godhead dwelt bodily (Colossians 2:9). He created Satan, and one day He will cast Satan into the lake of fire as the just punishment for his rebellion against God. Sadly, on that Day of Judgment those who fall for Satan’s lies will also be cast into the lake of fire with Satan and His demons. The god of the Mormons and Jehovah’s Witnesses is not the God who revealed Himself in Scripture. Unless these groups repent and come to understand and worship the one true God, they have no hope of salvation.

 

We should pray for our Mormon friends. Perhaps you should print out this article for reference.

 

How Can I Be Saved?

 

Shalom b’Yeshua

 

MARANATHA!

___________________

A MESSAGE TO MY [i.e. Geri Ungurean’s] READERS

 

Bundy Mistrial, Their Faith & Constitutional Patriots


John R. Houk

© December 23, 2017

 

I’ve been following the trials and tribulations the Bundy family of ranchers a number of years. The Bundys have received persecution from the Federal government, especially the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over property and public grazing land.

 

In the last post about the Bundys and Federal Prosecutors, “Will Bundy Prosecution MISCONDUCT be Given Pass by Judge Navarro?”, I elaborated a tiny bit of the misdeeds of the BLM grabbing Land and then exorbitantly charging ranchers to graze on Federally seized land.

 

I found out in a Tim Brown post that U.S. Federal Judge Gloria Navarro has declared a mistrial because of the blatant prosecutorial misconduct. Brown implies the few that have face minor charges and have been convicted might have their convictions tossed. Essentially this is yet another stain on Obama Administration non-legislated rules and regulations making it easier for government agencies to seize land and tell land owners how to work their own property.

 

Now comes the observation that will surely get me in trouble with members of the Church of Latter Day Saints (aka Mormons).

 

I consider myself a Conservative Biblically-oriented Christian. Most Mormons also consider themselves the same. However, most Christians that believe the Christian standard for faith in the Trinity believe Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three Persons that constitute ONE God. The persons of the Godhood unity are all coequal as one.

Mormons don’t believe that standard:

 

According to Mormonism, Jesus is a created being, the first spirit to be born of the Father (Mormon Doctrine, p.129) and a celestial mother (Mormon Doctrine, p.516). Therefore, Jesus could not be the eternal God or part of an eternal Trinity. Mormons also teach that both the Father and the Son are men with bodies of flesh and bone (Doctrine & Covenants 132:20; Articles of Faith, p 38); as two separate people, the Father and the Son cannot be considered “one.”

 

… READ ENTIRITY (Question: “Do Mormons believe in the Trinity?” GotQuestions.org)

 

Since Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever; Christians believe Jesus is eternal and not a created being. As with the Trinity and the coequal Godhood, Christ as God is the coequal unborn Creator who emptied His Divine characteristics to be born in the flesh. Hence Jesus is not only coequal in the Godhood, He is both fully man and full God. This perfect nature is the basis of the Redemption of a believing humanity.

 

Mormons are not so taught:

 

8. Prior to creation human spirits were literal children of heavenly parents. Although their spirits were created, the essential “intelligence” of these spirits is considered eternal, and without beginning. At a family council, God the Father told the spirit-children that according to his “plan of salvation” they would have to leave their heavenly home, take on human bodies, and be tested before they could progress to godhood. Satan rejected this plan and wanted to implement one that would have involved loss of moral agency. Jesus opposed Satan and offered an alternative plan in which he would take on human form and live a sinless life so that his spirit brothers and sisters could become gods. When his plan was not accepted, Lucifer is said to have rebelled and taken “the third part” of the hosts of heaven with him to the earth to serve as tempters. READ ENTIRETY (9 Things You Should Know About Mormonism; By Joe Carter; The Gospel Coalition; 7/15/14)

 

Here are some more excerpts on the Mormon Jesus-Satan brotherhood:

 

The “christ” of Mormonism and the Christ of biblical Christianity are two distinctly different people. While it is true that when asking a Mormon if they believe in Christ they will confirm that belief, the “christ” that the Mormon believes in is not the Christ talked about in the Bible. … As will be pointed out below, the “christ” of Mormonism is not the Christ of true biblical Christianity.

 

In Mormonism, Mormons deny Jesus Christ’s unique divinity. Mormonism teaches that Jesus Christ is a created person. Mormons teach that every person including Christ has had two births. The first birth occurs as a spirit child in preexistence state.  This first birth happens when sexual relations occur between an exalted man, a god, and his goddess wife.  The second birth occurs much later as a human being.

 

… Mormon theology states that Christ was the first and foremost of subsequent billions of spirit children created through sexual intercourse between the earth god and his celestial wife. Mormon theology also teaches that later in order to produce the body for Jesus Christ the earth god again had to have sexual intercourse this time with the “virgin” Mary, who became Jesus’ earthly mother.

 

… In Mormon theology, there are infinite numbers of planets and infinite numbers of “gods” for each of those planets.  The essence of Christ is no different from the essence of any spirit child of Elohim, whether of men or of Satan and his demons. Every person on earth has the same essence or divine spark that Christ has. This means that every person can have the ability to become their own god or goddess. …

 

 

Mormon theology also teaches that Christ has a family relation with Satan. In other words, Jesus Christ is Satan’s brother. This is contrary to biblical Christianity and is just another example of how the two Jesus’ differ.  In Mormon theology since Satan (and his demons) was also a pre-existent spirit child of Elohim and his celestial wife, Satan is Christ’s brother. Looking closely at this teaching, we can logically conclude that the devil and all the demons are the spirit brothers of everyone on earth. This would mean that Christ, the Devil and we are all brothers and interrelated.

 

 

… Brigham Young’s controversial Adam-God discourse of April 9th 1852, he taught that the body of Jesus Christ was the product of sexual intercourse between God (Adam) and Mary, who then married Joseph.  This teaching is also used later to justify the marriage of more than one women. At the very core, this teaching denies that Jesus Christ was conceived by the Holy Ghost, and it maintains that Jesus was the literal offspring of the Father because according to Mormonism, the Holy Ghost does not have a physical body and could not have had sexual relations with Mary. In Mormon theology, the Father has a physical body and could have had sexual relations with Mary. The Father is “of flesh and bones.” READ ENTIRETY (WHO IS THE MORMON JESUS? EmpoweredByChrist.org)

 

So, here’s the thing. I’m not a big fan of Mormonism. The Church of Christ of the Latter Saints are a cult spinoff of the true Christian faith. AND YET, present day Mormons observe a morality that places many a mainstream Christian to shame. AND present-day Mormons are Patriots that honor the Flag, our nation and most importantly the U.S. Constitution initiated by America’s Founding Fathers.

 

The Bundys are these kind of Patriots. As a Christian American, I stand with the Bundys to protect their Constitutional Rights the American Left has slowly snuffed out for decades.

 

And with these my personal thoughts, I encourage to read the Tim Brown post about Judge Gloria Navarro calling a mistrial due egregious prosecutorial misconduct. I like Brown’s thought the weight of the law should be turned on the crooked prosecutors who have persecuting the Bundy family and other Ranchers.

 

JRH 12/23/17

Please Support NCCR

*********************

Judge Declares Mistrial In Bundy Ranch Case Due To Multiple Brady Violations By Prosecution

 

By TIM BROWN 

DECEMBER 21, 2017

Freedom Outpost

 

After sealed hearings took place in Nevada in the Bundy Ranch standoff trials, Judge Gloria Navarro declared a mistrial due to multiple Brady violations by the prosecution, but will this mean there won’t be a retrial?  Probably not.

 

Navarro blasted the prosecution for their lawless behavior in not turning over several exculpatory items to defense teams that were favorable to them.

 

Among those items were the cameras that were set up prior to the impoundment in 2014 in Bunkerville, Threat Assessment reports, names of potential witnesses, and reports from the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) reprimanding the BLM for not enforcing the court orders for years.

 

In all, there were at least seven Brady violations.

 

These violations are constitutional violations of the Fifth Amendment and Due Process.

 

Again, I ask, why are no charges being levied against Steven Myhre, his team of attorneys and the BLM in all of this?  They have been determined by a judge to be in violation of the law!

 

The prosecution didn’t act negligently nor did they violate the law unwillingly, but willingly.

 

Shari Dovale has more:

 

The government falsely represented that the view of the Bundy home was unintentional. This is huge. There could be, at minimum, sanctions coming for Acting US attorney Steven Myhre and other prosecutors.

 

Moving on to another item, Navarro referenced the snipers and that the indictment charges false representation, “But now we know there were snipers.”

 

She found that the information is favorable to the accused and bolsters the defense… “The court does find prejudice toward the defendants. This information may have caused a difference in the opening statements, cross examination of witnesses and undermines the outcome,” she said.

 

The judge continued her rebuke of the government for about an hour. She included other evidence, such as the threat assessment report and a log of activities surrounding the impoundment.

 

All together [sic], between 12/12/17 and 12/17/17, over 5,000 pages of new discovery and evidence has been revealed and there may still be outstanding discovery.

 

Several motions were made after mistrial was declared.

 

Ryan Bundy asked that the terms of the release of the defendants be changed so that they might be able to go home for the holidays to be with their families and the Las Vegas Review-Journal requested the unsealing of the evidence.

 

Additionally, the defense asked the Greg Burleson and Todd Engel be released, and it is expected that they will ask for their convictions to be overturned due to the suppression of evidence in their trial.

 

Wendy Kay Facebook Video of Ryan Bundy Speaking Outside Las Vegas Courthouse

12/20/17 1:08pm

All of these were considered by Judge Navarro and concerning the release of the defendants, she said that she would need to deal with pretrial services before ruling on that.

 

As to the request for unsealing the evidence, that would be answered on January 18th, 2018, almost two years since the Bundys were arrested on January 26, 2016.

 

The issue concerning Engel and Burleson will also have to wait until a later date.

 

One thing should be done here and that is to simply release all of these men.  Judge Navarro has to know the level of corruption that is clearly on display from Myhre’s office and the BLM.

 

The only just thing to do would be to release these men and not allow them to face trial again.  The US government has done enough damage to these men and their families.

