Skip to content

Rednecks and generals


When I was just a knave, the redneck preachers in our corner of Arkansas preached against gambling because, so they claimed, it promoted a “something for nothing philosophy.”  The idea was that if you create a society of getting without earning then you’ll teach people to be helpless.  They become mentally disabled because they believe what’s false (that there is such a thing as “free stuff”), and therefore they become dependents for life.  And with dependency came debauchery as sure as, well, death and taxes.  My redneck forebears had no trouble discerning a connection between sin and the dole.

I think we can all agree that’s been vindicated, though maybe not like they expected.  It seems we have certain generals who have grown accustomed to lots of privileges.  People salute them, stand up ramrod straight in their presence, and call them “sir” a lot.  Generals get a great many perks with all those stars on their uniforms.  And in a strange way, getting has gotten detached from working for them, too.  They don’t get perks in proportion to what they build or accomplish.  They get stuff and privileges and all manner of ego strokes in proportion to their rank.  It’s all got to do with how many people are beneath them.

Maybe even the redneck preachers would be surprised to learn how right they were in sizing up the cussedness of human nature.  They respected the military, after all, but maybe that’s only because the waywardness of other famous generals hadn’t caught their attention.  Whatever.  They were still right.

And if smart men like Petraeus and Allen can go like oxen to the slaughter in their own little entitlement society, what’s to be said for the tens of millions who have sold themselves way cheaper?

May God make us eager to earn our keep, to be content with what we have, to eat our own bread with singleness of heart, and to be thankful to the Lord whose grace and providence sustain us every hour.

Trash as theater and prophecy


The entertainment industry will never catch up with Washington reality.  First you have the tragic deaths in Benghazi which, to any reasonable adult, beg for explanation.  And then the most blazingly obvious questions are met with silence.  People who could have intervened to prevent the deaths were ordered to stand aside.  Who gave such an order, we all ask?  The answer has come back along the lines of, I dunno, explaining relativistic effects on electrical permittivity of free space.  Everyone gaped and gagged and asked more questions.

First thing we know, there’s this admiral in the Mediterranean who gets “reassigned.”  Then  CIA director Petraeus outs himself and resigns.  That left us wondering, since when was adultery a problem to Democrats?   We had all thought it was verily a requirement on their résumés!  Next, the Congress wants to talk to Hillary and learns that she’s too busy can can’t be bothered — perhaps still occupied with those Rose Law billing records or something.

By now the whole cosmos is undergoing a second inflationary phase, this time inflating with rampant speculation.  Since speculation is so much fun, here’s mine:  Petraeus was hired because the White House insiders knew about his dalliances.  It gives them leverage, or so they thought.  Amidst the administration’s toddler-level coverup operation, Petraeus gets called in and told what to say to the Congress.  The “or else” doesn’t have to be spoken aloud.  They know.  He knows.  And he knows they know.  So, like a master at checkers, he forces the jump early before the opposition is ready.  He outs himself, resigns his office, returns in personal disgrace to a home in tatters.

He has become, in short, the most dangerous critter Washington knows: A man who knows a lot, who is about to be under subpoena, and who has nothing to lose by telling the truth.

Oh, this is going to be fun to watch.

In the end, it is likely not to matter. Obama was elected to take stuff from people who earn it and give it to federal dependents.  Just suppose the ugliest, nastiest, darkest rumors are true, namely that the whole Benghazi affair was a bizarre plot to have Ambassador Stevens kidnapped and “saved” by a fake, staged rescue by Obama for election fodder.  And let’s just suppose it’s true, and suppose it’s all proved beyond a shadow of doubt, and suppose they’ve got it all on video and the whole plot is exposed on Youtube tomorrow morning, and let’s suppose every last soul in America knows the whole sordid truth.

There would still be zero chance that Senate Democrats would convict him of treason (which is what such a plot would amount to).  And the reason is simple: Obama was elected to give away free stuff, and he’s still doing that.  And this shows in microcosm how long the current government will last.  The American government has been thoroughly co-opted by the welfare class.  The government will fall when the welfare class misses its first check.

Victory for Team Grifter


Why did the GOP get clobbered after winning so decisively in 2010?

1.  The Obama campaign won the so-called “ground game” of getting its voters to turn out in numbers that were big enough.  That was key in this race.  Voter turn-out is to politics what speed is to NASCAR.

