Theology – Page 2 – Gerard Sczepura

GOD & the Gods: The Celts

Today, the terms Celt and Celtic are primarily associated with Ireland, but the Celtic speaking peoples originated in the Caucasus, the area between the Caspian Sea and Black Sea. The Celts and Italic speaking people derived from these Indo-European (IE) tribes who migrated westward from the Caucasus into central Europe. It’s also noteworthy that the Caucasus is located relatively close to northern Iraq where tradition holds was the site of the Garden of Eden, the Tower of Babel, and Abraham’s original homeland.

Any study of the Celts or Celtic religion is impossible without encountering numerous references to Indo-Europeans, Aryans, Indo-Aryans, Greeks, Romans, Gaul, Caesar, Pythagoras, and the Druids.

Interestingly, the Celts are related to the Indo-Aryan peoples who migrated from northern India and Iran.

It is not the intent of this writing to cover any of the goddesses or gods in any depth, that has already been accomplished by other writers. I would recommend Sarah Owen’s excellent book, Celtic Spirituality: A Beginners Guide for a concise list of the names of Celtic gods and goddesses along with a brief description of each.

The GOD of the Bible is always referenced in masculine terms such as “Abba! Father!” (Mark 14:36, Rom. 8:15, Gal. 4:6 NASB) In addition, Jesus opens His well-known prayer delivered during the Sermon on the Mount with: “Our Father who is in Heaven…” (Matt. 6:9) On the other hand, the Celts regarded the feminine nature Goddess over any masculine counterpart.¹

In Christianity, believers worship or communicate with GOD “in spirit and truth,” (John 4:23) but in Celtic religion communion with the Goddess is through being one with nature.²

Edward Anwyl, a Welsh academic who specialized in Celtic languages, points out that the Celtic religion held that spirits (deities) inhabited natural objects such as trees, rivers, lakes, and mountains. He also goes on to explain that certain deities also took on the form of certain animals such as the bear, horse, and surprisingly, swine.³

Sarah Owen takes Anwyl’s animism discussion a step further when she claims that the Celtic deities were able to take on various animal forms at will, i.e., shapeshifting,⁴ a concept confirmed by MacCulloch.⁵

The Celtic priests, i.e., the Druids, especially revered trees—the oak tree in particular. Druids believed the oak tree represented death and re-birth and that “oak to be the tree of life at the centre of the earth,” and that the “oak tree was a doorway to other worlds.”⁶

For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen. (Rom. 1:25)

The Greek philosopher Pythagoras, well known for the mathematical theory (a² + b² = c²) that bears his name, also believed in the immortality of the soul and in reincarnation. Given the apparent resemblance of Pythagoreanism with the druidic beliefs concerning the soul, the Druids have come to be regarded as philosophers by some.⁷

GOD and the Celtic gods and goddesses all share the attribute of being invisible.⁸

The Celtic gods and goddesses also possess the attribute of immortality⁹ however, by no means do any of them claim to possess the “omni” attributes, which are: omnipotence, omnipresence, and omniscience, these three attributes are exclusively reserved for GOD. Furthermore, none of the Celtic gods or goddesses claimed to have always existed, that is, having no beginning and no end, as the GOD of the Bible has claimed. (Heb. 7:3)

The Celtic gods and goddesses were by no means chaste; they frequently mated with mortals. Goddesses preferred to mate with heroes and the gods with mortal women.¹⁰ The Tuatha Dé Dannan, a divine race of people, were believed to have descended from the Goddess Danu.¹¹ This divine race of people possessed all the attributes discussed earlier; they were skilled warriors and magicians; they were also some new kind of hybrid beings who were immortal and yet could still be killed; they were shapeshifters and could become invisible at will.¹²

Owen goes on to write that the Tuatha Dé Dannan “deified” their people who had become adept scientists and engineers. These engineers are believed to be the ones most likely responsible for the design and construction of the stone circles that can be found throughout Britain today.¹³

Many Celtic beliefs and traditions have been adopted by the Church for example: the Christmas tree, the Yule Log, and mistletoe. These are traditions, but what about Church teachings? Maybe the Celts had more influence on Christian doctrine than we have been led to believe. Marie-Louise Sjoestedt in her short but dense book, Celtic Gods and Heroes, writes that “the number three plays a large part in Celtic tradition.”¹⁴ The number three is important in Christian theology as well given the “notion of one God existing in multiple persons”¹⁵ is referred to as the “Trinity.” Sjoestedt goes on to write: “…the ‘triad’, a formula which combines three facts or three precepts, is a genre which dominates the gnomic literature of both Wales and Ireland, and triple personages or trios are prominent in the epic tradition of the two peoples.”¹⁶

Celtic tradition uses the terms “Threefold One” and “Triple Goddess” when referring to the nature or earth Goddess.¹⁷ The term “Threefold One” can also be understood as “Three in One.” Were the Celts influenced by Christian doctrine or was it the other way around? The doctrine of the “Trinity” is a derived teaching based on interpretation since the word itself doesn’t appear in the Bible.

Celtic beliefs and influences have not been lost on today’s pop culture either as evidenced by the following examples:

Fleetwood Mac’s hit song “Rhiannon” is named after a Celtic goddess whose name is “a corruption of Rigantona, ‘great queen’.”¹⁸

Enya (Eithne Pádraigín Ní Bhraonáin), an Irish singer, songwriter, musician and producer famous for her New-age music notably her record albums entitled The Celts and Memory of Trees.

Celtic Women, an all-female (emphasis added) Irish musical ensemble.

Earth, Wind & Fire, a popular 1970s music group. Does their name include a possible reference to “Druidic Wind?”¹⁹

Or how about The Twilight Zone episode “Mirror Image” where a woman waiting in a bus terminal has an encounter with her “doppelganger,” according to IMDb. However, it could also be that the woman had an encounter with the Faery world. Owen writes that “[t]he Faery world mirrors our ordinary world. Whatever is found in one world has a reflection or polar partner in the other.”²⁰ Was Rod Serling, the episode writer, influenced by Celtic mythology?

Celtic themes have also appeared in more recent films including: Merlin, the warrior-magician, and the legend of Excalibur in The Last Legion; and the Picts in Centurion.

Lastly, I believe many current political and social movements are rooted in the Celtic and Druidic belief system, namely globalism, feminism, and environmentalism. The relationship between feminism and environmentalism with Celtic beliefs should be obvious from the arguments cited earlier in this writing. But what about globalism? Again, Owen writes that in Celtic spirituality all are one with the elements, e.g., “oneness.”²¹ Even though the concept of “oneness” is primarily described as being in tune with nature, it wouldn’t be much of a stretch to apply the concept to all people and geographical locations.

Sarah Owen, Celtic Spirituality: A Beginners Guide, (Printed by CreateSpace, 2018), 33. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Edward Anwyl, Celtic Religion in Pre-Christian Times, (Boston, Adamant Media Corporation, 2005), 39-41. ↩
Owen, Celtic Spirituality, 39-40. ↩
J. A. MacCulloch, The Religion of the Ancient Celts (p. 216). Kindle Edition. ↩
“Nine Sacred Trees of the Druids,” Maureen McGhee, posted April, 03, 2014, https://www.maureenmcghee.com/news/2/. ↩
Anwyl, Celtic Religion, 58-59. ↩
MacCulloch, The Religion of the Ancient Celts, 216. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Owen, Celtic Spirituality, 35. ↩
Ibid., 36. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Marie-Louise Sjoestedt, Celtic Gods and Heroes, (Mineola, NY, Dover Publications, Inc., 2000), 17. ↩
Gerard Sczepura, “GOD & the Gods: One God,” Theological Ruminations (blog), October 22, 2017, http://gerardsczepura.com/god-the-gods-one-god/. ↩
Sjoestedt, Celtic Gods and Heroes, 17. ↩
Owen, Celtic Spirituality, 33. ↩
MacCulloch, The Religion of the Ancient Celts, 182. ↩
Sjoestedt, Celtic Gods and Heroes, 11. ↩
Owen, Celtic Spirituality, 54. ↩
Ibid., 60-61. ↩

GOD & the Gods: Buddhism

Up until recently, I’ve always held that Buddhism was a religion and that Buddha was a god. Or, at least I believed he was worshiped or adored as a god. However, now I’ve come to the understanding that Buddhism can also be viewed as a philosophy and not just a religion—contrary to Buddhists’ outward expressions of worship that I’ve had opportunity to witness on several occasions. In theory, Buddhism may be a philosophy and/or psychology but in practice it has all the appearances of a religion.