 

Additionally, Steven Myhre and every person involved in suppressing the evidence should be arrested and charged.  If found guilty, they should not only be disbarred or removed from public service, but they should also face the same penalties that they sought for each and every defendant.  In other words, these people would never see the light of freedom again if convicted.

____________________

Bundy Mistrial, Their Faith & Constitutional Patriots

John R. Houk

© December 23, 2017

___________________

Judge Declares Mistrial In Bundy Ranch Case Due To Multiple Brady Violations By Prosecution

 

Tim Brown is an author and Editor at FreedomOutpost.com, SonsOfLibertyMedia.com, GunsInTheNews.com and TheWashingtonStandard.com. He is husband to his “more precious than rubies” wife, father of 10 “mighty arrows”, jack of all trades, Christian and lover of liberty. He resides in the U.S. occupied Great State of South Carolina. Tim is also an affiliate for the Joshua Mark 5 AR/AK hybrid semi-automatic rifle. Follow Tim on Twitter.

 

Copyright © 2017 FreedomOutpost.com

 

Disputing Separation Church/State Part 7


No Nation Survives without Law

John R. Houk

© April 5, 2014

 

Dougindeap left a comment on the post “The Truth about Separation of Church and State” at NCCR which is a cross post of an Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) brochure that provides reasons for the concept of Separation of Church and State as SCOTUS has set in stone today is and was not a correct interpretation of the U.S. Constitution.

 

It is my habit to usually post my perspective on a comment then place the comment below my thoughts. Since Dougindeap divided his comment into eight parts to refute the ADF points. So as I initially began to respond to Dougindeap’s original comment which resulted in various parts with the title “Disputing Separation Church/State” (which as of this writing is up to six parts). You can read an edited version of that comment at the end of my thoughts at SlantRight 2.0 or the NCCR blog. You can read Dougindeap’s unedited comment version at NCCR HERE. I am bucking my typical course and take a valiant effort to briefly take each of Dougindeap’s points to put in my two-cents. I say briefly because I can tell that the six parts of “Disputing Separation Church/State” could go on much longer than I desire to devote to the subject. I have to say something though because I disagree with Dougindeap as much as he disagrees with me. Sadly the slant of the reader’s politics will line the reader with Doug or myself.

 

So here we go.

 

dougindeap commented on The Truth about Separation of Church and State

April 2, 2014 at 8:12 PM

 

[Blog Editor: Dougindeap uses the abbreviation “ALF” when I suspect he was thinking Alliance Defending Freedom which would “ADF”. I mention this for clarity’s sake because we all post comments hurriedly in which typos or missing words occur and not as a criticism of Dougindeap.]

 

Dougindeap:

 

You have succeeded in gathering quite a collection of arguments about separation of church and state, nearly all of which I’ve seen and seen debunked many times. I won’t attempt to touch on every one of the many points, but will take the ALF items one by one.

 

1. While Jefferson’s first use of the term “separation of church and state” may have been in his letter to the Danbury Baptists, he hardly was the first to use the term.

 

Certainly Jefferson’s letter had nothing to say about limiting public religious expression. ALF contends against a strawman. No one contends that Jefferson said any such thing.

 

It is important to distinguish between “individual” and “government” speech about religion. The constitutional principle of separation of church and state does not purge religion from the public square–far from it. Indeed, the First Amendment’s “free exercise” clause assures that each individual is free to exercise and express his or her religious views–publicly as well as privately. The Amendment constrains only the government not to promote or otherwise take steps toward establishment of religion. As government can only act through the individuals comprising its ranks, when those individuals are performing their official duties (e.g., public school teachers instructing students in class), they effectively are the government and thus should conduct themselves in accordance with the First Amendment’s constraints on government. When acting in their individual capacities, they are free to exercise their religions as they please. (Students also are free to exercise and express their religious views–in a time, manner, and place that does not interfere with school programs and activities.) If their right to free exercise of religion extended even to their discharge of their official responsibilities, however, the First Amendment constraints on government establishment of religion would be eviscerated. While figuring out whether someone is speaking for the government in any particular circumstance may sometimes be difficult, making the distinction is critical.

 

JRH:

 

I believe Dougindeap has correctly expressed the meaning of the First Amendment until he gets to the part I took the liberty to highlight with bold print.

 

When Doug says the government can only act through the individuals comprising its ranks, he is correct to the extent those individuals are under the direct mandate of the government. The problem is the Left Wing assumption that all instruments of the government are representative of the Federal government. THIS WAS NOT THE ORIGINAL INTENT of the First Amendment.

 

The Bill of Rights which are actually the first ten Amendments of the U.S. Constitution provides an intent that must apply to the First Amendment as enumerated in the Tenth Amendment:

 

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

 

Just as Doug points out the First Amendment prevents the U.S. Congress to establish a State Church or to make any laws that prohibits the free exercise of religion. The Tenth Amendment brings specificity in that the State government or “the people” (implying local government such as Counties or cities) can define how individuals working as instruments of government are defined on the State and Local level. Hence the Federal government did not end Established Churches on the State level. The States individually disestablished State Churches as it became obvious the State Established Churches were slipping into the minority among Christian denominations in the various States. Ironically Massachusetts one of the most Liberal States in the American Union today was the last State to disestablish their State Church in the 1833. States’ Rights ended the Established Church in the USA and not the enforcement of the Federal government. In the same manner of Original Intent each State has the power of the law to limit or encourage government instruments such as employees from sharing their individual faith.

 

Dougindeap:

 

2. Justice Hugo Black was not the first to “insert” separation of church and state into American jurisprudence. Not by a long shot. A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court first used that term in 1878 in Reynolds v. United States, where it quoted Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists while interpreting the First Amendment.

 

JRH:

 

In Reynolds v. United States Dougindeap fails to mention the reason for the unanimity of SCOTUS in the 1878 religious Liberty case before them. George Reynolds a citizen of the then Territory of Utah was a Mormon that married more than one wife. Reynolds was convicted of bigamy. Reynolds demanded his First Amendment rights of Religious Liberty. The 1878 SCOTUS officially was more concerned about social norms than Religious Freedom. In Christian America in 1878 bigamy was not only illegal it was also a heinous sin. The reality of the 1878 SCOTUS decision was upholding traditional Christian values over the cult of Mormonism (Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints). Mormons then and now believe in the supremacy of the Book of Mormon and certain so-called Mormon prophetic pronouncements (Book of Mormon; Doctrine and Covenants and Pearl of Great Price) over the traditional Christian values of the Holy Bible. SCOTUS upheld the conviction of George Reynolds in 1878 unanimously. I have no doubts Mormons consider themselves Christians however their theology is so divergent from the orthodox practices of Christianity an intelligent evaluation even today would come to the conclusion Mormonism at best is its own religion and at worst a cult spin-off Christianity. It should be noted the powers that be in Mormonism had the remarkable revelation that marriage is between one man and one woman in order for the Utah Territory could become the sovereign State of Utah in 1890.

 

As to the 1878 SCOTUS unanimous opinion referencing the Jefferson to Danbury Baptists letter WallBuilders provides the actual intent of that Court opinion:

 

Earlier courts long understood Jefferson’s intent. In fact, when Jefferson’s letter was invoked by the Supreme Court (only twice prior to the 1947Everson case – the Reynolds v. United States case in 1878), unlike today’s Courts which publish only his eight-word separation phrase, that earlier Court published Jefferson’s entire letter and then concluded:

 

Coming as this does from an acknowledged leader of the advocates of the measure, it [Jefferson’s letter] may be accepted almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect of the Amendment thus secured. Congress was deprived of all legislative power over mere [religious] opinion, but was left free to reach actions which were in violation of social duties or subversive of good order. (emphasis added)[12]

 

That Court then succinctly summarized Jefferson’s intent for “separation of church and state”:

 

[T]he rightful purposes of civil government are for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order. In th[is] . . . is found the true distinction between what properly belongs to the church and what to the State. [13]

 

With this even the Baptists had agreed; for while wanting to see the government prohibited from interfering with or limiting religious activities, they also had declared it a legitimate function of government “to punish the man who works ill to his neighbor.”

 

That Court, therefore, and others (for example, Commonwealth v. Nesbit and Lindenmuller v. The People), identified actions into which – if perpetrated in the name of religion – the government did have legitimate reason to intrude. Those activities included human sacrifice, polygamy, bigamy, concubinage, incest, infanticide, parricide, advocation and promotion of immorality, etc. (Excerpted from – The Separation of Church and State; By David Barton; WallBuilders.com; January 2001)

 

Dougindeap:

 

3. First, ALF tries to pass off the Supreme Court’s decision in Everson v. Board of Education as simply a misreading of Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists–as if that were the only basis of the Court’s decision. Instructive as that letter is, it played but a small part in the Court’s decision. Rather, the Court discussed the historical context in which the Constitution and First Amendment were drafted, noting the expressed understanding of Madison perhaps even more than Jefferson, and only after concluding its analysis and stating its conclusion did the Court refer–once–to Jefferson’s letter, largely to borrow his famous metaphor as a clever label or summary of its conclusion. The notion, often heard, that the Court rested its decision solely or largely on that letter is a red herring.

 

Second, it is ALF that has confused its history. Contrary to its assertion, Justice Black did not write that the Danbury letter may be accepted “almost as an authoritative declaration of the scope and effect” of the First Amendment.” Rather Chief Justice Waite wrote that in Reynolds v. United States. Black, moreover, did not repeat that statement in Everson.

 

Finally, the further notion, suggested by ALF and advanced by some, that the Supreme Court’s recognition of the constitutional separation of church and state in Everson is all Justice Black’s doing is laughable. It bears noting that all nine justices in the Everson case read the Constitution to call for separation of church and state, and indeed all of the parties and all of the amici curiae (including the National Council of Catholic Men and National Council of Catholic Women) did as well; no one disputed the principle, they differed only in how it should be applied in the circumstances of the case.