2.  The Romney campaign perhaps burned too many bridges winning the primaries.  Overall turnout was low, way low, stunningly low for such a historic election.  I suspect this is because lots of Tea Party voters and Ron Paul voters were deeply offended by how their issues were swept aside by the GOP establishment.  The choice of Paul Ryan as veep mended some fences, just not enough.

3.  Corollary to #2, Mr. Romney is just not conservative enough to get serious Constitutional conservatives off the bench and into the game.

4.  Give credit where it’s due, the leftist-dominated mainstream media did its part at hiding Obama’s failures and participating in his attacks on Romney.  It worked.  There are still millions of voters whose sole source of news and commentary is network television.  If you based your opinions solely on that, you’d know Obama is a saint whereas Romney is a rich vulture capitalist, a racist, a bigot, a homophobe, hiding millions in offshore accounts without paying his taxes, murdered somebody’ wife and wears magic underwear.  And did I mention that he’s rich?  Filthy, stinkin’ rich?  And he also has a lot of money?  Can you feel the envy rising?  I can’t imagine the left’s stark, nasty appeal to jealousy, envy, and covetousness having a good effect on the country in the long run.

5.  And speaking of covetousness… the Obama constituency is the most narrowly-defined, single-issue voter base in the history of American politics.  They know that Obama gives them free stuff.  Romney was not really a threat to that, but they thought he was, so they supported Obama.  It’s about the “fool stamps” and Obamaphones.

6.  Timing.  Romney had been gaining ground since the convention and especially since his first debate.  But it began to taper off, and his gains weren’t fast enough.  If the election had been held a month later, he might have come out on top.  Maybe not.  But maybe.

7.  The bipartisanship shtick was hurting Romney with voters who really understand what’s at stake in the impending debt and monetary crisis.  This is not a time to go along and get along with the people whose policies are threatening to overturn the nation.  It’s a time to impose fiscal restraint or die trying.  And yet, and yet!, Mr. John “Pink Tie” Boehner is already on the news offering the president some kind of compromise on tax hikes.  Good grief.  As if the trillions in debt resulted from anything other than overspending.  Sorry to use the ‘R’ word, but that is just retarded.

8.  Mr. Romney underplayed the appeal to values voters.  He made the election mostly about the economy and forgot to mention that a moral value like a work ethic doesn’t exist in isolation.  Belief in traditional marriage and sexual roles, a work ethic, honesty, keeping promises, personal responsibility — these are all of a piece.  A financial deadbeat who is also a truthful and faithful man is an odd and temporary critter.  Mr. Romney, though a Mormon and not a Christian, nonetheless could have appealed to Judeo-Christian values and picked up some voters, especially pro-life voters.  He didn’t.  He lost.

9.  Romney needed to do a better job of explaining why energy is the key to America’s economic future.  Saying it is not the same as explaining it.  Romney is uniquely qualified to explain how a two or three cent hike in electricity prices can shut down a manufacturing plant.  We never got the explanation.  Now, under Mr. Obama’s open threat to make electricity prices “skyrocket” (Obama’s word, not mine), America is at risk of doubling or tripling your power bill in the next decade.

10.  Romney’s campaign strategy was to paint Mr. Obama as a generally nice guy who’s just over his head and out of answers.  I think he did this because Romney himself is genuinely a nice man.  By contrast, insider info suggests Mr. Obama isn’t so nice after all.  And given his anti-American upbringing, anti-American church, and his unrepentant terrorist connections, it’s not a stretch to be chary about his intentions.  Romney presented his own resume and told us why he’d do a good job.  What his campaign never did was set forth good reasons to view four more years of Obama as a threat.  I find negative politics as distasteful as the next guy.  But when your opponent actually might be bad for the country, you have a duty to say it and explain why.  That never happened.

What’s the government FOR, anyway?


The 2012 general election will begin in just a few hours.  The biggest question never asked is, Why is there a government?  What is its purpose?

Purpose introduces the idea of an Agent who does the purposing, yes?  And an Agent with a purpose brings along the idea of an ought.  There are things the government ought to do, and things it ought not do.

The most basic purpose of government is to avenge crime (Gen 9:5-6, Rom 13:3-4).  Within a government’s borders, we do that with the police.  Outside a government’s borders, and for crimes of an international character, we do that with the military.

There are other things governments ought to do as indicated in the law of Moses such as establishing just weights and measures (which included coining money in those days), overseeing certain matters of public safety, enforcing lawful contracts and agreements, and so on.  So the biblical idea of government is not a pinched up little wad of stuff supervised by libertarian tightwads with attitudes.