I’ve also come to the realization that the word “Buddha” is actually a title meaning “awakened one” or “the enlightened one.” In most Buddhist traditions the first awakened one was Siddhartha Gautama who was born in 623 B.C. in the sacred area of Lumbini located in the plains of southern Nepal, according to most scholars. Today, when people refer to the Buddha, they are actually referring to Siddhartha Gautama, the Supreme Buddha.

Interestingly, Siddhartha Gautama never claimed to be a prophet or a god (deity). This is the argument adherents use to excuse their beliefs as not being pertaining to a religion because Buddhists don’t believe in a supreme being. Since Buddhists don’t believe in a supreme or higher being, it follows that when Buddha spoke, he spoke of himself and not of any other person or deity.

While the Buddha ‘preached’ doctrine to his followers (disciples) he wasn’t dogmatic concerning his teachings. Buddhism isn’t truth, to the contrary, it is the search for truth. Buddhists are required to come to the truth (enlightenment) through their own efforts in order to arrive at what they themselves understand to be the truth.

As it stands, the ultimate goal of all Buddhists is to achieve enlightenment which is arriving at the truth that frees one from suffering. According to Ian Tuhovsky in his Kindle book, Buddhism Beginner’s Guide: Bringing Peace and Happiness to Your Everyday Life, we are the cause of our own suffering¹ and that suffering can be overcome by simply having the right view or right perspective of reality.² This is an integral part of Dharma. But what is Dharma?

Permit me to define Dharma using an analogy with Christianity. If Dharma is considered to be the “right way” then Dharma is “the way, and the truth, and the life” (John 14:6 NASB) for Buddhists.

It doesn’t take a whole lot of research to learn that Siddhartha Gautama is credited with achieving “full realization”³ of reality or truth which elevated him to the status or title of Buddha. Most sites that discuss this achieving “full realization” concept do so in esoteric terms. That is, they tend to imply that in order for the traveler on the Path to Enlightenment to reach Nirvana, the traveler must first have reached Nirvana. Or, put simply, “You’ll know it when you get there.”

But what is truth? The ancient world was preoccupied with its search for truth; we know this was true in biblical times because Jesus, during His trial, claimed that He came into this world “to testify to the truth.” Pilate’s response to Jesus was “What is truth?” (John 18:37-38). Of course, Jesus was referring to the truth that is GOD. For the Christian, the only path to enlightenment is to know GOD.

While it may be true that Buddhists don’t believe in a supreme being, their philosophy does allow for belief in some minor deities. For example, the story of the demon Mara who tempted Siddhartha Guatama before he attained enlightenment.⁴ And then there are the Four Heavenly Kings.

If you happen to visit Bulguksa Temple in Gyeongju, South Korea, you will have an opportunity to meet these Four Heavenly Kings as you pass through the Gate of the Heavenly Kings on your way to the temple. since they are considered to be protectors of the temple, the monks, the worshippers, and Buddhism itself.⁵ First time visitors may be taken aback by their somewhat fierce countenance but upon closer examination they seem to take on a more softer appearance as shown below.

In Korean Buddhism, the Four Heavenly Kings are named as follows:

Gwangmok-cheonwang – King of the West
Damun-cheonwang – King of the North
Jigook-cheonwang – King of the East
Jeungjang-cheonwang – King of the South

Damun is the protector of the north and the ruler of rain (or wealth); Jeungjang is the ruler of the wind and protector of the Dharma; Jigook uses music to convert people to Buddhism; Gwangmok is one who sees all and who converts unbelievers to Buddhism.⁶

Even though the Four Heavenly Kings have specific powers over the natural world they are still subservient to the Buddha, even Gwangmok who is attributed with the attribute of being omnipresent.

Since these deities or supernatural beings were not the creators of Dharma, they can’t be considered supreme in the spirit world—that title is reserved for the Buddha.

In contrast, Christians believe that GOD is the supreme being who created all things and Who is sovereign over all His creation. In Christianity, all beings are subservient to GOD; GOD is subservient to no one.

Buddhists don’t believe in a supreme being, yet the minor deities are protectors of Buddhism. If the Four Heavenly Kings are protecting Buddhism they are indirectly protecting the “enlightened one.” That is, the Four Heavenly Kings are serving the Buddha not the other way around. How then is Buddha not considered a supreme deity?

In my opinion, if a belief system includes supernatural beings who dwell in the spirit world, then that belief system is considered a religion. If one practices Buddhism as either philosophy or psychology, it follows that by identification, that person also subscribes to all of the Buddhist practices and beliefs. As in Christianity, a person who follows Christ’s teachings is thereby identified with all of Christ’s teachings. Otherwise, that person’s belief system is ambiguous.

Ian Tuhovsky. Buddhism: Beginner’s Guide: Bring Peace and Happiness To Your Everyday Life (Positive Psychology Coaching Series Book 5) (p. 25). Kindle Edition. ↩
Ibid., pp. 28-29 ↩
Reginald Ray, “What is Dharma?,” December 26, 2017, https://www.lionsroar.com/in-a-word-dharma/. ↩
Prof. Geller, “Mara,” accessed April 2, 2018, https://mythology.net/demons/mara/. ↩
Khan Academy, “Guardian King of the West (Gwangmok cheonwang),” accessed April 03, 2018, https://www.khanacademy.org/humanities/art-asia/korea-japan/korean-art/a/guardian-king-of-the-west-gwangmok-cheonwang. ↩
Wikipedia, “Four Heavenly Kings,” accessed April, 04, 2018, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_Heavenly_Kings. ↩

GOD & the Gods: One God

Christianity is unique compared to all other religions of the world. There isn’t any other religion that declares that God took on human form in order to reconcile the world to Himself through Jesus’ substitutionary dead or sacrifice; that is to say, Christianity is what God has done for Man[kind]. This belief is fundamentally rejected by Jews and Muslims based primarily on the claims made by Jesus that he was, in fact, God. They can accept Him as a prophet or messenger but not as the one true Deity. Therefore, Christianity is accused of being polytheistic. As it turns out, the entire foundation of Christian belief is rejected by two of the world’s major religions.

The most fundamental objection to Christianity by both Jews and Muslims is the notion of the Trinity. The Trinity, according to Christian belief, is the concept of God consisting of three persons: God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit collectively referred to as the Godhead. Hence, Christianity is rejected by both Jews and Muslims as being a polytheistic belief system, that is, a belief in multiple gods.

Nevertheless, it is somewhat ironic that Christianity began as a Jewish belief system; as Jesus Himself said: “’I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.’” (Matt. 15:24 NASB) Yet the Jews rejected and continue to reject Him as their Messiah as was prophesied: “I permitted Myself to be sought by those who did not ask for Me; I permitted Myself to be found by those who did not seek Me. I said, ‘Here am I, here am I,’ To a nation which did not call on My name.” (Isa. 65:1)

This post will look at these objections and offer explanations from Scripture as well as some alternative and hopefully novel and interesting ways of looking at the concept of God. Future entries in the series will also examine some of the major differences between Christianity and some of the other major polytheistic religions from Greek Mythology to Buddhism. The intent here is not to be exhaustive, but there are some fundamental differences that are common to all other world religions.

Jews believe that there is only one true God. Both Christians and Jews know Him by many names including Yahweh or Jehovah, and the Muslims as Allah. Judaism and Islam are both recognized as being monotheistic religions, that is, their followers believe in only one true God. In the same way, Christians also believe that Christianity is a monotheistic religion in spite of their acceptance of God in three persons. So, are the accusations that Christianity is polytheistic valid? Does the Bible give us any indication that the Father, Son and Holy Spirit are three separate gods all acting according to their own individual will and desires? In addition to those arguments found in the Scriptures, this post proposes that Christianity is, in fact, monotheistic using concepts borrowed from object-oriented programming.

