Archive for the ‘Founding Fathers’ Category

God Cannot Live in the Presence of Sin

June 11, 2020

Excerpted from Revelation 18 and the Fate of America

By James F. Gauss

Rev 18

God, the God of the Bible, cannot and will not co-habit with sin. We cannot come before God without repentance and a contrite heart. No one can call upon God and plead for His mercy without first repenting of his or her wrong-doing. As America’s sins have piled high with a growing repudiation of her sinfulness, God, as He did with His chosen people (the Jewish nation) will have no choice but to turn her over to the consequences of her sins.

Despite the millions of practicing Jews and Christians in America, the United States as a whole has become a nation of idol worshippers who have turned away from the God of the Founding Fathers. Just like the rapid collapse of Israel and Judah, present and future generations will be astonished at the rapid decline of so great a nation that had so much potential under God’s guidance.   However, like the Jews, America “forsook the Lord their God” and “embraced other gods, and worshipped them and served them” (see 1 Kings 9:8-9).

“Oh, that you had heeded My commandments!” Isaiah warned the Jews on behalf of God. “Then your peace would have been like a river, and your righteousness like the waves of the sea” (Isaiah 48:18).   Many of America’s leaders, both secular and religious, have been boastful and egotistical for some time, refusing to consult God for the right path. They have not only fully rejected God’s ways but they have embraced the sinfulness of the world around them. And, in many cases they have created that very sinfulness with wicked hearts.

Remember democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide.

John Adams, letter to John Taylor, April 15, 1814

The leaders and people of America would do well to heed the warnings of the prophet Isaiah to the Jews over 2,700 years ago.

Woe to those who decree unrighteous decrees, who write misfortune, which they have prescribed to rob the needy of justice, and to take what is right from the poor of My people, that widows may be their prey, and that they may rob the fatherless. What will you do in the day of punishment, and in the desolation which will come from afar? To whom will you flee for help? And where will you leave your glory?” (Isaiah 10:1-3)

Isaiah warned that because Israel’s sins had caused a great separation between them and God and that they were guilty of shedding innocent blood, that God would be forced to turn His face away from them and not hear their pleas (Isaiah 59:1-3, 6-9). The Jews were so full of sin, Isaiah said, that they no longer knew the way of truth and righteousness. Therefore true peace and justice escaped them. Although they sought the light of understanding to guide them, they were surrounded by nothing but darkness.

Cherish, therefore, the spirit of our people, and keep alive their attention. Do not be too severe upon their errors, but reclaim them by enlightening them. If once they become inattentive to the public affairs, you and I, and Congress, and Assemblies, Judges, and Governors, shall all become wolves.

Thomas Jefferson

Letter to Edward Carrington, January 16, 1787

From a secular viewpoint, James Madison, the “Father of the Constitution” and fourth president of the United States, understood that, “The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny” (Federalist No. 48, February 1, 1788).   Madison recognized that if the United States ever drifted away from the separation of powers wisely set up in the U.S. Constitution by the Founding Fathers, and became one monolithic governing body without any “checks and balances”, America would descend into tyranny. Unfortunately, that is where America finds itself under past and current political leadership.

Once again, Isaiah lamented what he saw was in Israel’s future if they did not repent. If they did not turn from their wicked ways and seek God’s salvation, then God would turn away from them (Isaiah 64:5-7). “But we are all like an unclean thing,” Isaiah proclaimed, “and all our righteousnesses are like filthy rags; we all fade as a leaf, and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away” (verse 6). Because no one called on God in repentance and appealed to Him for help, Isaiah was constrained to ask God, “Will You restrain Yourself because of these things, O Lord? Will You hold Your peace, and afflict us very severely?” (Isaiah 64:12).

As for My people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O My people! Those who lead you cause you to err, and destroy the way of your paths.

Isaiah 3:12

 

March 17 Release! Student Edition

March 17, 2020

studentedition

Size: 7 x 10; 550 pp.; Hard cover; $54.95 (full color)

Table of Contents

SPECIAL INTRODUCTORY OFFER: Order by May 31, 2020 and pay only $39.95 (SAVE $15 or 27%).  Order here: Lakeside Press

“In today’s ever charged torrent of religious and political unrest, it is becoming increasingly vital for the people of the world to understand the truth of both the religious and the geopolitical nature of Islam. The heart, purpose and vision of the Islamic system governed by a complete way of life known as Shari’ah is dangerously misunderstood and highly underestimated by the West. It has been that way for 1400 years, numbing the minds of people like a shot of Novocain before treating an abscessed tooth. This compendium, ‘Understanding Islam in the Light of Christianity’ by Dr. James Gauss, is a vital and valuable resource that will be called upon again and again. If you are a pastor, spiritual leader, governmental leader, business leader or simply a curious person with a sincere desire to understand the heart of both Islam and Christianity, get this book.”

Rev. Dale Witherington
Chief Steward, Restore Minnesota
State Director, Minnesota Prayer Caucus Network

A direct and thorough comparison of the Messenger, Message and Mission of the Qur’an and the Bible.  Over 550 pages of essential information for every college prep and college student.

Your book is the finest and most thorough analysis I have ever seen of the teachings of the Quran in comparison to the Bible. It is a treasure trove of biblical truth, theological insight, and practical application.
My granddaughter is using it in her Global Studies class on Islam this very semester. I think a college-level text book version would be very helpful.
Dr. Ed Hindson
Founding Dean | Distinguished Professor of Religion
John W. Rawlings School of Divinity
Liberty University

With Dr. Hindson’s encouragement, that college-level textbook is now complete.

  •  Almost 350 chapter review questions.
  •  Section review charts and comparisons.
  •  Dozens of  maps, charts and tables of information.
  •  Full color presentation.
  •  “Dig Deeper” challenges for each chapter.
  •  Ten Addendums of additional information.
  •  Hundreds of references and additional resources.

 

