Babylon

Here it comes folks! And remember you asked for it. The love feast has ended. What was hidden can now being revealed.

President Barack Obama on Friday lifted restrictions on U.S. government funding for groups that provide abortion services or counseling abroad, reversing a policy of his Republican predecessor George W. Bush.



















When the ban was in place, no U.S. government funding for family planning services could be given to clinics or groups that offered abortion services or counseling in other countries, even if the funds for those activities came from non-U.S. government sources.

"For the past eight years, have undermined efforts to promote safe and effective voluntary family planning in developing countries," Obama said in a statement.
"It is right for us to rescind this policy and restore critical efforts to protect and empower women and promote global economic development."

How' you figure that abortion will promote global economic developement? I'm scratching my head.

It is ironic that this comes a day after Obama announced plans to close Guantanamo Bay due to the nasty treatment of the murdering terroristic blackhearts that have killed and plotted to kill and acted against American soldiers and our Nation. And now today he wants "our tax dollars" to be used to assist Planned Parenthood and other such abortionists to empower women to kill.


















By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion. On the willows there we hung our lyres, for our captors there required, of us songs, for our tormentors mirth, saying "Sing us one of the songs of Zion!" How can we sing the songs of the Lord while in a foreign land?

If I forget you, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not remember you, if I do not consider Jerusalem my highest joy. Remember, O Lord, what the Edomites did on the day Jerusalem fell. "Tear it down," they cried, "tear it down to its foundations!"

O Daughter of Babylon, doomed to destruction, happy is he who repays you for what you have done to us, he who seizes your infants and dashes them against the rocks.

My Response to: A Real Lesson In America History

I’ve made mentioned before of our town’s local free paper, CityBeat. The tome is written and published by some well-meaning but very liberal-minded folks. I am rather conservative in my views, but try to keep an open mind and it is interesting to see the pretzel logic of the other side. So I pick up the paper regularly and cringe at times while perusing the op-ed pieces.

The latest issue had an article by Kevin Osborne called A Real Lesson In American History that strove to make a point against some extreme conservative organizations effort to place the Ten Commandments in a Tennessee courthouse. The grounds for his objection being the nation was not founded on the principals of God since our founding fathers were derelict in their Christian beliefs.

The author used the article to expose George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin as Deists. Writing about our first President he stated that although George Washington regularly attended church, he refrained from taking communion since his beliefs were in the god of nature instead of Jesus Christ. Benjamin Franklin was described as being raised Presbyterian, but not being much more devoted than Washington. Jefferson was given an equal if not lesser marks when it came to religion.

Now I am a devoted believer in the Lordship of Jesus, the Son of The Father Almighty God, Blessed be His Name. I stand firm that the Bible is The Word of God and is His love letter to the world. I claim no religious affiliation other than Christianity. I am saying this to show that when it comes to what was said in the CityBeat article regarding the beliefs of the founding fathers, I not only agree with the author but I will take it several steps farther as I find American History, that is Real American History, to be fascinating.

Washington, Franklin and Jefferson were geniuses. Their achievements speak for themselves. I don't know much about George Washingtons religious beliefs, but Franklin was definitely an oddity. He was a married man. His wife was named Debbie. (that is a fact!) But Benjamin cavorted about with French courtiers and was given to opening his bedroom windows on warm days and lying in bed naked as a jaybird taking what he called, an air-bath. These days folks are arrested for such behavior.

Jefferson believed that Jesus was a great philosopher. (So do Muslims) Jefferson went so far as to write and publish the Jefferson Bible. In this work Jefferson surgically dissected all the sections of the New Testament containing supernatural aspects as well as perceived misinterpretations he believed had been added by the Four Evangelists.


William Bradford lead the Separatists out of England to the Netherlands and then on the Mayflower to Plymouth Massachusetts and went on to become the governor for years. We commonly refer to this group as Pilgrims. The Pilgrims were considered Separatists by the Church of England, since they wanted to separate from that church. Though hailed historically, Bradford’s own writing speaks for itself.

Throughout our childhood we are taught the first Thanksgiving was an event of brotherhood where the White man and the Red man sat down together for dinner and fellowship. Bradford’s own writing speaks different and perhaps undermines his stature. For the people of Plymouth were giving thanks for the massacre of 700 Peoquat Indians.

