Tag: Government
The Government is Secular; not the Nation
The Government is Secular; not the Nation
The Founding Fathers had a vision of a secular Government, not a secular nation or culture. Their vision of a secular government was just that, a Federal Government that was not controlled by any religious institution or organization. Their goal was not to keep religious convictions and dialogue out of the public square. They never inferred that religious convictions on morality should not inform the public or the government.
The kind of secular system proclaimed by some secularists today would involve a violation of the First Amendment which is the freedom of religion and the freedom of speech. Free men have the right to speak their mind on any subject in the public square or in private, this includes the religious and nonreligious. The very idea that people could not express their religious beliefs in the public square or in spaces that some label ‘religious free zones’ is ridiculous and would violate our First Amendment rights.
Some interesting facts; the word secular is not used in any of the Founding documents. The expression, ‘the wall between church and state’ is not found in any of the Founding documents. It was used one time by Thomas Jefferson when writing to a Baptist Church in Connecticut. There is nothing in the Constitution that would hinder states from having a State Religion. The restriction was to only apply specifically to the Federal Government.
We’re All Debt Slaves- Here’s Why
Conspiracy, Conspiracy, Conspiracy
The latest way for the left to reject the truth is to call it a conspiracy. Then they simply pass off all evidence as a far right conspiracy. Once the label is applied they cease their inquiry into the evidence. However, the following video should give them pause for it is evident that Kennedy believed in a conspiracy against the country that was going on in secret and in high places. After viewing the video and giving it some thought, take a look at George Soros and his army of useful idiots that are undermining our country. He has given $100 million to the DNC and has funded millions more to them through his shadow organizations. Watch the video on him after Kennedy’s on lyleduell.me. Hit below link.
The DECLINE of American Empire
Religion and Freedom
The Cornerstone of Liberalism
The Cornerstone of Liberalism
You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. Yet because I tell the truth, you do not believe me! John 8:43-45 NIV.
The foundation of Liberalism[1] is made up of many stones. However, the cornerstone of the philosophy is the autonomy of the individual. What do we mean by the autonomy of the individual? It simply means that the individual is self-governing and to some degree is self-directed.
It may surprise you to hear that the Bible has quite a bit to say about this doctrine of the autonomy of the individual. In the story found in the book of Genesis, God created man free to make a choice and he also warned man that if he made the wrong choice there would be consequences. The choices were to governor one’s self and be independent of God (autonomous) or to choose to be self – denying and allow God to govern one’s life.
If we look at the liberal faith through the lens of the story. Liberalism is nothing more than an organized rebellion against God[2]. Like Adam in the story liberals do not believe God, of course in our age it’s not a matter of believing God, but rather not believing IN God. However, no matter how you word it, it’s the same old story. Man , wanting to be independent and free from the authority of God. In the story Satan deceived man in two ways. He first convinced man that God’s word was not true and then that God did not mean what he said. Both of his arguments were attacks on the truth of God’s word. Based on what I’ve all already said, it only follows that the liberal faith would be attacking God’s word today and even setting themselves up as the judges of God and his Word. Well, that exactly what we find.
It is the liberal faith that has embraced relativism (the denial that there is any absolute truth) and has led the attack on scripture and on the living word who is Jesus Christ.[3] In fact, liberals and their siblings[4] despise any authority, but especially anything or anyone that represents the authority of God. Like their father they hate God and everything that pertains to the true God. Like their father they know how to subvert language and appear as angles of light to naïve and gullible men. The apostle Paul says of them “And no wonder, for Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light. It is not surprising, then, if his servants masquerade as servants of righteousness” 2 Cor. 11:14-15. Still to this day we have liberals masquerading as Christians for their own purpose or the purpose of their father.
Even from a utilitarian point of view, liberalism has a number of problems, if every person is self-governing and self-directed, what happens when people begin to go in different directions and they then begin to disagree on whom and what should govern? The liberal answer is that a man’s freedom or self-governing ends where any others man’s freedom begins. But does this really take care of the problem or does it just raise more questions? For example who will determine where one man’s freedom ends and any other man’s begins? The state?[5] If the state is to determine this, is the individual really free? What happens if the state defines freedom differently than the individual? Maybe we should toss a coin? No, the one with the most power wins and in the modern world that means the state. Liberalism therefore will always look to the state to determine where freedom begins and ends. The state then judges the difference between good and evil. In other word the state begins to determine morality. Could this be the source of political correctness? It surely is the beginning of a totalitarian state.
