‘When the LORD your God brings you into the land which you go to possess, and has cast out many nations before you, the Hittites and the Girgashites and the Amorites and the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hivites and the Jebusites, seven nations greater and mightier than you, and when the LORD your God delivers them over to you, you shall conquer them and utterly destroy them. You shall make no covenant with them nor show mercy to them. Nor shall you make marriages with them. You shall not give your daughter to their son, nor take their daughter for your son. For they will turn your sons away from following Me, to serve other gods; so the anger of the LORD will be aroused against you and destroy you suddenly. But thus you shall deal with them: you shall destroy their altars, and break down their sacred pillars, and cut down their wooden images, and burn their carved images with fire. “For you are a holy people to the LORD your God; the LORD your God has chosen you to be a people for Himself, a special treasure above all the peoples on the face of the earth.

Deuteronomy 7:1-6

People will stumble over this passage where God commands the destruction (Cherem) of the inhabitants of the land of Canaan and if they don’t stumble over the passage they try to use it as a club to beat Christianity over the head, as if there is something unseemly in God’s command to utterly eliminate all the inhabitants of Canaan – man, woman, and child.

Keep in mind that this eventual cleansing of the land was long anticipated. Early on in Genesis Abraham is told, in reference to the land that his people will one day inherit, that the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet complete.” Finally, hundreds of years later, the iniquity of the Amorites was complete and God ordered His troops to destroy the Canaanites.

What was that iniquity of the Canaanites which was a cup that finally overflowed that had to be ended? We get the answer to that in Leviticus 18 and 20. There we learn the perversity and twistedness of the Canaanites that found them being vomited out of the land by their complete destruction.

Leviticus 18 & 20 teaches us that the Canaanites were

Perverted in their sexuality as they

– Uncovered the nakedness of mom, dad, sister, brother, aunt, uncle etc. (the most perverse forms of incest).
– Bedded a male as with a woman (Man lies with man).
– Bedded animals.
– Committed adultery with neighbor’s wife
– Bedded fathers wife.
– Bedded daughter in law.
– Married both a Mother and her daughter.
– Bedded one’s own sister.
– Bedded a woman on her period
– Bedded Sister-in-law

Perverted in their humanity as they

– Offered their own chidren to the false God Molech (i.e.They bbq’d their children on the altar of Molech – the fruit of their body for the sin of their soul)

– They cursed their Mothers and Fathers

Perverted in their Religion

– Turned to mediums and familiar spirits.

The summation then is;

“The land(of Canaan/Amorite) is defiled… all these abominations the men of the land have done, who were before you, and thus the land (Canaan/Amorite) is defiled””You shall not walk in the statues of the nation (Canaan/Amorite) which I am casting out from before you; for they commit all these things, and therefore I abhor them.”

These were twisted people and after generations of culture and breeding they had this behavior in their genes as well as reinforced by their culture. For that reason God deems them worthy to be destroyed. These people, if allowed to live in the land, would be a contagion which would infect Israel. (A thing that happened eventually anyway since Israel did not completely wipe out all the Canaanites.)

People need to keep in mind that Canaan was to be like the garden of Eden. Israel, as a subsequent Adam was being placed back in the garden and there in Canaan the Lord would reign over Israel, with the promise that God’s blessing would radiate out from Canaan to the whole world. As such the Canaanites were to Canaan what the Serpent was to the garden. Since Canaan was to be Eden rediscovered the vile serpent seed Canaanites were to be treated just as Adam should have treated the first serpent. So you see here one reason why the cleansing of the Canaanites — every man, woman, and child – was a righteous duty that glorified God and so perfectly reasonable.