Student Edition Contents

March 17, 2020

studentedition

Contents
Acknowledgements 13
Preface by Pastor Reza Safa. 15
Introduction. 17

THE BEGINNING 25
1. Understanding the Origin of Islam. 27
The World Islamic Population. 28
Countries with high Muslim Populations. 29
Regional Distribution of Muslims (map). 31
The Islamic Birth Rate. 32
Abortions Further Exasperate the Problem. 33
The Origin of Islam. 34
Muhammad’s First Revelation. 35
Problems with Muhammad’s Revelation. 36
The Source of God’s Word. 37
Satanic Verses—The Islamic Conundrum. 39
Muhammad’s Night Journey to the Seven Heavens. 41
The Hijra or Flight to Medina. 43
Dig Deeper. 44
Chapter Review. 44
References. 45
2. The Bible vs. the Qur’an. 49
Biblical Contrasts and Islamic Abrogation. 50
Abrogation—Strictly an Islamic Concept. 50
Muhammad’s Mecca vs. Medina Revelations. 52
Chronological Order of Surahs (insert). 52
Muhammad Revealed Only the Truth—But Jesus is the Truth. 53
The Qur’an in Light of the Bible. 55
Does an Original Copy of the Qur’an or Bible Exist? 55
Dig Deeper. 57
Muslims are Commanded in the Qur’an to Read the Bible. 57
Allah Revealed the Bible is Corrupt. 62
There is No Common Ground with the Bible and the Qur’an. 64
One God vs. The Triune God. 65
Biblical Testimonies to the Trinity. 66
The Triune God of Christians Explained. 68
Christians are not Polytheists. 69
The Coming of Jesus Christ Foretold. 70
The Death and Crucifixion of Christ. 71
Islam’s Version of Christ’s Crucifixion. 73
Witnesses to Christ’s Crucifixion and Resurrection. 75
Josephus, the Jewish Historian. 82
Muhammad’s Hatred for the Cross of Christ. 83
Dig Deeper. 85
Chapter Review. 85
References. 86
Addendum: Comparison of the Bible & Qur’an. 87
3. America’s First Introduction to Islam. 91
Map of the Ottoman Empire. 92
Map of the Barbary States. 93
Morocco’s Recognition of the United States. 93
The Real Reason Jefferson Owned a Qur’an. 93
The Islamic scriptural basis for jihad. 96
Jefferson’s Religious Freedom Statute. 96
John Quincy Adams’ Views on Islam. 98
Jefferson’s First War with the Barbary Pirates (1801-1805). 99
The frigate. 101
Article 11 of the 1796 peace treaty of Tripoli. 102
The Second Barbary War (June 17-19, 1815). 105
Dig Deeper. 106
Chapter Review. 106
References. 107
4. Israel and the Middle East. 111
Will There Ever be Peace in the Middle East? 111
Abram (Abraham) Seeks an Heir. 111
The Destiny of Ishmael and His Descendants. 112
God’s Plan and Covenant. 112
The Original Demarcation of the Land of Canaan. 113
Ishmael was not in God’s Plan for His People. 113
Muslims are not Descendants of Abraham. 114
God did not Recognize Ishmael as Abraham’s Son. 115
Allah says that Palestine is for the Jews. 117
Historical and Archeological Evidence that Jerusalem Belongs to the Jews. 119
The Origin of Palestine and the Palestinians. 123
Origins of the Name “Palestine.” 124
The Balfour Declaration of 1917. 125
Balfour Declaration. 126
The Two State Solution. 127
The Oslo Accord. 129
Hamas Covenant to Destroy Israel. 130
The UN Condemns Israel and Exonerates Hamas and Palestinians. 133
Dig Deeper. 135
Chapter Review. 136
References. 137
5. Deceptions of Islamic, Christian & Political Leaders. 141
Deceptions Among America’s Leaders. 141
True Islam. 148
Deception #1: Allah and Jehovah God are One. 149
Billy Graham Evangelistic Association vs. the Roman Catholic View. 150
Muslims Claim Allah is Jehovah God. 152
Did Allah Reveal Himself to Moses? 153
Biblical Reasons Allah is not the God of the Bible. 155
Deception #2: Islam is an Abrahamic Faith as is Judaism and Christianity. 159
Deception #3: Jews, Christians and Muslims Pray to the Same God. 160
The Roman Catholic Position. 161
What Does Jesus Say? 162
The Holy Spirit, Whom Muslims Deny, Directs the Prayers of Christ Followers. 164
Deception #4: Islam is a Religion of Peace. 165
The “Arab Spring” Reverberation. 169
Homegrown Terrorism. 173
Deception #5: Islam is a Religion of Tolerance. 177
“No Compulsion in Religion.” 177
Surrendering to Islam is not an Option. 178
Dig Deeper. 179
Deception #6: Islamic Terrorism & Terrorists Do Not Represent True Islam. 181
An Islamic Apologist. 182
Entrenchment of the Muslim Brotherhood. 183
In Defense of the Muslim Brotherhood. 185
Muslim Brotherhood Motto. 186
Deception #7: True Islam has been Hijacked and can be Reformed. 188
Deception #8: There are Moderate Muslims. 190
The Myth of the “Moderate Muslim.” 190
Questions Abound. 192
Can True Muslims Adapt to the West? 194
The Question Remains. 197
Dig Deeper. 198
Chapter Review. 198
References. 199

THE MESSENGER 205
6. Muhammad vs. Prophets of the Bible. 207
The Nature of a Prophet. 207
What and Who is a Prophet? 208
True Prophets Know the Voice of God. 210
Moses, an Ordinary Man. 210
Samuel, the Boy. 212
Isaiah, the Messianic Prophet. 212
Jeremiah, the Weeping Prophet. 213
Ezekiel, Prophet of the Captivity. 213
John the Baptist. 214
Jesus, the Christ. 214
The Changeable Allah vs. Unchangeable God. 215
The Purpose of Prophecy. 215
The God Who Cannot Lie or Change His Mind. 216
Old Testament Prophesies About Jesus. 218
Seed of David. 218
Son of God. 218
The Mediator Between Man and God. 219
The Anointed One—The Messiah. 219
Born of a Virgin. 220
Born in Bethlehem. 221
A Man without Sin. 221
Betrayed by a Friend. 222
Crucified and Pierced for Our sake. 222
Jesus was Resurrected and Did Not Die. 222
Prophet of Justice and Good News. 223
Lord and Savior. 224
Source of the Holy Spirit. 225
Does the Bible Prophesy about Muhammad’s Coming? 226
Jesus’ Wisdom vs. Muhammad’s. 226
An Examination of Deuteronomy 18:15 and 18. 228
An Examination of John 14:16. 233
A Brief Re-cap of Jesus vs. Muhammad. 234
God’s Unchangeable Word. 235
True Prophets Know Their History. 237
The Qur’an Acknowledges God’s Covenant with the Jews. 238
How the Qur’an Contradicts the Bible. 238
Creation Took 8 Days. 238
One of Noah’s Sons Drowned. 239
Joseph’s Dream Interpretation: The Baker was Crucified. 239
Moses was Adopted by Pharaoh’s Wife. 240
Pharaoh Saved from Drowning by Allah. 240
Gideon’s Army Led by King Saul Against Goliath. 240
The Wolf and the Wisdom of Solomon. 240
Zacharias’s Penalty for Unbelief was Only Three Days. 241
Moses’ Sister Gave Birth to Jesus. 242
Dig Deeper. 243
Was Muhammad the Last Prophet? 243
The 25 Prophets of Islam. 244
Signs of a False Prophet. 244
Is Islam a Complete Fabrication? 251
Dig Deeper. 253
Chapter Review. 253
References. 254
7. Prince of Peace vs. Warrior Prophet. 257
What the Qur’an Says About Peace. 257
How Muhammad and the Qur’an View Peace. 257
God of Peace and the Prince of Peace. 259
The God of Peace. 261
The Sword of Christ. 262
Christ’s Guarantee of Peace. 264
Is Allah a Peacemaker? 265
The Religion of Peace? 266
The Cause of Ahlam Tamimi. 268
Peace—A Gift from God. 270
The Gospel of Peace. 272
False Prophets of Peace. 275
Peace Denied to the Wicked. 276
Parting Words. 277
Dig Deeper. 278
Chapter Review. 279
References. 280
Addendum 1: Islamic Attacks Worldwide Since September 11, 2001. 281
Addendum 2: List of Islamic Attacks on U.S. Embassies. 282
Addendum 3: Names for God in the Bible. 283
Addendum 4: Names for Jesus Christ in the Bible. 284
8. The Duplicity of Faith. 289
The Five Pillars of Islam. 293
A Christian’s Path to Salvation. 296
The Righteous Man. 297
Jesus the Light vs. Muhammad of Darkness. 297
God’s People are Called to Righteousness. 300
Jesus is the Example of Righteousness. 301
But None are Righteous. 304
Righteousness is by Faith. 304
How Evil Works. 306
Tactics/Strategies of the Evil One. 306
The Beatitudes. 309
Islam does not Teach the Ten Commandments. 311
At Enmity with Women. 315
Women as Chattel. 315
Wife Beating & Oppression of Women is Permissible by Allah. 317
Jesus’ and the Christian View of Women. 319
Christian Headship and Servant Leadership. 321
Temporary Marriage for Sexual Gratification. 322
Rape is Permissible in Islam. 322
Juvenile Sex and Sex Trafficking. 325
Women are Deficient and Hellbound. 327
Female Genital Mutilation. 329
U.S. Women and Girls Potentially at Risk for FGM/C 332
Multiple Wives. 333
Muhammad’s Multiple Wives. 335
Divorce. 337
Divorce Rate among Christians. 337
What the Old Testament says About Divorce. 338
What Jesus Taught About Divorce. 338
Divorce among Muslims. 339
Reasons for Muslim Divorce. 340
Honor Killings. 342
Types of Honor Violence. 343
Is Honor Violence a Threat to the West? 344
Adultery (Biblical vs. Qur’anic Mandates). 347
Murder. 350
Fatwa, Islam’s Murder for Hire. 353
Mass Murder by the Numbers. 353
Law of Retaliation (Qisas). 354
Unspeakable Acts. 357
Beheadings. 357
Stonings. 358
Burnings. 358
Taqiyya: Lying & Deceit. 359
Allah is the Best Deceiver. 359
Masters of Deceit and Lying. 362
Dig Deeper. 367
Chapter Review. 367
References. 368
Addendum: The Messenger Comparison (Chapters 6-8). 374

