How White Liberals Treat Blacks

The first one is how white liberals treat good blacks who have stayed on the plantation.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/08/occupy_atlanta_silences_civil_rights_hero_john_lewis.html

This next one is how white liberals treat blacks who wandered off the plantation.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/10/06/fireworks_msnbcs_lawrence_odonnell_hostile_interview_with_herman_cain.html

Now, after viewing these two clips, where do these white Marxist liberals ever get away with ever bringing up the word “racist?” These people don’t love black folk. They are only using black people in order to create their social order where all are cattle to the moneyed white elite.

Cave of Adullam — A Homily

1 Samuel 22

1David therefore departed thence, and escaped to the cave Adullam: and when his brethren and all his father’s house heard it, they went down thither to him.

2And every one that was in distress, and every one that was in debt, and every one that was discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over them: and there were with him about four hundred men.

I believe it is safe to say that what we have before us here is a picture of Christ in his humiliation and his Church in the Wilderness. David is being persecuted by a King that God has already determined to set aside in favor of David, a man who, like the coming Christ, was a man after God’s own heart. So, this true King, living in humiliation, holes up in a cave that literally means “refuge,” and the refugees of Saul’s false Kingdom — those in distress, those discontented (Lit. — Bitter of soul) those in debt rally around this little Church in the Wilderness and around this type of Christ in his humiliation.

In the Cave of Adullam they not only find a refuge, but they find a stronghold as well (vs. 4). This is a place of rest, protection, and safety with the true King in their midst.

Now, knowing the rest of the story we know that David finally comes into what God has promised him, but at this time that future promise fulfilled is still future. David is outcast and he is surrounded with an outcast Church.

That the Church is often filled with outcasts and goes through times of eclipse is not a theme we find here alone.

In the book of Hebrews the writer to Hebrews can look back retrospectively at the Church and write of it during some of its epochs

36And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:

37They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;

38(Of whom the world was not worthy:) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.

The true Church has not always been a organism that has been embraced by the world, nor even by the visible Church. Many have been the times in history when the worst persecutors of the true Church was the visible Church.

There are times then in History when the Church revisits the place of refuge in order to escape from the deadly intent of those who would do her harm.

And the idea that that church is staffed often by outcasts is not only a Old Testament theme. In I Corinthians the Apostle Paul can say of the Church,

26For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:

27But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;

28And base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are:

29That no flesh should glory in his presence.

30But of him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption:

31That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

I believe we are living during a time when the Church must once again become a Cave of Adullam where those counted outcasts by the elite gatekeepers of our culture and often our Church can find a stronghold. In such times, we should not expect to find a great number of Caves. If there were a great number of caves we would not be in the situation where finding one was such a unique blessing.

It is my prayer that God would be pleased to make Charlotte CRC just such a cave of Adullam. A place where those distressed by the current spirit of the age can come and find rest for their souls. A place where those discontented by the strange Christs offered up by much of the Church today can be fed the Christ of Scripture. A place where those in the debt of sin can be reminded that God has paid the ransom and provided full redemption for them — body and soul. It may be the case that those who would come to this refuge has to drive many miles to do so, but should they make the trip — a trip that has to be made because there are no other caves around — let it be a trip that ended in balm for their souls and the word of life for their encouragement.

This may be a time for Adullam in our gathering but we must be reminded that we are in a different part of God’s story then David was. We are in the part of the story where God has already triumphed in Christ. As such we must not and can not be satisfied with a refugee status. If God has provided this place as a refuge and a stronghold He has provided it so we can scatter out from here back to Howell, Ann Arbor, Lansing, Battle Creek, as well as Charlotte and other points in order to be the elite military teams trained to overturn the current corrupt Church to be a Church that once again heralds David’s greater victorious Brother.

The cave is not to be permanent, as if every generation of Christians are to be cave dwellers. Christ is now in His exaltation and we are to be a Church militant that goes from victory unto victory in extending the crown rights of King Jesus — The Great High Priest who has provided a full redemption for us — into every domain.

We need to keep in mind Samuel Stone’s great lyrics

Though with a scornful wonder
Men see her sore oppressed,
By schisms rent asunder,
By heresies distressed:
Yet saints their watch are keeping,
Their cry goes up, “How long?”
And soon the night of weeping
Shall be the morn of song!

We may be in a night of weeping but because Christ is victorious there shall be rejuvenation in history and the Church shall once again have a morn of song.

Elizabeth Warren Provides Apologetic for ‘Class Warfare’ … or thinks she does

http://www.towleroad.com/2011/09/warrenwarfare.html

1.) Lizzy says, “There is nobody in this country who got rich on their own.”

Now this is fairly obvious but Lizzy immediately introduces from this premise that people who have gotten rich in this country (at least the ones who did it without sucking off the teat of the Federal Government that Lizzy wants to grow) have gotten rich because the Federal Government, through the tax dollars of the citizenry, created the environment where wealth could be generated.

Now, we can concede this, after a fashion. The whole idea that the US Constitution provides the dynamic where social order can exist and so where wealth can be pursued is something admitted to by all. However, all because Government has a role in sustaining order doesn’t mean that government gets to steal from those who produce and generate wealth.

