Memphis, Chicago, Black Lives Matter, and Bubba: The Consequences of the Rhetoric of Racial Division

Reposted from kingsjesterswordpress.com kingsjester

A few days ago, a certain Former POTUS, who was once referred to as "The First 'Black' President of the United States of America", "got real" with a bunch of protesters from Black Lives Matter, who would not allow him to continue a speech on behalf of his wife, who is running for Democrat Presidential Candidate Nomination.

Suffice it to say, ol' Bubba ruffled some feathers.

According to buzzfeed.com,

Racial justice and Black Lives Matter activists based in New York say they question the sincerity of Bill Clinton’s statement at the NAACP last summer that the longer sentences in the 1994 crime bill were “overdone” after he clashed with BLM protesters earlier this week.On Thursday, after protesters interrupted Bill Clinton’s remarks at a rally in Philadelphia, the former president criticized the demonstrators and defended his wife’s use of a controversial term — “superpredators” — in 1996 that has been the source of protests in recent months.

“I don’t know how you would characterize the gang leaders who got 13-year-old kids hopped up on crack and sent them out into the street to murder other African-American children,” Bill Clinton told the protesters. “Maybe you thought they were good citizens—she didn’t,” he added. “You are defending the people who killed the lives you say matter. Tell the truth.”

On Friday, BuzzFeed News contacted a dozen activists based in New York, which will hold a primary on April 19. The activists said they now question the calculus behind Bill Clinton’s speech last summer, in which he said his administration was wrong for signing a bill that required longer sentences for many low-level criminals that did not justify their crimes. (“I signed a bill that made the problem worse. And I want to admit it,” he said then.)

Bill Clinton, they said, seemed to justify his wife’s 1996 usage of the term “superpredator” with the same rationale widely debunked by criminologists — a term she has apologized for and distanced herself from.

Tamika Mallory, a prominent activist and member of the board of directors of Justice League NYC, said the former president’s views are out of touch.

“Bill Clinton’s comments beg the question whether his apology — about how his policies as president negatively impacted the black community — was genuine or a campaign strategy to make Americans move past the devastation his administration caused,” she said. “What we saw yesterday is a person who is very much out of touch and I believe his true colors have once again appeared.”

"Out of touch"? Hardly.

Any American with common sense, would say that ol' Bubba's off-the-cuff remarks were spot on.

Please allow me to use my Hometown as an example of what Former President Clinton was addressing.

Jody Callahan, writing for the Memphis Commercial Appeal, posted the following article on April 3rd:

By at least one measure, the homicide rate in Memphis this year is nearly twice that of Chicago, a town that is generating unwanted notoriety for its soaring number of killings.

Through the end of March in Memphis, 60 people had been killed in the violent first three months of the year. As of the latest U.S. Census estimate, the Memphis population stands at 656,861, for a homicide rate of 9.13 victims per 100,000 population.

Through the same period in Chicago, 151 people had been killed. As of the latest U.S. Census estimate, the Chicago population stands at 2,722,389, for a homicide rate of 5.55 victims per 100,000 population.

If the Memphis numbers continue rising at that rate for the rest of the year, the city would record more than 240 homicides, a tally that would obliterate the record of 213 set in 1993.

By any measure, it's too much death, too much killing. And it's overwhelming those in the city charged with responding to it.

"It's an emotional strain on everybody right now, the whole community," Shelby County Dist. Atty. Gen. Amy Weirich said. "But in terms of strain on the office, sure. That's potentially 60 more cases of the most serious nature. These are the most emotionally draining and difficult cases we handle."

Memphis Police Department Acting Lt. Col. of Investigative Services Caroline Mason said the homicide unit was coping with the influx, aided by solving 46 of the 60 killings.

"Homicide is a tight-knit unit. The morale is high because they are solving these cases," she said. "It's not like it's 60 unknown, or mysteries. Again, the solve rate is 77 percent."

When asked how much extra stress the homicide increase has put on the unit, Mason said, "I wouldn't say anything about extra stress, because this is just what we do."

But a former homicide detective who spent 17 years in the unit before his retirement said he's heard the strain has been tremendous.

"It would be daunting. You have so many coming in, but so few people working on them. You're just not able to give the attention to them that you should be able to. They're coming in too fast, you're spread too thin. A lot of times when they're coming in that fast, you're going to miss stuff," Bill Ashton said, remembering his time in the unit when homicide rates were up. "When they come in that fast, you get frustrated because you don't have enough time to work on them." It's not just Memphis and Chicago, either. Other large American cities are seeing jumps in homicide numbers. A New York Times story last year pointed to such increases in several cities, including Baltimore, Milwaukee, New Orleans, St. Louis and Washington, D.C.

"It's a nationwide trend," Weirich said. "For the latter part of 2015, we were all watching as major cities across the nation noticed their violent crime spiking. We ended 2015 looking good, and then lo and behold (came) Jan. 1, 2016, and all that good work is gone."

Except, DA Weirich, Memphis is now in first place, in a race that no self-respecting municipality wants to win.

Is it just me, or, gentle reader, do you also remember that we are supposed to be living under the first post-racial president?

It certainly does not seem that way.

Ever since Obama got into office, all I have heard from him is the Rhetoric of Racial Division and Class Warfare.

It reminded me of all the historical conflicts which I used to read about, during the course in college which I took, titled “The Rhetoric of Social Protest“.

Karl Marx knew long ago that all you needed to do to touch the heart of the common man was to convince him of a shared struggle.

Vladimir Lenin took this a step further, by using the concept of a shared struggle to convince the Bolsheviks to help him overthrow the Czar of Russia and murder him and his family during the Russian Revolution.

Forgive me for stating the obvious, but fiery rhetoric spoken by a national leader and his "New Bolsheviks" has consequences.

President Barack Hussein Obama is as responsible for what has happened in Ferguson, New York, Baltimore, and is happening in cities across America,  as any thug wannabe in those cities.

However, he is not alone in his responsibility.

