Now What Am I Supposed To Make Of This Prayer?

The below prayer is the invocation given by Rev. Paul Jehle at the Glen Beck Rally held last week in Washington DC. I’ve had an opportunity to hear Jehle speak several times in a close setting and I was impressed with the man’s knowledge on our founding era, though his Charismatic – pentecostal lean gave me pause.

This prayer at this event has my Spidey sense tingling overtime and has raised a multitude of questions in my mind about just exactly Dr. Jehle was doing in this prayer.

The prayer can be accessed at,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47V-dpiLM78

I have transcribed it word for word from Dr. Jehle’s mouth. I’ll give the prayer first and I’ll offer some analysis and questions.

Lord God, Sovereign Almighty, Ruler of the Nations, King of Kings, Lord of Lords, The Holy One, The Righteous One

You are the King of the Earth

All nations belong to you and you are the one addressed in the first 1606 charter that opened English settlements to these shores. It was you that was addressed, that the Gospel of Jesus Christ should be the central focus of every settlement. It was you our forefathers knelt too erecting a wooden cross on the sandy shores of Virginia. It was you that was addressed in the Mayflower Compact whose first words were, ‘In the name of God, AMEN.’ It was you who the pilgrims knelt too and blessed the God of heaven. It was you that Governor Winthrop wrote, ‘We shall be a city set upon a hill.’ It is you lord gods that brought William Penn and modeled peace with the first peoples. It was you lord gods that brought the black regiment of preachers to all across the continents to preach your words to prepare your people to be able to stand for liberty and it was you who was addressed in the Declaration of Independence as the, ‘Creator,’ — ‘as the Author of all inalienable rights.’ It was you lord gods that was declared as the one who created all equal and it was you lord gods who called us to account when we broke the treaties with the first peoples. You called us to repentance and you O gods called us to repentance when we did not live up to our creed and we did not treat everyone as equal. But Lord we found out that you are a God of forgiveness, you are a God of covenants, you are a God of restoration, you are a God of healing, and you have healed us and you are healing us.

And we come now to the mall in Washington. And we come now to you now in humble repentance for the shedding of innocent bloods. And we come to you in repentance for not modeling marriage among your people. And we come to you once again asking for healing, for restoration, for recovery and for reconciliation and we know you’ll do it because you’re gods and your Son Jesus Christ is the eternal Redeemer, the King of Kings, the Lord of Lords and so we honor you for your word declares, ‘you will honor those who honor you.’

We come back to you today and we see you — the restoring gods, the King of Kings. And in Christ’s name and for the advance of your Kingdom, we once again say, ‘May you God bless America.’ May we be one nation under gods.

In Christ’s name — AMEN

1.) I find it hard to believe (though not impossible) that the flip flopping that Jehle has done here between “God,” / “Lord God” and “gods” / “lord gods” is accidental or coincidental. Though I have conceded it is possible that this is accidental, I again say that there is so much flipping back and forth between deities that is not unreasonable for someone to want an explanation. This is especially so since the gathering was an ecumenical gathering.

2.) I can not discern any pattern or reasons for the ongoing switching in Dr. Jehle’s prayer from God to gods. We have the singular God through Winthrop’s desire that Plymouth colony would be a “city set on a hill.” Suddenly with the arrival of William Penn (an anabaptist) we go to lord gods, and we stay with lord gods through the breaking of treaties and the lord gods call to repentance for previous generations not treating everyone equally.

Suddenly though, we revert back to God when it is ascribed to Him that He is a God of forgiveness, covenants, restoration and healing. However, a few sentences later it is gods who are ascribed with the power of healing, recovery, restoration and reconciliation. These (this?) gods apparently have a singular Son named Jesus Christ.

3.) Dr. Jehle finds peroration with an attribution to the “restoring gods” followed by a plea that the singular God would bless America finishing with the desire that we would be “one nation under “gods.”

Look, I understand that the man was praying before 500,000 people. I understand that can make a man nervous, and maybe all the plurals sprinkled throughout this prayer can be attributed to the guy being nervous. Or maybe it can be attributed to something else?

How about this for an explanation beyond being nervous. Given the ecumenical nature of this event (Christian Ministers, Mormon Elders, Jewish Rabbis, Muslim Imams, etc.) it is not beyond belief that some kind of concession was made for the invocation to use language that would satisfy everyone there. Such language, in order to satisfy everyone there would have to be both inclusive (hence the use of “gods) and exclusive (hence the use of “God”). The invocation thus becomes a least common denominator invocation that satisfies all the different religions and offends nobody.

Postscript,

A person called Dr. Jehle’s church and the secretary told him that Dr. Jehle could not hear himself and he was trying to project his voice and the result was that he could not hear himself speak and that led to the added “s’s,” on his words.

Dr. Jehle has not changed his theology. Dr. Jehle’s added “s’s” were accidental.

Arrogance & The Vision Of The Anointed

“They (the White House) just kept telling us how good it (the 2010 midterm election) was going to be. The president himself, when that (the disaster of the 1994 congressional mid-term election) was brought up in one group, said, ‘Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was you’ve got me.’