 

JRH:

 

Actually Hugo Black equally emphasized Jefferson and Madison together. Doug fails to mention that Black’s Majority Opinion included both Jefferson and Madison’s efforts on a State level in Virginia to disestablish any Church to receive tax support because such taxation would be discriminatory toward non-established Christian denominations. Hence Jefferson and Madison were not arguing the removal of recognized Christian Morality but rather the removal of taxpayers’ paying the salary of a State established Clergy. AND so yes, Hugo Black misappropriated the work of Jefferson and Madison use of a States’ Rights issue to apply to Federal authority. Hugo Black attempts to solidify the Church/State separation by adopting Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists. How did Black connect a States’ Rights issue to Federal authority? Then Black used the presumption that the Fourteenth Amendment which officially ended Slavery in all the States by Federal rule of law, then by extension Black presumed the Fourteenth Amendment nullified the Tenth Amendment which in turn pertained to individual State sovereignty bowing to the will of the Judicial and Executive branches of government. This interpretation had the effect to keep the influence of Christianity outside the scope of State level and local level government parameters in the rule of law.

 

Dougindeap:

 

4. That the words “separation of church and state” do not appear in the text of the Constitution assumes much importance, it seems, to some who once mistakenly supposed they were there and, upon learning of their error, fancy they’ve solved a Constitutional mystery. To those familiar with the Constitution, the absence of the metaphorical phrase commonly used to name one of its principles is no more consequential than the absence of other phrases (e.g., Bill of Rights, separation of powers, checks and balances, fair trial, religious liberty) used to describe other undoubted Constitutional principles.

 

Contrary to ALF’s supposition, separation of church and state rests on much more than just the First Amendment. It is a bedrock principle of our Constitution, much like the principles of separation of powers and checks and balances. In the Constitution, the founders did not simply say in so many words that there should be separation of powers and checks and balances; rather, they actually separated the powers of government among three branches and established checks and balances. Similarly, they did not merely say there should be separation of church and state; rather, they actually separated them by (1) establishing a secular government on the power of “We the people” (not a deity), (2) according that government limited, enumerated powers, (3) saying nothing to connect that government to god(s) or religion, (4) saying nothing to give that government power over matters of god(s) or religion, and (5), indeed, saying nothing substantive about god(s) or religion at all except in a provision precluding any religious test for public office. Given the norms of the day (by which governments generally were grounded in some appeal to god(s)), the founders’ avoidance of any expression in the Constitution suggesting that the government is somehow based on any religious belief was quite a remarkable and plainly intentional choice. They later buttressed this separation of government and religion with the First Amendment, which affirmatively constrains the government from undertaking to establish religion or prohibit individuals from freely exercising their religions.

 

JRH:

 

Doug mistakenly equates the lack of the words “Wall of Separation of Church and State” in the Constitute is the same as other civics terms not being the Constitution such as “Bill of Rights, separation of powers (i.e. in branches of government), checks and balances, fair trial, religious liberty” and so on. The reason Doug is mistaken because all those other terms are specifically spelled out in the Constitution BUT the term “Wall of Separation of Church and State” is not spelled out AT ALL The First Amendment ONLY spells out that Congress cannot make a law to Establish a State Church and that Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion.

 

Dougindeap:

 

5. While the First Amendment undoubtedly was intended to preclude the government from establishing a national religion as you note, that was hardly the limit of its intended scope. The first Congress debated and rejected just such a narrow provision (“no religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed”) and ultimately chose the more broadly phrased prohibition now found in the Amendment. During his presidency, Madison vetoed two bills, neither of which would form a national religion or compel observance of any religion, on the ground that they were contrary to the establishment clause. While some in Congress expressed surprise that the Constitution prohibited Congress from incorporating a church in the town of Alexandria in the District of Columbia or granting land to a church in the Mississippi Territory, Congress upheld both vetoes. Separation of church and state is hardly a new invention of modern courts. In keeping with the Amendment’s terms and legislative history and other evidence, the courts have wisely interpreted it to restrict the government from taking steps that could establish religion de facto as well as de jure. Were the Amendment interpreted merely to preclude government from enacting a statute formally establishing a state church, the intent of the Amendment could easily be circumvented by government doing all sorts of things to promote this or that religion–stopping just short of cutting a ribbon to open its new church.

 

JRH:

 

Dougindeap quotes James Madison’s first writing of a proposed First Amendment: “no religion shall be established by law, nor shall the equal rights of conscience be infringed”. I suspect Doug is implying Madison’s influence spoke for all the Congressmen in constructing religious freedom as imputed by Federal government authority en toto as opposed to States’ Rights. That is DEFINITELY not the case because of House deliberation the First Amendment’s form ratified as law is what was sent to the States for ratification. Hence States’ Rights coupled with the Tenth Amendment became the actual Original Intent of the First Amendment which included the individual States upholding the primacy of the values of the Christian religion by which all Denominations upheld regardless of varying theological dogma.

 

Since the Declaration of Independence led to the Articles of Confederation which were then superseded by the U.S. Constitution in 1789 shows that the Founding Fathers bowed to the will of ‘We the People’ in the promotion of the very least the promotion of Christianity as what will maintain the general welfare of the people of the new USA.

 

Here’s an abbreviated list of the Continental Congress pushing Christian Morals and Values for the General Welfare (1774 – 1789):

 

1. Congress’ First Act: A Resolution to Pray – September 6, 1774

 

2. Congress Ordered Purchase and Printing of Bibles – September 11, 1777

 

3. Congress Expressly Promoted Religion – October 12, 1778:

 

Whereas true religion and good morals are the only solid foundations of public liberty and happiness: Resolved, That it be, and it is hereby earnestly recommended to the several States to take the most effectual measures for the encouragement thereof.

 

4. The Declaration of Independence – formally adopted it on July 4, 1776, and signed it August 2, 1776. The Declaration directly appeals to God at least four times

 

5. Congress Appointed Days Of Prayer, Thanksgiving, and Repentance – In the approximately fifteen years of its existence, the Continental Congress approved at least fifteen proclamations calling on the states to appoint days of special worship or honor to God. Dates enumerated from 1777 through 1787.

 

The above lists remarkable does not contain the Northwest Ordinance enacted by the Continental Congress under the Articles of Confederation July 13, 1787. The legislation has 14 Sections and the Fourteenth Section has Six Articles. The purpose for the Northwest Ordinance was to establish a Central government rule of law for expansion westward from the Original 13 States and a method of admitting new sovereign States to the United States of America (then under the Articles of Confederation). Christianity and Religious Freedom combined are expressly part of the designs of the Northwest Ordinance.

 

Sec. 13. And, for extending the fundamental principles of civil and religious liberty, which form the basis whereon these republics, their laws and constitutions are erected; to fix and establish those principles as the basis of all laws, constitutions, and governments, which forever hereafter shall be formed in the said territory: to provide also for the establishment of States, and permanent government therein, and for their admission to a share in the federal councils on an equal footing with the original States, at as early periods as may be consistent with the general interest: (Bold emphasis Blog Editor’s)

 

Sec. 14. It is hereby ordained and declared by the authority aforesaid, That the following articles shall be considered as articles of compact between the original States and the people and States in the said territory and forever remain unalterable, unless by common consent, to wit:

 

Art. 1. No person, demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments, in the said territory.

 

Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged. …

 

The two bills James Madison vetoed was done correctly. The bills’ goals were to Establish the Episcopalian Church in the city of Alexandria within the District of Columbia and provide public funds to buy land for a Church in the Territory of Mississippi. On a Federal basis the First Amendment specifically states that Congress can make no law establishing a Church. AGAIN this has nothing to do with the laws enumerated to the several States not in the U.S. Constitution (Tenth Amendment).

 

My above thoughts on the history of the Courts and Church Establishment already refute the Doug’s claim that Church/State Separation issues is “hardly a new invention of modern courts.”

 

Dougindeap:

 

6. Dreisbach’s fundamental error is his largely unspoken and unexamined presumption that the Constitution’s separation of church and state is merely a First Amendment textual matter. As noted above, however, it is rather a bedrock principle of our Constitution, resting on much more than the First Amendment.

 

JRH:

 

Already proved this line of thinking is in error by Dougindeap.

 

Dougindeap:

 

7. The Constitution, including particularly the First Amendment, embodies the simple, just idea that each of us should be free to exercise his or her religious views without expecting that the government will endorse or promote those views and without fearing that the government will endorse or promote the religious views of others. By keeping government and religion separate, the establishment clause serves to protect the freedom of all to exercise their religion. Reasonable people may differ, of course, on how these principles should be applied in particular situations, but the principles are hardly to be doubted. Moreover, they are good, sound principles that should be nurtured and defended, not attacked. Efforts to undercut our secular government by somehow merging or infusing it with religion should be resisted by every patriot.

 

Wake Forest University has published a short, objective Q&A primer on the current law of separation of church and state–as applied by the courts rather than as caricatured in the blogosphere. I commend it to you. http://tiny.cc/6nnnx

 

JRH:

 

The only contention I can agree with Dougindeap is that the First Amendment prevents the Federal Congress from Establishing a State Church and that the Federal Congress cannot enact laws prohibiting the free exercise of religion. Everything else not forbidden by the U.S. Constitution is the purview of each State in the Union of the United States of America. The tiny url posted by Doug does not work or at least not in my Chrome or Internet Explorer browsers. When I Googled ‘Wake Forest Q&A primer on Separation of Church and State’ I discovered Dougindeap has been posting link since at least 2010. I can find no such document online from Wake Forest. Perhaps the closest thing I can find is a PDF document entitled, “Religious Expression in American Public Life: A Joint Statement of Current Law”. I found two links for this document: One by Wake Forest and another posted on the Anti-Defamation League website but both are the same document. Both documents are dated January 2010. The document is a collective work by a bunch of people that are on opposite sides of the Church/State Separation issues. The document is anything but definitive. The closest section talking about the First Amendment and Church Establishment is Chapter Two of the roughly 32 page document with End Notes longer if you include acknowledgements by Wake Forest’s (at least then) Director of Wake Forest University Divinity School and the Center for Religion and Public Affairs. The Chapter Two title is “Is the First Amendment the only constitutional or legal provision that affects these issues?

 

Chapter Two clearly expresses the First Amendment is functional as a Federal law in which there is a large degree of discretion on the State level of law in which the First Amendment does not address.