In the story, God creates man and then gives him freedom. In the liberal system it is the state that defines and gives freedom to the individual, of course, if the state gives freedom, the state can take it away. If the deity gives freedom no government would have the right to take that freedom away. This was the thinking of the founding fathers when they said that men “are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” and government was created to protect those rights. It is quite obvious that the founding fathers were not liberals. This is the reason why liberals are not extremely fond of the Declaration of Independence or the Constitution. They simply don’t believe them.
There is any problem with the liberal faith, which is, who has the authority to define the concept of freedom? Freedom is one of those elusive concepts that could be defined in a numbers ways. For the atheist it could be defined simply by the expression “Freedom is doing what I what to do or simply being left alone by the authorities”. For the Christian freedom would be defined “as being free from self to serve God and others.”
Now liberals, will respond by saying that the state should stay out of defining freedom or liberty. But if this true, why then do they use the public school to push their liberal faith? In fact, every time they have a change, liberals use the government and the court system to impose their liberal faith on the American people. They get away with this because the American people do not recognize liberalism for what it is, a godless religion that is against all other religions.
In the story when man sinned something happened to his nature. Before the fall his will was directed toward God, after the fall his will was directed to himself. His will was directed to satisfying his lower nature. He then began to live not for God, but rather to satisfy his lower nature’s appetites. The story therefore depicts liberalism, perfectly, for liberalism is nothing more than a high form of hedonism (living for pleasure). Even, discipline and self-restraint is practiced primarily to extend the ego.
The conclusion is this; liberalism is nothing more than an organized rebellion against the living God. It is a religion or a philosophy that denies and subverts God’s word. Therefore, it is sinful for Christians to be involved in liberalism or to support any group or politic party that supports it.
[1] Liberalism is not being nice or compassionate. It is a philosophy that competes and stands in contradiction to the Christian faith. The advanced liberals which often call themselves progressives are liberals who have embraced the liberal philosophy and have taken it to its end, which is anarchy.
[2] The symbol and the height of the liberal move is the French Revolution with its motto “No king and no God”.
[3] Liberals have used the methodology of higher criticism to deny the authority of scripture and to deny the Lordship of Jesus. Note Eta Linnemann Book “Historical Criticism of the Bible” with the sub-title “Methodology or Ideology? Reflections of a Bultmannian turned evangelical”. Also note Jude 8-16
Harry Blamires book “The Christian Mind” saved me from embracing a liberal view of the Bible.
[4] The two siblings of liberalism are atheism and libertarianism. Atheism is the ultimate distortion of the image of God in man and libertarianism is a secular counterfeit of the Christian faith which in its true state lives above the law.
[5] In the end for the liberal the state becomes God walking on the earth. A good example of this that the state in the abortion controversy ended up determining what is life or non-life. In this Secular liberalism is nothing more than man playing God.
Free Traders or Traders
Free Traders or Traders
The following is a recent report about the decline in wages in America.
Report: Manufacturing Decline And Low Skill Immigration Have Depressed Wages by CAROLINE MAY30 Jun 2015
“A recently published study from an economics professor concludes that the declining manufacturing base and increases in low skilled immigration have served to increase income inequality in the U.S.
“The overall evidence suggests that the manufacturing and immigration trends have hollowed-out the overall demand for middle-skilled workers in all sectors, while increasing the supply of workers in lower skilled jobs. Both phenomena are producing downward pressure on the relative wages of workers at the low-end of the income distribution,” reads the abstract to Hebrew University Professor Eric Gould’s paper.
He examined data over the forty years. In “Explaining the Unexplained: Residual Wage Inequality, Manufacturing Decline, and Low-Skilled Immigration” Gould reveals that changes in wages, employment, and income inequality have been impacted by the shifts in manufacturing, immigration and trade:
The last four decades have witnessed a dramatic change in the wage and employment structure in the United States and many other developed countries. The wage gap between earners at the top versus the bottom of the distribution have widened, and research has been unable to explain this transformation with changes in the quantities or the returns to observable factors like education, experience, occupation, and industry. At the same time, the manufacturing sector has steadily declined, while less-skilled immigrants have increasingly become a larger proportion of the population in the United States.