"Those that scraped the fire were slaine with the sword; some hewed to peeces, others rune throw with their rapiers, so as they were quickly dispatchte, and very few escapted. It was conceived they thus destroyed about 400 at this time. It was a fearful sight to see them thus frying in the fyer, and the streams of blood quenching the same, and horrible was the stincke and sente there of, but the victory seemed a sweete sacrifice, and they gave the prayers thereof to God, who had wrought so wonderfully for them, thus to inclose their enemise in their hands, and give them so speedy a victory over so proud and insulting an enimie."

The Pequot massacre came after the colonists, angry at the murder of an English trader suspected by the Pequots of kidnapping children, sought revenge, rather than fighting the dangerous Pequot warriors, John Mason and John Underhill led a group of colonists and Native allies to the Indian fort in Mystic, and killed the old men, women, and children who were there. Those who escaped were later hunted down. Bradford is remembered historically for his leadership in the new world. However he was by no means a saint.


Kevin Osborne of the CityBeat article also mentions John Adams quote from the Treaty of Tripoli;

“As the Government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Musselmen; and as the said States never have entered into any war or act of hostility against any Mehomitan nation, it is declared by the parties that no pretext arising from religious opinions shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.”

“Musselmen” is an antiquated term for Muslim people, while “Mehomitan” is another term for Islamic.

Of course we need to set these words in context and not put the entire onus on Mr. Adams.
At the time the United States had broken ties with England. Even before independence was declared, American ships were pirated and their Christian crews enslaved by Muslim pirates operating under the control of the “Dey of Algiers”—an Ottoman Islamist warlord ruling Algeria. When the colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American ships lost Royal Navy protection. A Revolutionary-War era alliance with France offered French protection to US ships, but it expired in 1783. Immediately US ships came under attack and in October 1784 the American trader “Betsey” was taken by Moroccan forces. This was followed with Algerians and Libyans (Tripolitans) capturing two more US ships in 1785.

Lacking the ability to project US naval force in the Mediterranean, America tried appeasement. In 1784, Congress agreed to fund tributes and ransoms in order to rescue US ships and buy the freedom of enslaved US sailors. In 1786 Thomas Jefferson, then US ambassador to France, and John Adams, then US Ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Dey’s ambassador to Britain, in an attempt to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote of funding. Hence the reason for the wording of the treaty.

In a splitting hairs sense, this treaty does state that the United States is not founded on Christianity. However The Declaration of Independence does state that "...we are to assume the powers granted us by nature and nature's God." And goes on to state we "...are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights." I must admit that is right in line with the reasoning of the founding fathers.

I can agree with Mr. Osborne’s evaluation of the character of the aforementioned men. (Although he never brought up Bradford) His argument that because the faith of our fathers was questionable, therefore the United States was not founded on Christian principals, and hence the Ten Commandments should not be displayed in buildings paid for by the public just does not stand up.

The Commandments, The Noahide Laws, The Magna Carta and other historic documents should not be diminished because by nature they are ascribed to one religious group or another. Although the Commandments mention God, which apparently offends and causes atheists to blush, we all live in the same world and need to be accepting of each other. And isn’t that a prime tenet of Liberalism?


Let me point out, the Ten Commandments do not necessarily belong to one religious group.



I have no problem with the Ten Commandments being in a courtroom and I am not sure what the religious beliefs of Washington, Jefferson & Franklin’s have to do with this matter.

Link to the Citybeat article:
http://www.citybeat.com/cincinnati/article-16956-a-crash-course-in-(real)-us-history.html

Jacob Wrestles an Angel

I last discussed some gleanings from Torah studies regarding Jacob’s plan to meet Esau.

This two-fold plan included splitting his tribe in two and preparation to send members forward with his herds and flocks “drove by drove” to impress his brother with his wealth and position. In the event the first group was massacred the other members would survive.

In Chapter 32 we read that Jacob finally set forth his remaining family members. These were the ones that were dearest to him. Jacob helped them to cross the river.

That night he met a man. He wrestled with this man throughout the night until the break of day.