 

In connection to this PDF document (Religious Expression in American Public Life: A Joint Statement of Current Law), the “diverse” committee that truly consisted of representation of both sides of the political spectrum on Church/State issues was led by Melissa Rogers as the Director of Wake Forest University Divinity School’s Center for Religion and Public Affairs during the PDF document’s 2010 publication. Melissa Rogers is hardly neutral a person that looks equally on both sides of the coin on Church/State issues. Rogers is a downright and overt proponent of the revisionist Left Wingers choosing to exclude the merits of Original Intent of the Constitution in relation to the opinions of the Founders on how Christianity effects the general welfare of a good society. Even the Founding Fathers in James Madison (See also HERE) and Thomas Jefferson that were closer to the secularist Enlightenment discrediting of orthodox theology of Christianity agreed that Christian Morals and Values promoted a good society.

 

Dougindeap:

 

8. While some, including myself, grow tired of the semantic wrangling over the phrase commonly used to describe or name one of the Constitution’s fundamental principles, that principle—by whatever name—remains central and essential to the Constitution and our way of life.

           

JRH:

 

Doug says he is getting weary of wrangling that Separation of Church and State is a fundamental principle of the Constitution. I myself am frustrated about Leftists trying so hard to prevent the historical nature of Christianity of being such a huge influence on the development of our nation. It is my belief that the Leftist efforts at historical revisionism is to transform America into a society that abandons Christianity as a Moral Foundation. Then replace Christianity with a Secular Humanist perspective as a foundation for societal morality. Such a humanist morality places the created on a pedestal above the Creator. No matter how lofty the ideals of man being inherently good, actual history shows that man is inherently evil. That inherent evil exists in human nature because God’s first created human being – Adam – betrayed God the Creator by agreeing with the serpent Satan and partook of the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Why did Adam consume the fruit? Satan told Eve, who Adam did not rebuke, believed the serpent that the fruit would make her and Adam like God knowing the difference between good and evil. Adam’s act of disobedience of God voluntarily sold his nature to the dominion of Satan. Since Adam was made the perpetual steward of God’s created Earth. That meant the earth also came under Satan’s control. Adam’s disobedience led to the punishment of being separated from God which is spiritual death. Humanity and Earth became cursed to a Fallen nature explaining an inherent evil nature. The inherent evil nature of man will inevitably lead to unwholesome if not downright wicked choices in which selfish desires overrule the general welfare of humanity.

 

The good news for humanity God the Creator promised a way out for Adam choosing Satan’s lie as truth rather than God’s holy union.

 

14 So the Lord God said to the serpent:

 

“Because you have done this,
You are cursed more than all cattle,
And more than every beast of the field;
On your belly you shall go,
And you shall eat dust
All the days of your life.

15 And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel
.” (Bold Emphasis Blog Editor – Genesis 3: 14-15 NKJV
)

 

Verse 15 is God’s first Promise of a Redeemer to bring humanity back into right standing with God Almighty. Then and only then will humanity not need laws of a government to curb the inclination of a Fallen human nature. Secular Humanism is wrong, humanity is not essentially good.

 

JRH 4/5/14

Please Support NCCR

Paul Ryan Should bring in Social Conservatives


Romney-Ryan

John R. Houk

© August 16, 2012

 

Bob Unruh has written an article about Dr. James Dobson’s personal thoughts on presumptive GOP Nominee Mitt Romney. In essence Dobson advises Romney with Conservative Social Values.

 

Dobson is absolutely correct. It is Social Issues that Conservatives have labeled Romney – The anybody but Obama candidate. As the Governor of Massachusetts Romney was not exactly the paragon protector of Social Conservatism. The case can easily be made Romney believes a woman’s right over her own body overrides the unborn life that is in her womb. There is also some questionability where Romney stands on Same-Sex Marriage versus Traditional Marriage between one male and one female. And Romney’s lackluster Social Conservatism is a bit surprising since he is a big dog in the Mormon Church (Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints). For all of the Mormon Church’s lack of Christian orthodoxy Mormons have nailed Social Conservatism (Check out the Mormon stance on abortion).

 

If Romney wants to move up the likability scale among the GOP base he should embrace Social Conservative issues. Romney’s pick for Vice President running mate Paul Ryan is a good beginning to embracing Social Conservatism.

 

JRH 8/16/12

Please Support NCCR

The Romney Plan for America


Romney Believe in America

 

John R. Houk

© November 1, 2011

 

I am definitely not in former Governor Mitt Romney’s camp for the GOP nomination for President. I have to own-up to the primary reason for this is Romney is a Mormon and Mormonism is not Christianity yet pretends to be Christianity. As a Christian I have a problem with that. The secondary problem I have with Romney he appears pretty close to being a RINO. Full-on RINOs make no bones about their Liberal leanings. Then there is RINOs like Romney that is Conservative Republicans in some areas but is politically liberal or socially liberal in others.

 

On the other hand if Romney does win the GOP nomination I am definitely voting for him over President Barack Hussein Obama. At the very least Romney does not have an agenda to transform America into a socialistic nation dependent on government entitlements to move the economy and secretly enslave the poor by making the Federal government the poor’s source of livelihood.

 

Romney’s major campaign agenda is his 59 point plan to get America’s economy on track. Just like Rep. Michele Bachmann, the Romney plan has less to do with tax reform and more to do with traditional tax cuts and strategies for jobs growth international trade.

 

Romney’s answer is a 59-point plan, including 10 steps he vows to take his first day as president. “Each proposal is rooted in the conservative premise that government itself cannot create jobs. At best, government can provide a framework in which economic growth can occur. All too often, however, government gets in the way. The past three years of unparalleled government expansion have retaught that lesson all too well,” he wrote. The candidate didn’t go into deep detail about the 59 items on his jobs agenda, but he did offer a shout out to those starting their own companies: “Only the individual initiative of entrepreneurs, workers, investors and inventors enables companies, and our economy as a whole, to flourish.” (ELECTIONEERING; By J. Jennings Moss; Portfolio.com, 9-6-11)

 

With both Cain and Perry now offering dramatic pro-growth tax reform proposals, Romney will either jump on the tax reform bandwagon or be left in the dust (or possibly both).

 

The only pro-growth tax cuts in Romney’s 59-point economic plan are a reduction in the corporate income tax rate to 25% (from 35% today) and the elimination of the death tax.  However, both Perry and Cain are similarly calling for repeal of the death tax.  Also, Perry’s plan would cut the corporate income tax rate to 20%, and Cain’s plan would reduce it to the equivalent of 9%.

 

Romney is advocating eliminating taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains, but only for people making less than $200,000 a year.  This “cap” would vitiate any benefit to economic growth.  Worse, this element of Romney’s plan implicitly validates Obama’s “class warfare” rhetoric. (Fundamental Tax Reform Is Now Unstoppable; By Louis Woodhill; Forbes, 10/26/2011)

 

Tomorrow, I will introduce a plan consisting of 59 specific proposals — including 10 concrete actions I will take on my first day in office — to turn around America’s economy. Each proposal is rooted in the conservative premise that government itself cannot create jobs. At best, government can provide a framework in which economic growth can occur. All too often, however, government gets in the way. The past three years of unparalleled government expansion have retaught that lesson all too well.

 

Only the individual initiative of entrepreneurs, workers, investors and inventors enables companies, and our economy as a whole, to flourish. We must once again unleash the tremendous economic potential of the American people. The contrast between what the Obama administration has done and what I would do as president could not be starker.

 

 

As this catalogue of differences makes clear, our country has arrived at a fork in the road. In one direction lies the heavy hand of the state, indebtedness and decline. In the other direction lies limited government, free enterprise and economic growth. I know which direction is the American way. And I know in which direction lie the millions of jobs we need. (MY PLAN TO TURN AROUND THE U.S. ECONOMY; By Mitt Romney; MittRomney.com, 9-5-11)

 

Q: A Wall Street Journal editorial recently called your 59-point economic plan “surprisingly timid & tactical considering our economic predicament.” Specifically, they had a problem with you picking the $200,000 income threshold for eliminating interest, dividends, and capital gains taxes, writing that you were afraid of “class warfare rhetoric.”

 

ROMNEY: What you have to do is make America the most attractive place in the world for business, and that means our corporate tax rates have to be competitive #2: government and regulators have to be allies of business, not foes.#3: we’ve got to become energy secure in this country. #4: we have to have trade policies that work for us, and crack down on cheaters like China. And my list goes on in my 59 points. I know there are some that say, look, we should lower taxes for the very highest-income people. My view is very simple: The people that have been hurt most by the Obama economy, has been the middle class. That’s why I cut taxes for the middle class.

 

 

Q: Do you support the FairTax?

 

ROMNEY: The idea of a national sales tax or a consumption tax has a lot to go for it. One, it would make us more competitive globally, as we send products around the world, because under the provisions of the World Trade Organization, you can reimburse that to an exporter. We can’t reimburse our taxes right now. It also would level the playing field in the country, making sure everybody is paying some part of their fair share. But the way the fair tax has been structured it has a real problem and that is it lowers the burden on the very highest income folks and the very lowest and raises it on middle income people. And the people who have been hurt most by the economy are the middle class. And so my plan is for middle income Americans, no tax on interest, dividends or capital gains. Let people save their money as the way they think is best. We’re taxing too much, we’re spending too much and middle income Americans need a break and I’ll give it to them.

 

 

If we want to make more capital available for investment, we will have to lower taxes on saving and investing, either at the corporate or the individual level, or preferably both. A lower corporate tax rate would accomplish all that the myriad special tax breaks do, and improve the incentives for investment and entrepreneurship as well. Personal taxes on dividends, interest, and capital gains for all middle-income families should be completely eliminated.