Specifically, Gould concludes that an area already being hit by a decline in manufacturing will see more inequality if there is more low-skilled immigration:
The results show that an influx of less-educated immigrants increases inequality, especially in areas that are undergoing manufacturing decline. A similar interaction is shown to affect the employment rate of non-college graduate native men – an increase in immigration coupled with a decline in manufacturing lowers the employment rate of less-educated men. The similarity of the results for inequality and the employment rate of non- college men reinforce the interpretation that these two phenomena are putting downward pressure on the wages of less skilled men – thus increasing inequality primarily at the bottom half of the wage distribution and encouraging more and more men to drop out of the labor market altogether.
In total, Gould concludes that some of the previously unexplained inequality increase since the 1970s has been due to the intersection of declining manufacturing and increased low-skilled immigration.
This paper establishes an important link between inequality within all sectors and the general equilibrium impact of manufacturing decline and an influx of less- skilled immigration. These two phenomena, which do not appear to be related to one another … generated a decline in the overall demand for middle skilled work and an increase in the supply of workers looking to work in less-skilled jobs. As a result, variation in the extent to which a city or state experienced either one of these phenomena explains a large proportion of why the ‘unexplained’ level of inequality increased over time”
The following is my commentary on the report. This reports links American immigration policies and its free trade policy to a decline of wages. You do not need to be a brain surgeon to figure this out. There are only two reasons why American politicians refuse to see this. One, they are in the pocket of big corporations that are benefiting from our unfair trade policies. Secondly, they are simply obtuse and brainwashed by a fictional theory of economics fostered by big business. In either case I do not want to see these people as leaders in our government. They are either dishonest or just stupid.
Now let’s follow the dots. Who is pushing open borders and more immigration. Who is promoting more free trade? What two presidents signed the free trade bills. Who benefited from free trade? Unions or big business, the working class or big corporations. Wake up America, The leadership in both parties are selling us out.
If you do not know which president signed the free trade agreement it was President Bill Clinton and president Obama. Which parties supported the treaties? Both the Democrats and Republicans. Who running for president has promised to correct unfair trade policies. Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump. The rests are free traders. Out the Those running for president who has promised to slow down immigration and the flow of cheap labor into the country? Bernie Sanders no, Donald Trump yes. Other Republicans and Democrats have said that they would like to slow down immigration but their reason is questionable. It seems that it not to protect the American worker. If these two problems are not taken care of in the next decade America will be a third world country. LD
The Great Myths of Modern Man
The Great Myths of Modern Man
The lawless man is produced by the spirit of evil and armed with all the force, wonders, and signs that falsehood can devise. To those involved in this dying world, he will come with evil’s undiluted power to deceive, for they have refused to love the truth which could have saved them. God sends upon them, therefore, the full force of evil’s delusion, so that they put their faith in an utter fraud and meet the inevitable judgment of all who have refused to believe the truth and who have made evil their play-fellow. The Apostle Paul
Before we can have a rational discussion on the subject of modern myths, we need to understand the terms and concepts we are using. When I use the word myth, I am not referring to something that is false, but rather to a large explanatory story or narrative that gives us some insight into what stands behind the way we view the world. In science they are called models or paradigms. In religion they are called shadows, types, or parables. In essence, myths are large metaphors that we use to talk about the things that we cannot see and yet believe they are there. They are believed to be the truths that point to the truth that stands outside of man’s grasp. All true myths in some fashion and to some degree, depict reality. If this were not the case, they never would have been elevated to the place of myth. With this in mind, we are ready to talk about the great myths of modern man.
In order to understand the making of the great myths of modern times, we have to understand the time of the Enlightenment in Europe which gave rise to the great myths of Western civilization. The Enlightenment was a time of great upheaval and change in the thinking of man. The old authorities in every area of life were being challenged and being replaced. Feudalism was being replaced with democracy, magic with science, capitalism with socialism, and faith with atheism.
During this Enlightenment period there was a tremendous effort by the skeptics of religion to move the masses away from religion. To do this, they would have to convince the masses that heaven could be created on earth by man and a transcendent God and a heaven up there was no longer needed. If you recall, mankind had once tried to build a tower to heaven, which ended in Babel[1]. If man could not storm the gates of heaven, he would simply build his own on earth, while shaking his fist in defiance at the God of the true heaven.
