This is merely a place where I can express myself. I will post news articles, points of faith, stories, fellow blogger posts (with due credit of course), and generally anything I feel is worthwhile.
My Endorsements for the South Carolina GOP Primary Elections held June 8th.
Governor - Nikki Haley Bauer means business as usual. Barrett is a progressive spender. And even though I personally like AG McMaster, I am not so sure he is right for the state’s highest seat.
Lt. Governor - Bill Connor You can’t go wrong with this guy. He is a warrior through and through!
Adjutant General – Bob Livingston The only conservative running…. AAAAANNDD, who wants a liberal in charge of the state’s military?
Attorney General - Alan Wilson What’s not to like? This guy cuts ‘em and guts ‘em like an AG should.
Commissioner of Agriculture – Hugh Weathers I tend to agree that the election of the ComAgri. Can interfere with goals of the Commissioner and Governor to truly promulgate, expand and make successful the agricultural needs of the state.
Comptroller General – Mike Meilinger In this case, change would be good.
Secretary of State – Mark Hammond The only conservative running has done an adequate job…if it ain’t broke…
Superintendent of Education – Kelly Payne I am truly excited about Kellye Payne. Not only is she immensely qualified and loaded with experience for the position, I have also seen her personally take an opportunity to reach out to those who can’t vote for her but for whom it will be her job to protect and advance.
Congressional Distrcit 2 – Joe Wilson Even though it may not have been polite, the guy from SC was right about Obama’s denial of universal healthcare for criminal invaders.
Senate – Jim DeMint Just plainly the right guy for this job. I pray he keeps up the good work!
The History of American Founders and Patriots You Aren’t Supposed to Know About
One of the things that has always hacked me off is when truth is hidden from those who can benefit from it the most. From religion to politics, this has happened time and again… especially in history. It is often said that the winners of battles and wars write the history books, and in the case of the topic of African-American history, it was the losers who have done the writing – to the shameful detriment of the truth.
How many of us have been taught in school about Frederick Douglas, Harriet Tubman and Booker T. Washington? And then nothing until Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King, Jr. (I didn’t even get Malcolm X when I was in school). And what’s worse is the VITAL role blacks have played in the founding of this nation has been denied or written out of American history. The only black’s name we hear from that period is Crispus Attucks. But do we Americans of all colors know who Benjamin Banneker, Richard Allen, Oliver Cromwell (not the British Lord Protector) or even Wentworth Cheswell were? Cheswell was a part of Paul Revere’s Midnight Ride, but you have to look long and hard to find a connecting reference when reading anything about Paul Revere.
Because I love American History, I have been able to learn the truth through various sources about those Americans of African ancestry who were fundamental in the founding and continuing prosperity of this great nation. Washington, Jefferson and Franklin are all important figures who contributed greatly to the birth and start of America. But it was Salem, Estabrook, Whipple, and Armistead who gives the founding of this nation its true character.
This revisionist history is virtually criminal to African-Americans, and ALL Americans for that matter. It denies something that has always been vital to the lifeblood of this country – TRUTH.
Of course we cannot remove or deny the horrible crime of slavery and involuntary servitude placed on blacks in our history. After all that is truth as well. But we have got to stop looking at our American history based on race or politics.
Below is the video from Glenn Beck’s May 28th “Founders’ Fridays” TV show. Whether you like him or not or whether you disagree with him or not, please watch. This show is not about politics, it’s about the truth.
At the bottom is included the aftershow Q&A that is really awesome!
The United States Constitution is Alive, But Not as a “Living, Breathing Document.”
“The debate between interpretivists and non-interpretivists over how to give meaning to the Constitution is often framed in the following terms: Is the Constitution a ‘living’ document, in which judges ‘update’ its provisions according to the ‘needs’ of the times? Or is the Constitution an enduring document, in which its original meanings and principles are permanently maintained, subject only to changes adopted in accordance with its amending clause? I believe that it is better described in the latter sense. It is beyond dispute, of course, that the principles of the Constitution must be applied to new circumstances over time — the Fourth Amendment on searches and seizures to electronic wiretaps, the First Amendment on freedom of speech to radio and television and the Internet, the interstate commerce clause to automobiles and planes, etc. However, that is distinct from allowing the words and principles themselves to be altered based upon the preferences of individual judges.
“Our Constitution would be an historical artifact—a genuinely dead letter—if its original sense became irrelevant, to be replaced by the views of successive waves of judges and justices intent on ‘updating’ it, or replacing what some judges view as the ‘dead hand of the past’ with contemporary moral theory. This is precisely what the Founders sought to avoid when they instituted a ‘government of laws, not of men.’