2.) Lizzy says, “You moved your goods on the roads that the rest of us paid for.”

One would like to ask Lizzy if those who are moving their goods didn’t also pay for the roads that their goods are being shipped upon? One also wants to ask Lizzy if the consumers that helped pay for those roads aren’t likewise advantaged by the ability to receive goods shipped as the producers are advantaged by being able to ship their goods? In other words, it is not as if all those who paid for the roads are not at the same time advantaged by the roads they are paid for, and that quite apart from providing justification to gouge those who create and generate wealth.

Second, on this score, Lizzy seems to extrapolate easily from those things governments should do with money raised in taxation (build roads) to those things that governments shouldn’t do with money stolen in taxation. The US Constitution clearly enumerates and delegates what the Federal government can and cannot do. Lizzy wants to take examples from what the Federal Government can do and apply it to what the Federal Government cannot do.

3.)Lizzy says, “You (the rich) hired workers the rest of us paid to educate.”

If ever anyone was taken advantage of in a business deal it has been US businesses who have been put in the position of having to hire workers who are graduates of Government indoctrination centers (government schools). The US educational system dumbs down intentionally its students and so provides a sub-standard worker for American businesses to hire.

Second, once again, the rich have also paid to educate (for good or for ill) the workers they eventually hired. It is not as if “the rich” are getting off without contributing to the cause.

Third, where in the US Constitution does it enumerate and delegate that the role of the Federal Government is to educate youth?

4.) Lizzy then talks about police forces and fire departments that the citizenry paid for that the wealthy use to protect themselves and their property.

First, Lizzy is running for a Federal office. This is important because it is the States who provide monies for State needs such as police and fire-fighters and not the Feds. Why should Lizzy be making a point justifying Federal taxation by appealing to State functions?

5.) Lizzy talks about “social contract” and “paying forward.”

First, the only social contract that is valid in this country is the US Constitution and the US Constitution is a document that is dedicated to constraining the delimiting the size and scope of the US Government. This is important to note because Lizzy wants to use abstract ideas like “social contract” and “paying it forward,” as excuses to enlarge the already Leviathan State.

Secondly, “pay it forward” to whom? Is Lizzy seriously suggesting that by paying exorbitant tax rates that the produces who generate and create wealth are doing their duty by “paying it forward.”

Third, what Lizzy leaves unsaid is that by “paying it forward” to the State what is happening at the same time is that the family is de-capitalized and so is unable to pay forward an inheritance to the generation that comes behind. What Lizzy apparently desires is that the Wealthy capitalize the State in their paying it forward at the expense of capitalizing their own family. What is required is that some strangers has it paid forwarded while the heirs are left unpaid forwarded.

Lizzy is offering classical Socialism. The State is to be prioritized and the State is to be the determiner of where charity is assigned.

However, Scott Brown how Lizzy Warren is running against is only marginally better.

Can anything good come out of New England?

Attempt At Consolation

“For He inflicts pain, and gives relief; He wounds, and His hands also heal.” Job 5:18

“Come let us return to the Lord,
For He has torn, but He will heal us;
He has stricken, but He will bind us up…” Hosea 6:1

******,

I am desperately sorry and grieved over all the terror your daughter and your family has gone through. It breaks my heart to think that a child would have to go through what your daughter has gone through.

I don’t pretend to have all the answers. I walk by faith as much as the next person. All I know is that when I read the Scriptures I see in Job someone who went through and experienced unimaginable suffering and the only explanation that he received is that “God is sovereign, and as the Creator He does not owe explanation to a demanding creature.” I believe that is true.

I also see in Genesis after all the trials that Joseph went through (beat by Brothers, sold as a slave, falsely accused of rape, thrown in the most disgustingly imaginable prison though innocent) Joseph tells his brothers,

“You intended your treatment against me for evil but God intended it for good.”

From this I learn that your daughters rapist intended all that he did for evil, while God intended it for good. Ask me what good there is in any of this and my answer is … “I don’t know.” I must take it on faith, just as I took all the many extreme physical abuses I received as a child as the abuser intending it for evil but God intending it for good. However, if you had asked Joseph the same question when he was languishing in Prison he would not have had any answer either in terms of how it was at that point “good.” He had to take the matter on faith as well. As God’s silver we seldom see the end when we are in the refiner’s fire.

If I flee from Christ because of my disappointments, anger,and bitterness over what He has providentially ordained where do I turn to find meaning in life? I find no meaning and nothing but more disappointment, anger, and bitterness. I am the clay. Can I ask the potter, “Why have you made me this way”?

Instead I choose to believe that those uglinesses and tragedies that have come into my life, and do come into my life, come into my life through the hand of a God who is good all the time and from a Father who loves me so much that He ordained that His Son would suffer my eternal deservings that I might not be eternally condemned. The reality of forgiveness and the gift of eternal life causes all other real hurts in my life to seem inconsequential in comparison.

I do not have the ultimate final answer to the problem of evil. I do not know why God ordained your daughter’s rape. I know God is good. I know that evil is real. And I know that God has a morally sufficient reason to have ordained these matters that I am not yet aware of. If I leave him, where would I go for he alone has the words of Eternal life?