However, to storm the gates of heaven and bring heaven down to the earth, mankind would need a huge amount of power; he would need a machine that could replace God. He found his machine in the creation of the modern state.[2] The state would be God walking on the earth creating heaven on earth, a heaven in which the God of heaven was no longer welcomed. In the new myth of the state, it would be God who is banished from the new paradise, not man. In this, we see the birth of the modern state and atheism, which are the two greatest myths of modern time.
In order for the modern state to become a god in the eyes of the majority of people, they would have to believe it had the power to save them and deliver them from the forces beyond their control. These forces would include natural disasters, diseases, the very forces of nature, even death. In order to accomplish this, the state would need to have a mechanism to convince the people that it was their true savior and not religion. It would also need a discipline that could be used to support it. That discipline was found in the new field of science. It is self-evident that science and the state have grown together and are very much dependent on each other.
And since the time of the Enlightenment the state has continued to annex more and more of the scientific enterprise for its own selfish ends, those being ultimate authority and domination. In the last few decades science has been increasingly controlled by the flow of money provided by the state to support its research.
Another great myth of modern man is Darwinism. The thinking of the Western world has been controlled by the concept or myth of undirected evolution since the time of Darwin. In fact, it has become the dominating concept behind most science and thinking in general. For many, the concept is now a self-evident truth. To most, everything is getting bigger and better, moving from the simple to the more complex.[3] Of course, this concept fits well into the ideological concept of progress that was implanted in the midst of the Enlightenment by Christian millennialism[4] and was the foundation on which they built the humanistic project of replacing the concept of a heaven up there with a heaven down here. It also fit well as it supported the ideology of a capitalistic system, which was the prevailing economic ideology during the time of Darwin. Darwinism has always been strongly supported by the ruling class, which maintains its place through the educational system of the state.
You could say that Darwinism was the missing link that the humanist skeptics of the Enlightenment (not science) needed to banish God from the earth.[5] They needed a theory of how things could be explained without an appeal to a deity. So the maxim was created that everything in the new discipline of science must be explained by natural causes without an appeal to a deity. Of course, this sealed the faith of the new discipline of science as the weapon of choice for the skeptics and atheists to support and spread their unbelief or should I say their new belief?
However, true science was not created to banish God from the earth and many of the greatest scientists have been believers.[6] Science as a discipline is the study of nature and has little to say about the existence of a God who stands outside nature.[7] Science can make the statement that it has not found God in nature, which is a statement that theologians could make as well; on the other hand, many men of science can and do say that they see things in nature that seem to point to a deity who had organized all things.
To the thinking person and the person who truly understands science, science explains nothing; it only describes things. It answers the “how” question not the “why” and “what” questions. For example, when it speaks about light, it does not explain it but rather describes the way it behaves. Sometimes it behaves like a wave and sometimes it behaves like a particle, but these are metaphorical descriptions and do not tell us what light is. In fact, if we where to ask science to explain itself, it could not give an explanation without the aid of philosophy; in itself it could only tell us what it does, not what it is.
What are the great myths? They are the myths of the mega state and the myth that it has the power to save, which is the myth of modern science-ism. It is the belief or myth that everything in reality can wholly be explained by the theory of materialistic evolution. Evolution is surely a large part of the circle of existence, but it is not the whole. It may help us with a number of how questions, but it never answers the why questions of existence, and it is the why questions that gives life meaning.
In view of the above, the question must be raised as to how many of the new myths really square with reality and how many of them are simply illusions.
[1] Babel means confusion.
[2] Note: The Myth of the Machine by Lewis Mumford.
[3] This view of evolution is not based on science and is believed by the masses.
[4] The Christian faith believes that everything is moving toward perfection and completeness. This concept evolved in the West into a strong belief in the concept of progress. Without the Christian faith, the question must be raised as to whether or not there are any grounds for a belief in progress.
[5] Of course, true science explains nothing; it simply describes things. When it slips into explaining things, it ceases to be science and becomes philosophy or something else.
[6] To name a few: Nicolas Copernicus, Francis Bacon, Johannes Kepler, Galileo, Rene Descartes, Blaise Pascal, Max Planck, and Albert Einstein.
[7] The US National Academy of Sciences has gone on record with the following statement: “Science is a way of knowing about the natural world. It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes. Science can say nothing about the supernatural. Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral.” This was taken from Who Made God?: A Searching for a Theory of Everything by Fay Weldon.