Also responsible are the black political leaders, who make their living and get their 15 minutes of fame by exacerbating racially-divided situations. Their silence speaks volumes.

For example, by the Mayor of Baltimore, purposely giving carte blanche to the rioters to destroy her city by ordering the police to stand down, she, like the Roman Emperor Nero, lit the match that has set her kingdom ablaze.

If Black Lives truly do matter, it is the black community who are going to have to save themselves.

With a nationwide illegitimate birth rate of 74%, black Americans, with help from Uncle Sugar, have succeeded in tearing apart the very thing that kept them safe and strong for decades: the Black Family Unit.

Until that Sacred Foundation, which taught individual responsibility to generations of black Americans, is restored, the violence and disrespect for others will continue.

I remember, as a 9 year old in Memphis, Tennessee, watching my parents’ black and white television as the National Guard was called into action on the night that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was assassinated.

I remember after that Civil Defense Announcement that President Lyndon Johnson come on national television to make the announcement of Dr. King’s death. I remember a feeling of helplessness and of fear, as a nine-year-old, that I had not felt before.

It wasn’t just the fact that we were living in Midtown Memphis, that made me afraid.

It wasn’t just the fact of the out-of-control violence itself, that caused my consternation.

It was watching my beloved Hometown on the verge of going up in flames.

And now, 48 years later, Memphis is the #2 Most Dangerous City in America, as ranked by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and has borne witness to over 60 homicides so far the year, the overwhelming majority of which were black Memphians killing one another.

Words can hurt or words can heal.

A President who was supposed to bridge the Racial Divide in this nation…has, instead, widened it.

And, with every divisive word he and the political activists whom he champions speak, the chasm of Racial Divisiveness, which has created a gaping hole in the fabric of American Society, grows wider.

Words mean things.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Jews Are Not Descended From Khazars, Hebrew University Historian Says

 Reposted from Haaretz.com
The research ended up taking him four years. “I thought I’d finish in two months, but I discovered that there was a huge amount of work. I had to check sources that aren’t in my field, and I consulted and got help from many people.”

New study finds no evidence that Ashkenazi Jews are the descendants of Khazars, or that subjects in the medieval kingdom converted to Judaism en masse.
Ofer Aderet Jun 26, 2014 2:22 AM

The ruins of an 11th-12th century house in Itil, a Silk Road city that served as the Khazar capital, in July 2005.AP

    Shlomo Sand's 'The Invention of the Jewish People' is a success for Israel
    Shattering a 'national mythology'
    DNA links prove Jews are a 'race,' says genetics expert
    Ashkenazi Jews descend from 350 people, scientists say
    DNA tester: 75 percent of Jews trace ancestry to Middle East

The claim that today’s Ashkenazi Jews are descended from Khazars who converted in the Middle Ages is a myth, according to new research by a Hebrew University historian.

The Khazar thesis gained global prominence when Prof. Shlomo Sand of Tel Aviv University published “The Invention of the Jewish People” in 2008. In that book, which became a best seller and was translated into several languages, Sand argued that the “Jewish people” is an invention, forged out of myths and fictitious “history” to justify Jewish ownership of the Land of Israel.

Now, another Israeli historian has challenged one of the foundations of Sand’s argument: his claim that Ashkenazi Jews are descended from the people of the Khazar kingdom, who in the eighth century converted en masse on the instruction of their king. In an article published this month in the journal “Jewish Social Studies,” Prof. Shaul Stampfer concluded that there is no evidence to support this assertion.

“Such a conversion, even though it’s a wonderful story, never happened,” Stampfer said.

Stampfer, an expert in Jewish history, analyzed material from various fields, but found no reliable source for the claim that the Khazars – a multiethnic kingdom that included Iranians, Turks, Slavs and Circassians – converted to Judaism. “There never was a conversion by the Khazar king or the Khazar elite,” he said. “The conversion of the Khazars is a myth with no factual basis.”

As a historian, he said he was surprised to discover how hard it is “to prove that something didn’t happen. Until now, most of my research has been aimed at discovering or clarifying what did happen in the past ... It’s a much more difficult challenge to prove that something didn’t happen than to prove it did.”

That’s because the proof is based primarily on the absence of evidence rather than its presence – like the fact that an event as unprecedented as an entire kingdom’s conversion to Judaism merited no mention in contemporaneous sources. “The silence of so many sources about the Khazars’ Judaism is very suspicious,” Stampfer said. “The Byzantines, the geonim [Jewish religious leaders of the sixth to eleventh centuries], the sages of Egypt – none of them have a word about the Jewish Khazars.”


Stampfer said his research had no political motives, though he recognizes that the topic is politically fraught. “It’s a really interesting historical question, but it has political implications,” he said. “As a historian, I’m naturally worried by the misuse of history. I think history should be removed from political discussions, but anyone who nevertheless wants to use history must at least present the correct facts. In this case, the facts are that the Khazars didn’t convert, the Jews aren’t descendants of the Khazars and the contemporary political problems between Israelis and Palestinians must be dealt with on the basis of current reality, not on the basis of a fictitious past.”

Sand had tied the Khazar issue directly to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, telling Haaretz in 2008 that many Jews fear that wide acceptance of his thesis would undermine their “historic right to the land. The revelation that the Jews are not from Judea [ancient Israel] would ostensibly knock the legitimacy for our being here out from under us ... There is a very deep fear that doubt will be cast on our right to exist.”

Stampfer believes the persistence of the Khazar conversion myth attests to researchers’ reluctance to abandon familiar paradigms. “Those who believed this story – and they are many – usually didn’t do so for malicious reasons,” he says. “I tell my students that the only thing I want them to remember from my classes is the need to investigate and ask – to investigate whether the arguments they hear are credible, reasonable and well-founded.” 

read more: http://www.haaretz.com/jewish/features/1.601287

The black goo theory of everything

Joseph Morris´ prophecy update

The Gated Community

Republished from hallindsey.com

by Hal Lindsey On Sunday, followers of Jesus commemorated the pivotal moment in history when Christ our Champion defeated death.  We also remembered why He died.  He received in Himself all of His own wrath against sin and evil, so that we no longer have to fear death, or His wrath.  