I prayed for you and your family in our long Pastoral prayer Sunday *****. I’ve prayed for you and your daughter before I sent this. It is my earnest prayer that all of you will find not only emotional healing but that you will discover in the dark night of your soul that Christ alone is the only place where real comfort can be found.

As one pilgrim to another making our way to the Heavenly land,

Bret

More Chit Chat With Congressman Walberg’s Staff

Clem,

Thank you for your phone call. Since you desire to carry on our correspondence by phone, and not by e-mail I wanted to let you know that you can contact me at ***-***-****. I have your phone number on your business card you gave me so I will take advantage of contacting you when I want to toss some ideas around.

I want to clear up my actions as to why I have posted these exchanges publicly. I have posted these publicly because like many Americans I am completely exasperated with our political process. All attempts, by historic Americans like myself, to be taken seriously by their elected officials are completely pleonastic as revealed in the phoniness of form letters received back or as revealed in the patronizing that occurs when one phones the respective Congress offices. I realize that this is not your fault and that my publicly posting these exchanges likely means that I forfeit whatever input I may have had with you, but frankly I am at the point, as a citizen of this great country, of being exasperated beyond my ability to articulate with what our Federal Government and its representatives are doing.

You mentioned that you thought that the second Sowell article,

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/274020/pyrrhic-victory-thomas-sowell#

did not contend, as I believe, that Dr. Sowell had reversed himself on his initial support on the debt ceiling bill as put forth at this link,

http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell072911.php3

I promised I would go back and re-examine the article and I have. Allow me to pull snippets from the second Sowell article that reveal that Dr. Sowell did indeed reverse himself on his support of the Bill that Congressman Walberg egregiously supported.

First, Dr. Sowell starts by titling the article, “Pyrrhic Victory.”

Now we both realize that a Pyrrhic victory is by definition, a victory that is won by incurring terrible losses. Should we believe that Dr. Sowell in his first article was advocating supporting something he knew ahead of time would be a victory that is won by incurring terrible losses only to turn around in the subsequent column and lament the Pyrrhic victory, and that without having changed his mind? To think so stretches credulity.

Second, the subtitle of Sowell’s article is,

“The budget deal turns out to have been a defeat for Republicans.”

Notice that Dr. Sowell uses the phrase, “turns out,” which clearly suggests that it turned out differently than he had hoped unless one believes that Dr. Sowell would have been supporting, in his first column, a bill that he knew beforehand would be a “defeat for Republicans.” Why would Dr. Sowell have supported a bill that he knew beforehand would be a defeat for Republicans? Clearly, this concession on the part of Dr. Sowell’s that “the budget deal turns out to have been a defeat for Republicans,” is an admission that his initial support for the bill that the Republicans supported was errant.

As the article unfolds we read,

“To a remarkable extent, he (Obama) has succeeded, with the help of his friends in the media and the Republicans’ failure to articulate their case.”

Here we see Dr. Sowell faulting Republicans (including Congressman Walberg?), once again. Are we to believe that Sowell, in his first column was supporting the Republicans’ failure to articulate their case or is this yet another example of Sowell conceding that his support in his previous column was a mistake in light of the Republican failure to articulate their case? We need to ask here if Dr. Sowell would have supported the Republican position if he knew in advance that the Republicans would fail to articulate their case.

Sowell closes with these two paragraphs

“Since neither side can afford to be blamed for a disaster like that, this virtually guarantees that the Republicans will have to either go along with whatever new spending and taxing the Democrats demand or risk losing the 2012 election by sharing the blame for another financial disaster.

In short, the Republicans have now been maneuvered into being held responsible for the spending orgy that Democrats alone had the votes to create. Republicans have been had — and so has the country. The recent, short-lived budget deal turns out to be not even a Pyrrhic victory for the Republicans. It has the earmarks of a Pyrrhic defeat.”

These last two paragraphs seals that my reading of Sowell is correct and that Sowell really is giving a mea culpa for his earlier support for the Republican deal that Congressman Walberg supported. I don’t know how any other reading of Sowell’s article except my reading could be considered a fair reading of Dr. Sowell’s words.

Sowell is lamenting that the Republicans were maneuvered into this Politburo Super Congress with the consequence that they are now going to either go along “with whatever new spending and taxing the Democrats demand or risk losing the 2012 election by sharing the blame for another financial disaster.” Now, again Clem, we have to ask ourselves if Dr. Sowell would have been supporting the Republican deal, as he did in the first column under question, if he had knew in advance that this maneuvering, that he laments in this column, was going to be the result of the first deal he now regrets supporting. Again, it stretches credulity to read this column as anything but a regret for earlier support of the Republicans voting to raise the debt ceiling.

Now that I’ve revisited the article under question as I promised, I’m open to your phoning me with your insistence of how I am misreading Dr. Sowell. In the end, Republican support for the deal that was passed was a colossal mistake as Dr. Sowell makes clear in his article. I can only hope that Congressman Walberg will reverse himself just as Dr. Sowell has.

Thank you for your continued collegiality.

Bret L. McAtee
Pastor — Charlotte Christian Reformed Church