Is Socialism Christian?
Is Socialism Christian?
A letter to a young Christian
In your letter you asked if socialism is Christian. By asking this question, I am assuming you are asking whether or not it is compatible with Christianity. Before answering the question, we might need to ask another question. Does it work? Socialism, like so many other theoretical systems of man, looks good on paper, but in real life, it doesn’t seem to work very well. History seems to verify that socialism is flawed and not a workable system. In fact, it has never worked anywhere in the world. It promises equality and plenty for all but seems to make everyone equally poor, except the top two percent. Of course, all those who endorse or promote it imagine themselves as being a part of the two percent.
Not only has socialism failed in other countries, it has failed here in America as well. The first two settlements in this country attempted a pure communistic type community. These communities had common storehouses and no currency. In other words, they had no money. Everyone could take from the storehouse what they needed. I believe these communities included Jamestown and Plymouth. Now keep in mind that these were deeply devoted Christians who loved one another. In a short time the storehouses were empty and the communities were near starvation. The leadership was forced to change to a purely capitalistic system. “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.” In a short time the community was thriving and people were back working. Even those who were sickly and weak miraculously got better and went to work. There is something about the grim reaper of starvation that seems to motivate people to work.
For socialism to work, massive power must be given to the state in order for the state to be able to manipulate and control the masses. The state must have enough power to change human nature and do away with sloth and greed. The problem with this is that the state can never have enough power to change human nature for human nature cannot be changed. The people who believe that it can are materialists who believe that humanity has no nature, which contradicts our faith and is rejected by science. However, if you do believe that the state can, with enough power, change human nature, you then have a problem with who will control the state. Once the state has been given this massive power it will soon become demonic as it begins to plan and control the lives of every individual. No group of men should ever have this kind of power. Remember that “power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Here is where we see the wisdom of the founding fathers of our nation. They knew for men to be free there must be limits placed on the size and power of government, lest government exalts itself to the place of God. We should be thankful to our founding fathers who instilled in our form of government limitations on the power of government.
It is a well-kept secret that the founding fathers knew all about socialism and communalism. Benjamin Franklin ran into it in France and was less than impressed. He saw the theories of socialism as the source of the bloody French Revolution and the chaos that followed. Samuel Adams said of socialism: “The utopian schemes of leveling (redistribution of the wealth) and a community of goods (central ownership of all the means of production and distribution) are as visionary and impracticable as those which ivest all property in the Crown. (These ideas) are arbitrary, despotic, and in our government, unconstitutional.”
The reasons for socialism failing are many. One of the greatest, I believe, is the fact that it is based on a false view of human nature. It assumes and arrogates that man is basically good and born totally neutral in his nature toward good and evil. In other words, he is born into the world as a blank slate on which his environment writes the script of his life. This theory sets in motion a number of dangerous concepts. One is that through centralized planning the government can manipulate the very nature of man. The government can remake man to be unselfishly seeking what is the best for the community. They believe that government can undo all the faulty programming put into an individual by the institutions of a capitalistic system. If the institutions cannot be reformed or captured by the government they must be destroyed. This is why socialistic and communistic governments are never friendly toward Christianity or any religion. They see religion as a major hindrance to their central planning and manipulation.
Moreover, this centralized planning and its corresponding manipulation raises some serious questions. Who will do the planning and who will choose the agenda? Who will determine what constitutes the good? This view of man as a blank slate is also in conflict with the Christian faith which teaches that man basically has the propensity to do evil. Some refer to this propensity toward evil as original sin. However, you do not need the Bible to tell you that men are prone to evil; just read a newspaper. It is one of those self-evident truths that the founders spoke about.
Now, the greatest danger with this false worldview of man and his nature is that there is enough truth in it to make it believable. The truth is that man is both good and evil. In this, man is a unique creature who has a dual nature. He stands uniquely between heaven and earth. He has a will both to do good and evil. In other words, every man has a shadow. Therefore, our faith teaches that man needs God to strengthen his desire to do good and grace to keep him from doing evil. Left to himself, he will tend to gravitate toward the evil. It is also true that many men and maybe even the majority can be manipulated by controlling their environment, but there are always the exceptions, and we all like to think that we are the exception. These exceptions are what demonstrate that the humanistic view of man’s nature is false.