It’s something of a shock for many Americans of the 21st century to think about God having wrath.  But He does.  Deuteronomy 29:23 speaks of God’s wrath toward Sodom and Gomorrah.  Psalms 78:49 tells us about God’s wrath against Egypt before Pharaoh relented and released the Children of Israel.  The Book of Revelation speaks again and again of the wrath of God.  In fact, it’s spoken of scores of times throughout scripture.

Colossians 3:6 says, “The wrath of God is coming upon the sons of disobedience.” (NKJV)  Psalm 7:11 says, “God is a righteous judge, And a God who has indignation every day.” (NASB)  

He is righteous, so of course He has indignation.  Sin is repugnant to righteousness.  It’s filthy and destructive, and righteousness sees it clearly.  We humans fall far short of God’s righteousness, but even we feel a certain level of indignation against sin.  When you hear of someone cheating the vulnerable, stealing from the poor, abusing children, or any one of hundreds of other evil and demeaning human activities, don’t you feel indignation?  So does God.  The difference is, He sees every gruesome detail with perfect and painful clarity.

People claim to reject God because He allows such things to happen.  But do they really want Him to put a final stop to sin and evil?  In most cases, they want Him to judge some of the world’s evil, but not all.  When He finally judges all of it (and He will), that judgment will include every person who stands outside the protection of Christ’s shed blood on the cross. 

For many, including many Christians, that is the shadow hanging over Easter.  To them, the Christ-centeredness of salvation seems undemocratic, exclusionary, and even un-American.  “Why only one way?” they ask.  “Why can’t we all just believe what we want to believe?”

They point out what they see as our exclusionist message by asking, “Will Jews go to heaven?”  The answer for Jews is the same as for anyone else.  Those who accept God’s gift of salvation in Christ will be saved.  Heaven will contain millions of Jews, including Peter, John, Paul, and Jesus Himself.  But it will not include anyone who rejects salvation in Christ.

Peter stood before the “rulers and elders and scribes” in Jerusalem and spoke to them about Jesus.  He concluded by saying, “There is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved.” (Acts 4:12 NASB)

Bible-based Christianity makes clear that Jesus is the exclusive means of salvation.  And that really gets under a lot of people’s skin.  

Suppose someone of infinite wealth decided to build the perfect subdivision — every house a mansion and every mansion a masterpiece.  The infinitely wealthy person puts a high wall around his subdivision and allows only a single door in the wall.  He makes it the ultimate “gated community.”  That might sound exclusionary, but suppose he then said, “Everyone is welcome to come inside, pick out a mansion and live there forever for free.  I only ask that you come in through the door.”

Jesus said, “I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he shall be saved.” (John 10:9 NASB)  

Anyone!  How can it be exclusionary if it’s free and excludes no one?  Romans 6:23 tells us that “the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”  It’s a gift, and it’s free to “whosoever will.” (Revelation 22:17)

Some still say it’s not fair, but that will change.  They apparently expect to talk their way into heaven by standing before God on Judgment Day, and convincing our all-knowing, all-powerful Creator that their sense of morality trumps His.  Instead, when the day comes, they will stand quivering before Him, a pile of fast-melting jell-o, feeling like the biggest fools who ever lived.  

In John 14:1-6 (NKJV), Jesus said, “‘Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me.  In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you.  I go to prepare a place for you.  And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also.  And where I go you know, and the way you know.’ Thomas said to Him, ‘Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way?’  Jesus said to him, ‘I am the way, the truth, and the life.  No one comes to the Father except through Me.’”

The question isn’t how you feel about God’s way of salvation.  The question is, is it true?  

In scripture, you can look at the record of Jesus’ life.  You can look at the impossibility of any mere human fulfilling the ancient prophecies about Him.  And you can look at those prophecies and see that the Messiah must be divine.  You can also look at prophecies, including His own, regarding His return, and see that we live in that time.

You believe in God.  Inspect the record, and you will believe in Jesus, too.  Trust Him.  The amazing stories are all true.  He really is who He said He is.  When you get to know Him, and His character, you will realize the power of His words, “If it were not so, I would have told you.”

Still Report #758 - Trump: Massive Recession Looms

Hillary’s Freudian Slip is Showing. Refers to Unborn as “Person”. Uh Oh. by kingsjester

This is a debate about our understanding of human dignity, what it means to be a member of the human family, even though tiny, powerless and unwanted. – Henry Hyde

[Where am I? This is July…not January. What are all these bright lights? What’s that smell? I don’t understand. I was inside my mother, sucking my thumb, all nice and safe and warm. The next thing I know, I feel this pressure on either side of my head, and I was ripped out of my mother.

Why is this happening to me? I have a whole life ahead of me.

I deserve a Mother and a Father. I will never have those. Grandparents, either. Heck, I won’t even get to know my cousins.

I want to know what milk tastes like. I want to hold a Cheerio in my hand and put it in my mouth. I want to know what it’s like to get my first tooth…to take my first step….to hear music for the first time. I want to hold a puppy. I want to have a first day in school. I want to have a best friend. I want to ride a bike. I want to have a best friend and go out to play with them. I want to know what Christmas is all about. I want to eat a turkey leg at Thanksgiving…and to see a fireworks display on the 4th of July. I want to wear costumes on Halloween. I want to go to ballgames with my Father.

I want to watch cartoons. I want to love and be loved.

I want to fall in love. I want to experience my first kiss. I want to have my parents drop me and my date off at the movie and then pick us up. I want to play sports in school…or be an artist…or be a musician…or, just be a kid.

I want to go to a pep rally. I want to dance at a prom. I want to get a report card. Heck, I want to taste a school lunch.

I want to graduate and go to college. I want to start work…and have a family.