 

Some people advocate the “FairTax” as a means of boosting savings, a system that would entirely replace income taxes with a consumption tax–a kind of sales tax. FairTax proponents estimate that a tax rate of 23% would be sufficient, but detractors claim that it would be closer to 40%. The enormous amount saved by the wealthiest under the FairTax would be made up by a higher tax burden on the middle class. This is not an outcome that will or should gain traction with the American public. (Mitt Romney on Tax Reform; Q & A On The Issues)

 

Five Bills for Day One

 

The American Competitiveness Act: Reduces the corporate income tax rate to 25 percent

 

The Open Markets Act: Implements the Colombia, Panama, and South Korea Free Trade Agreements

 

The Domestic Energy Act: Directs the Department of the Interior to undertake a comprehensive survey of American energy reserves in partnership with exploration companies and initiates leasing in all areas currently approved for exploration

 

The Retraining Reform Act: Consolidates the sprawl of federal retraining programs and returns funding and responsibility for these programs to the states

 

The Down Payment on Fiscal Sanity Act: Immediately cuts non-security discretionary spending by 5 percent, reducing the annual federal budget by $20 billion

 

Five Executive Orders for Day One

 

An Order to Pave the Way to End Obamacare: Directs the Secretary of Health and Human Services and all relevant federal officials to return the maximum possible authority to the states to innovate and design health care solutions that work best for them

 

An Order to Cut Red Tape: Directs all agencies to immediately initiate the elimination of Obama-era regulations that unduly burden the economy or job creation, and then caps annual increases in regulatory costs at zero dollars

 

An Order to Boost Domestic Energy Production: Directs the Department of the Interior to implement a process for rapid issuance of drilling permits to developers with established safety records seeking to use pre-approved techniques in pre-approved areas

 

An Order to Sanction China for Unfair Trade Practices: Directs the Department of the Treasury to list China as a currency manipulator in its biannual report and directs the Department of Commerce to assess countervailing duties on Chinese imports if China does not quickly move to float its currency

 

An Order to Empower American Businesses and Workers: Reverses the executive orders issued by President Obama that tilt the playing field in favor of organized labor, including the one encouraging the use of union labor on major government construction projects

 

Mitt Romney’s Plan for Jobs and Economic Growth

 

The book released by the campaign underscores President Obama’s failed approach to each policy area crucial to turning around the economy, and lays out precisely how Mitt Romney will address the issues as president:

 

Tax Policy

 

Mitt Romney will push for a fundamental redesign of our tax system. He recognizes the need to simplify the system. He also recognizes the need both to lower rates and to broaden the tax base so that taxation becomes an instrument for promoting economic growth. As president, Romney will hold the line on individual income tax rates and eliminate taxes on interest, dividends, and capital gains for low- and middle-income taxpayers. He will eliminate the estate tax. And he will pursue a conservative overhaul that applies lower and flatter rates to a broader tax base.

 

Romney will also reform the corporate tax system. He will immediately lower the corporate income tax rate, and then explore opportunities to further lower the marginal rate while broadening the tax base. He will also begin the process of transitioning to a territorial corporate tax system. A territorial system must be designed to encourage multinational companies to bring their profits back into the U.S. and it must avoid the creation of incentives for outsourcing. (Excerpted from FACT SHEET: MITT ROMNEY’S PLAN TO TURN AROUND THE ECONOMY; By Mitt Romney; MittRomney.com, 9-6-11)

 

Like I wrote, I am not voting for Romney in my State Primary but I will probably vote for Romney as the GOP nominee the General Election of November 6, 2012.

 

JRH 11/1/11

Mormonism and Conservative Politics


Caveman - Mormonism

 

John R. Houk

© October 13, 2011

 

I am a Christian. Christians are those that believe Jesus Christ was crucified, buried for three days and Resurrected to ultimately sit at the right hand of the Father. Christians believe that Jesus is God incarnate as son of the Father hence the Son of God; the same yesterday, today and forever as the eternal God without beginning or ending. Christians believe that the Holy Spirit was the vehicle that impregnated the then virgin Mary that made Jesus human (I believe fully human and fully God) to have the ability to redeem humanity from the grip of Satan attained by the betrayal of Adam in the Garden of Eden.

 

This is the simplicity of Christ that all Christians believe. It is on minor theological points that Christians disagree on such theology as whether or not the Holy Spirit proceeds from just the Father or both the Father and the Son. These are the minor points that Christians have warred over and persecuted each other even though there was agreement on the major points that define a Christian, Christ the Lord and Redemption.

 

Now there have been authentic heresies that have sprung from Christianity that not only disagreed on the minors but also on the majors. Christian Gnosticism is one example:

 

A one-sentence description of Gnosticism: a religion that differentiates the evil god of this world (who is identified with the god of the Old Testament) from a higher more abstract God revealed by Jesus Christ, a religion that regards this world as the creation of a series of evil archons/powers who wish to keep the human soul trapped in an evil physical body, a religion that preaches a hidden wisdom or knowledge only to a select group as necessary for salvation or escape from this world.

 

The term “gnostic” derives from “gnosis,” which means “knowledge” in Greek. The Gnostics believed that they were privy to a secret knowledge about the divine, hence the name. (Huxley coined “agnosticism” on the basis that all knowledge must be based on reason. We cannot rationally claim to have access to knowledge that is beyond the powers of the intellect.) [Gnostics, Gnostic Gospels, & Gnosticism; Early Christian Writings – link above]

 

Now I have thought of Mormonism as a modern offshoot of Christianity through a Gnostic lens. Check this out from author Lance S. Owens:

 

The intrinsic and true American religion, pronounces Bloom in his widely reviewed book, is a kind of Gnosticism – alone a surprising enough declaration. But in evidence of this American Gnosis and as first hero of his story, Bloom gives us Joseph Smith. Of the man himself, he judges:

 

Other Americans have been religion makers….but none of them has the imaginative vitality of Joseph Smith’s revelation, a judgment one makes on the authority of a lifetime spent in apprehending the visions of great poets and original speculators…. So self-created was he that he transcends Emerson and Whitman in my imaginative response, and takes his place with the great figures of our fiction.”1

 

And of his religious creation,

 

The God of Joseph Smith is a daring revival of the God of some of the Kabbalists and Gnostics, prophetic sages who, like Smith himself, asserted that they had returned to the true religion….Mormonism is a purely American Gnosis, for which Joseph Smith was and is a far more crucial figure than Jesus could be. Smith is not just ‘a’ prophet, another prophet, but he is the essential prophet of these latter days, leading into the end time, whenever it comes.2

 

Brooke notes the “striking parallels between the Mormon concepts of coequality of matter and spirit, of the covenant of celestial marriage, and of an ultimate goal of human godhood and the philosophical traditions of alchemy and Hermeticism [SlantRight Editor: HERE is a great concise article on Hermeticism], drawn from the ancient world and fused with Christianity in the Italian Renaissance.” Of course, in this light Harold Bloom’s poetic reading of Joseph Smith as a “Gnostic” takes on broadened nuances: though unnoted by Bloom, Smith’s religion-making imagination was allied in several ways with remnants of an hermetic tradition frequently linked to gnosticism. (Joseph Smith: America’s Hermetic Prophet; Lance S. Owens; Gnosis Archives)

 

 

Below is the part of the article linking Joseph Smith to Gnosticism:

 

A “Gnostic” Joseph Smith?

 

… Within humankind there is an immortal spark of intelligence, taught the Prophet, a seed of divine intellect or light which is “as immortal as, and coequal with, God Himself.” God is not, however, to be understood as one and singular. Turning to Hebrew and an oddly Kabbalistic exegesis of the first three words of Genesis (an exegesis probably taken directly from the Zohar), Smith pronounced there are a multitude of Gods emanated from the First God, existing one above the other without end. He who humankind calls God was Himself once a man; and man, by advancing in intelligence, knowledge – consciousness – may be exalted with God, become as God.

 

Near the beginning of his ministry in 1833, Smith declared “the glory of God is intelligence”, eternal and uncreated. Those who wish to find in him a Gnostic have pointed out that Smith used the word “intelligence” interchangeably with “knowledge” in his prophetic writings during this period. Indeed, they suggest, his words might be read poetically to proclaim God’s glory is Gnosis – a Gnosis that saves woman and man by leading them together to a single uncreated and intrinsically divine Self.

 

I have led up to this point on Mormonism because in my estimation the religion is a cult that aims to be grouped with Christianity yet is apart from the major tenets that defines Christianity.

 

It may be offensive to Mormons that I point out that their faith is not a Christian faith and hence I stand against it. As a Christian it is my right to stand against the LDS just as it is the right of followers of Mormon cultism to have the right to propagate their religion. That last sentence is a very salient because it has to do with Religious Freedom and Free Speech in America. The only problem I have with Mormonism is its aim to evangelize Christians as if they are deceived. It is up to the Christian to buy into the deception or register “no sale”. A follower of Mormonism absolutely has the right to follow and proclaim their faith to America and humanity as far as I am concerned.

 

There is the gigantic Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints (LDS), the much lesser Reformed Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (RLDS) and a handful of splinter Mormon groups that are determined to follow the Mormonism of the LDS founder and the LDS next in command. The first two Mormon groups especially are supportive of the U.S. Constitution at least as far as the First Amendment goes. They are supportive of American Liberty, Freedom and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

Now I will rail against Mormonism as an anti-Christ theological movement; however the followers of Mormonism that are devout plug into Christian values of right and wrong as well as to what is sin and that which is not sin. I will not vote for a Mormon for a political Office because of my Christian beliefs UNLESS the only alternative is a greater evil. The example of a greater evil is intolerant Islam that would propagate by the sword if it had the strength to do so. Another example of a greater evil is a godless atheist (usually with Marxist underpinnings) that has a vision to eliminate Christianity as well as all religious faiths which would include the limitation or the elimination of First Amendment rights in order to transform America into a Left Wing utopia. Incidentally a Left Wing utopia will always be the goal presented to the people but will never arrive because a godless human nature can never give up the notion of absolute power to bring about an actuation of utopia. Hence, the utopia goal will always be presented but the perpetual use of authoritarianism will be maintained in the name of transformation to get to the elusive utopian goal.

 

Now that I have established will look at a Conservative Mormon candidate for anything, let’s look at Mitt Romney.