“There is no charter of government in the history of mankind that has more wisely set forth the proper relationship between the governed and their government than the American Constitution. For those of us who are committed to constitutional principles and fostering respect for that document, there is no better homage that we can pay it than to understand clearly its design and to take care in the manner in which we describe it.” – “Constitutional Myths and Realities (Myth or Misconception 8: The Constitution is a living document.)” by Michigan Supreme Court Associate Justice Stephen Markman, August, 2005 Inprimis
American Exceptionalism is the theory that the United States of America occupies a special niche among the nations of the world in terms of its unifying national credo, historical evolution, political and religious institutions, and its being built by immigrants. The roots of the belief are attributed to Alexis de Tocqueville, who claimed, in his work, Democracy in America, that the United States held a special place among nations, because it was the first modern democracy.
But let’s carry this to today’s world and see if that belief hold’s true. Or is America merely an arrogant flash in the pan? We should start with the vocabulary:
What is exceptionalism?
Exceptionalism comes from the word exception which is rooted in the Latin word exceptionem, or in better etymology, exceptio probat regulam in casibus non exceptis; "the exception proves the rule in cases not excepted;" The context of American Exceptionalism means that all other nations are not unique from each other. In Tocqueville’s time it was even truer. But even in today’s time The United States of America is still very much unique (at least for now).
The stability provided by the U.S. Constitution is most exceptional and politically stable when compared to other nations of the world today.
France, 10 years younger than the U.S., is governing with their FIFTEENTH Constitution.
Brazil has had SEVEN constitutions since 1822.
Russia has had FOUR constitutions since 1918.
Poland has had SIX constitutions since 1921.
Afghanistan has had FIVE constitutions since 1923.
America has had only two governing documents since its independence and only ONE constitution since its ratification in 1788. Our Constitution has been a solid rock of a governing document to withstand and make possible what no other nation in the history of the world has been able to do. If you pay attention to the membership of the United Nations, you will notice that the number of nations rises and falls each year. That is a distinction that promulgates American Exceptionalism when compared to the political instability of the rest of the world.
What is America’s unifying National Credo?
Credo is Latin for “I believe.” The English derivative is the word creed. Etymologically, this means a statement of belief. So, what is our national credo? Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address states it best. The United States of America is a nation "conceived in liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal". In this view, America is indistinguishably connected with liberty and equality. Yes, the struggle to live up to this credo has been hard fought and fraught with selfishness and even hatred. However, the thought processes from Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. have consistently espoused the self evident truth that all men are created equally.
Has American government had a Historical Evolution?
Evolution comes from the Latin term evolutionem which translates into “an opening of what was rolled up.” Evolution’s meaning even came to be known as a growth into maturity. But had our nation grown into maturity, governmentally speaking, by the time of “Democracy in America?” Or are we, as some will attest, never going to reach that maturity? The fact that our Constitution has endured for over 230 years, seems to promote the former above the latter.
Has American government had a Historical Evolution?
Evolution comes from the Latin term evolutionem which translates into “an opening of what was rolled up.” Evolution’s meaning even came to be known as a growth into maturity. But had our nation grown into maturity, governmentally speaking, by the time of “Democracy in America?” Or are we, as some will attest, never going to reach that maturity? That fact that our Constitution has endured for over 230 years, seems to promote the former above the latter.
When independence was declared in 1776, the Continental Congress struggled to create a form of government that would endure. The first national document of government was the Articles of Confederation. This was about as close to anarchy as a nation could have while still having a ruling government. It didn’t work and was replaced by the current Constitution of articles we know today.
Historically, America has politically, geographically, religiously and socially has collectively grown into a maturity that no other nation has been through. Politically is covered above. Geographically, from a small strip of land on the east coast, across a continent to lands separated by great distances, this nation has done nothing but physically grow in size. Religiously, America, with a foundation in Judeo-Christian principles has grown to so embrace the freedom of religion without physical conflict to include religions and faiths never known of thought of by the Founders. Yet they knew back then, the importance of that particular freedom. Socially, we have had our greatest growth. From the hard fought abolition of slavery, to the suffrage of women, minorities and young adults, to the struggle to ensure civil rights, America has long since come of age.
What is unique about America’s political and religious institutions?