I want to live!

Wait! What are you doing with those scissors! Don’t…]

I was born three days before my mother’s 40th birthday. To say I was a surprise is an understatement. As I recently wrote, I truly believe that they were going to name me “Oops”. That being said, I am grateful that God convicted them, regarding the sanctity of the life that my mother was carrying within her.

The issue of why "personhood" begins has always been a contentious one, as far as the subject of abortion is concerned.

Legally, America's legal System, time and time again, have charged those criminals who have stopped the beating hearts of both a mother and unborn baby with the crime of murder, with the leagal charge or First and Second Degree Homicide, respectively.

Yesterday, the presumed Democrat Presidential Candidate, Hillary Rodham Clinton, throw a verbal "pipe bomb" in the middle of this already volatile argument.

The Washington Times reports that

Democratic primary front-runner Hillary Clinton ran afoul of both the pro-life and pro-choice sides of the abortion debate Sunday when she said constitutional rights do not apply to an “unborn person” or “child.”

“The unborn person doesn’t have constitutional rights,” Mrs. Clinton said on NBC’s “Meet the Press.” “Now that doesn’t mean that we don’t do everything we possibly can in the vast majority of instances to, you know, help a mother who is carrying a child and wants to make sure that child will be healthy, to have appropriate medical support.”

Mrs. Clinton also said “there is room for reasonable kinds of restrictions” on abortion during the third trimester of pregnancy.

Diana Arellano, manager of community engagement for Planned Parenthood Illinois Action, said Sunday that Mrs. Clinton’s comments undermined the cause for abortion rights.

The comment “further stigmatizes #abortion,” Ms. Arellano said in a tweet. “She calls a fetus an ‘unborn child’ & calls for later term restrictions.”

Describing the fetus as a “person” or “child” has long been anathema to the pro-choice movement, which argues the terms misleadingly imply a sense of humanity.

In addition, the specific term “person” is a legal concept that includes rights and statuses that the law protects, including protection of a person’s life under the laws against homicide. Pro-choice intellectuals have long said that even if an unborn child is a “life,” it is not yet a “person.”

Guidelines issued by the International Planned Parenthood Federation discourage pro-choice advocates from using terms such as “abort a child,” instead recommending “more accurate/appropriate” alternatives such as “end a pregnancy” or “have an abortion.”

“‘Abort a child’ is medically inaccurate, as the fetus is not yet a child,” the guide reads. “‘Terminate’ a pregnancy is commonly used, however some people prefer to avoid this as terminate may have negative connotations (e.g., ‘terminator or assassinate’) for some people.”

“‘Abort a child’ is medically inaccurate, as the fetus is not yet a child,” the guide reads. “‘Terminate’ a pregnancy is commonly used, however some people prefer to avoid this as terminate may have negative connotations (e.g., ‘terminator or assassinate’) for some people.”

The guidebook also advises against the terms “baby,” “dead fetus,” “unborn baby” or “unborn child” when discussing what it is that’s being aborted. Instead, it recommends the terms “embryo,” “fetus” and “the pregnancy.”

“The alternatives are medically accurate terms, as the embryo or fetus is not a baby,” it explains.

The exchange with NBC’s Chuck Todd on Sunday came after Mrs. Clinton blasted Republican front-runner Donald Trump last week for saying that women should face “some form of punishment” for having abortions if they were illegal. He later reversed his statement, multiple times, after an outcry from both pro-life and pro-choice groups.

Conservatives also caught Mrs. Clinton’s words and drew implications. Commentary Editor John Podhoretz said the gaffe is comparable to those of Mr. Trump.

“This is Trump-level gaffery,” Mr. Podhoretz said in a tweet. “If you acknowledge personhood, then the unborn has every Constitutional right.”

Daily Wire Editor-in-Chief Ben Shapiro also said that Mrs. Clinton’s statement “demonstrates just how incoherent and evil the left’s abortion position is.”

As everyone knows, who was actually paying attention, Trump responded to a "What if" scenario, in which abortion was illegal. Just like Liberals lied about Michael Brown and the "Hands up. Don't Shoot" garbage, they attempted to lie about the Trump situation, as well.

But, this post is not about Donald J. Trump.

In a speech in April of 2015 at a Women’s Summit, Democratic Presidential Hopeful, Hillary Rodham Clinton, told Christian Americans. that were going to have to change our beliefs, in regards to abortion. Breitbart.com reported at the time, that

“Far too many women are denied access to reproductive health care and safe childbirth. All the laws we’ve passed don’t count for much if they’re not enforced,” Hillary Clinton said at the Women in the World Summit on Thursday night. “Rights have to exist in practice, not just on paper.  Laws have to be backed up with resources and political will. And deep-seated cultural codes, religious beliefs and structural biases have to be changed.”

Clinton made it emphatically clear she’s not just talking about, say, the horrific abuse of women by Islamist extremists: “As I have said, and as I believe, the advancement of the full participation of women and girls in every aspect of their societies is the great unfinished business of the 21st century, and not just for women but for everyone… and not just in far away countries but right here in the United States.” She pointed at the very ground she was standing upon, to emphasize the point.

It shouldn’t surprise anyone that a Far Left Radical Follower of Saul Alinsky, like Hillary Rodham Clinton, should feel this way.

Hillary, like Obama, sincerely believes that she is the smartest person in any room that she happens to walk into.

There is no room in her ego-filled heart and mind, for a Supreme Being. Hillary, herself, believes that she is the sole arbiter of Right and Wrong in her life.

Have you ever tried to have a discussion with an ardent  pro-abortion supporter, either on Facebook or face-to-face? You won’t hear these “Champions of Tolerance” call those innocent lives, babies, human beings, a life, a soul, a gift from God, or anything remotely resembling something that they should feel remorse about killing.

Pro-Abortionists are opposed to the taking of sonograms of the woman’s womb, before she has an abortion. They’re afraid that the “seed-carrier” will realize that IS a HUMAN BEING inside her, and will decide not to kill that baby.