 

I am never going to vote for Mitt Romney in any primary I am able to vote in. Why? If you have read this far the answer is obvious – Romney is a Mormon. On the other hand of Romney is unwisely selected by the rest of the Republican Party to face President Obamunist, I will vote for Romney.

 

I will vote for Romney even if his Conservative credentials are not exactly stellar. President Obama has placed such a burden of guilt to the entire world by globetrotting with an apology for American past actions for all the evils that have beset the world that he projected that America is evil rather than the fact that America is more responsible for spreading Liberty globally than any other nation. Were international toes stepped on as we proceeded or continue to proceed with American largesse? Sure, toes were stepped on. If American National Interests are not preserved, the America that has given tons of money both as a government and as individual donors would disappear. Americans do not want to disappear. If the nations that spew hatred toward America would examine their past (ESPECIALLY EUROPEANS), a greater appreciation of America’s largesse should be appreciated. Without the American military umbrella and post WWII reconstruction on the American taxpayer dime, most of Europe and Germany in particular, would not have attained a Western standard of prosperity that it now has. Sure Europe is suffering a bit in the economic realm; however that is more because they invested their economy in developing a democratic socialism (money freed from spending military defense from the likes of the USSR and present day Russia) than in building free market sustainability.

 

Frankly I am looking at Herman Cain or Michele Bachman as choices for the GOP nomination before I vote before Romney. As much as I loathe Libertarian slanted Ron Paul, I would even vote for him before I would vote for Romney. Nonetheless, if Romney wins the nomination I will vote for him to make sure President BHO does not win.

 

The inspiration for these thoughts on a Romney candidacy comes from a WND Article by Joe Kovacs entitled “Mormon bishop’s daughter spills Romney’s ‘secrets’ …” The article delves into a Mormon Conspiracy Theory that there is a Mormon agenda to get Mitt Romney elected for some purpose to benefit Mormons in America. Is that true? You will have to read that and decide for yourself.

 

JRH 10/13/11

He Risked his Life, His Fortune and His Sacred Honor – To Do What’s Right


 

I am an admirer of Glen Beck. I used to watch his show on FOX News before he moved on. The only real thing I have against Mr. Beck is his theology. I haven’t checked into it really but I understand Mr. Beck’s theology is that of the Mormon Church. I am quite the Mormonphobe and believe that the Church of Christ of the Latter Day Saints is a Gnostic cult derived from Christianity. Unlike the dark side of Islamic theology I can live with respect to Mormons though. Mormons have an authentic Judeo-Christian values system. I will not vote for Mitt Romney in the primaries because of his adherence to Mormonism; however if he actually becomes the nominee for the GOP I will vote for him based on an anti-Obama Republican ticket.

 

With that explanation on my thoughts on Mormonism as related to Glen Beck, I am more of a supporter than a critic. Not long ago Beck went to Israel to initiate a pro-Israel rally titled Restoring Courage held in Jerusalem. Below is a supportive Beck email because of that Rally in Jerusalem. Local ACT for America Chapter leader Dr. Nancy Bonus attended “Restoring Courage” in Jerusalem and was moved. Bonus was so moved she wrote a scathing criticism aimed at Glen Beck critics. I forget which Chapter Bonus represents and she did not include it in this last email, but I think it is the San Bernadino County Chapter. If I am incorrect I am sure Dr. Bonus will let me know in a follow-up.

 

JRH 9/7/11

***********************************

He Risked his Life, His Fortune and His Sacred Honor – To Do What’s Right

 

My report from having attended the “Restoring Honor” event in Jerusalem, Israel

 

By Nancy Bonus

Sent: Aug 30, 2011 at 5:31 PM

 

Glenn Beck is hated:

 

Many in the world hate Glenn Beck. Maybe you’re one of them.

 

He’s been called – a right wing extremist, a hater, a liar, a bigot, a buffoon, dangerous, an Anti-Semite, and most improbably and contradictory – a Jew-Lover. This character assassination comes from many sources, regrettably often from good people who are well meaning and want to warn others not to be taken in by him.

 

Unfortunately most often their negative opinions of him are based, not upon having watched and listened to full-length broadcasts of his, but upon what they’ve heard others say about him and what he supposedly stands for.

 

Assassinating another’s character and slandering them publically is one of the most grievous offenses one can commit against another according to Jewish scripture. Public humiliation – the act of destroying their good name, means you have killed their reputation in the eyes of others and it’s one of the most difficult offenses to overcome.

 

But this is what many do when they take part in repeating or agreeing with vicious slanders about Mr. Beck based upon what they’ve read online or have heard about from websites they frequent… or from magazines who paint him in the most unflattering light through doctored photos, innuendoes or partial quotes or sound-bites taken out of context.  (This is a tactic that’s been used against Jews repeatedly throughout history to turn public opinion against them…and has led to expulsions, pogroms, and attempted annihilations.)

 

He certainly does inspire passion from all sides. Unfortunately what passes for journalism today is not ‘just the facts.’ That went out decades ago and most journalists admit they want to promote an agenda and see that as their job.

 

Good people without a lot of time to do their own research believe the opinion pieces without realizing that the writers today have a strong bias or agenda they are promoting. Mr. Beck often says, “The truth has no agenda.” He encourages his listeners to “question with boldness” and to “do your own research” not believing what anyone says, even him unless you’ve checked it out from first level sources…not what someone says about another, but what that person actually said or wrote himself.

 

We had to be in Jerusalem at this momentous time:

 

My husband and I traveled to Jerusalem to take part in Glenn Beck’s – “Restoring Courage” event. I felt compelled to support this non-Jewish man who was standing up and standing by Israel and Jews in this dangerous and perilous time.

 

During the time we were there from August 18th to August 28th, there were three major suicide-bombing attacks against Israeli civilians and military from different points around the country. Areas that had never been targets were now on the hit list for terror.

 

The Arab Spring and its promise of “democracy” had brought instead chaos, agitation, and the rise of Muslim Brotherhood agitators, Hamas/Fatah partnerships, and awakening of Al Qaeda affiliates. Israel is under siege once more and the stakes are very serious.

 

What would have happened if Christians supported the Jews during WWII?

 

The burning impetus for being there was to experience and take part in a miracle – a new phenomenon in world history – the Christian love and support for Jews and for Israel. Finally at this crucial time in our history, we are not alone.

 

As someone who grew up experiencing many incidents of painful Anti-Semitism directed against me for no reason other than my having been born Jewish, I am awed by the love and support of our Christian brothers and sisters at this important time in history. I keep thinking to myself what a different world it would have been had we had this kind of love and support, during the Holocaust and in my childhood when I felt the sting of persecution for being a Jewish minority in a hostile, Christian land.

 

I’ve become active by supporting and attending events presented by various Christian organizations who not only love Israel and the Jewish people, but who do everything in their ability to show that love and support through charitable contributions, rally’s, books in support of Israel, pamphlets, educational seminars and events for which they risk everything to do the right thing…often making them targets for attack themselves.

 

Christians United For Israel:

 

I’ve heard Reverend John Hagee many times as he preached to thousands about the duty of Christians to love and support Israel. I’ve also seen countless Glenn Beck shows where he laid out the danger the Arab Spring would bring to Israel and why the western world must support her now in her hour of need.

 

When I tell others about the love and support many Christian movements today have for Israel I often am confronted with suspicion or cynicism. And of course, I understand why there would be mistrust, based upon centuries of Christian persecution of the Jewish people.

 

That’s why this new kind of Christianity, called ‘Dispensationalism’ is such a miracle and something that all Jews should thank God for and wholeheartedly embrace. John Nelson Darby, a 19th century British evangelist who is the forerunner of modern Christianity, popularized it.

 

This new kind of Christianity supersedes “Replacement” theology in which Christianity was said to have replaced Judaism and for that reason, there was no longer any need for Jews except those who would convert to Christianity. Unlike the bigoted Christianity that our parent’s generation faced, this brand of Christianity loves the Jewish people and quotes bible verses where God commands them to do so. They also are thankful for the Jews who gave them Jesus, Joseph, Mary, the Apostles, the patriarchs, the bible, the ten commandments, etc…In other words, without Judaism, there would be no Christianity.

 

This is not to say that all Christians today follow this kind of theology but the numbers who do is extremely large and growing.

 

Glenn Beck and Restoring Courage:

 

Glenn Beck is a very complex, intelligent, compassionate and courageous man. In many ways, he’s been a kind of prophet by accurately predicting world events years before they occur and warning his viewers of what is coming and to be prepared for what will be happening in the world and to all of us.

 

He would (and has) rejected the notion that he is any kind of prophet and would probably not appreciate my seeing him that way, but I truly feel he is a man of God that was placed on earth just at this time, to help show all of us the way to save ourselves. He believes that Israel is the cornerstone for Western Civilization and believes that, if Israel were to fall, the Western countries would be close behind, including America.

 

He predicted the Arab Spring before it occurred and told of what would happen if it came to pass. He showed with maps and diagrams how the various countries would threaten Israel and even used the phrase that “Israel is being set up.”

 

In promoting his “Restoring Courage” event, he often spoke about the courageous reverend, Dietrich Bonhoeffer whose life greatly impacted Glenn’s own. Bonhoeffer was hunted down and tortured by the Nazi’s for speaking out against their evil. Even when they imprisoned him and tortured him and prohibited him from writing and getting the word out, he didn’t stop and found ways to sneak his words out of the prisons in an attempt to rally support for fighting against the evil of Nazism. He was executed by hanging by the Nazis when he was only in his early 30’s, right before the end of the war.

 

Glenn often quoted Bonhoeffer as a guiding light for right action in the face of evil: “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless. Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.” Glenn said on many shows, “I stand with Israel and the Jewish People. If you must come for someone, come for me.”

 

This courageous man who stands with Israel and the Jewish people has been an inspiration throughout the world. In a Gallup Poll last year, Americans said they admired Glenn Beck more than the Pope; more than Billy Graham, or Bill Gates, Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush – and he came in a close second to Nelson Mandella. So it’s pretty obvious he didn’t do this for fame.