No etymology here as there is no need to define the departments of government nor places of worship and philanthropy. Politically, this is where we are the most immature. Our Founders strived to create a government that had just enough power to fulfill the claims of the Constitution’s Preamble. Yet continually and consistently, American government has grown to where it has such an involvement in individuals’ lives, it has made the constitution about itself rather than “[w]e the people.” This is leading the nation into potential socialism and toward communism. The fact is that socialism/communism has been tried at least 44 times in the history of the world and has FAILED EVERY SINGLE TIME!!! A mature government is one that involves and adheres to the consent and importance of the governed. That includes the states as well as the people. Hopefully, the voters of this nation will realize how close they are to not being able to vote anymore.
America’s religious facets are the most unique in the world. This nation is full such a myriad of diverse beliefs and faiths that peacefully coexist and, in some cases, even work with each other to better the lives of many Americans. The influence that religion has had on ethics and morality in America has exponentially affected the society enough that laws are changed or created to match. Under our Constitution, America (not the government proper) has promoted the belief in religion (or the practice of not believing) that influences and affects the rest of the world more than any other entity (except God Almighty Himself).
Are immigrants the architects of America?
The land that is now America had no inhabitants until nomadic people – immigrants – from Asia migrated to the American continents so many years about. Over the generations, from the Inca in South America to the Mississippians in North America, the building of the western hemisphere started with immigrants. This tradition continued with European immigrants who brought their culture to build a free nation based on the Laws of “Nature’s God.” Even after the nation was founded, Immigrants (free and forced) from the rest of the world had a part in building this nation. Being a child of the Mayflower may hold social importance to some, but is has been immigrants and their descendants who have been the most influential pioneers in industry, agriculture and innovation. The peacefully coexisting ‘melting pot” of immigrants in this great country is the most unique and diverse in the world. Why? Because, as explained by Ronald Reagan in 1985 speaking of our forefathers who were immigrants or descendants of immigrants, “The idea of freedom impelled them; it intoxicated them. And it is freedom that impels us still.”
Does America reach the claim of American Exceptionalism? Yes! But again, as proud of that as we can be, we should absolutely be humbled by it. The one consistent proclamation among the Founding Fathers is that American Exceptionalism is exceptionalism credited to God Almighty and should bring Him honor and glory.
And yet so many denounce American Exceptionalism as “self-serving and jingoistic” arrogance. However, our founding fathers knew and believed that their governance was something of humility rather than pride. This is mainly due to the founders’ acknowledgement of God as their Providence in government. And even though Tocqueville calls America a modern democracy, that word just doesn’t apply, even if he used it in a positive way.
When our political leaders apologize for America and proclaim arrogance, the damage they do isn’t just to our nation, but to the worldly perception of where that exceptionalism comes from. It is time again to see “morning in America again!"
It’s time to be Americans again! It’s time to lead the world again! It’s time to be that “shining city on a hill” again! It’s time! It’s time! It’s time!
During this election season, search your convictions as an American and vote accordingly. Cast your vote behind someone who will serve, yes SERVE, his or her constituents rather than continue to promote the current trend of governing without serving. Forget political party. Forget seniority. Forget ethnicity. REMEMBER AMERICAN EXCEPTIONALISM!!!
"Blessed is the nation whose God is the Lord, the people whom he has chosen as his heritage!" - Psalm 33:12
He gives ten points that, on the surface, seem reasonable regarding the ways Christians fail. But when he elaborates, it is extremely clear that Mr. Shore doesn’t read the context when he surgically pulls verses to make his points. The ten are:
1) Too much money. 2) Too confident God thinks we're all that and a leather-bound gift Bible. 3) Too quick to believe that we know what God really means by what he says in the Bible. 4) Too action-oriented. 5) Too invasive of others generally. 6) Too invasive of others personally. 7) Too quick to abandon logic. 8) Too fixated on homosexuality. 9) Too insular. 10) Too uneducated about Christianity.
In point one, Mr. Shore uses Luke 12:33, Matthew 19:21; 6:24 to claim that Christians shouldn’t earn wealth. The context of those versus has NOTHING to do with money, other than the mention of it. The same ruler could have sold everything he had, given it to the poor, and yet dishonored his parents. Jesus’ point was to show the man how wretched he was in God’s eyes because he loves something more than God. If he would have looked further and read Matthew 19:24 (Mark 10:25; Luke 19:25), he would have discovered that a rich person CAN enter the kingdom of God. It’s just not as easy as if he were not wealthy. If we read Proverbs 3:9-10, we learn that God will bless us with wealth AS LONG AS we also understand Luke 12:34 in that our wealth must honor God first. While these verses do not quantify what wealth is, it recognizes that every individual has his own personal wealth in which God has blessed him and his stewardship. God doesn’t hate rich people; He hates what those rich people sometimes do.