Heck, I have even, on a Facebook Political Page, run into one, so out of touch with reality, that they, to this very moment, insist that a baby is not a "person", until the moment of birth.

They insist that, until then, it is just a fetus.

Of course, I informed them that "fetus" is Latin for BABY.

But, that did not seem to matter to them.

If those in favor of abortion would acknowledge the personhood of a human being inside their mother's womb, they would also have to come to grips with a very harsh reality.

From the scientific perspective, Dr. Carlo Bellieni, in his book “Dawn of the I: Pain, Memory, Desire, Dream of the Fetus,” writes:

As soon as it is born, the child shows in a scientifically demonstrable way that it recognizes its mother’s voice and distinguishes it from that of a stranger. Where has he learned that voice other than in the maternal womb?

There are also direct proofs. For example, we register how the movements and cardiac frequency of the fetus vary if we transmit unexpected sounds through the uterine wall. And we see that at first the fetus is startled, then it gets used to it, just like we do when we hear something that does not interest us.

In fact, the scientific evidence is immense. We cannot understand how it can be thought that it becomes a person at a certain point, perhaps when coming out of the uterus.

From the physical point of view, at the birth very little really changes: Air enters the lungs, the arrival of blood from the placenta is interrupted, the type of circulation of blood in the heart changes, and not much more.

As I often say, only blind faith in magic arts or some strange divinity can lead one to think that there is a “human” quality leap at a given moment — certainly not science.

While this Presidential Election is not about Social Issues, this is an important gaffe by Hillary.

Why?

First, her Freudian Slip was showing. She called the being that a mother is carrying in her womb an "unborn PERSON", possibly having their Constitutional Rights violated by being murdered in their Mother's womb.

Second, the pure political entertainment value provided by that slip is priceless.

Hillary's "Moonwalk", in her attempt to limit the damage that her Freudian Slip caused, reminded me of Michael Jackson in his prime.

Until He Comes,

KJ

Three Sheets to the Wind

Republished from servehiminthewaiting.com

The vicious snake

Republished via servehiminthewaiting.com

Four Lessons From Jonah

Wednesday, June 18th, 2014

Commentary by Jack Kelley

For being only four chapters long, the Book of Jonah packs quite a punch.  Jonah was called by God to take a message to Nineveh (modern Mosul in Iraq) but ran away instead. He thought he could escape on a boat bound for Tarshish, which was about a thousand miles in the wrong direction. Of course the Lord watched him do this and created a great storm in the Mediterranean Sea as Jonah was trying to cross.


Jonah quickly realized Who had sent the storm and why. When the waves threatened to overwhelm the small ship, he convinced the sailors their only hope was to throw him over the side and when they did the storm subsided. Then the Lord summoned a great fish to rescue Jonah and He spent three days and three nights in the belly of the fish while contemplating the folly of his ways. When Jonah repented, the Lord had the fish vomit him out on dry land and the next time the Lord asked Jonah to go to Nineveh, he obeyed immediately.

It’s a great lesson on the folly of trying to avoid the Lord’s call on your life, but the lessons we can learn from Jonah don’t end there. That was only the first one.

Lesson #2

Nineveh was a Gentile city, the capital of the Assyrian Empire, and had no covenant with God. They had made no agreement to obey Him like the Israelites had (Exodus 24:3), and God had no obligation to save them. At one time their ancestors had known the Lord but over time the people had drifted away and taken a different path, one of paganism. But in a demonstration of His love for them in spite of their rejection of Him, God saw fit to warn them of impending judgment, and when Jonah finally arrived with God’s warning the response was remarkable to say the least.
The Ninevites believed God. They declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to the least, put on sackcloth.
When the news reached the king of Nineveh, he rose from his throne, took off his royal robes, covered himself with sackcloth and sat down in the dust. Then he issued a proclamation in Nineveh:
“By the decree of the king and his nobles:
Do not let any man or beast, herd or flock, taste anything; do not let them eat or drink. But let man and beast be covered with sackcloth. Let everyone call urgently on God. Let them give up their evil ways and their violence. Who knows? God may yet relent and with compassion turn from his fierce anger so that we will not perish.” (Jonah 3:5-9)
The Pharaoh of Egypt had arrogantly asked Moses, “Who is the LORD, that I should obey him and let Israel go? I do not know the LORD and I will not let Israel go.” (Exodus 5:2) But unlike him, the King of Nineveh remembered God and knew He had no desire to judge them, but that their behavior had made it necessary. If they changed their behavior maybe He would be merciful.

They changed their behavior, God showed compassion, and judgment was averted.
Now this was no small feat. Nineveh was a large and important city. According to Jonah 3:3 a visit to Nineveh required 3 days just to see it all. Jonah 4:11 tells us 120,000 people lived there. And everyone of them from the greatest to the least obeyed the King’s directive.
Besides fasting, praying and donning sack cloth we’re not told just what the Ninevites did to postpone their time of judgment. The King’s decree called on the people to give up their evil ways and their violent behavior, but there’s no indication that they ever converted to Judaism or offered sacrifices for their sins, or even began to worship the God who had threatened them. We don’t know of any who were saved through faith in the coming Redeemer. They just tried to behave in a manner they thought would be more acceptable to Him.