On the other hand, the Bible starkly contrasts two concepts of government.  The law of Moses prescribed a limited government.  It got a revenue stream based on the tithe, or ten percent of the net produce of the land.

The governments of the heathen were not limited, at least not conceptually.  Heathen potentates conceived of themselves as the sole proprietors of their domains, and anything you possessed was at their pleasure.  Think Nebuchadnezzar here.  Whom he would he slew, and whom he would, he kept alive.

If we ever had anything like a real debate between candidates for the presidency, senate, or house of representatives, there are two questions I’d love to hear:  First, on your principles, what should be the limit on the percentage of earnings the government can take in taxation?  Second, what is the principle, and its source, that you believe should limit the government?

A person who truly believes in limited government should be able to come up with a numerical limit.  Just as importantly, a person who believes in limited government should be able to explain what limits it.  A government that is limited implies something above the government, a concept which I am convinced is literally incredible to our friends on the left — and which is getting close to the same on the so-called right.

If anyone running for office in 2012 believes in limited government and has principles that explain the limitation, I haven’t heard about it yet.

Loss of legitimacy


There comes a point when governments lose their legitimacy.  That’s not anything you can define precisely.  I imagine it as the kind of thing that accumulates in bits and pieces until a crisis makes it all unmistakable.

The courts are toying with one of those bits and pieces right now.  The Fourth Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees to Americans the right to be free from unreasonable searches by the government.  The actual text is:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

Obviously, the Framers and the states intended to prohibit officers of the government from watching us, searching us, performing surveillance upon us.  They wanted a country in which the government was prevented from rummaging around looking for trouble and, inevitably, finding it against perceived enemies of the state.  Limitless search and seizure power is what made the Jews hate the publicans.  It’s what made the Russians hate the Communists, the East Germans hate the Stasi, and even the Iranians hated the shah’s Savak.  Soon, it may be what makes Americans hate our government.

The link here (provided by Drudge) says a court has okayed the use of hidden surveillance cameras on private property without a warrant.  Those of you who’ve read Orwell’s 1984 know that pervasive surveillance was a central feature of the totalitarian state symbolized by Big Brother.

If you think our government will set up cameras only upon the bad guys, fine.  Just know this, that in their view, you will always be one of the bad guys.

There will come a point when a citizenry is so overtaxed, so over-regulated, so over-watched that they no longer can sustain the belief that the government’s authority is legitimate.  They suddenly see the government as a giant gang of bland but dangerous criminals whose power is all threat and no blessing.

The late James Kilpatrick attributed to Thomas Jefferson the story of an old Indian chief who put a pebble in his pouch for every grievance he endured.  When the pouch was full he went to war.  The emergence in the last decade of a near-ubiquitous environment of surveillance amounts to a handful of pebbles in the American citizens’ collective pouch.  People are tired of being filmed at Wal-Mart, filmed at traffic lights, filmed at Burger King, filmed by neighbors with security cams, filmed by critter cams as they walk through the woods, filmed at every traffic stop by a cop.  They’re tired of being unable to manage their children properly because some joker with a camera will record just enough of the scene to get everything wrong.  It’s not just creeps putting cameras in the ladies’ restroom.  It’s regular civil servants setting up cameras to watch every step you take, scan your texts and e-mails, listen to your cell phone calls.

The Fourth Amendment was already well on its way to being a dead letter.  Now a federal judge has said that the government can come on your private property and set up cameras to watch what you’re doing.

Judge Griesbach, you’ve put a lot of pebbles in that pouch with this one.  Just so you know.

The undecided nation


The 2012 election is a gut-check for America.  I don’t think I’ve ever seen the two halves of America so cleanly and neatly divided.  I call it the party of outright moral rebellion against the party of lip-biting and indecision.

For a generation the Democrat party has stood for rebellion and up-in-yo’-face irresponsibility.  They represent the forces that continually define social sickness down.  They support unlimited welfare, abortion, sodomy, and since much of that has been energized by liberal white race guilt, the Democrats have also pushed for a weaker America.  These are the calling cards of leftism: Dependency, death, deviancy, and defeat.  After their convention in Charlotte, you could another ‘D,’ defiance.  They didn’t even want the word “God” left in their party platform.  It’s ironic that the only way God was left in the platform was by LA Mayor Villaraigosa brazenly cheating.

We all know this dismal summary of the Democrat party to be true, especially the Democrats themselves.  The only part that should shock anyone is that that roughly half of America cheers for this.