THE MESSAGE 379
9. God of Love vs. Allah. 381
What Allah Does Not Love. 382
One Lost Sheep. 383
God is Love. 386
God Loves You! 386
King David Knew God’s Love. 388
Muhammad did not know Allah’s Love. 389
God’s Love Covenant. 390
God’s Love is Irreversible. 390
The Sealed Covenant. 392
God’s Revolutionary Love. 395
God’s Love is Everlasting. 398
Those Who Hate Christians and Jews, Hate God. 399
Dig Deeper. 401
Chapter Review. 401
References. 402
10. A Personal vs. an Indifferent God. 405
God said: “This is My Son.” 407
The Challenge for Muslims. 407
A Common Man. 410
What God Said About Jesus. 410
In Jesus’ Own Words. 411
They Called Him Son of God. 415
Paul Preached about Jesus as the Son of God. 417
The Doubters and Scoffers. 419
The Purpose of God Revealing Himself in the Flesh. 420
The Final Summation. 422
Children of the Living God. 423
Allah has no Children. 425
God Created Mankind in His Image. 425
Allah is too High and Mighty to have Children. 427
Sonship Baffled Muhammad. 428
Children are NOT a Blessing to Allah. 431
Allah’s Followers Have No Purpose. 433
The God Who Is There. 434
Allah will not Hear Unless you Speak Arabic. 434
Jesus on Repetitive Prayer. 437
Changing from the Inside Out. 438
God Wants to Know You Personally. 438
Did Christ Abandon His Followers? 442
Dig Deeper. 444
Chapter Review. 444
References. 445
11. Preaching a Different Gospel. 449
The Nature of Sin is Obscured. 451
What the Bible says About Sin. 451
What Islam Teaches. 456
Allah Loves Sin—Not the Sinner. 458
Through Adam, Sin and Death Entered the World. 460
Jesus’ Sin Offering is Null & Void. 461
Christ Followers are Dead to Sin. 461
For the Muslim there is No Sin Offering. 463
There is no Holy Spirit. 465
Role of the Holy Spirit (partial listing). 466
Islam’s View of the Holy Spirit. 468
Blaspheming the Holy Spirit. 469 Light of the Gospel vs. Darkness of the Qur’an. 469 Allah has no Compassion. 472
No Forgiveness and Reconciliation in Islam. 474
Where the Spirit of the Lord Jesus Christ is, there is Freedom from Sin. 475
Sins Cannot be Remitted or Forgiven in Islam. 476
Muslims must Abstain from Sin. 477
Allah is not a Forgiver and a Redeemer of Souls. 478
There is No Peace after Death in Islam. 481
“The Trial of the Grave.” 481
The Rich Man and Lazarus. 482
Allah is a Jew Hater. 483
The Rise of Anti-Semitism. 484
God’s Grace Does Not Exist for the Muslim. 485
Muhammad Reversed of God’s Plan of Salvation. 489 Salvation Comes from Confession of Faith, Not by Works. 489
Oppression Replaces Freedom of Choice in Islam. 493
Heaven is a Perverted Place for Muslims. 495
In Islam, Everyone Goes to Hell First. 495
Houris (Virgins) and Rivers of Wine in Paradise. 495
Heaven for the Jihadist. 496
The Reward of Righteousness. 498
Dig Deeper. 499
Chapter Review. 499
References. 500
Addendum: 70/72 Major Sins of Islam. 502
The Message Comparison (Chapters 9-11). 505

THE MISSION 509
12. A Sacrificial Life vs. Islamic Martyrdom. 511
The Islamic Mindset. 512
The Islamic Republic. 514
A Sacrificial Life. 515
The Sacrificial Life of Jesus. 516
The Only Mediator Between God and Man. 517
Persecution and Martyrdom. 518
The World of the Jihadist. 520
The Two Jihads. 520
164 Jihad Verses in the Qur’an. 520
Military Jihad is what Motivates Muslims. 522
The Alternate Christian Response. 524
First, Love the Brethren. 524
Second, Love the Unbeliever. 525
Third, Love Your Enemy. 527
Prophet of Change. 529
A Call to Charity and Servanthood. 532
Dig Deeper. 534
Chapter Review. 535
References. 535
Addendum: The Koran’s 164 Jihad Verses. 537
13. Proselytizing. 541
Proselytize Through Love & Service. 541
No Compulsion in Religion. 541
Who are the Sheep and Goats? 544
The “Great Commission.” 545
Don’t Read that Book. 549
Muhammad’s Method. 550
Dig Deeper. 554
Chapter Review. 554
References. 555
14. Treatment of Non-believers. 557
Christian Persecution. 558
The Hatred of the Jews and Unbelievers. 560
The Rise of 21st Century Anti-Semitism. 563
What the Qur’an and Islamic Law Teach. 564
Slavery (American vs. Islamic History). 565
A Brief History of Slavery in the West and Among Muslims. 565
Muslim Slavery in the 21st Century. 568
Sexual Slavery is Still Permitted in Islam. 570
Praising the Killer of an Infidel. 572
Islamic Rules of Retaliation and Reward. 572
Palestinian Terrorist Rewards. 573
Israel and the United States Take Action. 573
No One Leaves Islam. 574
Apostasy as a Criminal Offense. 575
Does Allah Play a Role in Apostasy? 576
The Good Samaritan. 578
There is Hope. 581
The 10/40 Window. 581
Conversions in Iran. 582
Dig Deeper. 584
Chapter Review. 584
References. 585
The Mission Comparison (Chapters 12-14). 590
Epilogue. 593
Addendum A: Islamic (Arabic) Words & Terms Defined. 594
Addendum B: Resources on Islam. 596
Addendum C: A Sinner’s Path to Salvation. 601
Index. 603
More Books by the Author.
Book Order Information.
About the Author.

Islamic Infiltration of the U.S. Government, Part I

November 25, 2019

What America’s Founders knew about Islam.  The earliest record of Islam’s interface with America was when the Muslim Barbary Coast pirates tried to extort money from the fledgling United States of America in 1786 in exchange for safe passage of America’s merchant ships through the straits of Gibraltar at the neck of the Mediterranean Sea. The U.S. government sent Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and Benjamin Franklin abroad to negotiate with the Muslim ambassador in Tripoli, Libya. After considerable negotiations, the American representatives could see no other way out of the predicament other than agree to pay an exorbitant ransom, which amounted to ten percent of America’s GDP (Gross Domestic Product) at the time.

On March 28, 1786, in a letter to Secretary of State, John Jay, who was in London at the time, Jefferson and Adams shared the following observations.

We took the liberty to make some inquiries concerning the Grounds of their pretentions to make war upon Nations who had done them no Injury, and observed that we consider all mankind as our friends who had done us no wrong, nor had given us any provocation. 

The Ambassador answered us that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman who should be slain in battle was sure to go to Paradise.