Now, if we compare socialism and Christianity, we will see a tremendous contrast. First, the church never was constituted by Jesus to force people to pay taxes or give to their neighbor. It is not an institutional Robin Hood. In the same vein, Jesus never took away from the rich to give to the poor. In fact, Jesus never commanded His disciples to give to the poor. He simply assumed that they would out of their love for their brothers. He did command them to love one another. He knew that out of love would come a freewill offering from their hearts. He had no need to level taxes or ties on them. “Each man should give what he has decided in his heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. And God is able to make all grace abound to you, so that in all things at all times, having all that you need, you will abound in every good work” (2 Cor. 9:6-8).
The Bible or our faith should not be used to justify any kind of collectivism which invariably will take economic freedom away from the individual and lead into totalitarianism of the worst kind. Socialism seems to be an attempt by secular man to control his own greed and his love for money. In this, those who endorse socialism fail to realize that money is a spiritual power that cannot be defined or defeated by any earthly systems. Jesus spoke of it as a spiritual power, as an idol that rules in the hearts of men. Only God can destroy the love of money in the hearts of men by replacing it with love for God and their brothers.
I have a friend who is a socialist and believes that the government should have a lot of programs to help the poor. However, he believes that paying taxes is his giving. He very seldom gives money away personally and on a spiritual level that is the only way to defeat its power. Even in giving your money away, such giving should be done with the upmost caution and wisdom. It should be done in humility and not for the purpose of seeking the praises of men. The Lord said, “Don’t let your left hand know what your right hand is doing.” Giving in secret will strengthen your heart with grace.
You also need to remember that giving money to people can often hurt them and actually create resentment. Money is a mediator. Do you remember the song that says “money talks”? Money does talk; it tells you who the boss is and it mediates between the classes. In a recent survey I read, the largest group of people that dislike the government was those who received the most benefits from the government. Money does not bind people together; it separates people. If you ever want to get rid of a friend, just loan him some money. You will immediately see a change in your relationship because you are no longer his equal; you have become his benefactor.
Socialism will never serve God’s purpose in the world nor any other system of man; this includes capitalism, though at the present time capitalism seems to be the lesser of two evils. When you take money away from one group to give it to another, it has nothing to do with righteousness or goodness in a Christian world view. Socialists refer to their distribution of money as social justice. In some cultures it might be called stealing. The rich and powerful in every society including socialistic ones, give money to the poor for two reasons: To keep the poor in their places and for their own glory and praise. As Jesus said, “They love the praises of men.” Look at what the presidential candidates gave to the poor a year before the election: almost nothing. Don’t think for a minute that any government really cares for the poor. The poor are used as pawns in their political chess game.
Only in Christ is found the true equality of the rich and the poor. For in Christ there are no rich and poor, professionals and nonprofessionals, educated and uneducated; for all are one in Christ. In Christ the rich and the poor are blind to each other’s social standing. “The brother in humble circumstances ought to take pride in his high position. But the one who is rich should take pride in his low position, because he will pass away like a wild flower. For the sun rises with scorching heat and withers the plant; its blossom fall and its beauty is destroyed. In the same way, the rich man will fade away even while he goes about his business” (James 1:9-11).
Mankind has had many utopian schemes to bring heaven down to earth. The Tower of Babel was one such scheme, and we see how it ended in misery and chaos. Remember what the Bible said, “It is not in man that walks to direct his steps.” In the story of the fall of man in the book of Genesis, it is recorded that when God ejected the man from the garden, he set two angels with flaming swords at the gate to make sure that mankind would never enter by his own power. The pied pipers of progress have been trying to storm those gates since the dawn of time. Some of them may have good intentions, but they have caused great misery and chaos in the world. Their good intentions gave rise to communism which has killed over 100,000,000 people in the name of equality. It has also created a welfare class that is dependent on the ruling class for its bread and circuses. In doing this, it has stripped these people of their humanity and the dignity that comes from self-sufficiency. These people may think they are doing good, but the devil has a way of using the misguided good to do evil.
Therefore, I encourage you to be wise in your search for social justice and in the ways that you help your fellow man. Make sure that all you do encourages and builds up all those whom you are trying to help. Remember the words of President Lincoln: “If you give a man a loaf of bread you feed him for a day. If you teach him to fish, you feed him for a lifetime.” Above all, remember to point people to Jesus Christ and the one and only true heaven.
Gratefully redeemed,
Lyle Duell
Lyle Duell 