It was external, physical, national behavior and to some extent it worked. One generation of Ninevites was spared a terrible judgment and allowed to die in peace, but as far as we can tell they all went to Hell anyway. And the next generation went back to behaving as badly as ever. They conquered the Northern Kingdom and scattered its people to the four winds, leading them away into slavery. The one after that came within one day of conquering the South before God put an end to their evil ways. The night before the battle, when they were camped on Mt. Scopus looking down over the Temple Mount, God sent an angel into their camp with devastating results.
Then the Angel of the LORD went out and put to death a hundred and eighty-five thousand men in the Assyrian camp. When the people got up the next morning—there were all the dead bodies! So Sennacherib king of Assyria broke camp and withdrew. He returned to Nineveh and stayed there. (Isaiah 37:36-37)

Of course God knew all this would happen when He sent Jonah to Nineveh. He knew He was going to empower the Babylonians to conquer the so-called known world and that Nineveh and the entire Assyrian Empire would soon be no more. So what was His point?
I think this lesson from Jonah was intended as a message to the Israelites. The Northern Kingdom was over 100 years into it’s flirtation with idolatry and Jonah was a prophet from the land of Zebulon who was known to the King (2 Kings 14:25). Later, the southern Kingdom would fall into idolatry as well and over a 23 year period God would offer them a deal even better than the one Jonah carried to Nineveh.  Jeremiah 25:3-6 tells us that God promised not to harm them if they would just turn from their idolatrous practices.

In an effort to turn his people back to Him, God was using Nineveh to give them a demonstration of His Promise to them in 2 Chronicles 7:14; “If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.”
The Ninevites were not God’s people and they weren’t called by His name, but when they humbled themselves and turned from their wicked ways the scheduled judgment was postponed. Tragically, the Israelites of both kingdoms, who were God’s people, missed this lesson from Jonah, ignored His promise, and suffered the consequences. The lesson was wasted.

Lesson #3

700 years later Jesus said He would prove Himself to Israel’s leaders using Jonah’s experience in the belly of the fish as a sign. It would be another lesson from Jonah.
Then some of the Pharisees and teachers of the law said to him, “Teacher, we want to see a miraculous sign from you.”
He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a miraculous sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” (Matt. 12:38-40)

He was speaking of the resurrection, an unmistakable sign that He was who He claimed to be. It was the definitive proof they had asked for, and should have removed all doubt that He was their Messiah. After all, how many other times had someone made such a prediction and then fulfilled it? And just as Jonah had given Nineveh 40 days notice, Jesus waited 40 days after His crucifixion for Israel to recognize Him before finally departing for Heaven (Acts 1:3,9). That lesson was wasted, too.

Lesson #4

In Romans 15:4 Paul said that everything that was written in the past was written to teach us. That being the case there’s a lesson from Jonah for us, too. But remember, things that were external, physical and national in the Old Testament often become internal, spiritual, and personal in the New. (Read Something Old, Something New.)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life” (John 3:16).

When Jesus came into the world we began receiving clues that God’s focus was widening to include all His creation, not just Israel. Henceforth the emphasis would shift from external, physical, national behavior to internal, spiritual, personal belief.  It’s not how we behave that saves us, but what we believe.

The Ninevites responded to Jonah’s warning with external, physical, national behavior and their generation escaped the coming judgment. So if God sent a prophet like Jonah with a similar warning to us today, what would be the proper response? Is there a New Testament equivalent to 2 Chron. 7:14? The answer is yes and it’s John 6:28-29.
 Then they asked him, “What must we do to do the works God requires?”
Jesus answered, “The work of God is this: to believe in the one he has sent.”

It’s becoming more and more obvious that the world is under judgment. No nation is exempt. Escape from judgment has become a personal matter, and can only be found by joining a people of no nation, but of a Kingdom that’s in the world but not of the world. The Kingdom of God. And our King, who cannot lie, has promised to protect us from the judgment.
They tell how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for his Son from heaven, whom he raised from the dead—Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath (1 Thes. 1:9-10).
For God did not appoint us to suffer wrath but to receive salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ (1 Thes 5:9).
Since you have kept my command to endure patiently, I will also keep you from the hour of trial that is going to come upon the whole world to test those who live on the earth (Rev. 3:10).
No matter what country you live in, trying to appropriate Old Testament promises made to a different people under a different set of rules won’t do any good. You can’t save your country but you can save yourself by believing in the one God sent to save you. And then by the power of the Holy Spirit you can show others how to save themselves the same way. Remember, it’s internal, spiritual and personal.

If you know for sure you belong to the Lord, then you have nothing to worry about. Your challenge now is to live in such a way that your life serves as an example that attracts others to Him. If you’re not sure you’re His, you should hurry to make yourself so. Everyone who asks receives, all who seek will find, and to whoever knocks the door will be opened (Matt. 7:7-8). No one is refused, no one is excluded. All you have to to is to admit you’re a sinner, and ask Him to be your Savior and to forgive your sins. He will send His Holy Spirit to show you what to do from there (Ephes. 1:13-14). The Church could disappear any day now, without a prior sign or warning, and those who are left behind will soon be living in a much less friendly world.

When the people of Nineveh heard the voice of Jonah they responded immediately and although Nineveh’s destruction was foreordained, their generation was spared. The same is true today, but the appropriate response is different. Instead of being external, physical and national it’s internal, spiritual, and personal. The destruction of the world is foreordained. If you hear the voice of the Lord, respond immediately and you’ll be spared. It’s our most important lesson from Jonah. Don’t let it be wasted like the others. 03-10-12

Avi Lipkin: Russia and the New Ottoman Empire

Minarets in FEMA region 3 Maryland

Republished via servehiminthewaiting.com

The Rapture’s in the Air: Part 2 by Pete Garcia

Republished from omegaletter.com
via servehiminthewaiting.com
Pete Garcia

It is only natural for those who are watching the deteriorating conditions in the world today, too want to abandon the idea of the “blessed hope” in favor of ‘prepping’ for The Tribulation. History has, after all, shown us that fortune favors the prepared. But just as it is with our eternal salvation, our deliverance from this coming time isn’t dependent upon our efforts but on what Christ has already done. After all, isn’t that what distinguishes Christianity from every other faith-system? In other words, the ‘blessed hope’ goes against man-centered logic and puts the onus of salvation completely in God’s hands.

Consider the two examples Christ gave us with Noah and Lot. What manner of prepping (aside from what God told them to do specifically) could Noah and Lot have done to ‘weather the storm’? What bunker or high place could have saved Noah from the flood waters which covered the earth? What fortifications could Lot have done to make his house ‘judgment-proof’? In either case, their deliverance wasn’t dependent upon themselves to find a way through it, but as they were instructed by God. 