I actually do agree with point two; hopefully for the same reasons. The first thing we Christians must understand is that we are wretched, filthy sinners because we have broken God’s Law (The Ten Commandments). Once we are humbled in knowing that we are doomed to an eternity in hell, we then can receive salvation by faith alone, through grace alone, in Jesus alone, God as man, had himself punished and killed to pay the price for our sins so that we wouldn’t have to. God is everything and we Christians are blessed to have a God that loves us so much, He would make the ultimate sacrifice.
In point three, Mr. Shore uses Luke 8:9-10 to convey how confusing the Word of God is and that we shouldn’t believe the literate words of the bible. Well, yes, there are mysteries that only God can know, i.e. Matthew 24:36; Mark 13:32, but the parables are easily understood if you read and study what Jesus says. The Parable of the Sower in Luke 8 wouldn’t still be a mystery if he READ ON THROUGH THE REST OF THE CHAPTER (in fact the exact answer starts only one verse further in v. 11. And if the bible should be so blindly followed, why does Mr. Shore bother to use any verses at all? 2 Timothy 3:16 settles the matter by using the world “ALL.”
In regards to point four, Mr. Shore seems to forget that Christians are commanded and commissioned to do things in the Name of Christ. But specifically, Matthew 5:16; John 3:21; 7:3; 8:39; 9:4; 10:37; Acts 2:11; and 2 Thessalonians 3:6 mention doing works. And these are to be done in God’s name. The Great Commission can’t be fulfilled if we are just sitting around being Christians.
The separation of church and state is brought up in point five. And while I agree that it is extremely dangerous for a state to tell people they have to worship a certain way, it is just as dangerous for the state to tell people not to worship at all. The concept of the separation of church and state wasn’t born in political circles, but in the Christian Reformation. During the Protestant Reformation of the 1500s-1600s, The Catholic Church had gained a great deal of political power and was promoting, allowing and commanding things contrary to biblical teaching. One of those was the concept of “Divine Right” which is the foundation of Monarchism. Monarchism allowed kings in Europe to maintain bloodline and totalitarian in their perception of power as given by God. However, once biblical understanding became prominent over obedience to church, it was the Reformation movement that came up with the concept of an authentic separation of church and state that still honored God. This is not the modern anti-religious argument being debated today, but a fundamental understanding of how God expects us to govern ourselves. If the Christians of the past had been less invasive of others and things, the world might still live under monarchies and even slavery!
In point six, it becomes clear that Mr. Shore doesn’t understand the key to salvation or the gospel itself. Christians are commanded to do one thing above all others that can be physically done and that is to evangelize by telling others about Jesus and the whos, whats, and whens involving His life and Sacrifice. And as a matter of note, this is where that parable from above comes into play. I pray that the seeds sown by Mr. Shore end up in good soil.
Again Mr. Shore is promulgating how unworthy the scriptures and their doctrine are for modern times. I challenge anyone to produce an archaeological or anthropological discovery that contradicts the bible. God offers logic that is the simplest to understand and follow. It’s when people create their own understanding of logic that clouds their desire to follow God’s.
Homosexuality is just a sore spot for non-Christians that it seems that point eight it true. The fact is that sin is sin and all sin is equally detestable in God’s eyes. But unlike theft, lying, and killing, which are committed in secret. Homosexuality is practiced openly. As Christians, we should be able to fixate on sin as sin when we share the gospel. And remember that God doesn’t want thieves, liars, and murderers or homosexuals. He wants sinner who have repented and trusted in Jesus as their salvation.
In point 9, Mr. Shore speaks of Christians spend time with only Christians. He says Christians stop doing that to spend time with non-Christians. This seems to contradict, one of many in his piece, points four and six. And while we should be spreading the gospel to unbelievers, the bible does command us to group together as Christians – 2 Corinthians 6:14. While it is fine to socialize with non-Christians, we should be willing, as Christians, to witness at a moments notice. If our focus is on the socializing alone, God doesn’t get glory unless we can witness or do works in His name.
On point ten, I can basically agree. However, not for the same reasons. Secular society, pop-culture, politics and several other factors have become such distractions that people don’t willingly pay much attention to the bible. And since neither the Great Schism nor the Diet of Worms have anything to do with the gospel, they don’t really matter when it comes to witnessing. And since Robert Duvall and a rock band have nothing to do with the gospel, they are irrelevant when it comes to talking about Jesus.
Mr. Shore has taken upon himself to desire ChINOs – Christians in name only. He wants Christians that suit his expectations and disregards the commands of God. His sketchy understanding of biblical context denotes his lack of Christian understanding. I pray that he will delve into the covenants of the bible and truly learn the love he should share with others because of the love God showed him.