Jefferson, Adams and Franklin knew the United States did not have the money that the Muslim ambassador demanded. Their only hope was to get the U.S. Congress to agree to allow them to make a loan agreement with Holland.

John Adams, in his report to John Jay, gave his impression of Islam. He referred to Muhammad as a “military fanatic” who “denies that laws were made for him; he arrogates everything to himself by force of arms.”

In reviewing his experience, Franklin wrote: “Nor can the Plundering of Infidels be in that sacred Book (the Qur’an) forbidden, since it is well known from it, that God has given the World, and all that it contains, to his faithful Mussulmen, who are to enjoy it of Right as fast as they conquer it.”

When Jefferson became president in March, 1801, the Barbary Coast pirates were extorting 25 percent of America’s GDP and were still attacking America’s merchant ships. Jefferson wasted no time and agreed to send the full might of America’s naval fleet to vanquish the Muslim pirates.

The Universal Goal of Islam. The goal of Islam has never changed since its inception over 1400 years ago: To conquer and subjugate the infidels wherever they may be found by any means possible and necessary. For the West and those in the United States to believe otherwise is pure folly and a potentially deadly error. As a zebra cannot change its stripes, neither can Islam be reformed into some passive, peacenik ideology.

In America, Muslims represent less than 2% of the total population. However, they have accomplished far more than in any other Western country in a very short time. Thanks to America’s diversity complex; desire to welcome all people; overall openness and kindness; Judeo-Christian heritage; ignorant and easily deceived church leaders and politicians; generous welfare laws that include non-citizens (including Social Security benefits); socialist-leaning government; adoption of the Islamist “Islamophobia” rhetoric and agenda and a host of other welcoming loopholes, Islamists are right at home in the country they seek to dominate.

Islamists—radical, fundamentalist Muslims—have successfully infiltrated America’s government (county, state and federal), military, law enforcement, educational systems (from elementary through university), legal systems, churches and every aspect of daily American life. Not fully, but effectively enough that it is changing the minds of Americans to accept the Muslim mindset more and more each day. The Muslims refer to it as the Civilization Jihad—the undermining of the very foundations of America from within.

The process of settlement is a “Civilization-Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan [Muslim brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions. Without this level of understanding, we are not up to this challenge and have not prepared ourselves for Jihad yet. It is a Muslim’s destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes, and there is no escape from that destiny except for those who chose to slack. But, would the slackers and the Mujahedeen [Islamic guerilla fighters] be equal (An Explanatory Memorandum, On the Strategic Goal for the Group in North America, 5/22/1991).

This document, An Explanatory Memorandum, discovered by the FBI in a raid on a Muslim Brotherhood home in Annandale, Virginia in August, 2004, details the agenda of the Muslim Brotherhood and its sympathizers in the United States. Despite the overt candor of the Memo, the media, most politicians and law enforcement have not taken it seriously. To the contrary, the media, politicians, law enforcement and America’s churches have become all too willing dupes of the Muslim Brotherhood. The MB is well on its way to accomplishing exactly what the Memo proclaims: destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands.

“At what point then is the approach of danger to be expected? I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us. It cannot come from abroad. If destruction be our lot, we must ourselves be its author and finisher. As a nation of freemen, we must live through all time, or die by suicide.”

Abraham Lincoln, January 27, 1838

(See Revelation 18 and the Fate of America.)

Islam and the U.S. Constitution are not compatible. The First Amendment of the United States of America Constitution reads: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 

America was the first nation in the history of the world to have such an extensive and all-inclusive “Bill of Rights.” Islam neither acknowledges nor believes in any of the freedoms presented in this treasured law of America.

In Islamic countries, it is the government that dictates the religion for its citizens. There is no freedom of choice for and individual to decide whether or not to worship Islam’s god. All must worship Allah or face severe persecution and consequences. Islamic governments, the mullahs and imams respect no religion other than Islam. In many Muslim countries, if one is allowed to remain a Jew or Christian, you must pay a “poll tax” that allows you to be a second class citizen. However, you cannot express your faith openly or share it with others. You are a prisoner of the confines of Islam. If your father is a Muslim, the moment you are born, you are a Muslim also. If you decide to leave Islam later in life, you risk abandonment by your family, at least, or death.

(1) Islam is the religion of the State.

(2) No religion other than Islam can be propagated in the country.

(3) No law can be enacted that is not compliant with the general principles and objectives of Shari’ah.

Article 2

The Federal Republic of Somalia

Provisional Constitution

Adopted August 1, 2012

Freedom of speech does not exist in Islam. It is Islam’s religious leaders and scholars that determine what one can say, especially if it pertains to Islam or its prophet, Muhammad. If one says anything critical or judgmental about Islam or Muhammad, one can go to prison or be executed. You are not allowed to question the ideology or its leaders. Their word is of Allah and infallible.

In Islamic countries, Islam is the Law. Islam functions as the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government and dictates what every citizen is to believe and do. No freedom of thought or discussion is permitted.

Islam also does not observe freedom of the press. All official media must comply with Islamic teaching and not deviate in their presentations. Media releases are often fabricated to order to present the official positions of the Islamic government and to toe the line of Islamic propaganda.

The right to peacefully assemble or petition the government with grievances does not exist in Muslim countries. They are dictatorships. While there have been frequent citizen protests in places like Egypt and Iran, they are met with brutal force and death to silence any opposition to Islamic dictatorial rule.

Islam also dictates what women must wear, how they must behave, what she can do in public and basically suppress a woman’s life so that it is not her own, but only that which is dictated by her male superior.

Bottom line: Islam is oppressive, dictatorial and entraps men and women in a veil of bondage with no escape without severe consequences. It is the very antithesis of what America’s Founders envisioned and implemented by the wisdom of God Almighty.

A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within.

Ariel Durant

Russian born American Author

1898-1981

understandingislamcover

Available at: https://understandingislaminthelightofchristianity.com

Understanding Islam in the Light of Christianity–the Book

May 8, 2019

Now Available!!

understandingislamcover.png

This is the go-to resource on Islam from a Christian perspective.  It is designed to provide everything one needs to know about Islam, the greatest challenge of the 21st century for the Church and the Christian community.  An invaluable compendium for homeschooling parents and organizations, church pastors and leaders, Christian schools, universities and seminaries.  If you truly want to reach the Muslim community with the truth of the Gospel of Jesus Christ or just want to be more knowledgeable about what is happening in the world, the West and America, this is a must resource book for your library. After nearly 20 years of research, Dr. Gauss has put together a one of a kind resource that is designed to educate Christian leaders/teachers on the unadulterated truth about Islam and the extreme challenge it presents to the Church and the Christian community and how Muslims can be presented with the truth of the Gospel without the Church lowering itself to “Common Ground” or “Interfaith Dialogue.” Understanding Islam in the  Light of Christianity A comparison of the Messenger, Message and Mission of the Qur’an and the Bible  An Invaluable Compendium By James F. Gauss, Ph.D. Author of Islam & Christianity, A Revealing Contrast.

Dr. Gauss, in this profound study, is upholding the truth of the Gospel, revealing the fallacies of a false religion. His pen is sharp but the imprint of his spirit is marked with compassion and love for a lost people who believe they are worshipping the one true God.

I commend Dr. Gauss on writing such an informative book bringing out the darkness that covers every page of the Quran and delusions of the Islamic faith.

May there be more voices such as Dr. Gauss proclaiming the truth of God with boldness and in the spirit of Christ. And may we witness freedom for millions of Muslims who are bound by a dark and evil force!

Blow the trumpet in Zion; sound the alarm on my holy hill. Let all who live in the land tremble….