But it’s wishful thinking to say that the Republican party has stood for the opposite, that is, for self reliance, life, morality, and strength, and true reverence for God.  Not long ago, the GOP held both houses of Congress, the White House, and had a fairly reliable majority on the Supreme Court.  If ever there had been a time to do something so simple as defunding — I dunno, National Public Radio? — that would have been it.  But they didn’t do it.  Instead, they supported their own version of the welfare state.

What exactly does the GOP stand for, then?  Frankly, it’s hard to say. They have become the party of hand-wringing.  The reason they perennially disappoint conservatives is that they don’t really have a set of flaming core beliefs they’re willing to fight like hell for.  Say what you will about the Democrats; they wage their wars on every front and at all times.

As for the GOP, we know they want a bigger military and for the welfare state to be pared back a little, maybe, but only a little.  We know that establishment Republicans think the abortion issue is an idiotic distraction foisted upon them by church crackpots whom they loathe but cannot win without.  They will campaign against abortion to gain Christians’ votes but since 1972 have steadily declined to do much about it.  As for deviancy, you have only to listen to conservative talk radio to know that protecting sexual deviancy is downright chic in the GOP’s libertarian wing.

So it’s odd, in a way, that the GOP is identified with conservatism when it’s clearly not a party of conservatives.  It has become, as I’ve said, the hand-wringing party, the lip-biting, nervously waffling party of everlasting equivocation.  They’re against terror, against China manipulating the value of the yuan.  They’re against public cannibalism.  Everything else is open to some kind of bipartisan negotiation.

How fitting, then, that election after election is decided by the “undecided,” an amoral lot of feckless voters squatting in a sort of demilitarized zone amid the culture war.

So, in just a few more days the voters will have a go at it.  The undecided voters will cast the deciding votes.  At this juncture, it’s looking vaguely like they’re breaking toward Mr. Romney who may win a squeaker election, but that’s in serious doubt.  As for the rest of the elections, the Senate will stay Democrat.  The House will stay Republican.  Gridlock will ensue.  My Democrat friends therefore need not despair if they lose control of the White House.  We can expect that, absent a divine intervention to awaken the soul of America, the leftward drift of the nation will continue.

But isn’t this what Christians should have all along expected?

Except the LORD build the house, they labour in vain that build it: except the LORD keep the city, the watchman waketh but in vain.   –Psalm 127:1

A nation that tries to make a go of things without forthrightly acknowledging Him is destined to fail.  God has structured the whole realm of nature to deny final success to those who will not openly honor the Creator.  You should not wonder why the natural state of the political process is toward evil.  This is how the whole fallen world works.  It’s only when men kneel before the one, true God and actively seek Him that things begin to make a turn toward righteousness.

On the other hand, the lesson of Lot still stands.  For the sake of ten righteous, God will spare the city.  Let us be numbered among those ten righteous who are the unseen yet vital link to the life-sustaining power of God, and let us plead with the heathen as Daniel did for a return to Christ, “if it may be a lengthening of thy tranquility.” (Dan 4:27)  Politics, like law, has power to destroy but cannot save.  For salvation, you need a Savior, Christ the Lord.

Need more Gospel


I work during the day, so I seldom hear Rush Limbaugh’s program which airs (oddly) during working hours.  But I happened to hear him ranting about the murder of our ambassador in Libya and accusing the president of lying about it. He made a fairly convincing case that the CIA had already told the president that Al Queda was responsible, yet Obama and his aides continued to play the theme that a video was to blame for the whole affair.

Rush was clearly upset that this is all very well known, but the scandal just can’t get any traction.  There should be pitchforks and torches on the White House lawn, yet people are still watching TeeVee and yawning.

Here’s the problem: America has built a society well described by Isaiah,

the whole head is sick, and the whole heart faint. From the sole of the foot even unto the head there is no soundness in it; but wounds, and bruises, and putrefying sores.

Ours is a society in which whole subcultures derive their political and financial subsistence from slaying the unborn.  For millions in our society a promise means nothing.  Easy divorce, rampant bankruptcy, widespread corruption in the financial industry, a massive welfare state with tens of millions who could work and do not, the general expectation that all politicians lie — these are all of a piece.

To angrily accuse the president of lying about four dead in Benghazi is to assume what isn’t so, which is that people care.  True, some do.  But voters who care only about an Obamaphone and getting free birth control are incapable of understanding why having a liar in the White House might matter.  They know the game: It does not matter what politicians say.  The equation has only one variable in it: If our side wins, we get free stuff.