 

It also took a lot of his own money to make this happen. One article said he was around $1million in the hole in order to put on these events (after the three events in Israel, he took the show to South Africa – to show that Israel is NOT and never has been an Apartheid state…to South America, with the same message – the necessity of standing for good over evil – supporting Israel and he’ll finish up with a huge rally in Texas.) He didn’t do this for fortune.

 

He did it because it’s the right thing to do and he has the clout and recognition to bring attention to this issue. He is highly principled and as a recovering Alcoholic, follows the steps laid out as part of that recovery – and he obviously takes them seriously.

 

So did he achieve his goals of imparting the importance for each of us to do the right thing and to stand up for good over evil no matter the price? I know for myself and for thousands of others, he certainly did.

I Am Described Often as Phobic: Islam, Homosexuality and Mormonism


Phobias

 

John R. Houk

© August 23, 2011

 

If you come to any of my blogs and you do not like my type of Conservatism there are two accusations you could hurl at me. One is that I am an Islamophobe and the second is that I am a Homophobe.

 

The “phobe” part is derived from a Greek word that denotes fear; thus I would be in fear or perhaps an extreme irrational fear of Islam and homosexuals. The concept of fear connotes something in which the scared anxiety would lead one to be repulsed to such an extent as to avoid or to run from that causing the fear.

 

Along my thoughts of a “phobia” attached to Islam and homosexuality I do not feel the effect that bodily harm is imminent triggering the fight or flight autonomic response. As an Islamophobe and a Homophobe I am concerned of the effect those two lifestyles will have on my environment. My environment is one which I believe Islam is a false religion that has a very dark nature which is a threat to individual and communal safety as well as to American Constitutional issues such as Free Speech, Religious Freedom and Liberty in general. Likewise I believe the homosexual agenda to seek normalization in American is antithetical toward my faith which includes Biblical Morality.

 

Both Islam and homosexual activists view Biblical Christianity as a threat that might encroach on their spheres of influence or freedom to practice immorality openly. Islam does not like being called a pseudo-religion ripped off from Judaism and Christianity. According to Muslim holy writings when another religion calls Islam false that is an insult worthy of death. I am fairly certain Judaism does not have a Scriptural edict to kill those that insult Judaism. I am absolutely certain the Christian Scriptures do not mandate a death penalty if another religious person insults Christianity. Now I realize there are Christians that would become offended and take the insult as an attack and might start a fight resulting in death; HOWEVER such an action by a Christian would contrary to the Biblical New Testament. Homosexuals feel threatened by Biblical Christianity for the New Testament clearly spells out that sex between two males or two females is an abomination to God. Statistically most Americans still consider themselves Christians even if they are not strict adherent to a Christian lifestyle. Hence it is understandable that Homosexuals and their apologists on the Left side of the political spectrum do all they can to relegate Christianity to an outmoded religion that should be regarded as a collection of myths that for the most part is not applicable to a Western Secular mindset.

 

Now after my long-winded justification for Islamophobia and Homophobia there is another phobia that bugs me that will undoubtedly produce yet another epithet that would relegate me to what one might call an intolerant-racist Archie Bunker mindset (Humorous look). I am a huge believer that certain religions that like to be associated with Christianity but have a different doctrine than Christianity are not Christian. The two that come to mind immediately are Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormonism (aka Church of Jesus Christ of the Latter Day Saints). The particular sect/cult I am going to focus on in this post is the Mormons. Why?

 

Mormons of today basically lead what definitely would be defined a Biblical Christian lifestyle. Mormons as a group of cult-believers are typically Conservative with a Pro-Life stance. Thus it is not the people that bug me rather it is the Mormon faith in general. Why am I picking on the Mormons?

 

It is because a candidate running for the Office of President under the Republican Party is a Mormon. That person is former Governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney. Actually Romney has been in the enviable political position as the front runner for the GOP slot as of this post.

 

Now I am not what one would call an expert on Mormon doctrine but I know enough for the Christian red flag to pop up. To my understanding Mormon theology teaches that Jesus is a created Son of God as opposed to being co-equal as One God in three persons known as the Trinity. The God of the Trinity has no beginning and no ending as in the first and the last and the alpha and the omega. The Mormon Jesus is a created supernatural being like the angels. Indeed, Jesus and Lucifer have a commonality in both being created. There is much more to be concerned about with Mormonism and a Presidential Mormon. The guy to read about this is Ed Decker of Saints Alive in Jesus. Decker is an ex-Mormon that is full of details on the reasons to be wary the Mormon cult. Below is an email I received from Saints Alive that points toward a book by Ed Decker at his website. I am also going to squeeze the info derived from the book at the Saints Alive website.

 

JRH 8/23/11

**********************************

A Special Report and An Urgent Message from Ed Decker

 

By Ed Decker

Sent by: Saints Alive

Sent: August 22, 2011 4:08 PM

 

A secular reporter opined last week that if Mitt Romney made it to the White House in next year’s elections, Mormonism would become a main-stream Christian religion and it would add several million new members to its rolls.

 

My concern is not that a conservative Mormon would replace the socialist now occupying the White House, but that a few more millions of victims would fall prey to the doctrines of demons that are the foundation of Mormonism and lost to God and given over to the devil.

 

That’s it in the simplest of terms.

 

In my book, My Kingdom Come: The Mormon Quest for Godhood, I systematically detail the Mormon doctrines that separate its members from the true body of Christ and from the promise of eternal life in Christ. I also dedicate a full chapter to the Mormon Plan for America and the rise of Mitt Romney

 

I was back East recently and was watching the News when one of the new LDS warm and fuzzy “we are just like you” ads came on and I was impressed by the quality and impact of the ad to a lost and dying world. Would that a few of the mega-churches spend a tenth of what the Mormons spend and reach out with the real Jesus to that same lost world.

 

The problem is that for the most part, the Christian church has stopped inoculating its people against the warm and fuzzy demons of the cults. I have said many times that Satan is not going to come to you looking like a fourteen foot frog with bad breath. He is going to come as a sweet and enticing spirit.

 

The late Dr. Walter Martin said that the cults are the unpaid bills of the Church and it has not been more so than today, when the vast majority of the churches, especially in the evangelical community, do not want to offend anyone. They seem to forget that Jesus, the rock of our salvation, offended a whole lot of folks, especially the religious ones.

 

Rarely do I see a church confronting its people with their sins and calling for repentance. Words like “sanctify yourselves” and “be holy and righteous before Him” don not come from the pulpit very often these days.   Salvation comes at the end of services by a quick two second lifting of a hand while all heads are bowed and eyes are closed, like it is a secret thing and no one should be privy to who was ‘saved.’
Might embarrass them. 

 

Funny. Jesus said, “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father.” That’s the deal I would want in on!

   

Well, I started in one place and ending up in another. Let me get back on subject.

 

Because of the lack of discernment so prevalent in the church today, men like Mitt Romney and Glenn Beck seem to captivate the hearts of many Christians, especially some of our most leaders. 

 

They seem to be able to casually trade their biblical integrity for the spotlight, standing with these ministers of deceit and openly accepting them as true Christian brothers, as though they were unaware that both Beck and Romney proclaim not the righteousness of the Living God, but their own righteousness as they work to become gods of their own planets. The Word of God warns us of this coming to pass in the last days.

 

I bear them record that they have a zeal of God, but not according to knowledge. 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. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth. Rom 10:2-4

 

 

The other day, I watched Mitt Romney being interviewed by one of our most well known Christian TV personalities. This is a man with whom I have personally shared the dangers of the LDS doctrines. He knows the dangers. Yet this man who professes to have great spiritual discernment sat, knee to knee, with Mitt Romney, A Mormon High Priest wearing his magic temple undergarments inches from this great Christian leader who fawned all over this “strong conservative candidate.”

 

This last Sunday night, August 21, 2011, Carol and I turned on the TV to see John Hagee speaking on TBN, while at the Glenn Beck “Restoring Courage” event in Israel. TBN, another major player in Christian Television had dedicated its full broadcast power, without interruption to this mighty cause, led by the demonized temple Mormon, Glenn Beck.

 

Dear Lord, deliver us from the vanity of such blind fools.

 

Therefore, please accept a copy of the entire 12th Chapter of my book, The Mormon Plan for America and the Rise of Mitt Romney.”

 

You can download it from our Saints Alive Facebook Page,

 

Our website

 

Or email me personally at ed@saintsalive.com And I will personally send you a full copy by return e-mail.

 

After you read it, I would ask you to send it out to every person on your email list and post it on your FB page, Twitter page and whatever other social networking system you use. This word must get out!

 

The Man Who Would Be God

Mitt Romney

 

The Secret World of Mitt Romney

 

Mitt Romney has a few secrets he really doesn’t want you to know…

 

Mitt isn’t just a member of the Mormon Church.

 

Mitt Romney is a Temple Mormon, a High Priest, and as such he has sworn blood oaths of sacrifice, obedience, and consecration to the church and the soon coming, long prophesied “Kingdom of God.”

 

His belief in and obedience to these laws will allow him to become a polygamous god in the next life, the literal father of the peoples of a new and different earth. He wears secret undergarments marked with sacred talismanic symbols that he believes will keep him protected as he works his way to godhood.   He is truly a Presidential candidate with an actual, definable god complex.

 

This “Kingdom of God” is the actual Mormon Theocracy that will take over the U.S. government when the Constitution of the United States “hangs by a thread” and the nation is ‘saved’ by the Mormon Brethren, the LDS spiritual leaders. The prophet and the apostles and key Mormons in high positions, such as Mitt Romney sitting in the Oval Office. The money pouring into his campaign isn’t accidental. It is to fulfill prophecy.

 

Mitt Romney’s strong candidacy for 2012 and his possible presidency has become a whispered ground swell of speculation in Mormon circles, as they wonder if he is the “one Mighty and Strong” who will usher in the last days and bring America into the LDS “Kingdom of God.” These are the whispers that the Brethren hope do not become public but are laid wide open in this chapter.

 

Get your own free copy of “The Mormon Plan for America and th e Rise of Mitt Romney

 

Today!