NOWHERE in the NT epistles does the Church find instruction to prepare for the 70th Week of Daniel. The only way people can come to that conclusion is if they take information intended for another audience, and then misapply it to themselves. Such is the case with the confusion over the Olivet Discourse and Revelation 4-19.

Who’s who in the Tribulation? 
We now turn to Daniel’s 70 Weeks Prophecy for further clarification of who this particular time is for. The future 70th week of Daniel then is a seven year, “week of years” and is the summation of the entire 70 Weeks (490 years) prophecy as was given to the Prophet Daniel by the angel Gabriel. Daniel 9:24 states;
“Seventy weeks are determined For your people and for your holy city,
To finish the transgression, 
To make an end of sins, 
To make reconciliation for iniquity,
To bring in everlasting righteousness,
To seal up vision and prophecy,
And to anoint the Most Holy.

If you were to take the whole passage of Daniel 9 in context, it becomes abundantly clear who Daniel was asking forgiveness for and on behalf of…that being national Israel. Here, we see the angel Gabriel comes to assure Daniel that God has a plan for the Jew’s (your people) and for Jerusalem (your holy city). Again, the Church is nowhere to be seen in this, as Daniel (along with all the other OT prophets) had no concept of who or what the mystery of the Church was then, because it had not yet been revealed, and wouldn’t be, until Christ first does in Matthew 16:17-20. Even then, Christ doesn’t go into the details about the specifics of the Church, He will save that task for the Apostle Paul, many years later. And just as we don’t see the Church in the first 69 weeks, neither will we in the 70th week. 

As another point of confirmation, we see in the Revelation of Jesus Christ, Jesus addressing the Church (ecclesia) 19 times in chapters 1-3…yet doesn’t mention the ecclesia anymore from chapters 4-19 while describing the 21 divine Judgments that are poured out upon the earth. Critics will argue that this is an argument from silence, but the silence is deafening. Note this as well, the phrase He who has an ear, let him hear what the Spirit says to the churches accompanies each of the seven letters to the seven churches. Yet, inside the seven year Tribulation, we see this warning given in Revelation 13:9, which states if anyone has an ear, let him hear. If the Church were still in the Tribulation, this would have been the perfect opportunity to mention it. 

At best, critics of the Pre-Tribulation Rapture liken the term ‘saints’ as the Church on the earth during the Tribulation. I’d like to point out, that ‘saints’ is a fairly generic term, which is used before, during, and after Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. So the usage of ‘saints’ as an indicator of who one is, must be understood in light of the context in which it is given. Jesus specifically addresses the Church as ecclesia, and is liberal in the usage of it in the first three chapters of Revelation. If the ecclesia is in the Tribulation, why neglect it for the next 17 chapters? If you were reading a story in a book and a character was regularly mentioned for the first three chapters, and then not mentioned again…wouldn’t that strike you as odd? The burning question it should leave you unsettled with is…what happened to them? 

The Restrainer
  One of the most significant points in understanding why the Church is not inside the confines of the seven year Tribulation, is that Paul exhorts and corrects the Thessalonians in his second epistle that they can’t already be inside that specific time period (as someone had erroneously taught them), because the man of lawlessness had not yet been revealed. The man of lawlessness can’t be revealed, until the Restrainer is removed. The Restrainer can’t be removed, until the apostasia has arrived. See the sequential process in 2 Thess. 2:3-8; 

Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God. 

Do you not remember that when I was still with you I told you these things? And now you know what is restraining, that he may be revealed in his own time. For the mystery of lawlessness is already at work; only He who now restrains will do so until He is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord will consume with the breath of His mouth and destroy with the brightness of His coming. 

1.  And then the lawless one will be revealed
2.  “Falling away”; apostasia occurs first
3.  This occurs in conjunction with the removal of the Restrainer

 The apostasia, must be a singular event. Why is that you ask? Well, apostasy has been present in this world since the 1st century as Paul, Peter, Jude, John, early church fathers, etc. all have had to contend with it in their respective days, even until today. If apostasia simply means the KJV rendering of “falling away”….which “falling away” is it then? Paul dealt with Judaizers. John and Peter dealt with Gnostics. The ECF’s dealt with heresies of all kinds. We have Mormonism, Jehovah Witnesses, Roman Catholicism, and cults of every flavor to contend with these days. The current theory is the ‘general falling away’ across greater Christendom through ecumenism with heretical and non-Christian faiths. So which is it then and why would God give us such an unspecific sign that could be used in every single generation? And why do those who argue against imminence, then use apostasia as a type of imminence in their argumentation?

This author (along with others), believes that the apostasia is the actual departure at the Rapture. This concept of apostasia is tied to the removal of the Restrainer. Consider the identifying characteristics of the Restrainer who is first identified in a gender neutral identity (what is--vs. 6), then in the masculine form (He--vs. 7). 

Were this speaking of Michael the Archangel, or the Antichrist himself, or Satan, they could only be referred to as a ‘he’ or ‘him’, since they are masculine in embodiment. Were the restrainer human government or religion, or some other type of institution, the restrainer would be a thing, and not referred to with a personal pronoun. The only One who this could be referring to is neither male, female, or human in any type of bodily form…yet, is also a living Being, so as to distinguish Him from simply being a ‘thing’…which is God the Holy Spirit. Jesus referred to the Holy Spirit as a ‘He’ numerous times in John 14-16, and thus we should conclude, that the clues Paul leaves here can only reference God the Holy Spirit. 