People have trouble realizing how wicked and animalistic the Canaanites were. One analogy I am aware of is what Hernan Cortez discovered upon being introduced to the Aztecs. Cortez found in the Aztecs a people who were both at the same time cultured (canals, gardens, and Temples) and demonic. The Aztecs ruled over 500 smaller peoples. From these smaller people groups the Aztecs drew, as tributary, a stream of blood as rendered up by a conveyor belt of men and boys whose hearts were cut out of their bodies while they were still alive in order to satisfy the blood lust of their gods. One especially egregious example of the appetite of the Aztec gods was the re-dedication of the Great Pyramid of Tenochtitlan in 1487. In this ceremony 84,400 prisoners for sacrifice were offered up over four days.

Further, the Aztecs were a cannibal people. They dined on the arms and legs of the multitude of sacrifices offered up every year. Word is that they especially enjoyed leg of human as garnished with tomatoes and chili peppers.

Do you suppose any of the people groups who were subject to Aztec control shed any tears when their Empire was destroyed by Hernan Cortes and the Spaniards? Instead those captive peoples likely partied that such a dreadful enemy had been destroyed.

In the same way instead of condemning God or being puzzled by a God who would order complete destruction upon such a wicked people as the Canaanites we should rejoice that such a people were eliminated. No longer would they be killing their seed. No longer would their perversity cover the land. No longer would their sexual perversity continue from generation to generation. No longer would they consult mediums and worship darkness. The destruction of these people is good news, and hardly the stuff that should cause us to question God’s goodness. Indeed, in point of fact it was the goodness of God that ordered the extermination of the Canaanites. We should lead with this history in our evangelism. God is so good that he exterminated the Canaanites, that He destroyed the Aztec Empire. See how good God is.

There are a couple other observations to put forward so as to clear God’s name in His excellent decision to wipe out the Canaanites.

First, we would ask why anybody thinks that they have a claim on God’s mercy. The surprise in the Canaanite Cherem is not that the Canaanites were exterminated. No, the surprise is that every man, woman, and child inhabiting the globe wasn’t exterminated. Man is a rebel who is owed nothing by His creator. Indeed the only thing rebel man is owed by God is complete and utter destruction. The Canaanites received what we all deserve and the fact that we don’t get what we deserve should deliver us from indicting God for doing with His own whatever He determines. Instead we should say, when looking at the Cherem (Destruction) of the Canaanites, “There but for the grace of God go I.”

Secondly, and similarly, it is a curious phenomenon that fallen man thinks he has the place to put God in the dock, charging Him with the crime of genocide by our twisted standard of justice. The fact that anyone could charge God with wrongdoing for ordering the wholesale slaughter of the Canaanites reveals that they themselves have a heart of a Canaanite. God doesn’t answer to us. God doesn’t need to provide a defense of His actions to us. If the Canaanites were only guilty because God said they were guilty that would be reason enough for them to be wiped out. The Canaanites, like us today, remain the clay to God as the Potter. The Potter has no need to explain Himself to the clay. However, God did explain Himself for His orders to destroy Canaan, and the explanation was that they were serpent seed and as serpent seed who were wicked beyond naming, they had to go.

All of this should serve as a warning to us. The West has taken up some of the habits of the Canaanites and the Aztecs after them. We are offering up our children to Molech by way of abortion. We are institutionalizing sexual perversity in the same kind of directions as the Canaanites before us. Indeed, we are even moving beyond incest, bestiality, and sodomy to sex with sexatronic life sized dolls. We now sanction and celebrate the “marriage” of Butt-buddies. The consulting of mediums is on the rise and we are building statues to Satan and placing them in the public square and calling it enlightened. Whereas the Aztecs sacrificed by their 10,000’s we sacrifice our children by way of millions.

I pray daily that the West would repent before their own cup of iniquity has filled and we receive the just punishment of Canaan – every man, woman, and child.