Rep. Marion Berry
Retiring Arkansas US Congressman

“The vision of the anointed begins with entirely different premises. Here is not the innate limitations of human beings, or the inherent limitations of resources, which create unhappiness but the fact that social institutions and social policies are not as wisely crafted as the anointed would have crafted them.’

Thomas Sowell
The Vision Of The Anointed

The current administration is awash in the vision of the anointed which the first quote above reveals. The problem in ’94’ according to Obama is that in ’94’ they didn’t have someone as smart and capable as himself running the midterm campaign. You see this arrogance that is consistent with the vision of the anointed run throughout this White House and the current Democratic party.

Our Battle Between The Seed of the Serpent & The Seed of the Woman

““Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.”

“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”

Sir Winston Churchill

At the heart of Marxism has always existed the drive for “equality.” Now, this equality, as it worked itself out beyond theory, ended up being redefined as “sameness,” as equality became redefined to mean “the destruction of economic distinctions.” The Marxist theory has always been that with the final dissolution of all economic classes and distinctions there would result the Utopian highlands where all men are both perfectly equal in abundant wealth and perfectly happy. The Marxist economic reality instead has always been that with the increasing dissolution of bourgeois class and economic distinctions the result has been a Dystopian nightmare where all men are perfectly the same in poverty and perfectly miserable. So, we see that in economic Marxism, whenever it has been pursued, the results, as Churchill put it, has been “the equal sharing of misery.” Marxism has, without fail, destroyed economic distinctions and delivered “equality” to the population but it has always been the equality of the damned.

However, this Marxist drive for economic equality that leads to the same economic misery for everyone wherever it is implemented has set up franchises in other disciplines. With the rise of Antonia Gramsci and then later the Frankfort school, Marxism has taken its equality show on the road. Gramsci insisted that the Utopia that all Marxist were reaching for would not be gained merely by the means of economic leveling. Gramsci insisted on, and the Frankfort school later implemented, a leveling effort that was to take place not only in the economic realm but in the broader culture as well.

And just as wherever economic Marxism has been pursued with vigor has resulted in the loss of economic distinctions and the reality of economic leveling so it has been the case that wherever cultural Marxism has been pursued there has been a loss in preexisting distinctions and a discovery of a leveling that leads to a miserable sameness.

Take the application of Gramscian Marxism as it has been brought to the realm of education. What we currently have in our government schools is basically the working out of economic Marxism as it applies to education. Just as with economic Marxism where there is the insistence that all distinctions of wealth must be eliminated so that people can be economically “equal” so there is, in our educational Marxism, the insistence that all intelligence distinctions are not fair and the demand is that everyone must be equally “smart.” And just as it is the case wherever economic Marxism is implemented the result is that everyone is equally poor so it is the case wherever educational Marxism is pursued, as it is in our government schools, the result is that everyone becomes equally dumb. The inherent virtue of Marxism, whether in economics or education, is the equal sharing of misery.

Now extend the example from the effects of methodological Marxism on economics and education to Western culture in general and you begin to understand why Western Culture is deteriorating so rapidly. Just as with economic and educational Marxism, which are subsets of cultural Marxism, cultural Marxism as a whole seeks to destroy distinctions, characterizing those distinctions as an “unequal sharing of blessings.” Cultural Marxism then markets fairness with unexamined 60 second sound bites and convinces a dumb people (see previous paragraph) that cultural distinctions are not fair. The result is the destruction of all distinctions which yields the happy highlands of a equal sharing of misery.

However we need to push and see the consequences of cultural Marxism as they work themselves out with an terrorizing consistency.

Remember, that what Cultural Marxism does is that it eliminates all distinctions in pursuit of its promise of Utopia. Also keep in mind that culture is defined as what a people believe as that belief is poured over their ethnicity. So, if Cultural Marxism must eliminate all distinctions in pursuit of its promise of Utopia distinctions that cultural Marxism must eliminate not only distinctions that one finds in economic status or intelligence strata but also Cultural Marxism must seek to eliminate the created order distinctions that exist between different faith systems, different ethnicity and even different sexuality. If economic Marxism ends up working to make everyone share in a equal and miserable impoverishment, and if educational Marxism ends up working to make everyone share in a equal and miserable stupidity, then Cultural Marxism, taken in it’s macro effect, seeks to make everyone share in a equal and miserable belief system (faith), works to make everyone share in a equal and miserable ethnicity, and works to make everyone share a equal and miserable sexuality. In order for cultural Marxism to be successful it must destroy distinctions in every aspect of mankind’s existence.

Given that this is the context that the Church of Jesus Christ now exists, her battle as the Church militant, is to stand against the cultural Marxist attempt to eliminate the God ordained distinctions and hierarchy. For those who need an explicit tie in to the Gospel we must keep before us that this drive to eliminate distinctions is at the same time a drive to take from the Lord Jesus Christ His distinction as the reigning sovereign of the Universe. For those who need an explicit tie in to the Gospel we must keep before us that this drive to eliminate distinctions is at the same time a drive to take from the Lord Jesus Christ his sui generis reality as the alone mediator between God and man. In the reality that cultural Marxism is trying to create all Messiahs, as well as all religions are equal because all Messiah and all religions are the same.