Doug Wilson is fond of saying that religion forms culture, and culture trumps politics.  Nowhere is that more obviously true than in this latest scandal.  The average American hears you denouncing the president for lying and thinks it’s about like standing in the landfill and complaining about all the garbage.

America needs the Gospel in order for moral arguments to make sense.  The cross shows why righteousness matters.  Without that, people just don’t get it, and their souls rise no higher than Obamaphones.  There is no political solution to spiritual problems.

My top picks for the Nobel Peace Prize


1.  Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, for not really meaning it when he threatened genocide against Jews.  Everyone in the U.N. Security council knows he’s only kidding.

2.  Barack Obama, who deserves a second Nobel Peace Prize every bit as much as he deserved the first one.

3.  John Galvin, acting head of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, because if Al Gore got one for the politicized junk science behind global warming, then Galvin should get one for the same thing underlying the latest unemployment numbers.

4.  Bashar al-Assad, for being a western-educated eye doctor with a pretty wife (and waging a war to save Syria).

Possible signs of a brain wave?


Imagine the patient lying there on the gurney, wires all over his head, doctors studying the screens searching for any sign of brain activity.  They prod the patient’s feet with a needle.  Nothing.  Loved ones speak and squeeze the hand, still nothing.  The preacher stops by and offers prayer to God.  Still nothing.  The doctors inject stuff into the IV, twiddle knobs, all in vain.

The TeeVee in the room, tuned to the omnipresent leftist media, quietly announces the Bureau of Labor Statistics has found that the unemployment rate has fallen below 8 percent.

The patient sits bolt upright and says, “That’s the biggest crock of bull I ever heard!”

I’m thinking it’s a good sign for America that not one person in the whole country believes the BLS announcement is anything other than lying propaganda for the administration.  The abbreviation “BLS” never seemed more fitting.


Needs to be repeated to blind western media


Linked from

It is astonishing that so many in the mainstream media are self-censoring the growing wave of Islamist violence around the world. A sign similar to this one raised controversy last week when a “journalist” defaced the sign with spray paint in a demonstration against “hate.” One wonders where this journalist was when Islamic radicals were murdering Coptic Christians in Egypt, killing our Ambassador to Libya, lopping off Daniel Pearl’s head, launching rockets into Israel, or sending suicide bombers hither and yon throughout the world.

So, yes.  Support the civilized man.  Regardless of your feelings about America’s relationship with Israel, you have to admit that they’re the only actual democracy in the middle East, and they’re the only ones actually trying to keep some order there.  The Obama administration’s appeasenik approach to Islamist radicals has brought nothing but an upward spiral of bloody, medieval lunacy.  Mr. Obama — spiraling down — reached a new low in his contemptible U.N. speech when he said that the future won’t belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

The biggest slander against Mohammed, if you want to call it slander, is the behavior of some of his followers.  Beheadings and suicide bombs and raging madmen taking to the streets is perhaps not the best way to persuade people to respect your religion.

Then again, judging by the response of Mr. Obama and his lickspittle acolytes in the leftist media, maybe it is.

When liberals take over the dictionary


I remember when preachers mocked the liberal establishment for calling drunkenness a disease.  First it got renamed alcoholism, which sounds more like a religious belief in alcohol.  Then alcoholism got classified as a sickness.  Now the sickness has morphed into a disability.  And being a disability, it’s now protected by the ADA, the Americans with Disabilities Act.  So in one generation, being a drunken fool has graduated from contemptible to something like an endangered species.

Could any of this folly have consequences you and I would care about?

Well, as a matter of fact, yes, and it would be hard to top this as an example of how the loony left has taken over our government.  Old Dominion Freight Line fired one of its truck drivers for being an alcoholic.  The “disabled” man pushed back under the ADA, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued Old Dominion on his behalf.  The link shows that Old Dominion had a policy in which no alcoholic could be returned to driving position.  Now the Heritage Foundation is reporting that the EEOC has won the suit, getting a court order to put alcoholics back on the road in Old Dominion trucks.

You wonder if the outcome of the suit might have been different if the EEOC lawyers knew their children would have to ride in the truck with one of these — pardon a term from the obsolete King James lexicon — drunkards.