In Exodus 3:14 when Moses asks God for His name, God answers with the self-referential phrase YHVH, better known as “I AM WHO I AM.” On the surface, God’s answer seems dismissive or matter-of-fact. His answer really says nothing about who He is, yet at the same time it says everything; I am God, what more do I need to say? From God’s point of view, He is and that’s all Moses needed to know. And by this one attribute alone, the God of Israel sets Himself apart from all the other so-called gods—as we shall see in detail later in this series.

However, before attempting to defend Christianity as a monotheistic belief system, a unique and proper name for the God of Israel; the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob—who is also the God of Christianity needs to be settled upon. I prefer the name Yehovah, a transliteration of the name YHVH from the Tanakh or Jewish scriptures. YHVH, which is known as the Tetragrammaton meaning “the four letters,” is not pronounced by observant Jews; instead, they substitute Adonai when reading the Torah or the name Hashem, “the Name,” at other times.¹

I refuse to yield to the temptation of substituting any of the proper names of God with “G-d” which is another common practice among observant Jews. In my way of thinking, substitutions are more offensive than unintentionally but reverentially mispronouncing any of His names as revealed in Scripture. In the same way, I find the substitution “Xmas” for “Christmas,” irreverent and offensive.

In this series, because I’ll be discussing many gods, I’ve decided to use either a qualifier with the name God when referring to the Hebrew / Christian Deity or simply GOD (all uppercase) as necessary to avoid ambiguity. For example, I may use: Yehovah God, God of Israel, Godhead, or GOD. Of course, the name Allah will be used when referring to God as revealed in the Quran.

My first argument, in a series of arguments, will be to compare Yehovah’s attributes with the attributes of some of the major polytheistic gods from around the world. If Christianity were to be seriously classified as polytheistic, then God as represented in the Christian Trinity would, out of necessity, be expected to possess the same or similar attributes as the gods of commonly recognized polytheistic world religions. I propose to show that Yehovah God is unique among the many gods of popular polytheistic world religions that I’ll be discussing in this series “GOD & the Gods.”

Also In this series, I’ll attempt to answer some objections that Jews and Muslims have leveled against the Christian Trinity. I’ll also argue that the objections are really leveled against Jesus and not the notion of the Trinity specifically.

Before this series attempts to examine and compare the attributes of GOD with the attributes of the gods of polytheistic religions, the attributes of Yehovah God must first be identified. The first attribute considered is His origin or genesis, if you will. The Scriptures say that He is eternal, without beginning and without end. Finite man cannot fathom the concept of an infinite being—the mind just collapses in on itself. Without a doubt, this is the hardest concept for humankind to comprehend but nevertheless, this is exactly what the Scriptures teach as illustrated in the following verses:

The eternal God is a dwelling place… (Deut. 33:27)

Blessed be the LORD, the God of Israel, From everlasting even to everlasting… (1 Chron. 16:36)

…Even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God. (Ps. 90:2)
Your throne is established from of old; You are from everlasting. (Ps. 93:2)

From everlasting I was established, From the beginning, from the earliest times of the earth. (Prov. 8:23)

As illustrated in the Scripture verses listed above, it can be seen that God is infinite as inferred by the word “everlasting” which is a translation of the word olam (Hebrew NASB Number: 5769). The word olam has also been translated into other English words such as: “eternal,” “continual,” and “perpetual.” Psalm 90:2 clearly says that God is not only eternal but that He is eternally God—a subtle point which will be examined later in this series “GOD & the Gods.” In addition, God not only existed before all Creation as stated in Psalm 90:2, Proverbs 8:23, and Isaiah 40:28, but He is the author of all Creation.

In Exodus 3:14 when Moses asks God for His name, God answers with the self-referential phrase “I AM WHO I AM.” On the surface, God’s answer seems dismissive or matter-of-fact. His answer really says nothing about who He is, yet at the same time it says everything; I am God, what more do I need to say? From God’s point of view, He is and that’s all Moses needed to know. By this one attribute alone, the God of Israel sets Himself apart from all the other so-called gods—as we shall see in detail later in this series.

The second attribute considered is God’s power or authority. Yehovah God is sovereign over all creation. He exercises His authority over nations, kings, nature, life and death, and the angelic world which includes demons. His position of power and authority is unchallenged and absolute in both the spirit world and in the natural physical world. Consider the following verses:

While the earth remains, Seedtime and harvest, And cold and heat, And summer and winter, And day and night Shall not cease. (Gen. 8:22)

For this time I will send all My plagues on you and your servants and your people, so that you may know that there is no one like Me in all the earth. For if by now I had put forth My hand and struck you and your people with pestilence, you would then have been cut off from the earth. But, indeed, for this reason I have allowed you to remain, in order to show you My power and in order to proclaim My name through all the earth. (Exod. 9:14-16)

Behold, to the LORD your God belong heaven and the highest heavens, the earth and all that is in it. (Deut. 10:14)

The LORD commanded the angel, and he put his sword back in its sheath. (1 Chron. 21:27)

Then Jehoshaphat stood in the assembly of Judah and Jerusalem, in the house of the LORD before the new court, and he said, ’O LORD, the God of our fathers, are You not God in the heavens? And are You not ruler over all the kingdoms of the nations? Power and might are in Your hand so that no one can stand against You.’ (2 Chron. 20:5-6)

And the devil who deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever. (Rev. 20:10)

In Genesis 1:28, God commands Adam and Eve to multiply, subdue the earth and rule over all living things. Man was given the authority to use the earth and its resources in order for Man to survive and prosper. Then in Genesis 2:15, God balances authority with responsibility when He commands Adam to be a good steward of the garden where he was placed. I am convinced the earth’s resources will last as long as they are intended to last. Contrary to popular opinion, Man wasn’t created for the earth, but the earth was created for Man, even though Man was created later.

Later on, in Genesis 8:21, God, speaking to Himself after bringing the flood upon the earth, promised that He would never again destroy every living thing as He had done with the flood. The interesting statement is in the next verse where God promises that as long as the earth exists, hot and cold, summer and winter, and day and night will not cease. God establishes and preserves the natural order of things, not politicians or so-called environmental activists. If there are, in fact, any variations in the earth’s temperature, God is allowing it to happen. God knows how to keep the earth in balance—after all, He created it.

I believe the third and final attribute that separates God from all the other gods is the one attribute that causes most other religions to stumble and that is the notion of one God existing in multiple persons. (Notice I didn’t say Trinity, but that’s a topic for another time.)

So, how can the concept of One God in three persons be reconciled? Is the Trinity polytheistic? The answer being proposed is to consider God as an instantiation of a One GOD superclass or base class. The Trinity consists of objects instantiated from three subclasses such as Father, Son, Comforter. The three persons that are identified as composing the Trinity are: YHVH, Jesus, and The Spirit respectively. If the Trinity is in fact a composition of all three instantiations of the three subclasses, then you could say that One GOD has a Father; One GOD has a Son; and One GOD has a Comforter. All three persons would have to exist in order for God to exist as One GOD.

I think there is a biblical basis for this theory since God established the notion of classes or kind in creation.

God made the beasts of the earth after their kind, and the cattle after their kind, and everything that creeps on the ground after its kind; and God saw that it was good. (Gen. 1:25)

Unlike creation, God was self-instantiated.

As it stands, I’ll leave this theory of God, as derived from object-oriented programming, here for now. I plan to elaborate on this in a future post.

I’ll close this writing with one final thought. Isn’t the belief in an all-powerful, all-knowing, eternally existent Deity just as hard to believe as the concept of one God composed of three entities? Just the idea of a being without a beginning or end is enough to make your head explode. Probably the best analogy for this can be found in the Star Trek episode “The Changeling” where the character Captain Kirk confounds the probe Nomad with his accusation that it is imperfect.