Pastor Reza Safa (Former Iranian Shi’a Muslim); President, TBN Nejat TV; Director, TBN Middle East; Author of Inside Islam: Exposing and reaching the world of Islam

Understanding Islam in the Light of Christianity

8.5 x 11 – Over 480 pages $49.95 Hardcover (plus tax) • $34.95 Soft cover (plus tax)

Order from https://understandingislaminthelightofchristianity.com

Culture of Death

March 7, 2018

Every time there is a mass shooting or some horrific event in the United States involving guns, some (usually Democratic or leftist) politician or leftist talking head on television will boldly proclaim that America has become a “culture of death”.

I agree, but not for the same brash pontificating reasons they promulgate.   America, indeed, has become a culture of death, but it started long before the first mass shooting at a school.  Conspicuously absent from the culture of death dialogue on the left is the fact that God, the Bible and prayer have been stripped from our nation’s schools and the killing of the innocent has become the law of the land.

I would put forth that it started the day in 1963 when prayer was outlawed in U.S. schools.  (I remember clearly that when I was in first grade in public school in the late 1940s that we started each day with a reading from Psalms or Proverbs, a recitation of the Lord’s Prayer, followed by the Pledge of Allegiance.)  Prayer and then Bible reading were ripped from the children of America via three Supreme Court decisions in 1962 (Engel vs. Vitale) and in 1963 (Murray vs. Curlett and Abington Township School District vs. Schempp).  In all three cases, the High Court, led by liberal Chief Justice, Earl Warren, erroneously and boldly misinterpreted the First Amendment and cited the non-existing doctrine of separation of church and state that does not exist anywhere in the U.S. Constitution.  Essentially, the Supreme Court of the land was telling the nation’s children that Almighty God had no place in their life – no grounding of absolute truth; and no moral compass by which to judge one’s life.*

Then came the horrific Supreme Court ruling on  January 22, 1973 in Rowe vs. Wade that gave women in America the right to kill their unborn children.  Since that ungodly decision, American women/mothers have killed or allowed to be killed over 60 million of their babies – 60 MILLION!  So, what lesson did (and does) this teach America’s youth? That life is not worth much.  If your own mother can chose to end your life, then what is life worth?  NOTHING!  “So, why should I care about someone else’s life or my own?”

Abortion is a form of child sacrifice that God calls evil (see Leviticus 18:21, 20:1-5 and 1 Kings 11:5-8).   The debate from the left on what constitutes a human life in the mother’s womb is a non-issue as far as I am concerned and as far as God is concerned.  In the Bible, God declares that, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew you; before you were born I sanctified you . . .” (Isaiah 49:1, 5).  The left can argue all it wants about when a life is a life, but it is God who has stated that a life begins when He has conceived of it.

On top of these sweeping events affecting our nation’s children who become aggressive adults is the onslaught of violent video games and gratuitous Hollywood murder and mayhem filth that permeates our collective senses, but especially that of our youth.  Video games are no longer gratifying unless a 9 year old can blast away the humanoid of his choice or annihilate by a multitude of gruesome methods any foe he desires.  And we have the audacity to wonder why a growing number of our children are killing children or anyone else who invades their space.

One Virginia House of Delegates representative got it right in a speech before his peers on March 2, 2018.  You can watch and listen to it here.  Republican Nick Freitas (Culpepper, R-30) stated unequivocally that gun control is not the issue, the issue is the breakdown of our society.

PLEASE NOTE, the “culture of death” is not an issue of gun control or Second Amendment rights, but a mindset change on what is truly important to us as a people.  Do we want God in our lives or not?  Is murder, murder, whether of the unborn or those walking upright?  What respect for life do we truly honor and not give lip service to on a daily basis?

The great pastor and preacher, Dr. Peter Marshall, at the height of World War II gave a riveting sermon on March 11, 1944 called Trial by Fire.**  It was based on 1 Kings 18:21.  Some excerpts from that famous speech which I had the privilege of transcribing from a cassette tape his son gave me.

Materialism had a god, Dr. Marshall thundered.  His name was Baal. He offered to his devotees things that human instincts craved.  He was a god of the flesh.  His priests encouraged the people to follow their natural inclinations.  It was worship and indulgence expressed in lust and adorned in selfishness.  It had no inhibitions at all. . . .

So, morality became a relative thing.  The old absolutes were regarded as far too intolerant.  The national moral standards were lowered. . . .

It was a time now for men to take sides.  There was no middle ground.  They could not be neutral.  They had to be on one side or the other.  They had to decide whether their nation would be governed by God or ruled by tyrants. . . .

The choices you make in moral and religious questions determine the way America will go.  We badly need a prophet who will have the ear of America and who will say, “If the Lord be God, follow Him!  But if Baal, then follow him!”

President George Washington also had it right.  Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.  The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and cherish them (Farewell Speech, September 17, 1796).

*To learn more about these pivotal cases and the status of America, get my book, Revelation 18 and the Fate of America.

**Dr. Marshall’s complete sermon is in my book above.

To the Right or to the Left?

January 31, 2017

Have you ever wondered what makes people on the left (the “liberals” or “progressives”) do or think what they do and why those on the right (the “conservatives”) do or think the way they do?

Are you to the left or to the right, politically speaking? When did “left” and “right” start being used to describe political parties or political ideologies?

The predominate thinking of left and right divisions points to the French Revolution of 1789-1799. When the seating of the National Assembly took place those who were loyal to religion (i.e., Christianity) and the king were seated to the right of the president and those who supported the revolution sat on the left.  When the National Assembly was replaced with a Legislative Assembly in 1791, the “innovators” (revolutionaries) sat on the left, the “moderates” sat in the center and the “conscientious defenders of the constitution” sat on the right.

Burke vs. Paine. The political divisions of left and right became solidified in the ongoing political pamphlet war between Edmund Burke of Britain and Thomas Paine of America during the 1790s. Burke was a conservative while Paine was considered to be more liberal.  In 1790 Burke published Reflections on the Revolution in France.  Burke was known as a great reformer and many assumed that he would embrace the French Revolution as did intellectuals, radicals and orthodox Britains.  However, in Reflections Burke revealed his disdain for the Revolution, which he proclaimed would descend into anarchy, terror and war, which it did.

Burke’s position outraged Paine, who responded with his lengthy pamphlet of 31 articles, The Rights of Man, in 1791.  The pamphlet “war” became a literary battle between Burke, the consummate intellectual with a mastery of facts and a deep understanding of the limitations of man versus Paine, known for his hatred of authority in any form, rejecting conventional wisdom and tradition in exchange for re-establishing society and government based on abstract reasoning.  While Burke was typically admired by his contemporaries for his integrity and dignity, Paine garnered little admiration, even from his followers.  Burke was considered to be the consummate conservative on the “right”, while Paine was looked upon as the ordered radical on the “left”.

The reaction of the left vs. that of the right. Have you noticed that when people on the “left” get upset when things do not go their way they seem motivated to ridicule, demean and dehumanize their opposition? When they really get upset, they vehemently protest, riot, oppose authority, destroy other people’s property and businesses and even injure the innocent or those that serve to protect.  In the extreme, they seem to go ballistic; become irrational and are driven by unreasonable and idiotic demands.

People on the “right” on the other hand, when they are upset because things do not go as they hoped for or planned, typically do not demean the opposition, riot, destroy property or threaten the well being of others. They tend not to break the law, but, rather, respect the law to do what is right and constitutional.  Their typical form of protest is through the written or spoken word, or by voicing their disappointment or disapproval via the ballot box.  They take legal channels to work for change.  This may take longer, but their methods do not disrupt or threaten the stability or well being of individuals or society.

Well, I think I have discovered the reason for this great divergence of behavior between the left and the right political and societal factions. In the Bible the wise sage, King Solomon, mused long ago that, “A wise man’s heart is at his right hand, but a fool’s heart at his left” (Ecclesiastes 10:2, NKJV).  In the NIV translation of the Bible, the same verse reads thus: “The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”  The Amplified version of the Bible states the verse this way:  “A wise man’s heart turns him toward the right [which is the way of blessing], but a fool’s heart turns him toward the left [which is the way of condemnation].”