Before I’m done, let me scare you a bit more with the ADA (text linked here).  The act specifically excludes addiction to illegal drugs from being classified as disabilities.  Just to pick something harebrained at wild random, let’s suppose marijuana became legalized.  Marijuana abuse would then be a government protected disability.

Is there anything so violently stupid and evil that a band of government lawyers will not sue to make a protected privilege out of it?

Snake handlers


Just a brief observation about one of the quirks of human nature.  People of all social strata seem drawn to do foolishly dangerous things.  The crackpot preacher handling rattlesnakes is easy to pick on.  What about the crackpot liberal that handles a gang of murderous outlaws such as the Muslim Brotherhood?  Both kinds of creatures are equally trustworthy, and both kinds of crackpots are equally demented, ignoring obvious dangers out of a misguided religious determination to believe what isn’t so.  Our State Department, under the direction of Clinton and Obama, has been handling the Islamic serpent, showing it off, promising it won’t bite.  Well, it bites.  Now the middle East is seething with unrest (again) while our Ivy League snake handlers assure us everything will be okay.  They are true believers in their own right, impervious to contrary evidence even when it arrives in the form of the dead.

Election 2012, with the West hanging in the balanace, it’s still evil vs. stupid


Now that Mitt Romney has secured the GOP nomination, he’s backtracking on his promises to repeal ObamaCare.  As recently as June 28 of this year — before the convention — Romney was still vowing to “repeal and replace” ObamaCare.  Now that he’s the official nominee, he’s saying he will not repeal it, at least not all of it.

Now we have to divine the causes of his change.  Why did he promise to repeal it in the first place?  Was it merely to tickle the ears of suckers on the right or did he actually see a problem somewhere?  And which parts of ObamaCare will be left in force?  Will he retain the 16,000 new IRS agents and the countless multitudes of regulations which still nobody understands?

And why is he backtracking now?  If he’s fishing for sucker votes on the left, he should realize that there are no words that could ever draw the hard core grifters away from the Democrats.  The Democrat Party is the natural habitat for every species of social deviancy.  They simply won’t vote for a GOP candidate no matter what.  In terms of electoral success in November, there is  nothing for Mr. Romney to gain by selling out his support on the right.

Besides, if he’ll renege on his campaign promises before he’s even elected, what would he do after?

The keystone to Obama’s “radical transformation” of America into a socialist welfare state is ObamaCare.  If Mr. Romney doesn’t grasp why this is so, then why would anyone on the right want him to be president?  And that’s a serious question.  While I certainly understand why the nation needs to be rid of Mr. Obama’s baneful influence in the White House, fact is we won’t be rid of it as long as his signature legislative accomplishment remains on the books.

Put me down as one of the many Constitutional Conservatives yearning intently for Mr. Obama’s departure.  But I see no point in wasting casting a vote for a man who represents no genuine improvement.

Blessed hope, and those who don’t have one


Titus 2:13 refers to the coming of Christ as our “blessed hope.” The context of the passage is that Christians are to lead godly lives while we’re looking for the return of Christ and our final deliverance from a fallen world. And oh, how the world is fallen.

One of the hopeful ideas the New Testament holds out to Christians is the thought of Christ’s return. The world won’t always be like it is now. One day, the desert will blossom as the rose. Isaiah describes this hope:

Strengthen ye the weak hands, and confirm the feeble knees. Say to them that are of a fearful heart, Be strong , fear not: behold, your God will come with vengeance, even God with a recompence; he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened , and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing : for in the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the desert.  (Isaiah 35:3-6)

Note that Isaiah says God shall come, which is much like Paul’s assurance that “the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout.”  The prospect of his returning is a satisfying thought, something that encourages threadbare people to keep on plugging for another day.

What would you call the lack of a blessed hope — cursed despair?  It makes sense for the heathen to look at life with bleak hearts and black future.  They have no savior.  Despair is reasonable for the Secular Man for he is a Christless man.  But it’s unworthy of the Christian man, for this man has a future and a Savior who guarantees it.

Good old days


Say not thou, What is the cause that the former days were better than these? for thou dost not enquire wisely concerning this.  Ecclesiastes 7:11

An older Christian was describing his impoverished childhood and said, “If those were the good old days, I don’t want any more of them.”  He has a good life now, and he’s thankful for it.  Sure, there were things he enjoyed about those times, but living in the past is not just futile; it’s at least a failure of gratitude.  What has God given you now that you’re ignoring?  And Paul said, “forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.” (Phil 3:13-14)  Yesterday is gone, but you have today.  Go live it.