Unless otherwise indicated, all Greek-Hebrew dictionary references are from The New American Standard Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible.

“The Hebrew Name for God – YHVH,” John J. Parsons, accessed October 08, 2017, http://www.hebrew4christians.com/Names_of_G-d/YHVH/yhvh.html. ↩

Americanism

If someone stopped you on the street (like Jesse Waters for example) and asked you to define “Americanism,” would you be able to do it?

There was a time when most Americans would describe themselves as: proud, self-reliant, and individualistic. Proud of their country and its flag; reliant on God instead of the state; and free to say and think whatever they wanted without fear of reprisal. Basically, Americanism meant individual freedom.

And now, to the contrary, American society is becoming more and more intolerant and tribalistic, Tribal people are more loyal to their own social group than they are to the country as a whole. The saying or proverb that “It takes a village to raise a child,” at best promotes a certain level of dependence but could also lead to tribalism.

The various tribes each have their own military arm, that being the mob. Their uniforms are hoods and facemasks. Will official uniforms come next?

One of our national mottos, “E Pluribus Unum” could be interpreted now as meaning: “From the masses, one leader.” Could it be that Mussolini was inspired by the phrase “E Pluribus Unum” for his choice, in Italian, of “fascio” to name his political party? Is it not then any surprise that HRC and BHO both elevated “E Pluribus Unum” above our official national motto of “In God We Trust?” Why would two dyed-in-the-wool liberals favor an originalist motto?

And so, the coordination of America continues…

Does anyone find it curious that the wave of opposition to historical statues and monuments has sprung up all over the country with military precision. Even statues of Mary holding the baby Jesus are being removed in Catholic schools! This is very significant since Catholic doctrine elevates Mary, the mother of Jesus, to the position of “Queen of Heaven.” By removing these statues, they are capitulating to the intolerant mob who takes offense not just at statues but the doctrines themselves and by removing these statues, the Catholic schools are now guilty of being complicit. I never thought I’d see the day.

When I was in school, you might be sent to the principal’s office if you cut class or were caught “smokin’ in the boy’s room,” but now first-graders are sent to the principal’s office for the serious offense of misgendering a classmate.

But the worst I’ve heard so far is how NYC Mayor Bill de Blasio is considering the removal of the Christopher Columbus statue from the middle of Columbus Circle in Manhattan no less. You can’t make this stuff up.

Want a definition of Americanism, it’s everything progressives hate about America—Borders, Language, and Culture. Where Borders represent America’s sovereignty; Language confirms our identity; and Culture is who we are as a people.

Therefore, isn’t it correct to say that Nationalism is the natural enemy of Globalism and that Americanism is the natural enemy of Multiculturalism?

Speaking of culture, I’m kind of partial to the creed of a famous American Icon namely John Wayne who, in his role as John Bernard Books, said:

I won’t be wronged, I won’t be insulted, and I won’t be laid a hand on. I don’t do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.¹

That’s a pretty good creed to live by and I believe it’s subtly ingrained in the American consciousness. On the other hand, Americans are an enigmatic people, like General George S. Patton for example, who on the one hand could be very vulgar and profane and yet on the other hand could also be a strong believer in the power of prayer. History seems to prove that Patton’s enigmatic nature worked to his advantage on the battlefield.

Religion also makes up a large part of Americanism. After all, the Puritans who settled the Massachusetts Bay Colony were English Calvinists. The Calvinistic tradition was “responsible for promoting the idea of a job as a ‘calling,’ as opposed to something one did for money.”² As a result, the Protestant Work Ethic established a strong connection between work and happiness³ which is probably why workers in America have far less time off than their colleagues in Europe. It should be noted that Protestantism, along with Catholicism in Europe, is believed by some to be responsible for the spread of capitalism⁴ —a theory not overlooked by Karl Marx.

“The Shootist (1976) Quotes,” IMDB, accessed August 08, 2017, http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075213/quotes. ↩
“The Protestant Work Ethic Is Real,” Daniel Luzer, Pacific Standard Magazine, Sep 04, 2013, https://psmag.com/economics/protestant-worth-ethic-real-65544. ↩
Ibid. ↩
Ibid. ↩

American Fascism

Fascism is authoritarianism, and the poster boy for American Fascism today is Donald J. Trump. Now, if you believe President Trump is a fascist then you also believe that Obama is a libertarian.

It’s obvious to everyone that under President Trump’s administration, individual rights have been trampled by the administration’s enforcement of the laws of the United States. According to the Pew Research Center, “Same sex marriages are on the rise.”¹ So, the Trump Administration’s authoritarian posture has had a positive effect on the LGBT community.

The violence in Chicago is on track to top 700 homicides for the year.² Is this an indication of authoritarian rule at the expense of individual rights? Seems Chicago needs a little more, not less, authoritarianism.

And then there’s Trump’s attempts to convert Americans to Christianity illustrated by the appointment of an Evangelical Christian to be deputy director of the White House Office of Management and Budget.³ An Evangelical in government service! What is happening to America? Thank God for the socialist, secularist, atheist, Marxist Senator from Vermont who took a stand for traditional American values.

Everyone these days seems to have a propensity to throw around the word “fascist” without really thinking (or knowing) what it really means. The word fascist comes from the Italian, “fascio” which means “a bundle,” “a sheaf,” or “league” according to Wikipedia. (No, I don’t speak Italian.) Given this definition we can try to apply it, as follows: Fascio delle Nazioni (League of Nations).

Also, don’t think that you will get a clear definition of fascism on the Web because most articles are screeds written by anti-Trumpers. As it stands, there are more and more slogans floating around but here’s one that you may not have heard recently, “All for one and all for the state,” that is, the state and its dictator.

Dictator form of government is the greatest form of government there is, if you have the right Dictator.

Will Rogers

In case one has forgotten, or have never been taught in school, fascism enjoyed widespread popularity in America in the 1920s through the 1940s. And, according to RationalRevolution.net, Some famous fascist sympathizers included such prominent Americans as: William Randolph Hearst, Joseph Kennedy (JFK’s father), Charles Lindbergh, John Rockefeller, and Andrew Mellon.

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
The cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I’ve been everything you want to be
I’m the cult of personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I’m the cult of personality
The cult of personality
The cult of personality⁴

You might already be aware of Columbia University’s Casa Italiana, a center for Italian studies which opened in 1927, but did you know that at the time it was controlled by Mussolini supporters who used it to dispense fascist propaganda.⁵

Now, let’s take a look at some quotes attributed to Mussolini, the Father of Fascism, taken from AZ Quotes. I leave it as an exercise for the reader to figure out which political ideology Mussolini’s quotes are most closely aligned with today:

The state reserves the right to be the sole interpreter of the needs of society.
Fascism accepts the individual only insofar as his interests coincide with the state’s.
All within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state.
There is a violence that liberates, and a violence that enslaves; there is a violence that is moral and a violence that is immoral.
You know what I think about violence. For me it is profoundly moral -more moral than compromises and transactions.
Fascism is a religious concept.
Journalism is not a profession, but a mission.
Our future lies to the east and south, in Asia and Africa.

The Juche (North Korean) ideology fits right in with quotes 1-3 except that in the DPRK, the individual is more likely to wind up in a labor camp or face total re-education by anti-aircraft gunfire.

Quotes 4&5 provides the rationale for the anti-Trump, anti-American, Antifa black shirts who use violence and intimidation to suppress those holding opposing viewpoints. Look no further than James T. Hodgkinson, the congressional baseball practice shooter. Antifa is a leftist group and Mr. Hodgkinson was a Bernie Sanders supporter.

You hear a lot of chatter from the political commentators and analysts on why the mainstream media is so biased against President Trump, well it’s because journalism is no longer a profession, instead it is now on a mission to take down our rightfully elected president.

You might ask how could this happen? Well, it’s not just journalism, it’s happened to every major institution in America. They have all been synchronized (coordinated) with progressive ideology. This technique of coordination or “gleichschaltung,” was employed by the Nazis in Hitler’s Germany to get everyone and every institution to follow the Party line.