This is our season to turn turn turn. Now is the appointed time. God commands all men everywhere to repent. Instead of going further out, and deeper in to our own personal sin as well as our institutional and cultural sins will we not cast our all upon the only one by whom we can have peace with God. Instead of continuing to carry this sin and guilt will we not discover the grace that is found in God’s provision of one who would, as our substitution …as the one who stood in our place and so close with Christ? Will we not own as our own the truth that Christ took upon Himself the wrath of the Father that belongs to us? Will we not find in Jesus Christ’s death our life? Will we not be amazed that despite our Canaanite and Gomorrah-ish personal behavior and cultural-Institutional behavior that we can still be reconciled to God through the Lord Jesus Christ.

You want to see the love, mercy, and kindness of God? It is found in the reality that even now He has not yet brought the judgment of the Canaanites upon us and our people. God is longsuffering not willing that any of His people should perish. He is commanding now for you to bow and offer up allegiance and He will extend clemency to you on the basis of the finished work of Jesus Christ. His word now to you latter day Canaanites is to kiss the Son, lest His anger flash and you perish in the way as those Canaanites did long ago.

O Canaanite, if you ignore this Word you will die.

One thing that begins to happen when one becomes saturated in non-court History and Historians is the polished veneer begins to come off your own place of origin. The left does this all the time insisting that America is a sinful nation because of the way it has treated women, or because of the way it has treated slaves, or because of its past colonialism overseas or because of how the putative Robber Barons treated their employees, thus cutting a jag on Capitalism. Reading pig slop like Howard Zinn’s book “A People’s History of the United States” or Steven J. Keillor’s “This Rebellious House: American History and the Truth of Christianity,” or Alan Guezlo’s “Abraham Lincoln: Redeemer President,” the left becomes saturated in anti-history and so see’s America as a country has always done the devil’s work and so must be remade into the left’s image.

The problem with the left is that most of their criticisms of America of this nature are merely some type of warmed over Marxist historiography. The left hates America because it hasn’t been a Marxist country and their hatred for the country will only be lifted once statues of Marx and Lenin are placed alongside the statue of Martin Luther King.

But, what about the Biblical Christian? Does he ever begin to seen the veneer come off his birth of origin? I would answer resoundingly yes. Indeed, I would answer so vigorously “yes,” that I would say that the Biblical Christian ought to hate America just as all reasonable people rightfully hate Dracula. Now, keep in mind that saying “I hate America,” is not the same as saying, “I hate each and every American.” The hate spoken of here is what the America as a country has done and while that certainly has to include many, and perhaps even most Americans it does not include all Americans. Many Americans over the decades have fought the good fight against those who have been constantly clawing to turn this country into the beehive and the anthill.

However, I don’t hate America for the same reasons the left does. Indeed I hate America because the Marxists have been so successful in their project to remake America. I hate the America of Lincoln, Wilson, and the Roosevelts because I love the America of Washington, Jefferson, and Coolidge. So I hate America for the exact opposite reasons that the left hate’s America. I hate America because America has become so Marxist while the left hates America because it isn’t yet Marxist enough. I hate the America that is because I love the America as she was created to be.

Recently, I made this declaration above in a setting that found people bewildered at such a sentiment and asking for precision and specificity over why I would say such a thing. Below, is just a beginning of why I say, “I hate America, and so should all Biblical Christians.”

Since 1973 America, under the flag of legality, as killed fifty million babies in the one place where one would think is the safest place in the cosmos. Fifty million people. The number is so large that it is beyond the ability to really think about. Since 1973 we have killed approximately 1/5 of our current population. How can a Christian not hate a country that has allowed for such a thing?

In 1944 and 1945, first at Tehran, and then at Yalta America turned over countless Millions of people in Eastern and Central Europe to the butchering Satanist communists (Tehran and Yalta). Similarly, our actions in China effectively turned over that whole nation to the Communists. (See George Crockers, “FDR’s Road to Yalta,” and John T. Flynn’s “The Roosevelt Myth,” and “Blacklisted by History,” by M. Stanton Evans — especially as he deals with figures such as Lauchlin Currie, and Owen Lattimore). How can a Christian not hate a country that pursued such a foreign policy course that resulted in Communism covering major portions of the globe and resulted in the deaths of countless tens of millions?