Furthermore, this Restrainer, must be God the Holy Spirit, since evil is present simultaneously all over the created order, and the Restrainer must be powerful enough to curtail it. We see in verse 9; The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders. It first removes the Satan as a candidate, since Satan wouldn’t hinder himself. Secondly, it removes Michael the Archangel since Michael doesn’t (or doesn’t presently) confront Satan with anything more than a rebuke. (Jude 1:9) 

It would seem that just as it was in Creation (Gen. 1:2), in Noah’s day (Gen. 6:3), and again before and after Pentecost, (Acts 2), there is coming a time when the Holy Spirit’s active role here on the earth will be changed. To clarify something that often gets misconstrued, the Holy Spirit is omnipresent, and so it’s not that He disappears from the earth altogether, but His role changes, just as it had in the past with Creation, during the OT period, at Pentecost, and now during the Church Age. He will be removing (the apostasia) the Body of Christ via the harpazo (catching up) of those He permanently seals and indwells (John 14:16, Romans 8:9, Ephesians 4:30) in order for the man of lawlessness (the Antichrist) to be revealed. 

Imminence 
I’ve recently had someone argue against the doctrine of imminence by stating that since Peter was foretold that he was going to have to die in a certain manner that this rules out imminence since Peter would not expect to be taken up in the Rapture prior to that. (John 21:18-19)

For me, that argument carries very little weight and seems to ignore the general expectation that Paul, John, James, and the others had in regards to keeping that ‘blessed hope’ alive, even in their generation. Marshall Hawkins writes concerning this “seeming” dilemma; 

Time for this gap between Peter’s middle age and his old age is allowed for by the progress of revelation. It was not until the book of James (written just about A.D. 50), and then later in Paul’s writings that the imminence of the rapture is revealed. Twenty years would have elapsed between the prophecy and the writing of James—enough time for Peter to have aged sufficiently. . . . By this time imminence was a viable doctrine for most of the church since they would have no idea whether Peter was alive at any one moment or not. . . . For those accompanying Peter at this time, the rapture was also imminent because Peter may have been seized and martyred at any time, making the rapture possible immediately afterward. Marshall Hawkins, “Rebuttal of the Posttribulational Denial of Imminence” (Unpublished ThM thesis, Capital Bible Seminary, 1979), p. 45. Cited in McAvoy, “Critique,” p. 83 

Let me conclude this discussion on imminence with a sampling of passages linking our faith, with the biblical significance of imminence; 1 Corinthians 1:7, 1 Corinthians 16:22, Philippians 3:20, Philippians 4:5, 1 Thessalonians 1:10, 1 Thessalonians 5:6, 1 Timothy 6:14, Titus 2:13, Hebrews 9:28, James 5:7-9, 1 Peter 1:13, Jude 21, Revelation 3:11; 22:7, 12, 20, Revelation 22:17, 20 [Excerpts from Dr. Tommy Ice’s Imminence and the Rapture] 

Conclusion
As mentioned earlier, a believer’s supernatural deliverance in Scripture, is in direct relationship to the size and scope of God's judgment. When the 70th Week comes, it will encompass the entire world and there will be no place for man to escape to on the earth, thus explaining the reason why the removal of the Church (those born-again believers), has to be off-planet. This reasoning fits exactly with what Jesus states in Revelation 3:10… 

Because you have kept My command to persevere, I also will keep you from the hour of trial which shall come upon the whole world, to test those who dwell on the earth.

The Mid-Trib, Pre-Wrath, and Post-Tribulation views try to promote the notion that ‘prepared’ believers are somehow exempted from the judgments and persecution that will come upon believers during the Tribulation. Yet, we see in Rev. 6:9-11 and 13:7 martyrdom has become global, and that the Antichrist is given permission to overcome the ‘saints’ completely. In fact, the ONLY ones’ who are sealed supernaturally, are those 144,000 Jews from the twelve tribes of Israel, who are listed out by their respective tribes. (Rev. 7:1-8) 

So the question then becomes….what exactly is the believer ‘kept from’ during the Tribulation? It would seem martyrdom is the only sure guarantee…which negates the idea of being ‘kept from’. 

The only view, which ensures and supports the biblical view of imminence is the Pre-Tribulation view. The Tribulation is a highly chronicled time, broken down by days (2,520), months (42 x 2), and years (3 ½ x 2) and marked by 21 divine judgments, with a clear halfway-point (Matt. 24:15) that separates the first half of the 70th week, from the last half. The question then is, how can any view outside the Pre-Trib view be considered imminent, (no man knows the day or hour) when there are so many clear signs and markers inside the confines of the 70th Week, which count down to the day the Lord will return at His Second Coming? 

The only view which correctly defines the apostasia, the Restrainer, and the role each play in accordance to the revelation of the man of lawlessness, AND also fits perfectly with chronological nature of Revelation 1-6 beginning with the Churches, the Rapture of John, the Throne Room scene, and Christ opening of the Seal Judgments, is the Pre-Tribulation view. 

The only view which is in keeping with the biblical purpose of “the why” of the Tribulation, is the Pre-Tribulation view. Jeremiah 30:7-11 and Daniel 9:24-27, very specifically teach that this time is for the Christ rejecting world, and for the nation of Israel. This then correlates perfectly to the obvious absence of the “ecclesia” from Revelation 4 onwards. 

The only view which properly defines divine wrath consistently, and in keeping with the principles laid out throughout the Bible, is the Pre-Tribulation view. Again, trials and persecutions in this life are to be expected. That is NOT the same thing as the wrath that God pours out in His indignation. 

The only view, which takes the biblical understanding of salvation, both eternal and physical, and puts it solely in God’s hands, is that of the Pre-Tribulation view. Our ‘blessed hope’ isn’t dependent upon our own ability to preserve ourselves, but in placing our faith in a God who is faithful to His word, and that He will not destroy the righteous with the wicked. 

Lastly, if the Rapture were in conjunction with the Second Coming, the passage below would make no sense. If the Rapture were at some point inside the Tribulation (which Christ said would be the most horrific time in human history), would makes no sense. The only way this passage makes sense, is if the Rapture happens before the Tribulation begins. Therefore…

“Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father’s house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. John 14:1-3 

About Pete Garcia Last week: The Rapture's in the Air: Part 1