The Nazi policy of Gleichschaltung (standardization) was an attempt to rid the country of independent institutions. During the Third Reich, almost every public institution and instrument of policy had been altered to serve Nazi purposes (Gleichschaltung), so all such institutions and instruments were subordinated to the Party. Newspapers, schools at every level, banks, courts, publishing houses, theatres, museums, radio stations, and government offices were all coordinated. Political parties ceased to exist. Even the German Red Cross had been corrupted.⁶

But that was then, now the Alt Left has adopted the same tactics.

What is the “Alt Left”?

It’s a movement of phony self-righteousness and “compassion” that it uses to gain power. It will do anything and say anything to achieve its goal of hammerlock control not only of government, but every significant cultural institution – from schools, universities and the press to churches, foundations, Hollywood and unions.⁷

So, what happened to America you ask? Well, it has allowed itself to be converted from belief in a divine being to Statism. Naturally, none of the statists are going to admit that they are following a religion because they believe in America and the First Amendment to the Constitution.

Naturally, it follows that statist doctrines are grounded in state socialism imputed to us through Darwinian evolutionary theology. After which, Marx took the Darwinian belief system and applied it to economics and politics. Finally, Lenin took the principles from both and formulated a collectivist system of government.

As a result, now instead of church or synagogue leaders teaching us the precepts of God, we now have central planners in government intent on controlling every aspect of American life.

“5 Facts About Same Sex Marriage,” Pew Research Center, published June 26, 2017, http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/26/same-sex-marriage/. ↩
“Halfway through 2017, violence remains stubbornly high in Chicago,” Jeremy Gorner, Chicago Tribune, published June 30, 2017, http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-chicago-violence-first-six-months-met-20170630-story.html. ↩
“Bernie Sanders attacks Trump nominee for following teachings of Christ,” Todd Starnes, Fox New, June 09, 2017, http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2017/06/09/bernie-sanders-attacks-trump-nominee-for-following-teachings-christ.html. ↩
Lyrics.com, STANDS4 LLC, 2017. “Cult of Personality Lyrics.” accessed April 29, 2017. http://www.lyrics.com/lyric/1001586. ↩
“When Columbia University was on the Mussolini bandwagon,” Louis Proyect: The Unrepentant Marxist, August 09, 2014, https://louisproyect.org/2014/08/09/when-columbia-university-was-on-the-mussolini-bandwagon/. ↩
“Gleichschaltung [coordination],” GlobalSecurity.org, accessed August 19, 2017, http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/europe/de-gleichschaltung.htm. ↩
“Let’s take a look at the ‘Alt Left’,” Joseph Farah, WorldNetDaily.com, 08/28/2016, http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/lets-take-a-look-at-the-alt-left/. ↩

Juche

On June 25, 1950, some 75,000 soldiers of the North Korean People’s Army invaded South Korea starting the Korean War. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) invasion of the South extended all the way down to the outskirts of Busan, demonstrating how ill prepared and caught off-guard the South Koreans found themselves. Considering that, unlike in 1950, the DPRK today has an estimated 1.2 million men in its military, the threat of an invasion would seem even more likely now.

What if the United States was removed from the scene?

On July 27, 1953, the Korean Armistice Agreement was signed officially ending the Korean War. But was it really the end since no peace treaty was ever put into effect? Truman fired General Douglas MacArthur in order to avoid having the Korean Conflict metastasize into WWIII but all he really did was to “kick the can” down the road to our time and now it’s President Trump’s problem. So now instead of facing WWIII we are facing the possibility of a nuclear conflagration. I wonder how that would affect climate change?

Even so, I’m guessing that you may not believe we are still at war in Korea so I’ve provided just three skirmishes which occurred since 1953 that say otherwise:

USS Pueblo Incident in 1968
Joint Security Area (JSA) Axe Murders in 1978
Otto Warmbier’s Death in 2017

All of these actions were taken against the United States without the DPRK suffering any serious retaliation or consequences.

I’ve heard many of the analysts and experts in Asian affairs give their opinions on the motives and/or mental state of Kim Jong Un. Some say he is unstable and unpredictable. Some say he is unhinged or just plain crazy. I say he is cool and calculating and doing exactly what he believes he should be doing given his country is technically at war with the U.S. and its perceived South Korean puppet state.

When news commentators or announcers reference the government of North Korea, they usually use the terms “Totalitarian,” “Stalinist” or “Communistic” which may seem accurate from the outside but I don’t think they, the North Koreans, necessarily view themselves in any of these terms. Instead, the DPRK’s official identity or ideology is “Juche” first proposed by Kim Il Sung.

It’s probably hard for non-Asians to wrap their heads around the concept of Juche since I believe it has strong tie-ins to ancestor worship—but with a Marxist twist. Instead of reverence for deceased family members, Juche ideology removes the spiritual aspect and instead advocates for reverence or worship of a living relative, i.e., a great leader. This leader is derived from a line of great leaders who considered themselves caretakers of their extended family, namely, the North Korean people. The great leader isn’t looked on as a dictator but a paternalistic head of the family. Kind of sounds like the Godfather, doesn’t it?

Another concept of Juche is self-reliance. For the North Korean, the only way to achieve self-reliance is through subordination to the great leader, and the current Great Leader is Kim Jong Un. Since Juche calls for worship of the Great Leader, it’s by definition the state religion. Take all this then throw in a heavy dose of socialism, ultra-nationalism, and hyper-militarism and you will have a better picture of what the DPRK looks like.

The North Korean people are bombarded daily with this humanistic Juche ideology, “The individual is the master of his destiny,” but only if the individual stays on the right path.

So, you have to ask yourself, how do you negotiate with this kind of government?

I believe there are only two ways to deal with the North Korean threat, the first is…well you know what that is. The second is for the United States to recognize the legitimacy of the North Korean state by signing a peace treaty and establishing diplomatic relations. But in order to assure the North Koreans that we respect their sovereignty, the U.S. would eventually arrive at an agreement to pull out all its military forces from the region, basically, abandoning the South Koreans to their North Korean neighbors. Don’t sound so shocked, this is exactly what we did in Vietnam.

As it stands, the status quo won’t last forever, at least not until Kim Jong Un has perfected his ballistic missile capabilities.

Islamic Jihad: Fulfillment of Prophecy?

There has been a good deal of speculation as to whether or not America is mentioned or even indirectly referenced in the Bible, specifically Revelation 12:14 where it is written that the wings of a great eagle are given to a woman to save her from the face of the serpent.

I believe it is somewhat of a stretch to infer America, i.e., the United States, as being the eagle referred to in the verse mentioned above. The Book of Revelation presents its own unique set of challenges for the reader because both figurative and literal language are interspersed throughout the book.

Unlike the sometimes confusing imagery presented in Revelation, there are other verses that appear in other books that really leave very little doubt as to their meaning and one I’m thinking of is John 16:1-2.

These things I have spoken to you so that you may be kept from stumbling. They will make you outcasts from the synagogue, but an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God.

John 16:1-2 NASB

I’m sure some would argue that since Jesus was speaking to His apostles, He was making a prediction concerning them and I would agree with that argument. But if you read through the Gospels you will find that Jesus frequently spoke in prophetic terms. I believe that most honest scholars, pastors, educators and theologians would agree that the Bible wasn’t written specifically for a certain people during a certain time in history but for all people in all ages. Otherwise, why preach it today?

Besides, at the time Jesus spoke those words, the Church had not yet come into existence. The apostles were all Jewish but they would become the core of the newly formed Christian Church being hand-picked by Jesus Himself.

Nevertheless, the words in John 16:2, “…an hour is coming for everyone who kills you to think that he is offering service to God” strikes a chord especially when you consider the worldwide persecution of Christians in many Muslim majority countries.

Let me rephrase what I just said, Christian are being systematically “cleansed” from many Muslim majority countries. As the saying goes, “This isn’t war it’s genocide.”