Prior to that there was the bloody disaster that was our involvement in WW I and then the Versailles treaty that led to WW II. (See two volumes by Docherty and MacGregor… “Hidden History: The Secret Origins of the First World War,” and “Prolonging the Agony: How The Anglo-American Establishment Deliberately Extended WWI by Three-and-a-Half Years,” and “How Britain Initiated both World Wars,” by Nick Kollerstrom. America by wrongly involving herself in World War I is responsible for the death of American lads, and for creating such a mess on the global stage that the Communists were able to take over Russia. Further America is responsible (along with other players) for aiding the destruction of European Christendom. How can a Christian out of love for those who perished so needlessly not hate the country responsible for that?

What else might we say, as reasons for hating America?

We dropped two atomic bombs on Japan when they were already agreeing, 6 months prior to the eventual peace deal, that ended up being the same peace deal that was eventually signed after the bombings. (See Herbert Hoover’s “Freedom Betrayed.”) The bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were war crimes committed by America. How can one not hate a country that does such a thing?

Then there are the million unarmed Germans that Eisenhower and the Allies killed in prison camps after WW II not to mention the human reparations that were sent to the USSR to die in their work Gulags. (See “Other Losses” by James Bacque and Nikolas Tolstoy’s “The Secret Betrayal.”)

There is, of course much more. This is merely a beginners plate that explains why a Christian might justly hate America. The Christians love for righteousness and justice makes one see all the unrighteousness, injustice, not to mention death and suffering, and so burns with loathing for a country that is responsible for all this death and mayhem. And it burns with loathing also for the left which hates America for the exact opposite reasons.

In the previous post, I wrote about Linguistic Tomfoolery. In this post I give an example of the same in the Church.

(1) “I remind Hill staffers and K Street lobbyists and military officers that real political action starts in the teaching ministry of our church and then flows outward from there — from our relationships with other members to our families, and our work places and beyond. First “Be,” and then “Do.” (2) Don’t tell me your interested in politics if you’re not pursuing a just, righteous, peace producing life with everyone in your immediate circles. (3) Paul asked the Jews of his day; ‘You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?’ (Romans 2:21). (4) I’ve got a few questions of my own. (5) You who call for immigration reform do you practice hospitality with visitors to your church who are ethnically or nationally different from you? (6) You who vote for family values do you honor your parents and love your spouse self sacrificially? (7) You who speak against abortion do you also embrace and assist the single mother’s in your church? (8) Do you encourage adoption? (9) Do you prioritize your own children over financial comfort? (10) You who talk about welfare reform do you give to the needy in your congregation? (11) You who proclaim all lives matter do all your friends look like you? (12) You who lament structural injustices do you work against them in your own congregations? (13) Do you rejoice with those who rejoice and weep with those who weep? (14) You who fight for traditional marriage, do you love your wife, cherishing her as you do your own body washing her with the water of the word? (15) You who are concerned with the economy and the job market do you obey your boss sincerely from your heart, not as a people pleaser but as you would obey Christ? (16) You who care about corporate tax rates do you treat your employees fairly? (17) Do you threaten them forgetting that he who is both your Master and theirs is in heaven and that there is no partiality with Him? (18) Finally, as you share your opinion about all these issues on social media do you gladly share the Lord’s Supper with a fellow member who disagrees? (19) Do you pray for his or her spiritual good?

All politics is local said former Speaker of the House of Representative, Tip O’Neil. He spoke better than he knew.

Jonathan Leeman
Minister — Capital Hill Baptist Church
How the Nations Rage: Rethinking Faith and Politics in a Divided Age

1a.) It is simply not the case that real political action starts with the teaching ministry of the Church. No, real political actions starts with the teaching ministry of the home.