These few verses intrigue me. So I had to do a study on the subject. I came up with some differing comments and viewpoints on the subject. So I am going to let the reader ponder each and leave the decision up to you.

My personal viewpoint is that Jacob was scared to death  his brother would kill him and his family. Perhap scared is not an intense enough word. He was terrified and worried to the point of obsession. I believe he first sent his family, not as a test, but because if they were killed he wanted to know the outcome and claim responsibility with his own life.

God had made it clear to Jacob to go back to his birth home and meet his brother. When God tells you what to do, you must do it, for God will not cause you to do something that would cause you or your family harm. And although I am sure Jacob knew this, his own human thoughts, feelings of guilt and remorse got in the way. After all he had twice deceived his brother and had gained Esau's birthright and Isaacs blessing. And though God had intervened in these matters, Jacob still felt uncomfortable with the situation.

Adding to this he had just left his father-in-law, Laban, under similar circumstances. Laban attempted to cheat Jacob after promising rewards to him and would have taken back all of Jacob’s possessions had Jacob not fled in the night.

I have read several translations including those literal translations in Hebrew and all say that Jacob wrestled with a man throughout the night. Going back to the beginning of verse 32 we read;

21So the present passed on before him, while he himself spent that night in the camp. 22Now he arose that same night and took his two wives and his two maids and his eleven children, and crossed the ford of the Jabbok. 23He took them and sent them across the stream. And he sent across whatever he had


24Then Jacob was left alone, and a man wrestled with him until daybreak. 25When he saw that he had not prevailed against him, he touched the socket of his thigh; so the socket of Jacob's thigh was dislocated while he wrestled with him. 26Then he said, "Let me go, for the dawn is breaking."

But he said, ")I will not let you go unless you bless me." 27So he said to him, "What is your name?" And he said, "Jacob." 28He said, "Your name shall no longer be Jacob, but Israel; for you have striven with God and with men and have prevailed." 29Then Jacob asked him and said, "Please tell me your name." But he said, "Why is it that you ask my name?" And he blessed him there. 30So Jacob named the place Peniel, for he said, "I have seen God face to face, yet my life has been preserved." 31Now the sun rose upon him just as he crossed over Penuel, and he was limping on his thigh. 32Therefore, to this day the sons of Israel do not eat the sinew of the hip which is on the socket of the thigh, because he touched the socket of Jacob's thigh in the sinew of the hip.

At the beginning of the verse, Jacob is left alone. However he still has the task of taking his immediate family, two wives, two maids and eleven children and sending them on the way to the land of his father Issac where his brother Esau lived. Although this was his plan it had to be very devastating to imagine you were sending off your very family to an uncertain future. And Jacob thought the worst.

For the great Rabbis that originally gave us their interpretations of scripture, crossing a body of water was a sign of a life event that would bring about change. Jacob assists his family over the fjord of the Jabbok. And though it is unsaid, he too must have crossed this water-way.

In Hebraic studies of ancient civilizations there was a belief that rivers were inhabited by river demons. Some interrupt that Jacob believed he was being attacked by a river demon upon his return to the camp and he thought he was wrestling a demon all night until by light of dawn he realizes it is not a demon but an Angel of God. At this point he asks for God’s Blessing. The Angel asks his name. Jacob is given a new name, Israel. And the word Israel contains part of God’s own name EL.

Jacob then asks the Angel his name. The Angel offers a rhetorical reply, “Why do you ask my name?” I interpret as the Angel of God saying “Do you not know you are in the presence of The Angel of The Lord God? You need not ask who I AM. You need to acknowledge and trust."

The Angel did not prevail against Jacob.

 Think about that.

Despite how he is portrayed in the earlier chapters as the weaker younger brother, Jacob hardships must have transformed him into a man of great strength.

The Angel had to use supernatural power to stop the fight by dislocating Jacob’s hip.Rabbinical interpretations say this was an outward sign of the change in Jacob resulting from God’s blessing and go so far as to say that Jacob limped for the remainder of his lifetime.

It is difficult for me to say, reader this is how it is, that’s my interpretation. The Bible is open to interpretation.  This is the way it was meant to be and why we have so many different Hebrew and Christian groups.