Some would argue that the Islamic Jihadis are just terrorists with a political or social agenda. If that’s true, then why does ISIS call it’s captured territory a Caliphate which by definition is an area ruled by an Islamic steward? Islam is still a religion, isn’t it? It should be no surprise then that many, if not all, Jihadis adopted “Allahu Akbar” as their battle cry. I’m aware that the term “Jihad” also carries the meaning of “struggle against self” for Muslims but that is not the meaning of the term I’m discussing here.

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are all monotheistic religions; however, Muslims and Jews both believe that Christianity is a polytheistic religion. (The belief that Christianity is a polytheistic religion is a topic I’ll investigate in a future series.) This view of Christianity as a polytheistic religion is the root of all the animosity both religions have towards Christianity. Of course with the Jews it’s passive aggressive but for the Jihadis it’s an intense hatred that expresses itself in the extremely violent acts carried out all too frequently throughout the world.

While Muslims can accept Jesus as being a prophet, they reject Him as being God. Jews, on the other hand, reject Him as being both a prophet and God. Therefore, He has become a hindrance or an obstacle to both. The problem was and always will be with Jesus as prophesied:

Then He shall become a sanctuary; But to both the houses of Israel, a stone to strike and a rock to stumble over, And a snare and a trap for the inhabitants of Jerusalem.

Isa. 8:14

The bottom line is that there is only one God. Christians and Jews know Him as Jehovah; Muslims know Him as Allah. The problem isn’t with God, it’s with our understanding of who He is and what He has said. So, which religion has it right? I would suggest that one very reliable way to decide is by asking yourself the question, “Whose prophesies have been fulfilled or are now being fulfilled?” I’ve just presented two very obvious ones to consider.

In the Crosshairs: Election Retrospective

In agile software development, it’s expected that Scrum project teams conduct a sprint retrospective. The sprint retrospective is a meeting attended by all project team members to determine what was done right during the sprint and what was not done so well. The team attempts to ascertain what actions that could be taken on future sprints to increase the team’s effectiveness or velocity.

In the old days, we used to call this retrospective type of meeting a post-mortem or “an examination of the corpse to determine correct cause of death.” In our case here, the corpse is the 2016 U.S. election. Or more accurately, the corpse in this case is what was said in the “Crosshairs” series published on this blog during the primaries and presidential campaign season. In other words, this post is a self-retrospective.

In the Crosshairs: Trump & the GOP

Published: August 06, 2015

Many Republican career politicians deserted Trump like rats from a sinking ship. Enter former presidential candidate John McCain. I admit I voted the McCain / Palin ticket in 2008 only because of Sarah Palin, I never really liked John McCain, there was always something about him…

Career politicians are only looking out for themselves, especially when they’re up for reelection.

Anyway, McCain dropped his support of Trump after the release of the infamous hot-mic tapes like a rat deserting a sinking ship, only the ship wasn’t sinking.

The so-called “fired up crazies” spoke and Trump won the presidency.

In the Crosshairs: Paris Attacks

Published: November 14, 2015

Our current president still refuses to acknowledge that the ISIL inspired Jihadis are Islamic, even though every name they use or ones that are given to them has the word “Islamic” in it.

So what’s the issue here? Will it give them more credibility if we in the West agree with them that they are Islamic? The “JV Team” seems to have no problem with credibility since they now have a presence in 18 countries around the world.

So, no matter what name you choose to give them, ISIL, radical Islamic terrorist, or Jihadis, you have to ask yourself, “What difference – at this point, what difference does it make?”

In the Crosshairs: Guns & Immigration

Published: December 01, 2015

I’ve heard Bill O’Reilly say, on more than one occasion in his Talking Points Memo on Fox News Channel, that America would never elect a socialist as president. Well, I think Bill O’Reilly is wrong since Bernie Sanders almost clinched the Democratic nomination were it not for the Clinton machine opposing him.

Maybe you don’t think there is a Marxist revolution going on in America, if not, then you haven’t been paying attention to the “Not My President” movement which surely advocates a globalist agenda with Marxist overtones.

So, if our Western democracy had worn a condom while fornicating with Marxian socialism we probably wouldn’t be in this situation today.

In the Crosshairs: “Yesterday Once More”

Published: December 05, 2015

This “Crosshairs” post was my tribute to Karen Carpenter and the good old ‘60s.

Check it out. I think I hit the nail right on the head with this one.

In the Crosshairs: Generals and Politicians

Published: December 25, 2015

So, in the fight against ISIS or the global Jihad, “What would Patton do?” Well, he’d win and that’s all he would have to say.

Yes, Donald Trump admires Generals Patton and MacArthur and so do I. History has proven Patton and MacArthur right and proven the politicians and some presidents wrong. As Trump might say, The generals “knew what the hell was going on.”

Coincidentally, Trump made many references to Patton and MacArthur during his campaign. Could he have been reading this blog?

In the Crosshairs: National Review’s Manifesto against Donald Trump

Published: January 30, 2016

The so-called conservatives at the National Review made idiots of themselves when they maligned Donald Trump in such a way that even the radical Left and Saul Alinsky would be proud.

The 2016 U.S. elections are over and Donald Trump is now the president elect. Remember during the primaries when Ted Cruz declared on many occasions that Donald Trump would not be the Republican Party’s nominee. Well, not only did Trump get the nomination, he won the election! What does that say about Cruz’s prophetic abilities or his credentials as an evangelical?

In the Crosshairs: Providence and the U.S. Election

Published: March 06, 2016

Although no one is really saying it, God spoke and Trump won the election. Obviously, God spoke through the voters. Notice that He didn’t speak through the elites, media pundits, experts, commentators, news reporters, pollsters, globalist, or progressives.

Most of the time when God speaks, no one really listens, but this time the whole world got the message.

In the Crosshairs: Looking Back to See Ahead

Published: August 28, 2016

The good news is that Trump won the election, the bad news is that all the loud mouth celebrities who said they would leave the U.S. if Trump won are still here.

So was I wrong to say that “America has been destroyed,” and “Donald Trump is running for president of a country that doesn’t exist anymore and that pretty much assures that Hillary Clinton will win the election?” I would have to say yes and no.

Yes, I was wrong in that Hillary Clinton didn’t win the election, but no, I wasn’t wrong to say America has been destroyed. Take a look around, see all the “Not my President” rioters and protestors. Obama met with Trump and was cordial but the President made no attempt to try to quell the violence his supporters are inflicting on our cities and institutions. I believe America as we knew it is gone—God just gave us a short reprieve. Maybe “for the sake of the elect?”

In the Crosshairs: The Last Election

Published: November 05, 2016

By the time I published this post, I was convinced that nothing could stop Hillary Clinton from becoming President of the United States. I was wrong…thankfully wrong. God intervened and pronounced His judgement.

And just when you thought it was safe to turn on the news and not hear a barrage of negative rants against Donald Trump that the corrupt mainstream media are working overtime to marginalize and ridicule his cabinet picks, wife and other family members during his transition to the White House. No doubt, the 2020 presidential campaign has already begun.

Yes, the Left was hoping this would be the last election. They had a candidate who they believed couldn’t lose. Who will they find to run against Trump for the 2020 election? Time alone will tell.

P.S. This concludes my series on the 2016 U.S. presidential election. I trust my insights and analyses were entertaining and hopefully even original at times. I tried to make analogies that were outside of the mainstream, maybe even outside traditional conservative circles. Nevertheless, I tried to make points that I felt others missed or neglected to some degree, particularly with reference to divine providence. All this with a healthy dose of sarcasm thrown in. As always, I welcome your comments.

In the Crosshairs: The Last Election

After this I kept looking in the night visions, and behold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrifying and extremely strong; and it had large iron teeth. It devoured and crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet; and it was different from all the beasts that were before it, and it had ten horns.

Dan. 7:7 NASB

It was also given to him to make war with the saints and to overcome them, and authority over every tribe and people and tongue and nation was given to him. All who dwell on the earth will worship him, everyone whose name has not been written from the foundation of the world in the book of life of the Lamb who has been slain.