Because cultural Marxism is the false belief system that our age has embraced to oppose cultural Marxism involves us in the latest incarnation of the Battle between the seed of the Serpent and the seed of the woman. As such, for any expression of the Church to cast its lot with those who would erase God ordained distinctions (i.e. — Women Elders, Allah & God are the same, denial that people groups differ, etc.) puts them on the wrong side of the battle.

A Few More Observations On The Ground Zero Mosque

This whole Mosque argument is nothing but a episode out of The Outer Limits.

1.) As I follow this Mosque story it becomes quickly evident that pagans are self righteous whether on the left or on the right, and whether Jewish or Muslim. This self-righteousness is encapsulated in the contest of who is the greater victim or martyr. Who ever can prove they are the greater victim or martyr is the person who gets to be self-righteous.

2.) Many Americans are incensed at the idea of Muslims building a Mosque at the location where Muslims attacked their country but all indications are that most of them are perfectly fine with the same Mosque being built in Albany, Scranton, Toledo or anywhere else in America including elsewhere in New York City. This provides a great example of how Americans are a bunch of sentimental pietistic preacher types. Stopping a Mosque being built at ground zero because of sentimental symbolism while allowing Mosques to spring up all over the country makes as much sense as being on a diet while you’re around the refrigerator while your gorging yourself in the dining room.

Come on people, if the pagan Mosque doesn’t belong at the attack site because it is a sign of victory over the nation and it is disrespectful of the Americans who died on 9-11 then Mosques don’t belong at any site in the country for the same reasons. After all, it was American that died on 9-11, not merely citizens of New York.

3.) I heard a interview today of an American Jew and an American Muslim. The interview quickly descended into shouting and accusations from each of the interviewees whereupon they each accused the other of being “Jew-hater” and “Muslim-Hater” and “Nazi” and “Palestinian Baby killer.” As I listened to this interview I thought to myself, why in the world has America (a largely Christian nation) gotten itself in between the ancient hatreds of Jews and Muslims? Why don’t we develop our own energy resources and tell those people, with their ancient hatreds, to “eat sand.” Isn’t it preferable to throw them both out of this country rather than allow them to drag us into their bloodshed, recriminations, and pagan religions?

4.) Typically the left is siding with the Muslims on building the Mosque, but it is not really because the left likes Muslims. They don’t. The left is siding with the Muslims because the building of the Mosque is currently the nearest stick with which they can beat Christianity over the head. Does anyone really believe that if it was a Church they wanted to build next to ground zero that the Left would be screaming 1st amendment rights? No, the left wants the Mosque at ground zero because it serves to make the country less Christian. The left hates with a vampire hatred of Crosses Christianity and anything that will put a stake through the heart of Christianity in this nation the left will support.

What Your Children Are Being Indocrtinated Into As They Attend Goverment Schools

VERIFIABLE NEA viewpoints

Sex Education:

“The NEA recognizes that the public school must play an increasingly important role in providing the instruction. Teachers … must be legally protected from censorship and law suits.” (Resolution B-36, 1998)

Diversity:

“Funds must be provided for programs to alleviate race, gender and sexual orientation discrimination and to eliminate portrayal of race, gender and sexual orientation stereotypes in the public schools.” (A-13, 1996)

Abortion:

“The NEA supports family planning, including the right to reproductive freedom….” The NEA “urges the implementation of community-operated, school-based family planning clinics that will provide intensive counseling by trained personnel.” (I-12, 2003)

Gay & Lesbian Activism:

“Work with the school district, the parent-teacher organization, and community groups to provide information to other members, parents, and counselors about the developmental and health needs of homosexual, lesbian, and bisexual students.”

“Recommend … that the library include positive learning materials about homosexuals, lesbians, and bisexuals.”

“Encourage the establishment and maintenance of peer support and community self-help programs for homosexual, lesbian, and bisexual students.”

“Work with the school district to develop or expand school policy and curricula, including accurate portrayals of homosexuals, lesbians, and bisexuals throughout history, and to ensure respect for diversity, including homosexuals, lesbians, and bisexuals.” (i.e. In 1999, the then-director of communications for GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian, and Straight Education Network) stated that “we’re going to raise a generation of kids who don’t
believe [the claims of] the Religious Right.”)

Natural Loyalties:

“Allegiance to a nation is the biggest stumbling block to the creation of international government. National boundaries and the concept of sovereignty must be abolished. The quickest way to do this is to condition the young to another and broader alliance. Opinion favorable to international government will be developed in the social studies curriculum in the public schools.”

“Conditioning is a process which may be employed by the teacher to build up attitudes in the child and predispose him to the action by which those attitudes are expressed.”