1b.) Notice in the first sentence how, for Rev. Dr. Leeman, that the sequential ripples starts with our relationships to other members, and then to our family and then to our workplace and beyond. Again, we see ecclesiocentrism here. Accurately described the sequential ripples start with our family and then to other members of the Church and then to our workplace and beyond.

#1 is not an insignificant point. The Church is forever trying to insinuate itself as the be all end all Institution. It’s not.Clearly the Church is monumentally important just as the family is monumentally important. Each of those Institutions compliment the other and it is a significant error in teaching to imply one or the other is always subordinate to its counterpoint.

2.) Here we applaud Rev. Dr. Leeman for a point well stated.

5.) Wouldn’t the logical corollary for those who wanted an Immigration Reform that resulted in closed borders be; You who call for immigration reform do you practice hospitality with visitors to your church who are ethnically or nationally the same as you as you are seeking to encourage them in light of the country being taken over by the stranger and the alien?

7.) Shouldn’t the question here be, in order to be logical; You who speak against abortion do you also embrace and assist the single and unmarried women in your Church by encouraging them to be sexually chaste before marriage?

11.) How is it that someone is a hypocrite who says all lives matter while not having any friends that don’t look like them? All lives can still matter even if I don’t have any friends named Jose, Levi, Tyrone, Mohammed or Han Soo. This is just so much cultural Marxism dressed up in pious sentimentalism trying to look Christian.

(12) “Structural Injustices,” sure sounds a great deal like “White privilege.” I mean up to this point we have heard that Christians are hypocrites if they want immigration reform but don’t break bread with someone of a different ethnicity. We have heard that we are hypocrites if we say all lives matter but don’t have friends who don’t look like us. Now we trip across the idea of “Structural Injustices” and if I read that in this context it sure sounds like “White privilege.”

(17) If God has no partiality the way that partiality is used in the sentence above how can there be elect and non-elect? I mean certainly there is partiality with God. Election teaches that. The idea that Christians are not to be partial comes in a very specific context in the book of James. Having said that I do affirm that employers do need to treat their employees consistent with their productivity and work ethic.

(18) I am not interested in sharing a Church let alone the Lord’s Table with someone who is on the wrong side of abortion, the wrong side of Christian Caucasian ethnocide by way of immigration overload, the wrong side of Cultural Marxism. But I will pray that they repent so that one day I might be able to join them at the Lord’s table.

Virginia gives us a classic example of how Government typically uses language. The fenced in portion on the Virginia state grounds that does not allow weapons (which is an unlawful decree from Governor Northam) during lobby day is called, “The Freedom Zone.” The one geographic area where there is the least amount of freedom is labeled “the freedom zone.”

That is the way bureaucrats use language. They consistently label things the exact opposite of what they are. For example, we have the “Secretary of Defense” when he is actually the “Secretary of War.” For example, Obama gave us “The Affordable Care Act” when it is in reality “The Expensive non-Care Act.” For example, “The Civil Rights Act” took away our civil right of freedom of Association. For example, “Social Security,” leaves one financially insecure. For example, “Freedom of choice” is the negation of freedom of choice for the infant in Mommy’s womb. For example, “The Equal Rights Amendment” would have given feminists “special rights.” For example, “undocumented workers” masks “illegal aliens.” For example, “Birthright citizenship,” masks “anchor babies.” For example, “Comprehensive Immigration Reform” is really comprehensive native population reform. For example, “Planned Parenthood,” is really “planned non-parenthood.” For example, “Terrorist” is really a White Male who attends Church every Sunday. For example, “enhanced interrogation,” is really torture. For example, “Welfare” is really enslavement. For example, “Pacification,” is really ethnic cleansing. For example, “Collateral damage,” is really “we killed lots of women and children.” For example, “Homeland security” really means controlling the citizenry. For example, “Responsible gun rights legislation,” means “we are coming for your guns.” We could go on but you get the idea. I’m sure you have your own examples.