Rev. 13:7-8

You may be asking yourself, “What does any of this have to do with the 2016 United States presidential election?” Well, maybe nothing…then again, maybe everything.

The biblical verses I quoted from Daniel and Revelation clearly predict a coming world leader or put another way, global governance on steroids. Additionally, if you read closely you will understand that this coming world leader will not be a friend to the Christian community. So, which presidential candidate supports policies that could lead to the loss of America’s sovereignty? I’ll give you a hint, it’s not Trump.

Hillary Clinton is running on a platform that seeks to preserve President Obama’s legacy, like Obamacare for example. Also included in Obama’s legacy would be the way he used every opportunity during his presidency to diminish and demean Christians of all persuasions. On the other hand, he has been an effective Islamic apologist, like refusing to admit ISIS is Islamic. Obama also likes to tout his immigration policy of allowing refugees into the U.S., but I bet you didn’t know that out of 6,726 Syrian refugees admitted to U.S. so far in FY 2016, only 23 are Christians!

And who can forget Obama’s many worldwide apology tours.

In order for a global leader to subdue the entire world, the United States, in particular, would have to be conquered or assimilated. I don’t think the U.S. could be conquered militarily, but I do believe it could be assimilated—and we are already well on our way! In my opinion, the results of this election will determine if the process becomes accelerated or decelerated.

So I think you need to ask yourself if you are really ready for Hillary because she is probably going to win the election. You know, having Hillary for President wouldn’t be so bad if it weren’t for her ideology. But then again, I suspect most voters have no idea what her ideology really is because she has been so good at putting the spin on her real opinions and beliefs.

Can you remember the last time Hillary held a news conference or agreed to interview with someone from a network other than CNN (Collusive News Network)? Then again, calling CNN a news network is seriously oxymoronic.

I found a pretty good way of deciding who I would vote for without even hearing any of the candidates’ positions. If you really want to know what a candidate stands for, just look at who is supporting the candidate. For example, George Soros and Lady Gaga are both supporting Hillary Clinton. In case you don’t know who George Soros is, you had better find out soon because he is a radical leftist ideologue who is determined to bring about an end to America’s sovereignty. If this sounds like your cup of tea, then vote for Hillary. On the other hand, if you’re looking someone with a strong desire to stand up for America, Steve Forbes and Jerry Falwell Jr. are both supporting Donald Trump.

Hillary’s campaign slogan is “Stronger Together” but she has no problem discriminating against those “irredeemable” folks that the Left have profiled as being un-American simply because of their belief in traditional values and American exceptionalism. Hillary’s definition of “inclusion” is to dispense all those who don’t support her leftist agenda into that “basket of deplorables.”

Left-wing bias is running rampant during this election cycle. The brazen mainstream media doesn’t even feel the need to hide it anymore. For those who love to criticize Fox News, you need to understand that there is a big difference between hard news reporting and commentary / opinion. Maybe your teachers and professors skipped over this subject in school.

Speaking of the news media, I have a habit of watching Water’s World on Fox News Channel and it’s really scary because I would have to say from what I’ve heard, almost 80% of the interviewees were totally clueless…and some will even be voting.

As an amateur photographer, I’m concerned with color and contrast in my photos. In the same way, I look for color and contrast in the current presidential candidates. Inarguably, Donald Trump is the most colorful candidate this country has ever seen while Hillary mostly appears in varying shades of gray. On the other hand, the contrast between the two candidates couldn’t be more lucid:

Nationalism vs. Globalism
< Regulation vs. > Regulation
< Taxes vs. > Taxes
Borders vs. Bridges
Law vs. Lawlessness
Truth vs. Lies…

Conspiracies abound, but since there are no Trump supporters lurking in the Bushes, we’re not hearing about that “vast right-wing conspiracy” anymore. No, instead we are getting barraged with Russia conspiring with the Republicans to influence the election. All this noise was generated by the media because Putin said that Trump was a “colorful candidate” and Trump said “wouldn’t it be nice if we actually got along with Russia.” What’s so terrible about that? Nevertheless, getting along doesn’t necessarily mean going along. Conversely, if Trump made some inflammatory remarks about Putin and Russia, the mainstream media would be accusing him [Trump] of trying to start a war.

The vast right-wing conspiracy has morphed into a two-man conspiracy to de-throne the Clintons.

Conspiracies aside, nothing sells better than sex, just ask Megyn Kelly of Fox News Channel. I was really shocked when she brought up the War on Women accusation against Trump at the first presidential debate. The mainstream media along with Megyn Kelly hammered the voters relentlessly with their coverage of the Trump NBC hot mic tape. Megyn Kelly has certainly done a lot to endear herself to the feminist movement or maybe she already is a card-carrying member.

Speaking of wars, we have lots of them now such as the War on: Coal (i.e., energy), Christianity, Law Enforcement, First and Second Amendments, Fox News, Conservative Talk Radio, Capitalism, American Values, etc., etc.

I’ve heard many commentators and pundits say that Trump’s achievements are unprecedented in modern political history, but so have Hillary’s accomplishments. She ran unsuccessfully against Barak Obama for the presidency and was then appointed as Secretary of State. Later, she successfully ran for office as senator from New York, all the while amassing a fortune of around $31 million. But her best achievement was being able to avoid any repercussions or consequences from using an unsecured private email server as Secretary of State. Hillary’s not worried, she could (hypothetically) “stand in the middle of 5^th Avenue and shoot somebody” and she wouldn’t get convicted.

Even so, I believe what Trump was able to accomplish without being a political hack is amazing to say the least. And whether he wins or loses, this 2016 election cycle will be discussed for many years to come.

If Hillary wins this election, she will be president for eight years. I don’t think it will be possible for the country to recover. This will be the last election.

In the Crosshairs: Looking Back to See Ahead

While serving in the U.S. Air Force in South Vietnam during the early 70s, I had the opportunity to see the movie Catch-22 in the base theater. I’ll never forget the scene of the outrageous conversation between Nately, played by actor Art Garfunkel, and an old, lecherous man which took place in a whorehouse somewhere in Rome during WWII. Part of the conversation (taken from the Kindle book) went like this:

‘America is the strongest and most prosperous nation on earth,’ Nately informed him with lofty fervor and dignity. ‘And the American fighting man is second to none.’

‘Exactly,’ agreed the old man pleasantly, with a hint of taunting amusement. ‘Italy, on the other hand, is one of the least prosperous nations on earth. And the Italian fighting man is probably second to all…Yes, I am quite certain that Italy will survive this war and still be in existence long after your own country has been destroyed.’

‘America is not going to be destroyed!’ he [Nately] shouted passionately. ‘Never?’ prodded the old man softly. ‘Well . . .’ Nately faltered.

The old man laughed indulgently, holding in check a deeper, more explosive delight. His goading remained gentle. ‘Rome was destroyed, Greece was destroyed, Persia was destroyed, Spain was destroyed. All great countries are destroyed. Why not yours? How much longer do you really think your own country will last? Forever?’

The idea of America being destroyed was unthinkable in 1970 when this film was released. Even though America was still involved in the war in Vietnam, Richard Nixon was president and it seemed that the anarchy of the 1960s had been quelled.

Who could have imagined then that America would only last another 50 short years?

When I got off the plane at Travis AFB in California in 1972 after the flight from Tan Son Nhut AB, Vietnam (with a stopover in Japan), I felt a sigh of relief—I was back in the “World.” I was even more relieved after arriving at JFK and after having taken a cab through familiar surroundings to Bay Ridge, Brooklyn where my aunt and uncle had an apartment.

There was a certain feeling of security in the U.S. back then. No one worried about being attacked, that didn’t occur in America…then 9/11 happened and everything changed.

In my opinion, nothing has been the same since the World Trade Center in NYC came down. Yes, America rose up to fight back but the cure has turned out to be worse than the disease.

On the other hand, nothing really happens overnight, America was already pivoting away from her traditional values of borders, language and culture during the 1960s.

Even though the radicalism of the 1960s was subdued during the Nixon years, it wasn’t cured it just went into remission only to flare up again in the 1980s with the appearance of political correctness.