Well, there you have it. The Bible says that those who are on the left are fools, deserving condemnation, while those on the right are wise, deserving of blessing.  Oh, I know some will say I am cherry-picking one verse in the Bible to make a point.  But, wait there is more.

Sheep vs. Goats. In the Gospel of Matthew, chapter 25, Jesus makes it clear what God’s Judgment will be like. Starting in verse 31, Jesus stated, “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory.  All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats.  And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left” (vss. 31-33).    Prior to this chapter, Jesus used the term “sheep” to refer to those He sought to follow Him or those who were following Him.  In other words, the sheep are those who would be obedient to His calling.

Jesus’ narrative continues: “Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:  for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me’” (vss. 34-36).  Jesus points out that it is those on the right that were obedient to God’s will and purpose even though they may not have known it.

“Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?  When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You?  Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’  And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me’” (vss. 37-40).

“Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

“Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life” (vss. 41-46).

Now you know why people on the “left” have lost their collective minds over the commanding political victories of Republicans on the “right”. The left, which has now become progressively aligned with communist, Marxist views and refuses to oppose radical Islam, no longer represents anything that resembles our Founder’s America.  The left has become unhinged, violent and literally insane in their approach to disappointment, defeat or objection to political policy.  Those on the “right” still have a strong desire to follow the U.S. Constitution so wisely laid down by America’s Founding Fathers; following legal procedures enshrined for our Republic almost two-and-a-half centuries ago.

When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice; But when a wicked man rules, the people groan.  Proverbs 29:2

Addendum. The preceding scripture in Matthew, as my wife so observantly pointed out after my posting, would seem to support the left’s outrage and their compassion for the “stranger” or refugee.  But are the majority on the left really concerned about the plight of the refugee?  Granted there are some on the left who have genuine compassion for those in need, but they tend to express their concerns in rational, dignified ways.  However, it would seem that the vociferous majority on the left (Democrats, progressives, liberal college students, the liberal media, Hollywood types, etc.) have gone ballistic over President Trump’s “temporary” four month ban on immigrants from hostile Mid-Eastern countries.  Is their outrage motivated by their compassion for the “refugee” (whom they clearly identify as “Muslim”) or are they motivated by their vitriol hatred of President Trump?  I believe it is clearly the latter.

Case in point #1: In 2011, President Obama instituted a similar ban on Iraqi refugees for six months and no one on the left, including our now clearly leftist media, said a peep.  No protests, no outrage; nothing.  Why is it so unreasonable to those on the left for the President of the United States to implement a temporary ban on refugees from countries that are well known hot spots of Islamic terrorists trying to get to the United States to do us harm?  Is not the first duty of the President to defend and protect the safety and well-being of the citizens of America, or are we too conditioned to eight years of a former president who could have cared less about such constitutional responsibilities?

Remember, under Obama, not only did he grant immigration waivers to senior members of the Muslim Brotherhood (known for Islamic terrorism), but he made other MB members part of his administration, including in the Department of Homeland Security.

No, those who are truly leftists are not concerned about the plight of the refugee. They are only concerned about opposing and destroying the Trump presidency.  They will be satisfied with nothing less.

Case in point #2: This past weekend in Seattle an unidentified Black Lives Matter speaker who identified herself as a “preschool teacher” (God forbid) went on a hate-filled, vulgar tirade, screaming: We need to start killing people. First off, we need to start killing the White House. The White House must die. The White House, your f—ing White House, your f—ing presidents, they must go! F— the White House.  F— white supremacy, f— the U.S. empire, f— your imperialist ass lives. That s— gotta go.

Now, if that were a white person advocating such hate and incitement to do violence during the Obama Whitehouse, she would have been immediately arrested and charged with (at the very least) with a hate crime and, perhaps, with a terroristic threat. However, under the “whiteness” of the Trump administration, the leftist media and Seattle law enforcement did not even give it a nod, but rather a wink of approval.

Case in point #3: On January 29, Jonathan Turley, a well known constitutional law professor at George Washington University School of Law (and a self-professed political liberal) was invited to appear on CNN to explain the constitutionality of President Trump’s Executive Order on the temporary immigration ban.  Turley barely got to say a few words when CNN’s “Foreign Political Analyst” (no joke intended), Rula Jebreal, jumped down his throat, screaming at him that the “ban” was racist, white supremacy and “an instrument of tyranny.”  Apparently Ms. Jebreal had her eyes and ears closed throughout Obama’s tyrannical presidency.  The irrational, leftist Jebreal was so out of control that all Professor Turley could do was shake his head in disbelief at her tirade.  CNN host, Fareed Zakaria, of course, did nothing to try to bring her back to earth.

There are other examples far too numerous to bother with in this blog. Suffice it to say that the majority on the left have no interest or intention of meeting the needs of refugees, but, rather are only interested in causing chaos in order to bring down the Trump presidency.  I would bet the “farm” that if the ban were for “Christian” refugees you would not hear a peep from anyone on the left.

To the contrary, those on the “right” (largely represented by Christians) have two thousand years of generous, sacrificial history of reaching out to the oppressed, the poor, the stranger, the refugee.

And, a brief review and reminder: Where was the collective outrage from the left and the Obama administration when tens of thousands of Christians were (and are) being slaughtered, tortured, beheaded, thrown from buildings, etc. by Muslim terrorists?  Not a peep; not a tear; not a word of objection.

 

The 2016 Presidential Election (Kathleen’s Insight)

October 16, 2016

There is one candidate who is for the things below and one who is opposed.

  • One is pro-Israel, the other is not.
  • One is for freedom of speech, the other wants to control speech.
  • One wants lawful immigration, the other wants open borders.
  • One wants justice in our court system, the other wants activist judges that create law, rather than interpret the law.
  • One wants free enterprise, the other wants increased government regulation.
  • One wants the U.S. Constitution to be the law of the land, the other favors the U.N. Constitution.
  • The one is pro-life, the other wants to support increased abortion, including partial-birth abortion.
  • The one supports freedom of religion, the other seeks to suppress Christianity in America.
  • One has never been investigated for criminal activity, while the other is under constant investigation for such activity at the highest levels.
  • One understands economics and the advantages of capitalism and job creation, the other favors socialism, government control and has never created a job in the free market.
  • The one profits from Wall Street through wise investment, the other profits from Wall Street by giving worthless speeches.
  • One stands firm against corruption in government, the other has been a part of that corruption for decades.
  • One seeks advice from Christian leaders, the other relies on radical socialists.
  • The one wants to rebuild our decimated military, the other wants to continue its demise.
  • The one wants parental control of education, the other wants government control.
  • The one wants to protect America’s sovereignty, the other wants a One World globalist America.
  • One supports racial equality, the other foments racial divisiveness.
  • One respects and supports the sacrifice of America’s veterans, the other despises America’s military personnel.
  • One has demonstrated financial responsibility in matters of finance, the other had $6 billion of taxpayer monies disappear and unaccounted for during time in government office.
  • One believes in parents and families raising children, the other believes government should.
  • One is surrounding himself with patriotic leaders, the other with far left socialists.
  • One expresses the love of country and countrymen, the other speaks of despising fellow Americans.
  • One is for equal opportunity and the “American Dream”, the other for the re-distribution of wealth.
  • One opposes gay rights and gay marriage, the other believes they are constitutional guarantees like freedom of speech and freedom of religion.
  • One stands for law and order, the other for selective justice.