Government uses this language not only for the obvious reason of masking what is really going on, but also as a means to sell the disreputable, vile, and disgusting to a brain dead public.

Linguistic Tomfoolery also happens when language is used in order to be sarcastic but eventually is embraced as non-sarcastic. The classic example of this is seriously calling Abraham Lincoln, “Honest Abe.” When the term “Honest Abe” was pinned to Lincoln it was done so by his political enemies in sarcasm. Yet today, people genuinely believe that Lincoln was known for his unique honesty. I suppose given enough time “Tricky Dick,” and “Slick Willy” will be spoken with the same reverence that we now use when we speak of “Honest Abe.”

All of this reminds us that the purpose of language is not only to reveal meaning but also, just as often, to conceal meaning. This is the way that savvy listeners and readers consume communication. Savvy readers and listeners are not only always listening for what is said but also for what is being hidden in what is being said. Personally, I never listen to a sermon, read a book, have a conversation, view a film, where I am not asking, “what is being concealed and hidden in this communication?” Of course the more I trust a person the more I let my guard down and correspondingly the less I trust someone the more intensely am I looking for linguistic tomfoolery.

This linguistic tomfoolery is never-ending in the Church. Whole theologies are just one relentless stream of linguistic tomfoolery. Some “theologians” will say they believe in the resurrection and later you find out they believe that “Jesus arose into history,” which is code language that he really didn’t physically resurrect. Some theologians will tell you that they believe that Jesus was divine and later you learn that they really believed that Jesus was a one of a kind human and inasmuch he was singularly unique in His character and spirit he should be considered divine. Many pastors will talk about equality when what they really mean is that white Christians need to surrender their convictions and churches and so be unequal. Seriously, I wouldn’t attend a church today without a handy dandy, readily available “What does he really mean” dictionary.

One sign of a social-order decline is when language is doing the work of concealing more than the work of revealing. And our culture is saturated with linguistic tomfoolery.

“One Southerner can lick twenty Yankees.”

Charles Hamilton
Gone With The Wind

Such is the bravado of young men. And, honestly, it should be that way. However, bravado, machismo, and testosterone do not, by themselves, win battles or wars. Battles and wars are won by bravado, machismo, and testosterone in the service of wise tacticians and strategists who know when to strike, when to lay back and absorb a blow so as to be positioned to inflict damage, and when to retreat. It is now Sunday 19 January 2020, and nothing I write here will make any impact on what will happen in Richmond, Virginia tomorrow, yet all the same I’ll state my convictions so that in three years time we won’t be in some other Virginian city (Roanoke anyone?) planning another march that will show how determined the Patriots are.

Please understand my opposition to attending this kind of turkey shoot … er, um, I mean rally, is not (as I’ve been accused) based on personal cowardice. Nor is it due to the fact that I have different long range goals then those who are protesting in Richmond tomorrow. I loathe Statist apparatchiks more than the next person and am in full agreement with Albert Jay Nock’s book title, “Our Enemy, the State.” No, my opposition to attending Richmond is about methodology. I am of the conviction there are better ways to skin the cat of Government oppression and illegality than putting one’s self in an environment that is completely under the control of the enemy. Nobody fights purposely allowing the enemy to choose and have the high ground and metaphorically speaking that is what is happening (again) as Johnny goes marching on in Richmond.

One would have thought that the Patriot movement would have learned something with Charlottesville or in Seattle or in Portland, but nope, it is, “Once more unto the breach, dear friends.” This is starting to look like Charlie Brown and his eternal determination, to this time “really kick that ball,” only to find that Lucy, once again, is way ahead of the well determined, likable, but not particularly astute Charlie Brown.

Lucy, in this case, is the Statist apparatchiks. They are the ones who are holding the football. They know what their going to do. They know the terrain. They have the resources to create and / or sustain and / or turn a blind eye to mayhem. It is a Captain Obvious statement, based on Charlottesville, Portland, and Seattle, to say that their sympathies are not with the Patriots. And yet, this time it will be different.