Political correctness has since metastasized into almost every institution in America: the mainstream media; Hollywood (actors and films); academia; the scientific community; government (Executive, Legislative, and Judicial); and churches…yes, even churches! Has America joined Europe and the rest of the world in this insanity?

So, here we are 16 years into the 21^st century and you have to ask yourself, “Has anything really changed?”

Politics certainly hasn’t changed. I recall spending time, while growing up, with my parents at Uncle Wallace and Aunt Sophie’s house in Wallington, NJ which is very close to Passaic. Uncle Wallace owned and operated a storefront deli in the front section of his house and once a year, around Easter, he would give my father some homemade kielbasa to bring home, usually two rings which never really seemed to be enough. Anyway, in 1964 during one of our visits, my father’s cousin along with his family were there also and the men were having a conversation on politics at the kitchen table. My father’s cousin was trying to make a case against Barry Goldwater for president by implying that if elected he would ban rock ‘n’ roll. From that moment on, the name Barry Goldwater was to me anathema since I was a big Beatles fan.

So, after all these years I decided to read a transcript of Barry Goldwater’s 1964 acceptance speech. I wanted to see if there was any basis for believing that he, as president, would turn out to be some kind of intolerant dictator as my father’s cousin would have liked us to believe. To the contrary, based on the following excerpts from Goldwater’s acceptance speech I find there was no basis whatsoever for my father’s cousin’s erroneous statements:

We see, in private property and in economy based upon and fostering private property, the one way to make government a durable ally of the whole man, rather than his determined enemy. We see in the sanctity of private property the only durable foundation for constitutional government in a free society. And beyond that, we see, in cherished diversity of ways, diversity of thoughts, of motives and accomplishments. We do not seek to lead anyone’s life for him – we seek only to secure his rights and to guarantee him opportunity to strive, with government performing only those needed and constitutionally sanctioned tasks which cannot otherwise be performed.

Balance, diversity, creativity – these are the elements of Republican equation.

This is a party, this Republican Party, a Party for free men, not for blind followers, and not for conformists.

Naturally, no one remembers any of these great words. The only words from Goldwater’s speech that people tend to remember are the words that the biased, dishonest media will allow you to remember, and those words are:

I would remind you that extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice. And let me remind you also that moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue.

Goldwater’s obvious fatal mistake was his use of the E-word. Ever since then, people have come to automatically equate conservatism with extremism, while on the other hand, they have come to automatically equate liberalism (progressivism / socialism / collectivism) with moderation (normalcy).

So who are the real extremists, Donald Trump or the criminal-coddling Left? Lest we forget, it was not long after Trump made his [in]famous statement about Mexican and other immigrants being “killers and rapists,” that Kate Steinle was murdered in San Francisco by a seven time convicted felon, an illegal Mexican immigrant who was deported five times and returned. San Francisco provides a safe haven for illegal immigrants since it is a “Sanctuary City,” and the Democrats in Congress blocked the passage of Kate’s Law. Insane? Yes. The inmates (politicians) are now running the asylum (government).

As I read through the text of Goldwater’s 1964 acceptance speech, I thought to myself, “This speech could have been used today, almost in its entirety, by Donald Trump.” Pretty much all that he would need to do is substitute “communism” with “radical Islam” and he would have it. After all these years, very little has changed, if anything.

The experts like to make comparisons between Donald Trump and Ronald Reagan but I think Mr. Trump’s views on many issues are more in line with Goldwater’s not Reagan’s. But no one dare mention the name Goldwater—it has become a pariah.

I believe the very reason for the Left’s unrelenting vitriol directed at Donald Trump is because he has become the 21^st century Goldwater Republican. And, if Ann Coulter’s theory is correct, no Republican can ever win the White House again. On the other hand, if Donald Trump does manage to get elected, he will in all probability be the last Republican president.

So, will the voters going to the polls in the U.S. make the same mistake on Election Day in 2016 as they did in 1964? Time will tell. Will the biased media be successful in demonizing Donald Trump so that enough people are persuaded to vote for Hillary Clinton? It depends on whether or not America is already too far gone.

Hillary Clinton was deemed “extremely carless” in her handling of classified information by FBI Director James Comey but she still leads Donald Trump in almost all the polls. Also, based on James Comey’s answers to Trey Gowdy’s questions concerning Hillary Clinton’s past statements, it seems clear that she has been less than truthful with the American people. While it appears that she can fool the FBI and large segments of the electorate, she isn’t fooling God (this is a theological blog after all).

Everyone deceives his neighbor And does not speak the truth, They have taught their tongue to speak lies; They weary themselves committing iniquity.

Jer. 9:5 NASB

Has America become like those of whom the prophet Jeremiah spoke of? Will Hillary Clinton’s lies eventually catch up with her as it is written:

A false witness will not go unpunished, And he who tells lies will not escape.

Prov. 19:5

Along with the proliferation of lies and liars, there is also no shortage of hypocrisy and hypocrites during this presidential election season. So…

Can someone please explain to me why the Liberals are all upset with Donald Trump for speaking out against the vicious personal attacks made by Khizr Khan during the Democratic Convention when it was those very same Liberals who during the Vietnam War called returning veterans “baby killers?”

Can someone please explain to me why Seddique Mateen, the father of the Orlando Pulse Nightclub shooter, was sitting in a prominent location directly behind Hillary Clinton at her rally in Kissimmee, Florida? Seddique Mateen is a Clinton supporter and gun control advocate—go figure!

Can someone please explain to me why billionaires such as Warren Buffet, Michael Bloomberg, Oprah Winfrey, George Soros, and many others are supporting Hillary Clinton when she is supposedly running against Wall Street and the 1%?

Can someone please explain to me why the mainstream media gives Hillary Clinton a pass for not releasing her 30,000 or so deleted emails but they slam Donald Trump for not releasing his tax returns?

Can someone please explain to me why Liberals break out into self-righteous indignation over Donald Trump calling it as he sees it when these very same liberals called George W. Bush “Dumbya,” “Dumbo,” “Bushitler,” and “Uncurious George,” among other names?

Can someone please explain to me why Hollywood actor Will Smith can get away with making an outright threat: “We get to know who people [Donald Trump supporters] are and now we get to cleanse it out of our country,” but the Left went hysterical over Donald Trump’s Second Amendment people comment? To most rational, thinking people what Trump said was an obvious double entendre—not intended to be taken literally.

I believe the results of the 2016 U.S. presidential election will either confirm or invalidate my earlier statement that America has been destroyed. That is not to say that America is or will be destroyed in the sense that Rome was destroyed in 476 C.E. America will be destroyed when her borders, language, and culture are abraded.

If my assessment that America has been destroyed is true, then Donald Trump is running for president of a country that doesn’t exist anymore and that pretty much assures that Hillary Clinton will win the election. Let’s hope I’m wrong. On the other hand, if Donald Trump does win the election, let’s hope that Miley Cyrus, Whoopi Goldberg, Rosie O’Donnell, Al Sharpton, Jon Stewart, and Cher stick to their word and leave the country. Do you think they’ll be missed? I didn’t think so.

However, if it all goes bad in November because the majority happens to get fooled again, then we can all sing the lines from a familiar song, “Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss.”

Joseph Heller. Catch-22: 50th Anniversary Edition (pp. 272-273). Simon & Schuster. Kindle Edition.

“Goldwater’s 1964 Acceptance Speech,” washingtonpost.com, accessed August 15, 2016, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/daily/may98/goldwaterspeech.htm.

“Senate Dems block votes on immigration issues, including sanctuary cities,” published July 07, 2016, FoxNews.com, http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/07/senate-dems-block-votes-on-immigration-issues-including-sanctuary-cities.html.

“Coulter: I Got 30 Million Reasons,” Ann Coulter, Human Events, July 3, 2013, http://humanevents.com/2013/07/03/coulter-i-got-30-million-reasons/.

Peter Townshend, Won’t Get Fooled Again, Abkco Music Inc., T.R.O. Inc., Spirit Music Group.