God did not choose to give us a Christian candidate. Perhaps that was the fault of the divided Christian community.  Instead, He gave us a person who is a “work in progress” like all of us.  One who believes in justice and who has strong convictions not unlike most Christians but expresses those convictions in ways that are often unacceptable to most of us.  However, they are sincerely held beliefs.  The other candidate provides evidence every day of being a pathological liar who has repeatedly deceived the American people.

A City on a Hill. If the Church and we as Christians are called to be “the salt of the earth” . . . “the light of the world” . . . and to be “A city set on a hill” that should not be hidden (Jesus in Matthew 5:13-14), why is it so hard for many Christians to believe that God planted His church and His people in America for the sake of the nation?

From the very founding of our country God has given His church (and His people) the responsibility for the spiritual well being of the nation. He gave America a constitution based on Judeo-Christian values—not Islamic, not Hindu, not atheistic or any other).  It has proved to be the best form of self-government the world has ever known.  Ironically, but by political design, our educational system now teaches the value of the U.N. constitution and globalism and Islamic thought.  These are two very different anti-freedom, anti-Christian and oppressive systems.  Partly as a result of these re-education systems (and to a lesser degree, biblical interpretations), many Christians believe that they should not be involved in politics or hold political office.  God foresaw this outcome of anti-God globalism with His revelation to the Apostle John on the Isle of Patmos nearly 2000 years ago.

As Christians living in America we are part of the most unique “experiment” in the history of the world—a self-governing people whose laws and way of life were founded on biblical principles. The Church was planted here in America for the sake of the country and the mandate of Christians to spread the Gospel of Jesus Christ worldwide.

As citizens of God’s Kingdom on earth we have a responsibility to demonstrate God’s love and righteousness in our midst; to be accountable for our actions or lack thereof in standing up for righteousness and mercy. I believe this is America’s last call for redemption.  The advantage that Satan has is that the Church has always been divided by pettiness, pride, rivalry and biblical incidentals.  We have untold denominations and sects, each believing they have the “truth”.  Here is the “truth”—“a kingdom” (country) or “house divided cannot stand” (Matthew 12:25).  America is divided mainly because the Church is divided.

For it is time for judgment to begin with the household of God; and if it begins  with us first, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?  (1 Peter 4:17).

Founding Father, John Adams, in his Thoughts on Government (1776), wrote: Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it. It is the responsibility of the populace, the American people, including Christians, to hold their elected officials accountable for their actions and decisions and to make sure they are upholding the law of the land and not implementing their own for their own benefit or agenda. An election is the one best opportunity, bar a revolution, to bring about a change of government when one is needed.

John Adams, in a speech before the Militia of Massachusetts declared, Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other (October 11, 1798). Perhaps that is America’s biggest problem, we have fallen away from God and as a whole are no longer a people of faith.  We have allowed our Constitution to be trashed by globalists and irreligious elitists with self-serving interests and not that of the people.  God will hold Christians accountable for the outcome of America’s unique world contribution to self-government.

 

The 2016 Presidential Election

October 16, 2016

A Christian’s Perspective

As Christians and Americans we have a challenging decision to make this election. Never in the history of our country have we had two least desirable candidates for the highest office in the land and perhaps the most powerful leadership position in the world.  For most, the decision boils down to Clinton or Trump, or “none of the above.”  It has been a presidential campaign marked by continuous accusations, threats, intimidations and lapses in moral character—all of which should be reprehensible for the Christian believer.

The truth is, America has never had a righteous, sinless person run or get elected to public office.  Not even George Washington, who was unquestionably the best and most humble person to hold the office of president of the United States.

However, I have come to realize, that despite the undesirable nature of each major candidate, for the Christian or patriotic American, this election is not about, “do I vote for Clinton or Trump?”, but what kind of presidential administration, judicial system, military, law, immigration policy, respect of life, civil rights, respect of the Bill of Rights and U.S. Constitution, etc. do I want and expect from the nation’s leadership?  Which candidate is most likely to surround himself or herself with law abiding cabinet members that will implement the will of the people?  Which one will seek to establish a judicial system that not only follows the Constitution, but interprets the law and does not make new law without the consent of the people or Congress?  Which one will rebuild the U.S. military that has been decimated over the last 8 years to levels not seen since WWII?  Which one will seek to re-establish racial harmony and oneness instead fomenting divisiveness?  Which one has pledged to respect the lives of the unborn?  Which one will uphold justice for all?  Which one has pledged to follow the Bill of Rights which guarantees the freedom of speech, religion, the press, right to peacefully assemble and bear arms?  Which one has agreed to protect our country’s borders and implement a sane immigration policy? Which one is likely to follow the law when signing into law congressional laws or mandates?

The presidency is much more than just the presidential candidate, it is the course of America and what we desire our country to look like.  Now, let me make myself clear: As a Christian, I am a Christ follower first, then an American in terms of birth and placement.  I have said for years that America has slid past the point where human intervention will save her.  Only God can and will redeem her, but only if the Church and its people repent for allowing things to get this bad through ignoring sin and refusing to stand up for righteousness.

Also read: https://ampatriot.wordpress.com/2016/10/16/the-2016-presidential-election-kathleens-insight/

America’s Descent into Chaos and Depravity, Part 3

July 7, 2015
Revelation 18 and the fate of America

Revelation 18 and the fate of America

Excerpted from Chapter 5 of Revelation 18 and the fate of America.]

. . . and has become a dwelling place of demons, a prison for every foul spirit, and a cage for every unclean and hated bird!”

Revelation 18:2b

Prayer Out of the Schools.  The United States Supreme Court led by Chief Justice Earl Warren issued three crushing decisions on prayer in public schools.  The first was in 1962 (Engel v. Vitale) and two in 1963 (Murray v. Curlett and Abington Township School District v. Schempp). The decision to ban prayer and Bible reading from public schools was made as a result of the Supreme Court’s interpretations of the First Amendment and the “wall of separation between church and state” dogma.

In the 1962 Engel v. Vitale case the issue centered on a prayer drafted by the New York State Board of Regents.  It simply read: “Almighty God, we acknowledge our dependence upon Thee, and we beg Thy blessings upon us, our parents, our teachers and our Country.”  Although it was not a biblical prayer or denominational prayer, the parents of ten students took offense and sued the Hyde Park, New York school district claiming the prayer violated the U.S. Constitution.

Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports.  In vain would that man claim the tribute of patriotism, who should labor to subvert these great pillars of human happiness, these firmest props of the duties of men and citizens.  The mere politician, equally with the pious man, ought to respect and to cherish them.

George Washington, Farewell Address, September 17, 1796

The Board of Regents believed that such a non-descript, non-denominational prayer would get the students off to a good daily start and encourage good moral character, promote spiritual guidance and help overcome juvenile delinquency.  Since students were not required to participate and participation in the prayer was completely optional, the educators felt they were on solid constitutional ground.

The case was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court on April 3, 1962.  Nearly three months later the Court rendered a majority 6-1 decision on June 25.  Associate Justice Hugo Black rendered the opinion for the Court.

In part, Justice Black wrote for the majority: “This daily procedure was adopted on the recommendation of the State Board of Regents . . . they recommended and published as a part of their ‘Statement on Moral and Spiritual Training in the Schools,’ saying: ‘We believe that this Statement will be subscribed to by all men and women of good will, and we call upon all of them to aid in giving life to our program.’

“. . . We think that by using its public school system to encourage recitation of the Regents’ prayer, the State of New York has adopted a practice wholly inconsistent with the Establishment Clause. . . .”

Without citing any references, Justice Black then went on to enlist Thomas Jefferson to support his contention and conclusions about the “religious nature of prayer”.

Hear my prayer, O God; Give ear to the words of my mouth.