Why not just start wearing a “hit me” sign?

Note here that the danger is not only as coming from the antifa side or as coming from the beloved Constables. There are those in the Patriot movement who might think to themselves, “”We need to get the pot to boil and the only way to do that is for our side to take some hits. If we can get Richmond to go bad that accelerates the Rebellion,” and in light of that reasoning work to the end of creating an incident for the good of the overall cause. So, if the question is asked “Cui Bono,” all sides could spin this thing going sideways as “we benefit.”

Then there is the publicity / media angle. The Patriot crowd could be saints on stilts but no matter what happens in Richmond all we are going to see on the media is Confederate (and maybe even Nazi) flags. Militia members who look like a cross of Sergeant Rock and Freddy Kruger. Followed by “in depth analysis” by some sodomite news anchor telling us the covert white supremacist action that all second amendment people represent.

So, I ask myself, “How does this advance the cause of the Patriots?” How does the gathering of some of the finest people getting beat up, arrested, slandered and libel advance the cause of the 2^nd amendment, or the Patriot movement overall? What are we proving? Our ability to take a punch? I think that is now well established.

Those people don’t care what Americans want. They don’t care how many letters they receive in the mail. They are nonplussed about numbers protesting. So, again, what does this accomplish besides making one’s self a target? Sure, the attendees can tell themselves good things about themselves about how they rallied as long as they leave out the part where they were bloodied by antifa and the Statist goons.

Some will contend, “Pastor, you don’t know how the Spirit of God might use this rally.” That is true. However, not knowing how God might or might not use something doesn’t excuse me for showing up at a turkey shoot starring as the turkey. (Yes, I know live turkeys are not used in turkey shoots … roll with me here.) Some will contend that a statement has to be made. What statement? That we will keep protesting no matter how many times the spider says to the fly, “Welcome to my parlor.”


So, what are the alternatives? If going to their place isn’t going to work what is going to work?

First of all, we have to be honest enough to admit that unless a much larger percentage of our country embrace Jesus Christ as Lord and Biblical Christianity that even if there is success there is failure. Right now America is a confused country when it comes to their faith. There is little understanding how Christianity is the only answer for stopping antifa and the Statist government and what understanding does exist is usually so tepid and watered down that if it is Christianity it is of a very strange variety. One wonders how many of those protesting have children in government schools? Wait … you want to keep your guns but you’re willing to lose your children? One wonders how many of those protesting are supporters of Israel no matter what? Wait … you want to keep your guns but your willing to continue to make America’s sons and daughters to be canon fodder for Israel’s wars? One wonders how many of those protesting care about God’s law? Wait … you want to keep your guns but your willing to let the rest of God’s law remain ignored and you expect God to bless your efforts? As long as Americans keep Biblical Christianity at arm’s length any success on keeping their guns is largely irrelevant.

Second, if protesting isn’t working on throwing off the vile Christ hating bureaucrats then maybe the answer is to organize locally into cell groups. Virginia, for example, has many counties saying they will not enforce unconstitutional laws. Beyond this there can be meetings of neighborhood areas where some kind of alarm system is established whereby neighbors coalesce if and when troubles from the enemy authorities arise.

Third, it may require that if we are living in areas that are overwhelming blue we have to move to an area that is sympathetic to our beliefs.

Fourth, at some point we have to realize that if rallies and ballots are strangled then history demonstrates that the only option available that remains is rope and bullets. This is what our forefathers concluded in 1776 when the British incarnation of tyranny arose. This is what one of our own 20^th century president observed,

“Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

John F. Kennedy

In conclusion, I salute the bravery of those seeking to exercise their constitutional right of peaceful assembly. I do not disagree one iota with their goals. My disagreement is on the best methodology to achieve those goals. I strenuously do not agree that protests that are intended to be peaceful on our part is a methodology that can achieve what is desired.