Bottom line on this study is;
Listen to God by whatever means works for you. Be it Bible/Torah study, prayer and worship or worshipping with others. Change happens. As long as you feel lead by God embrace the change and do not fear. You are a child of The King. Remember the words of John when he said, “There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves punishment, and the one who fears is not perfected in love.”

Joan D'Arc

Over the holidays I read a book called Personal Recollections of Joan of Arc. This was a fictional account of the life of Joan D’Arc written by Mark Twain under the pseudonym of Sieur Louis De Conte and said to be translated by Jean François Alden.

Essentially what we have is an author, Samuel Clements, who uses the pen name of Mark Twain to write a story adopting another pen name and a third pseudonym for the translator. By the way the name Sieur Louis De Conte is derived from the initials of Samuel Langhorne Clement or SLC.

Clement dedicates the book to his wife. He has written it after the death of his beloved daughter. It is said that he used his daughter as a basis of the character of Joan.

The details of the life of Joan of Arc from a biography which is unique among the world’s biographies in one respect: It is the only story of a human life which comes to us under oath, the only one which comes to us from the witness-stand. The official records of the Great Trial of 1431, and the of the Process of Rehabilitation of a quarter of a century later, are still preserved in the National Archives of France, and they furnish with remarkable fullness the facts of her life. The history of no other life of that remote time is known with either the certainty or the comprehensiveness that attaches to hers.

In my Christian walk I have questioned the Catholic Church’s position on appointing Saints. My wife has explained to me these are merely people that the Church feels have lived extraordinary lives and/or done extraordinary things. Even at that I still find it difficult to understand why the Church venerates some to the position of Saint. Understanding Joan of Arc has taken an understanding of this one step further for me.

Joan was a shy peasant girl of simple faith. She had friends but kept to herself. In doing so she began to be visited at age 13 by Angels of God.

Let me pause here. A few years ago, we in the Christian community and the not-so Christian community had this Angel fad going on. There were all sorts of gurus and no-it-alls writing books, visiting Churches, holding seminars and appearing on Oprah to let you know how you could find out about the care and feeding of your own personal Angel. For a fee they would even communicate with your Angel for you or perhaps draw your Angels portrait.

I say phooey on those folks. Joan's story and life have nothing to do with this nonsense.

The Bible clearly says that Angels are messengers of God. We also learn from the Bible the proof that a prophet speaks the Word of God is when the prophecy is fulfilled.

I have no doubt in my mind, not from reading this fictional account of Joan of Arc, but from reading the transcripts of her trials and knowing that historically the things she states she was told by her “visions” did indeed come true.


How is it that a poor uneducated peasant girl could wind up confronting the dethroned King of France and convince him to allow her to lead his army to drive the English invaders out of France? Although she was unskilled in battle and probably had never ridden a horse, miraculously she became the force that convinced the French to take up arms and revolt against their invaders. Incredibly by listening to God’s voice she was able to lead her army into battle and win while the learned men of war were still making their battle plans.

Joan D'Arc became the scourge of the English.

During her trial this unlearned country girl was given words for her defense and boldly said them to her accusers.

In her own words, her capture came about when she did not listen to God when He told her to stay at a town called St. Denis. Instead when her army moved out she went on to do battle and was captured at the town of Clariox.

During her imprisonment she attempt to escape twice and severely injured herself when she jumped from a tower. In her trial transcript before there is a verdict she tells her accusers that God said she would be a martyr.

I know, that I know, that God speaks to each of us. Most often it is through actions in our daily lives. At times it is in answer to prayer. And it is also a small voice or a thought that comes at us. There are those that God speaks to and uses in a dramatic way. He gives them a vision and they drop everything and follow it. We’ve seen this with Billy Graham and Mother Teresa and others.

In Twain’s book, the narrator states that Joan had a “seeing eye”, meaning that she could predict and she could view the heart of a man. I disagree. I believe she had a listening heart and availed herself to be used of God. I suppose that would be the definition of a Saint.

http://smu.edu/ijas/1431trial.html
The Trial Transcript

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/basis/conte-joanofarc.html
E-Book of Twain's Personal Recollection of Joan of Arc

Happy New Year

Baby Trevan, his Momma and I wish everyone a Happy 2009