Psalm 54:2

In the paragraph containing the Court’s decision, Black wrote: “The petitioners contend among other things that the state laws requiring or permitting use of the Regents’ prayer must be struck down as a violation of the Establishment Clause because that prayer was composed by governmental officials as a part of a governmental program to further religious beliefs. For this reason, petitioners argue, the State’s use of the Regents’ prayer in its public school system breaches the constitutional wall of separation between Church and State. We agree with that contention since we think that the constitutional prohibition against laws respecting an establishment of religion

must at least mean that in this country it is no part of the business of government to compose official prayers for any group of the American people to recite as a part of a religious program carried on by government.”

Associate Justice Potter Stewart was the lone dissenting vote.  Justices Felix Frankfurter and Byron White took no part in the decision.

In part, Justice Stewart summarized the case as he saw it.  “A local school board in New York has provided that those pupils who wish to do so may join in a brief prayer at the beginning of each school day, acknowledging their dependence upon God and asking His blessing upon them and upon their parents, their teachers, and their country. The Court today decides that in permitting this brief nondenominational prayer the school board has violated the Constitution of the United States.  I think this decision is wrong.”

Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart (1915-1985)

Justice Stewart was appointed to the Court on October 14, 1958 by President Dwight Eisenhower and confirmed by the U.S. Senate the following May in a 70-17 vote.  All dissenters were Democrats.  Stewart was a centrist Republican who believed that the Warren Court misinterpreted the First Amendment “Establishment Clause” and exceeded the intentions of the Framers of the Constitution.

“The Court does not hold, nor could it,” Stewart wrote, “that New York has interfered with the free exercise of anybody’s religion. For the state courts have made clear that those who object to reciting the prayer must be entirely free of any compulsion to do so, including any ‘embarrassments and pressures.’. . .  the Court says that in permitting school children to say this simple prayer, the New York authorities have established ‘an official religion.’

“With all respect,” he continued, “I think the Court has misapplied a great constitutional principle. I cannot see how an ‘official religion’ is established by letting those who want to say a prayer say it. On the contrary, I think that to deny the wish of these school children to join in reciting this prayer is to deny them the opportunity of sharing in the spiritual heritage of our Nation. . . .”

Religion is necessary to correct the effects of learning.  Without religion I believe learning does real mischief to the morals and principles of mankind . . .

Dr. Benjamin Rush, Letter to John Armstrong on March 19, 1783

Justice Stewart went on to point out the inconsistencies of the nation’s religious observances.  “At the opening of each day’s Session of this Court we stand, while one of our officials invokes the protection of God.  Since the days of John Marshall our Crier has said, ‘God save the United States and this Honorable Court.’  Both the Senate and the House of Representatives open their daily Sessions with prayer.  Each of our Presidents, from George Washington to John F. Kennedy [then in office], has upon assuming his Office asked the protection and help of God. . . .

“In 1954 Congress added a phrase to the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag so that it now contains the words ‘one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.’  In 1952 Congress enacted legislation calling upon the President each year to proclaim a National Day of Prayer.  Since 1865 the words ‘IN GOD WE TRUST’ have been impressed on our coins.”

Stewart wrote that he could list countless other examples but that his position could be summed by the fact that, “It was . . . this Court just ten years ago in a single sentence: ‘We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being’” [see Zorach v. Clauson].

“I do not believe that this Court,” Stewart concluded, “or the Congress, or the President has by the actions and practices I have mentioned established an ‘official religion’ in violation of the Constitution. And I do not believe the State of New York has done so in this case.”

Chief Justice Earl Warren (1891-1974)

Warren was appointed as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 1953 by President Dwight Eisenhower. Warren, although a Republican, was philosophically a centrist to liberal in his judicial renderings.  He served on the Court until 1969.

A year later, on the same day, the same Court (with Arthur J. Goldberg, a Democrat replacing Frankfurter) decided two other contentious cases that were argued before the Court at the same time concerning school prayer— Murray v. Curlett and Abington Township School District v. Schempp.

In the Murray v. Curlett case, Madalyn Murray O’Hair, a radical militant atheist, who was despised and hated by many Christians and fellow atheists, brought suit against the Baltimore, Maryland school board.  Like the previous complaint in New York, O’Hair sued because she claimed that her son William’s school violated the First Amendment by having students recite the “Lord’s Prayer” (Matthew 6:9-13).  She also came against the school board’s approval of the daily reading from the Bible.

14th Amendment

Section 1 [of 5]. . . . No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Passed by Congress on June 13, 1866

Before reaching the Supreme Court, a local Maryland judge, J. Gilbert Pendergast, dismissed O’Hair’s petition, saying, “It is abundantly clear that petitioners’ real objective is to drive every concept of religion out of the public school system.”  The Maryland Court of Appeals had a similar viewpoint and concluded that, “Neither the First nor the Fourteenth Amendment was intended to stifle all rapport between religion and government.”

In the Abington Township School District [of Pennsylvania] v. Schempp the complaint was similar—that the voluntary student participation in morning prayer and listening to a teacher recitation of ten verses of the Bible was unconstitutional.

In its majority 8-1 decision in both cases, with Justice Stewart once again being the lone dissenter, the Court once again cited its position as in Engel v. Vitale but with many more pages of nebulous Founder legal positions and case law.  The bottom line was that, again Thomas Jefferson’s non-binding, non-Constitutional statement on the “wall of separation between church and state” was held up as the justification for their affirmative decision for the plaintiffs.  When attorney for the petitioners, Leonard Kerpelman, used Jefferson’s statement in his presentation and implied it was in the Constitution, Justice Stewart quickly interrupted and asked him where it occurred.  A silence fell over the Court as Kerpelman was stumped for an answer.

In writing his dissent, Justice Stewart stated, in part:

I think the records in the two cases before us are so fundamentally deficient as to make impossible an informed or responsible determination of the constitutional issues presented. Specifically, I cannot agree that on these records we can say that the Establishment Clause has necessarily been violated. But I think there exist serious questions under both that provision and the Free Exercise Clause – insofar as each is imbedded in the Fourteenth Amendment – which require the remand of these cases for the taking of additional evidence.

The First Amendment declares that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . . .” It is, I think, a fallacious oversimplification to regard these two provisions as establishing a single constitutional standard of “separation of church and state,” which can be mechanically applied in every case to delineate the required boundaries between government and religion. We err in the first place if we do not recognize, as a matter of history and as a matter of the imperatives of our free society, that religion and government must necessarily interact in countless ways. Secondly, the fact is that while in many contexts the Establishment Clause and the Free Exercise Clause fully complement each other, there are areas in which a doctrinaire reading of the Establishment Clause leads to irreconcilable conflict with the Free Exercise Clause.

Religion is the only solid basis of good morals: therefore education should teach the precepts of religion, and the duties of man towards God.

Gouverneur Morris, Signer, U.S. Constitution

Interestingly and sadly, not one Christian group, church or organization chose to file a brief in either case on behalf of prayer or Bible reading in the public schools.  However, it is important to note that these joint decisions by the Supreme Court, DID NOT, as widely believed, remove prayer or Bible reading from the public schools.  The Court only concluded that “government-sponsored” prayer and Bible reading were a violation of the “Establishment Clause” of the First Amendment.  Students in public schools are still free to pray or read the Bible on their own or to conduct or participate in prayer or Bible study groups.

In essence, what the Warren Supreme Court decided to do was to deliberately misinterpret and re-write the First Amendment.  They changed the intent of the “Establishment Clause” of the Founders and replaced it with at statement out-of-context made by Jefferson in a letter.  North Carolina’s senator at the time, Sam Ervin (1896-1985), quipped, “I should like to ask whether we would be far wrong in saying that in this decision the Supreme Court has held that God is unconstitutional and for that reason the public school must be segregated against Him?”

Perhaps ironically, O’Hair’s son, William J. Murray, became a Christian and a Baptist minister and is chairman of the Religious Freedom Coalition and author of My Life Without God.