________________________________

 

I Am Described Often as Phobic: Islam, Homosexuality and Mormonism

John R. Houk

© August 23, 2011

_____________________________

A Special Report and An Urgent Message from Ed Decker

 

Saints alive in Jesus

P.O. Box 1347

Issaquah WA 98028

www.saintsalive.com

ed@saintsalive.com

 

Copyright: Ed Decker 2011

GOP Nomination for President Part One


Dialogue between Adam and John Houk

Edited by John R. Houk

© May 10, 2011

 

This is part one of an interchange between my son Adam Houk and myself that began as thoughts on the acceptability of Mitt Romney being the GOP nominee for the 2012 election against President Barack Hussein Obama.

 

Along the way the discussion merged with thoughts on the filter Christians should be using with their American right to vote.

 

****************************

 

Adam:

 

Subject: Mitt Romney

 

I have noticed in my readings that this is the leading candidate to make the Republican Party ticket so I went on to read about his political views. After this I was very disappointed and came to the conclusion that I would rather put a write in for the presidential candidate than vote for this guy and I will do a write in instead of voting for him.  In hopes of not being forced to do this I thought I would send you 2 an email in hopes that you could spread the information in order to vote for someone better in the primaries.  Here are the reprehensible views of why I would rather vote for someone else.  Here is some info I have found on Wikipedia.

 

“I am pro-life. I believe that abortion is the wrong choice except in cases of incest, rape, and to save the life of the mother. “

 

A baby is a baby no matter how it is created whether it was incest or rape and should never be destroyed.  It even gets much worse than this as I have found and will show.

 

Romney was photographed attending a Planned Parenthood fundraiser in 1994, and his wife made a $150 contribution to the organization.

 

It is my opinion that anyone that donates to Planned Parenthood supports their racist views and their driven need to abort babies.

 

In a 1994 debate with Senator Kennedy, Romney said that abortion should be legal, declaring that “regardless of one’s beliefs about choice, you would hope it would be safe and legal.”

 

And more Statements by Romney

 

“I believe that since Roe v. Wade has been the law for 20 years, that we should sustain and support it, and I sustain and support that law, and the right of a woman to make that choice, and my personal beliefs, like the personal beliefs of other people, should not be brought into a political campaign.”

 

And another statement by Romney when accused of being multi-choice

 

“I have my own beliefs, and those beliefs are very dear to me. One of them is that I do not impose my beliefs on other people. “

 

The last statement is the same as saying I don’t believe one human being should murder another but I have no right to impose my beliefs on someone else so murder should be legal.  It is ridiculous.  I in no way believe that Romney would ever sign anything into law that would protect the innocent life of the unborn.  This is not a pro-life stance at all but pro-choice.

 

Help us get a better candidate to vote for.

 

John:

 

Subject: RE: Mitt Romney

 

Yes Mitt Romney is what is known as a Republican in Name Only (RINO). Personally I doubt he will win the Republican nomination for two reasons. The primary reason is that Romney as Governor of Massachusetts set up a mandated healthcare system in his State. With a majority of Americans showing that Obamacare is not favorable I doubt Republicans will place the man who invented Romneycare will win the nomination. The secondary reason is the power of the Christian Right. You see Romney is a Mormon. Mormonism is regarded as a cult spinoff of Christianity that does not believe Jesus is coequal with the Father. In fact Mormons believe that Jesus was a created being along with Lucifer, thus making Lucifer out as Jesus’ brother. Lucifer erred in his ways and became Satan. Mormonism is a kind of battle between good and evil in the Gnostic sense.

 

On the other hand, if Romney does pull an upset and win the nomination I will vote for him. Trust me he will be the lesser of two evils in which President Barack Hussein Obama is an uber-evil American Leftist. Obama must be voted out so he does not have another four years of transforming America into the Leftist vision of a socialist utopia.

 

Adam:

 

Subject: RE: Mitt Romney

 

I’m done voting for the lesser of 2 evils.  If we cannot put a righteous candidate up for election we deserve our fate.  I will only vote for a candidate that is holding with God’s principles.  Ask yourself this would God vote for the lesser of 2 evils, no God would give us up to our evil ways and let us destroy ourselves and start judgment as he did with Israel.  I send this email out in order to avoid having Romney as the Republican Candidate, but if this fails I will try and popularize a write in President. This is a possible win.  Just look at Alaska, they did it.

 

It is time we draw the line.  Until we stand up for beliefs wholeheartedly and replace this congregation of corrupt politicians we aren’t ever going to be able to turn our country back to God.  It is time we proclaim the word of God openly and everywhere publicly as God has told us when he told us to go into the world to seek and save the lost.

 

John:

 

Subject: RE: Mitt Romney

 

Don’t get mad because I disagree with you. The last time I voted for the righteous cause instead of the lesser of two evils, President Slick Willie Clinton became President. The Republican was incumbent George G.W. Bush (aka Bush 1). The Dem of course was Clinton. I voted for third Party candidate Ross Perot who had the righteous cause back then. I distrusted Bush 1 because of his involvement with Watergate and a questionable CIA stint. I knew Clinton would be a Leftist politically and anti-Social Values. I loved Perot. So did many others. The reality though was Perot siphoned off Conservative voters that allowed Clinton to squeak out a win. The evil Clinton went to be so popular with the voters he was reelected, then impeached and then received a not-guilty from 40 Dem Senators and enough Republicans to score that victory for Clinton (I am uncertain but I think it was 12 Republicans).

 

I cannot allow my conscience to be responsible for helping Barack Hussein Obama win a 2nd term. Regardless though, as the nominee selection process narrows done to a winner, I doubt that it will be Mitt Romney. He was the favorite for awhile for the nomination in 2008 as well. He ended finishing behind Huckabee and the eventual winner John McCain.

 

Adam:

 

Subject: RE: Mitt Romney

 

I’m not mad, but I am frustrated.  I think you place the responsibility on the wrong person/people.  It is not the fault of those that voted for Ross Perot that Clinton was elected but those of evil and ignorant hearts that voted for Clinton.  God’s path is a narrow and most will choose the wide gate.  To choose the path of a lesser of 2 evils is still that evil.  There are many paths to evil but only 1 path to God.  Until the Christian community overwhelmingly stands up for what it believes in we will not be heard.  Did the apostles listen when they were told not to preach in the name of Jesus on the streets of Jerusalem?  They said they had to do what God had in store for them to do.  If any one candidate has major policies that are incredibly out of line with God’s word, we as Christians have a duty to communicate with each other and pick a candidate that is within the Word of God and write them in.  We cannot compromise when it comes to the word of God.  That which you feed will grow.  Even if we feed sin ever so minor it is a seed that can grow and it has grown abundantly in our country.  It is time we kick out the compromising population of politics and put in place candidates that are bold and will hold their ground.  Only then can we turn America around politically.  Of course this won’t happen until we start turning America around at the base level, with the people. 

 

As I said before if we can’t put forth a candidate that is in holding with God’s word then we deserve our fate as a nation, and as Habakkuk said as he cried out to the lord about why he hasn’t judged Israel for its wickedness “for the wicked doth compass about the righteous; therefore wrong judgement proceedeth.” 

 

And like in his day, we here in the latter days are starting to experience the birthing pains of this world as the wrath of God is upon us.  If we cannot turn this nation around now by standing for God, our country will then be consumed as the rest the world.

 

Revelations 3:15-16

 

15 I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot.  16 So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spew thee out of my mouth.

 

John:

 

RE: Mitt Romney

 

Adam your stick-to-it-ness is quite admirable. You are correct in one thing, people get what they deserve. Whatsoever is sown is that which is reaped. Consider this though:

 

1 Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks be made for all men, 2 for kings and all who are in authority, that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. 3 For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, 4 who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth. 5 For there is one God and one Mediator between God and men, the Man Christ Jesus, 6 who gave Himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time, (I Tim. 2: 1-6 NKJV)

 

In these days of libertinism it is up to the Believers to pray for those in authority. As ghastly as it sounds this even means President Obama as he is in the Office of President. Nonetheless, if the majority of Republicans miss it on the best nominee to replace Obama with, it is up to you, me and other Believers to pray for Mitt Romney.  If Romney is the too wrong for the Office of President, the Father will allow Obama to be reelected as the just deserts to those who miss the prompting of the Holy Spirit. I am guessing Romney if selected would be God’s choice much like the likes of Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus and Ahasuerus (aka Xerxes) were choices of God as instruments of God’s will toward bringing His Chosen People back to repentance.

 

1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. 3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do you want to be unafraid of the authority? Do what is good, and you will have praise from the same. (Rom. 13: 1-3 NKJV)

 

Even many of the Righteous Kings of Israel and Judah had sin in their life but were still used as instruments of God, especially the big dog of Jesus’ human bloodline King David. David had a problem with lust and so did the wing ding with another man’s wife – adultery. Then David attempted to cover-up his adultery by having Bathsheba’s husband come home from war so that he would have conjugal relations to cover David’s impregnation of Bathsheba. Then when that failed, David had Uriah the husband sent back to the battle line with instructions for Uriah to hand to General Joab. The instructions were to order Uriah to lead the frontline of an offense which ended as David had hoped with Uriah’s death – murder.

 

Again I have to make the point I would be very surprised in this climate of the Tea Party Movement that a Republican with a mixed bag of politics to offer as his bona fides would win the Republican nomination. My mind could change but my support currently is in the hope that Sarah Palin will run for President. She espouses both fiscal and Biblical values (growing up in the Pentecostal Assembly of God in Alaska) in the Conservatism she has to offer. As realist though I am sad to say Palin does not hold broad Republican support even though she was instrumental in getting many long shot Republicans elected that were Tea Partiers as well as making long shots make a close run even though the long shots barely lost.

 

Where am I going here? I am going with it is more important for Believers to pray than it is to vote even though there is also a responsibility to vote. In praying for those in authority we need to pray for the best candidate to win nominations and to win the political Offices so that whatever the will of God is, we as Christians may live a peaceable and fruitful life in Christ.

 

JRH 5/10/11

 

END OF PART ONE

 

____________________________

Part two will be delivered tomorrow. In writing this interchange between Adam and I spell check  and personal editing were involved to make up for both of our quick jotting of thoughts via email. All links even in Adam’s are provided by the Editor.